Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Oil and Gas Issues  (Read 1055751 times)

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1550 on: July 20, 2017, 07:28:53 AM »
Well, green BAU is a quite difficult definition. My experience is that you can save a lot with little pain. For example, temperature in winter in the offices doesn't need to be as high before 10 AM because people are still well awake, after 4 PM, it's another problem. So somebody reducing energy waste by adapting the regulation to the "real" needs, is he a green BAU ? I could give many similar example that have huge saving potentials.  I would say lets be walking the walk and try not to be extreme because this won't bring anything. I am just surprised when some multimilionnaire says he does a lot for climate because he has so many PV and batteries that his huge house (pool, AC, home cinema...) doesn't produce any CO2, he should look at  the CO2 of the staff used to maintain the infrastructure.
Added :  but I agree that it's better than other who don't care.

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 389
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1551 on: July 20, 2017, 08:22:09 AM »
Bob:

Quote
Optimistic realist greens?”

How about "Green Growth" fanatics, market fundamentalists, hypocrites?

By the way, riding your bike to work is not a “sacrifice”. It’s a pleasure!


TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1552 on: July 20, 2017, 08:33:38 AM »
We all see ourselves as realists.


When new renewables exceed new fossil fuel installations, I'll consider that the battle lines have been drawn. When the Keeling curve curves downward, I'll concede that the battle might be won.


Until then color me sad
Terry

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1553 on: July 20, 2017, 09:56:47 AM »
Green BAU realist - knowing it won't "save the world" but that it's the only way forward given greedy/selfish human nature and current weak governance. And hoping it will accelerate enough to make a significant impact. And pushing it on all fronts. This is you Bob, and a job well done.
(Should be careful though to avoid hinting that it sufficiently solves the fundamental problem, as it might lull some people who might otherwise be willing to make some deeper changes.)

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1554 on: July 20, 2017, 02:09:19 PM »
Well, I still wonder when the peak oil will be. Few years ago, some people thought that peak oil would solve our climate change problem. In 2008, it was like if this was happening. Since that time, fossil fuels have become cheap not expensive enough for a fast energy change, even if fossil fuel availability doesn't increase very much. Maybe this is also a sign that renewable and efficiency are doing much better than expected. Maybe cheating happens on renewable and fossil energy sides. If I look at Luxembourgish energy data, I'm astonished.
http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=12771&IF_Language=fra&MainTheme=1&FldrName=4&RFPath=51
Don't forget that Luxembourg is a growing economy. PIB =GDP
http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=13133&IF_Language=fra&MainTheme=5&FldrName=1

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1555 on: July 20, 2017, 06:09:40 PM »
Green BAU realist - knowing it won't "save the world" but that it's the only way forward given greedy/selfish human nature and current weak governance. And hoping it will accelerate enough to make a significant impact. And pushing it on all fronts. This is you Bob, and a job well done.
(Should be careful though to avoid hinting that it sufficiently solves the fundamental problem, as it might lull some people who might otherwise be willing to make some deeper changes.)

Thanks, but the BAU part feels very uncomfortable.  There's nothing 'as usual' about destroying the fossil fuel industry and sending the internal combustion engine to the pages of history.

And won't 'save the world'?  What does 'save the world mean'? 

People are already dying because of climate change.  We're already losing buildings and infrastructure.  There's nothing we know that will stop that from continuing to happen and getting worse to some extent.

At the other end is causing the planet to become a very difficult place for people to live.  (I don't think it possible to wipe out all human existence.)

Where in between those two conditions do we set the saved/didn't save threshold?

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1556 on: July 20, 2017, 06:24:11 PM »
Quote
Well, I still wonder when the peak oil will be.

You need another word in that sentence.

Peak oil supply?  That's what people were worrying about.  We would hit a point at which the known oil fields start drying up and supplies run short.  The most extreme/doomers talked about the end of civilization and the few, the strongest returning to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

That's peak conventional oil.  We hit peak conventional oil a few years back.  We were pumping oil faster than we were finding new conventional oil.

All this concern went away, or was at least pushed far into the future, when we recognized  how much unconventional oil there was.  Conventional is pumping out of underground "pools".  Drill a hole - pump oil.  Unconventional comes from fracking, cooking oil sands, etc.

Peak oil demand?  That's what we are looking at now.  Sometimes in the next five years EVs should become cheaper to manufacture than same-feature ICEVs.  Electric buses should start to become common in our cities and towns.  There's a good chance that Tesla will have started converting long distance hauling to electric/battery.  There's a decent chance that the Hyperloop will start replacing air travel.  Very efficient heat pumps will be replacing oil furnaces. 

Five years from now we might hit peak oil demand.  Oil use for transportation may stop growing and begin to fall.


Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1557 on: July 20, 2017, 06:30:01 PM »
Bob:

Quote
Optimistic realist greens?”

How about "Green Growth" fanatics, market fundamentalists, hypocrites?


Are you saying that I am a Green Growth fanatic?  Or a market fundamentalist?  A hypocrite?

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 389
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1558 on: July 20, 2017, 08:02:41 PM »
Bob,
Are you saying that I am a "hairshirt" Green because I ride my bike to work?

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1559 on: July 20, 2017, 08:10:53 PM »
Bob,
Are you saying that I am a "hairshirt" Green because I ride my bike to work?

Here's what I wrote -

Quote
Seems like you're saying there's a category of "Hairshirt Greens".  People who intentionally downgrade their lifestyle in order to lower their carbon footprint.

(I'm not suggesting that term as Hairshirt Greens might find it offensive.  Nothing more appropriate came to mind.)

If you ride your bike to work because you find it pleasurable (or because of the exercise or because you lost your driver's license or to save money or because parking is a problem) then I wouldn't put you in the "hairshirt" category.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1560 on: July 20, 2017, 08:24:51 PM »
Big Green and Small Green?

Going green with more (new tech), versus going green with less.

Can someone do both?  And so maybe be Bright Green?  :)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4606
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 826
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1561 on: July 20, 2017, 08:48:24 PM »
Because this is the "Oil and Gas Issues" thread, I'm sure there are some Slimy Greens selling used Priuses, Bolts and Leafs and Oily Greens who don't use shampoo and, um, Gaseous Greens who like undercooked beans.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2017, 09:13:28 PM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things because "we cannot negotiate with the melting point of ice"

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 389
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1562 on: July 20, 2017, 08:50:42 PM »
Sig,

Bright Green, may be a new category of people both Bob and I could see ourselves in, if he started riding his bike from time to time.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1563 on: July 20, 2017, 09:05:06 PM »
It's 54 miles from my house to the grocery store.  One way.  The first 3.5 miles are unpaved, mountain bike territory.  Then there's a 3,000' drop over ~ 10 miles. 

Riding my bike to town and bringing back two weeks worth of groceries is not something I'm going to be doing.  Especially with a bad knee.

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 389
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1564 on: July 21, 2017, 09:10:19 AM »
It’s  350 km (217 M) from my house to my work place. I could do like the oil folks do and fly via Stavanger and Aberdeen, but this would cost me about 10 grand.

Instead I took my bike on the train, camped out for a week, and had the most wonderful morning and evening rides back and forth on public bicycle paths (about 10 M every day). You should have seen the Scottish highland cattle stare at me during their breakfast, rabbits basking in the meadows, birds singing from the tree tops and deers coming out of the forest in the bright morning sun.

As we have discussed before, I deliberately sold my petrol car in order to intentionally downgrade my lifestyle in order to lower my carbon footprint.

Have a nice day.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1565 on: July 21, 2017, 04:48:26 PM »
It’s  350 km (217 M) from my house to my work place. I could do like the oil folks do and fly via Stavanger and Aberdeen, but this would cost me about 10 grand.

Instead I took my bike on the train, camped out for a week, and had the most wonderful morning and evening rides back and forth on public bicycle paths (about 10 M every day). You should have seen the Scottish highland cattle stare at me during their breakfast, rabbits basking in the meadows, birds singing from the tree tops and deers coming out of the forest in the bright morning sun.

As we have discussed before, I deliberately sold my petrol car in order to intentionally downgrade my lifestyle in order to lower my carbon footprint.

Have a nice day.

No, you temporarily moved within bike range of your work.  And during good weather.

If you were able to get rid of your car then that puts you in the category of those who don't need a car.  Millions don't. 

I expect my day will be mixed.  I need to drive ~120 miles RT in order to bring home some building materials.  Biking up a  3000' mountain with half a ton of wood and steel is a bit too hair shirt for me.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1566 on: July 21, 2017, 05:14:54 PM »
Bob, there are shades of "need". Millions don't need a car but still have one. Convenience isn't a true "need", it depends on your tastes and definition. My sister doesn't buy her clothes in second-hand clothes stores because she can't afford new clothes, but because she despises consumerism. She dresses very fashionably btw, so there's no suffering involved. And some people give up their cars not because the alternatives are much cheaper or more covenient, but because it's a small enough sacrifice that they can withstand it for a greater good. My own sacrifices are few, but I admire others who can make more of them without getting to "hair-shirt" status.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1567 on: July 21, 2017, 05:43:08 PM »
Bob, there are shades of "need". Millions don't need a car but still have one. Convenience isn't a true "need", it depends on your tastes and definition. My sister doesn't buy her clothes in second-hand clothes stores because she can't afford new clothes, but because she despises consumerism. She dresses very fashionably btw, so there's no suffering involved. And some people give up their cars not because the alternatives are much cheaper or more covenient, but because it's a small enough sacrifice that they can withstand it for a greater good. My own sacrifices are few, but I admire others who can make more of them without getting to "hair-shirt" status.

I fully understand the difference between need and want. 

Let's get back to the real issue.  There are a number of people who need a car.  And a number of people who don't actually need a car but want one.  The number of people who don't actually need a car, only want one, and are willing to give up their car in order to combat climate change is insignificant. 

We will not get oil out of our transportation systems by asking people to make a sacrifice. 

We won't get coal and natural gas off our grids by asking people to not buy coal/gas generated electricity.

I've watched and been part of the "green" movement since the mid 1960s.  We haven't stopped the use of fossil fuels.  We weren't able to decrease the use of fossil fuels any appreciable amount.  Fifty years of trying should be enough to tell us that we will not be able to avoid extreme climate by getting people to give up stuff, be that stuff cars or buying new clothes.

The only hopeful route I see off fossil fuels is to give people acceptable, affordable alternatives. 

Don't try to get people to lower their lifestyles.  Allow people to maintain, even improve, their lifestyles for the same amount of money they now spend.  Or for even less money.







Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1568 on: July 21, 2017, 08:24:38 PM »
Aliso Canyon Should Close Permanently, Says California Governor Jerry Brown

A call to phase out Southern California’s biggest natural-gas storage site in 10 years, and bring in efficiency, solar PV, energy storage and demand response to take its place.
Quote
Aliso Canyon, the leaking natural-gas storage site that’s been shut down for the past year and a half, has driven utilities Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas to invest millions in demand response, batteries, and other distributed energy resources.

Now California Governor Jerry Brown wants it to be closed permanently, forcing utilities and state regulators to come up with a plan to replace a major part of the region’s energy infrastructure with a lot more of the same.
...
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/aliso-canyon-should-close-permanently-says-california-gov.-jerry-brown
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1569 on: July 21, 2017, 10:53:43 PM »
Let's get back to the real issue.  There are a number of people who need a car.  And a number of people who don't actually need a car but want one.  The number of people who don't actually need a car, only want one, and are willing to give up their car in order to combat climate change is insignificant. 

We will not get oil out of our transportation systems by asking people to make a sacrifice. 

We won't get coal and natural gas off our grids by asking people to not buy coal/gas generated electricity.

I've watched and been part of the "green" movement since the mid 1960s.  We haven't stopped the use of fossil fuels.  We weren't able to decrease the use of fossil fuels any appreciable amount.  Fifty years of trying should be enough to tell us that we will not be able to avoid extreme climate by getting people to give up stuff, be that stuff cars or buying new clothes.

The only hopeful route I see off fossil fuels is to give people acceptable, affordable alternatives. 
I fully agree.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1570 on: July 21, 2017, 11:53:08 PM »
Let's get back to the real issue.  There are a number of people who need a car.  And a number of people who don't actually need a car but want one.  The number of people who don't actually need a car, only want one, and are willing to give up their car in order to combat climate change is insignificant. 

We will not get oil out of our transportation systems by asking people to make a sacrifice. 

We won't get coal and natural gas off our grids by asking people to not buy coal/gas generated electricity.

I've watched and been part of the "green" movement since the mid 1960s.  We haven't stopped the use of fossil fuels.  We weren't able to decrease the use of fossil fuels any appreciable amount.  Fifty years of trying should be enough to tell us that we will not be able to avoid extreme climate by getting people to give up stuff, be that stuff cars or buying new clothes.

The only hopeful route I see off fossil fuels is to give people acceptable, affordable alternatives. 
I fully agree.

Well said, Bob.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1571 on: July 21, 2017, 11:55:02 PM »
"The number of rigs drilling for oil in the United States in the week ended July 21 totaled 764, up by 393 from a year ago. Including 186 other rigs drilling for natural gas, there are 950 working rigs in the country, up by 488 the same from last year.

West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil for August delivery settled at $46.79 a barrel, down 0.7% on Thursday, the contract’s final day of trading. WTI for September delivery traded down 2.4% on Friday at $45.75. ..."
http://247wallst.com/energy-economy/2017/07/21/oil-rig-count-up-by-393-from-year-ago-crude-oil-price-inches-higher/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1572 on: July 22, 2017, 01:12:56 AM »
"The number of people who don't actually need a car, only want one, and are willing to give up their car in order to combat climate change is insignificant.  "

Perhaps, but I know many.

I've also been part of various green movements since the early '70's, and I've never seen a call to consume less as a major part of any major env movements message; not to the degree of stop driving, or stop flying.

So if we've been failing by not challenging people to live within their ecological limits, maybe it's time we started!
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

GeoffBeacon

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1573 on: July 22, 2017, 02:03:03 AM »
Oren, Bob Wallace ...

I feel I am shamed by a recent tweet:

Quote
Some people want  a big house, a fast car and  lots of money.

Others want a tiny cabin in the woods away from those kids of people

(Anyone know how I can find that tweet again?)

My attempt has been much less eloquent:

Quote
Green ghettos?

Unfortunately, separating low-carbon-polluters from high-carbon-polluters does not save the planet from greenhouse gasses which pollute the whole world. We can’t have one planet for polluters and one for non-polluters – but if that were possible the polluters would soon want to leave their polluted planet and change their ways.

Are there advantages for the low-polluters (other than the good feeling of being less polluting) if they were separated from the rest of society into areas where they could live low-carbon lives?

In previous previous pieces (e.g. A parable of four villages and Making planning work differently) I pointed out that these greener areas could have things that are dying out elsewhere: local shops, local pubs, nearby schools and even buses – and of course cycleways, like in Denmark.

Should these be low-carbon areas be called Green Ghettos?

And now in many towns, car filth kills.  In the UK traffic pollution kills about 60,000 per year. A driving license is a license to kill.

Where would you choose to live? LA or Venice?
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 02:25:10 AM by GeoffBeacon »
Il faut cultiver notre cité-jardin
The Sustainable Plotlands Association

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1574 on: July 22, 2017, 07:58:04 AM »
LA or Venice?  Venice, perhaps.  But it's a failing city.  And it's (from what I hear) so often packed with tourists that the quality of life can be crummy.   I've lived in SoCal (San Diego) and I don't like it.  I don't like the mono-climate and it's too damned crowded.  But that's kind of off topic....

 
"And now in many towns, car filth kills.  In the UK traffic pollution kills about 60,000 per year. A driving license is a license to kill."

True enough.  But we're looking at the end of both of those problems. 

I think we're 15 years or less from major improvements in air quality.  Very major.  In much of the world coal will be a minor player within 10 to 15 years.  The UK, for example, seems to have burned its last?  I see a major uptake in EVs by ten years from now with, perhaps, no more than 50% of our driving done with petroleum.  City buses and commercial trucks should clean up faster than personal cars.

Imagine that you are running a city.  You're a powerful local politician who has to provide as much service as you can with the available money and you have a responsibility to give your citizens as high a quality of life as you reasonably can.  (Let's assume you want to do a good job.  You're more of a Barak than a Donald.  ;o)

Very soon you're going to be in a position to pay the same or less for electric buses, garbage trucks, and other city vehicles.  And pay less to operate and maintain them.  Unless you are a complete knucklehead you're going to quickly phase out the ICEVs and move to battery power.  (And your city is going to be quieter.  People from other cities will notice and want the same.)

And imagine you're getting heavily leaned on by citizens over the quality of the air.  London and Paris are talking about preventing diesel vehicles inside the city limit.  As EVs become more common that sort of ban will be extended to gasoline powered vehicles.  Within 10 to 15 years I can see a few cities being "electric only" with some resident owned ICEVs grandfathered in.

Cars are already getting collision avoidance systems, even ICEVs.  Those systems are only going to improve and should soon be required in all new vehicles.  They just don't cost very much compared to the cost of repairing/replacing wrecked vehicles and even more costly humans.  Just think how much less we would spend on healthcare if we no longer were injured by vehicles.

We just lost two valued community members last night.  The driver apparently fell asleep and drove off the road.  One of the fatalities was someone I've done business with for the last 15 years.  I've hired his company to do road construction/repair and to put in septic systems.  Good man.  Soon that sort of tragedy will no longer happen.  Self-driving vehicles won't fall asleep.

GeoffBeacon

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1575 on: July 22, 2017, 10:42:05 AM »
 
Bob Wallace

Quote
Geoff Beacon
Quote
"And now in many towns, car filth kills.  In the UK traffic pollution kills about 60,000 per year. A driving license is a license to kill."
True enough.  But we're looking at the end of both of those problems.

Bob. Perhaps some of this is on the edge of off-topic but the way we live fuels the demand for oil and gas.

The science

We must cut carbon emissions by something like 4% a year to stay within the 2°C surface temperature limit. (Forget 1.5°C.)

It's not just reaching "zero carbon emissions". It's reaching ZCE within the remaining carbon budget for 2°C (i.e. quickly). That cannot be done without cutting current production and consumption, especially car and plane travel.

The Global Carbon Project estimates the remaining carbon budget at 823.0 Gt CO2 to keep within 2°C during this century - that estimate includes negative net emissions towards the end of the century. That's 106 tonnes per person in the world. UK consumption emissions have estimated by DEFRA at over 15 tonnes per UK citizen. In the UK we would bust our fair share of carbon emissions in about 7 years. The USA (on average) is worse.

Simply, we haven't the time to wait for your "improvements".

Freedom and choice

I look to the possibility of changing the model of development so that, in advanced green ghettos, we can choose to avoid "those kinds of people", who are destroying the world. Given the freedom to choose to live a pleasant life in properly planned green ghettos, there would be a chance of a new model of development that the whole world can follow.

Is this still correct
Quote
" a report by Climate Central, Roadmap to Climate-Friendly Cars: 2013, gives carbon emissions from the manufacture of an electric car as 12.3 tonnes CO2e. Two new electric cars to be bought before 2050. That’s embodied carbon equal to 25 tonnes CO2e. (Note: the embodied carbon in s gasoline car is given as 7.4 tonnes CO2e.)"

Add a few flights to that and we have a recipe  for disaster and in the meantime stressful polluted lives.

Conclusion

We won't see your "end to these problems" soon enough without drastic changes.

P.S. As usual I agree with wili.
Il faut cultiver notre cité-jardin
The Sustainable Plotlands Association

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1576 on: July 22, 2017, 03:07:40 PM »
Oren, Bob Wallace ...

I feel I am shamed by a recent tweet:

Quote
Some people want  a big house, a fast car and  lots of money.

Others want a tiny cabin in the woods away from those kids of people

(Anyone know how I can find that tweet again?)

<snip>

Just google it.  It appears to be a popular meme.

Here's one: https://artymarty99.wordpress.com/2015/12/09/some-people-want-a-big-house-a-fast-car-and-lots-of-money/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1577 on: July 22, 2017, 04:54:52 PM »
Quote
the way we live fuels the demand for oil and gas.

The way we live requires electricity, transportation, and heat.  We don't need fossil fuels for any of those things. 

Quote
We must cut carbon emissions by something like 4% a year to stay within the 2°C surface temperature limit. (Forget 1.5°C.)

It's not just reaching "zero carbon emissions". It's reaching ZCE within the remaining carbon budget for 2°C (i.e. quickly). That cannot be done without cutting current production and consumption, especially car and plane travel.

You tell us an effective way to cut consumption.  Yes, efficiency is helping some but that's not enough. 

Tell us how we get people to quit driving and flying.

Give us the solution, Geoff.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1578 on: July 22, 2017, 05:34:24 PM »
Well, all the quick wins could probably make it up to 5 or 10% of global consumption. Since May, I've got a new job and have visited few buildings for energy audit or energy management. Almost each building I visited had the heater on during the summer. In one case, the system took heat every morning from the district heat network just in case the ventilation would need it (temperature in the offices was above 25°C). So yes, efficiency would be a good start. In private houses, LED could also save a lot of energy at a very low cost each time that a standard bulb can replace an old one (works in many cases up to 60W, above you need to replace more than the bulb or to use normal energy saving bulbs). In one home, the Lady had bought many bulbs for one specific light probably 5 years ago in case she wouldn't find the same model anymore, just that now you can find it in LED. I believe that she also doesn't  wring clothes enough before putting them in the dryer.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1579 on: July 23, 2017, 02:44:54 AM »
Quote
the way we live fuels the demand for oil and gas.

You tell us an effective way to cut consumption.  Yes, efficiency is helping some but that's not enough. 

$100 to $200 per ton carbon tax, rebated back on a per capita basis (fee and dividend)/ used to fund building renovations that increase energy efficiency. Consumption will drop pretty rapidly, and manufacturers will respond to rapidly increase efficiency.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1580 on: July 23, 2017, 03:15:36 AM »
Quote
the way we live fuels the demand for oil and gas.

You tell us an effective way to cut consumption.  Yes, efficiency is helping some but that's not enough. 

$100 to $200 per ton carbon tax, rebated back on a per capita basis (fee and dividend)/ used to fund building renovations that increase energy efficiency. Consumption will drop pretty rapidly, and manufacturers will respond to rapidly increase efficiency.

We have to cut fossil fuel consumption to zero.  Sorry for not making that clear.

We could cut oil consumption to zero by implementing a high enough carbon price.  But no government that attempted to do that would rapidly be overthrown.

We can't conserve our way to a carbon free future. Unless you're advocate a return to "living in caves".

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1334
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1581 on: July 23, 2017, 03:42:13 AM »
If the carbon tax is on a "fee and dividend" basis, it will be on a tax-neutral basis for the vast majority, the government would not be overthrown.

Remove all retail sales taxes and replace with a carbon tax, that will fundamentally change consumption patterns. It will also be more progressive, as generally the rich use more fossil fuels (e.g. plane travel, big cars, yachts etc.).

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1582 on: July 23, 2017, 03:42:50 AM »
"...living in caves"

"hairshirt..."

You really are in to the cliche's these days, Bob!  :)
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1583 on: July 23, 2017, 03:48:02 AM »
"...living in caves"

"hairshirt..."

You really are in to the cliche's these days, Bob!  :)

Feel free to substitute your own terms that convey the same meaning.  I'm more into solutions than petty wordplay.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1584 on: July 23, 2017, 05:53:07 AM »
100$/ton CO2 is about 1US$/gallon at 20 pounds CO2/gallon of gas. Right now average us gas price is 2.278/gallon
So it goes to 1.278

diesel is 2.491 US$ and CO2 is mebbe 15% more. so say 3.5 U$ ish a gallon.

Average US driver drives 10 kilomiles. Average is north of 20 miles/gallon, but lets say 20,  thats 500$ paid and received in a fee and dividend system. I burn a lot more miles than ... but i make biodiesel so i can live with that.

Bring it on.

sidd

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1585 on: July 23, 2017, 05:56:41 AM »
"...petty wordplay"

Ummm, that's pretty much the definition of 'cliche,' so you do in fact seem to be interested in "petty wordplay."

Quote
a trite, stereotyped expression; a sentence or phrase, usually expressing a popular or common thought or idea, that has lost originality, ingenuity, and impact by long overuse

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/cliche
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1586 on: July 23, 2017, 06:09:19 AM »
No, wili.  I'm interested in discussing facts and concepts.

Please take your petty games elsewhere.  I graduated junior high well over a half century ago.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1587 on: July 23, 2017, 07:21:44 AM »
If the carbon tax is on a "fee and dividend" basis, it will be on a tax-neutral basis for the vast majority, the government would not be overthrown.

Remove all retail sales taxes and replace with a carbon tax, that will fundamentally change consumption patterns. It will also be more progressive, as generally the rich use more fossil fuels (e.g. plane travel, big cars, yachts etc.).

Well, I'm not sure that the carbon tax should be tax-neutral. I believe that it should bring some income to help the energy transition. Furthermore there is a major risk that carbon tax would stimulate efficiency so that it would reduce tax-incomes if a neutral impact is aimed.

I also belive that there should be a tax on new fossil fuel infrastructure. For example if you buy a new gasoline car, you could pay a tax per unit of horsepower because your investment will generate CO2 during up to 10 years.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1588 on: July 23, 2017, 07:39:41 AM »
Is anyone here against a carbon tax, with or without dividend? I'm sure Bob supports it as well. I wish for it with all my heart. It's not a new idea either, but it hasn't happened yet. Until it happens, pushing renewables and EVs seems like a good approach.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1589 on: July 23, 2017, 07:46:34 AM »
Re: carbon tax effect on gas price

I wrote: "100$/ton CO2 is about 1US$/gallon at 20 pounds CO2/gallon of gas. Right now average us gas price is 2.278/gallon. So it goes to 1.278"

That should read " So it goes to 3.278" The diesel numbers i quoted were correct.

In any case, diesel is the key, and the USA recently survived 4$ diesel. Not such a big deal, especially with dividend.

sidd

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1590 on: July 23, 2017, 09:04:20 AM »
Quote
Is anyone here against a carbon tax, with or without dividend? I'm sure Bob supports it as well.

I see a carbon tax as a catalyst.  Something that would drive the transition to RE electricity and EVs faster. 

The real drivers are getting wind and solar cheaper than other ways to generate electricity (we're pretty much there) and EVs cheaper to purchase than ICEVs (almost there). 

A carbon tax on electricity generation would cause utilities to close coal plants sooner and use less NG by installing RE at a faster rate.  And it might be sellable if the tax was refunded at the monthly electricity bill level.

I suspect a carbon tax on vehicle fuel is pretty much a non-starter (at least in the US).  Higher prices at the pump would cause some politicians to lose their jobs.   Even if that extra tax was refunded at income tax time.

An interesting way to possibly sell a carbon tax would be to first do an extensive educational campaign on the external/health costs of coal and oil.  Get people understanding that one reason their health insurance costs are so high it because we have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars per year treating coal and oil caused disease.

Then pitch the tax as a cost recovery.  No free riders.




TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1591 on: July 23, 2017, 11:32:53 AM »

We must cut carbon emissions by something like 4% a year to stay within the 2°C surface temperature limit. (Forget 1.5°C.)

It's not just reaching "zero carbon emissions". It's reaching ZCE within the remaining carbon budget for 2°C (i.e. quickly). That cannot be done without cutting current production and consumption, especially car and plane travel.



First we need to reduce CO2-e for one year, then we need to build on that.


Every year we put more GHG into the atmosphere than we did the previous year, yet we add some solar and wind and call this progress?
Each year our fossil use increases more than our renewable energy increases, and we bask in our success?


This is like the old saw that we're losing money on each sale, but we'll make it up in volume.


It's all OK because, because, because it just has to be. My children and their children and all the hundreds or thousands that inherit my DNA will live happy, healthy, zerocarbon lives, grateful of my legacy.
Either that or they'll live short brutish lives and die of starvation while cursing my generation for the greedy excesses we enjoyed while debating whether the invisible hand of the market, or stronger governmental control, would be the best way forward.


If we can't spew out less CO2 in 2017 than we did in 2016, we are not making progress, we're just digging ourselves in deeper. Adding 50% more renewable energy doesn't matter if we also add 5% more fossil fuel during that time period.


When Mr. Keeling's infamous curve flattens, then sags, we can claim we've made a start. We won't be able to claim that we've won or will win, only that we really were serious about fulfilling our most minimal obligation to future generations.


Mildly Miffed
Terry

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1592 on: July 23, 2017, 12:18:04 PM »
Well, we shouldn't be too desesparate. France also has similar data than Luxembourg with a global reduction of energy consumption.
http://www.statistiques.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/fileadmin/user_upload/Datalab-13-CC-de_l-energie-edition-2016-fevrier2017.pdf
Pages 12 and 14
Energy production goes up, but this is mainly about electricity. - Page 9.

Efficiency gains are unbelievable.
When I replaced my big sized car, even if the old one already had a TDI motor, I got up to 30% consumption reduction. On the small car, I went from diesel to gasoline and only reduced consuption of a few percents, but gasoline has a lower energy content.
Electrical motors have improved and you see the results on so many systems (from heat pump to vacuum cleaner...).

I believe that these values must be valid for most OECD countries, and since theses countries make a high percentage of global consumption, it should make a difference.

The second chance we have is that non OECD industrial countries like China have major pollution problems, so they also want to reduce their fossil fuel consumption.

The third chance we have is that other big countries like India, Russia... feel the effects of climate change (heat waves, thawing premafrost ...) and we can hope that they will become active in limiting CO2 emissions.

The main risk is that fossil fuels' prices would go down, and so consumption up, so here is a CO2 tax very important, but availability of cheap fossil fuels is limited, so lower prices and EV perspective might cause a collapse of fossil fuels' production.

Let's be optimistic and walk the walk.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1593 on: July 23, 2017, 12:24:38 PM »
I do so hope you're right etienne, but Keeling doesn't fudge their figures.


Terry

GeoffBeacon

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1594 on: July 23, 2017, 02:01:57 PM »
etienne.

I think the figures you cite are for domestic production. How is the consumption carbon footprint in France changing? In the UK, the production footprint is falling but the consumption footprint hasn't fallen much. e.g. We now import cement and steel we used to make, outsourcing our carbon emissions.

Terry

It may be too early to say but is there a mismatch between Keeling and Global Caron Budget figures? A mismatch caused by feedbacks?
Il faut cultiver notre cité-jardin
The Sustainable Plotlands Association

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1595 on: July 23, 2017, 02:40:25 PM »
etienne.

I think the figures you cite are for domestic production. How is the consumption carbon footprint in France changing? In the UK, the production footprint is falling but the consumption footprint hasn't fallen much. e.g. We now import cement and steel we used to make, outsourcing our carbon emissions.
...

The graph I attached is for domestic use, there is almost no oil and gas production in France.
If you open the linked document, on page 9 is the electricity graph production.

Etienne


GeoffBeacon

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1596 on: July 23, 2017, 02:52:43 PM »
Am I correct in thinking that these figures don't include the carbon embodied in imported steel and cement?
Il faut cultiver notre cité-jardin
The Sustainable Plotlands Association

GeoffBeacon

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1597 on: July 23, 2017, 02:52:59 PM »
Bob Wallace

Quote
Give us the solution, Geoff.

High carbon price

Since that post you have given one tool - a high enough carbon price. But to be effective quickly enough a higher price than rboyd's £100-$200 per tonne CO2 is required. Start at $100 now but raise it to $1000 over a decade then reassess.

If carbon tax with dividend were implemented with decent political support it could get public support because so many would benefit but it would be a political struggle given the power of the fossil fuel lobby.

Research and development

However, the FF lobby hasn't been able to stop R&D into renewable energy like wind and solar.  Usually ground-breaking research is kick-started by government support such as that given to Silicon Valley. In The Entrepreneurial State, Mariana Mazzucato says (actually this is from an Amazon review):

Quote
Debunking the myth of a laggard State at odds with a dynamic private sector, Mazzucato reveals in case study after case study that in fact the opposite situation is true, with the private sector only finding the courage to invest after the entrepreneurial State has made the high-risk investments.

I guess the FF lobby won't allow much support for government funded research in renewables in the US for the time being. Perhaps we might look to China's One Belt One Road Initiative

Quote
the One Belt One Road Initiative is not simply about roads and sea lanes, but will involve high-speed railways, bridges, and ports, as well as the potential for unprecedented electricity grid connectivity and increased renewable energy development.

I haven't the details to hand, but I did attend a talk at the London School of Economics, which plausibly claimed that expenditure on R&D for renewable energy was much more effective than subsidising its use.  This supports etiene's

Quote
I'm not sure that the carbon tax should be tax-neutral. I believe that it should bring some income to help the energy transition.

So far the emphasis has been on one type of R&D, which might be called white coat science and engineering. There is little funding for research into the economics and social science of how low carbon societies could be built.

Green ghetto utopias

This is where I see an opportunity where government funding could kick-start a market in lifestyles that could be low carbon and fossil fuel free.

I meet many people who would like to live in a low carbon neighbourhood - particularly away from the pollution, danger and expense of mass car transport and surrounded by concrete and asphalt.

Better to be surrounded by trees and fresh air. This is a market opportunity.

See e.g. The Green Settlement Handbook
Il faut cultiver notre cité-jardin
The Sustainable Plotlands Association

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1598 on: July 23, 2017, 04:31:53 PM »
Quote
If carbon tax with dividend were implemented with decent political support it could get public support because so many would benefit

Your first word is "if".  A large carbon tax is a non-starter.  It might be possible to put a small carbon tax on electricity production if the revenue was used to offset increases in consumer rates.  But there's about zero chance that we will see meaningful carbon prices that increase the cost of electricity or fuel at the pumps. 

I don't think you understand how "now" the vast majority of people are.  There aren't enough of us who are willing to invest in the future to make a carbon tax work. 

Quote
I guess the FF lobby won't allow much support for government funded research in renewables in the US for the time being

When it comes to wind and solar there's little to no need for government funding for research.  Wind and solar are now large enough businesses to drive their own research programs.  Companies are competing for who can deliver the best, most efficient, lowest cost turbines and solar panels. 

Government's role is generally to do the basic research on new ideas and to kickstart promising technologies.  That work is done.

Besides, the fossil fuel industry is losing power.  Coal has largely been neutered and oil has no real power in many countries.  China and India, for example, have no oil industry.  They only have an oil distribution system.  Same holds for most of Europe.

Quote
I meet many people who would like to live in a low carbon neighbourhood - particularly away from the pollution, danger and expense of mass car transport and surrounded by concrete and asphalt.

I live in a neighborhood like that.  It's called the country.   :)

What you suggest is not a solution.  It's an escape.

So, Geoff, you've delivered no solution.  IMHO.  You've stated that a heavy carbon tax could help but around the world a heavy price on carbon is pretty much a non-starter.  Solutions have to be implementable. 

GeoffBeacon

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1599 on: July 23, 2017, 06:30:51 PM »
Bob Wallace

Quote
I live in a neighborhood like that.  It's called the country.

In advanced societies, country dwellers are usually polluters

Most people in the country have cars because they need to get to shops, work and entertainment. In general they have large carbon footprints unless they are isolated and poor. In the"advanced" world many people in the countryside are climate destroyers and drive into towns and pollute them.

Why can't we have green ghettos with most cars excluded?

Just why do you think that modern green ghettos as part of urban areas is impossible? Your "no solution" assertion doesn't explain. Are you maintaining that we must have mass car transport when many are coming to cities and getting on their bikes (in the UK at least). Unfortunately, they suffer car pollution and see more car-orientated facilities crowding out the ones we used to have.

It's mass use of cars that isn't an answer.

Green ghettos are not a solution by themselves but a car driven lifestyle cannot fit within our remaining carbon budget. The vast majority of cars are still oil guzzlers and the electricity for EVs cannot be decarbonised fast enough. Recent news:

Quote
RWE plans to build Britain's biggest gas-fired power station on the site of its defunct Tilbury biomass plant in Essex.

And gas may be as bad as coal

Quote
Whether natural gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the assumed leakage rate, the global warming potential of methane over different time frames, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors.
Il faut cultiver notre cité-jardin
The Sustainable Plotlands Association