Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Oil and Gas Issues  (Read 265538 times)

longwalks1

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1500 on: July 11, 2017, 04:30:14 AM »
Wow, Not the most outgoing womens religious order, a little more conservative that Dominicans or Benedictines, but a strong commitment to peace and justice at the grassroots level, often involving education.  Having worked and/or  been arrested with a few sisters religious over the decades I am saddened with the language used; "nuns" to be me is a form of deprecation and distancing.  For the combination of shimmering vibrancy and stability that I have notices from friends and acquaintances who are sisters religious, I really detest the word "nun".

No water cannons or tear gas to be used on them (hopefully).  Will be intersting to watch how it unforlds.  Note - I will watch NCR - National Catholic Reporter if they have updates, none yet at https://www.ncronline.org/ 

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1501 on: July 11, 2017, 12:39:41 PM »
Good article from Bloomberg on how the oil and gas industry see the future of oil and gas. I hope they are wrong in assuming demand will peak at least 25 years from now. If they are right we are toast.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-11/remember-peak-oil-demand-may-top-out-before-supply-does
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
    • About energy
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1502 on: July 11, 2017, 01:24:59 PM »
I guess this is just a public speach in order to tell the world that renewable are just for climate change, not because of peak oil. Since non conventional oil has a much lower energy return on energy investment (EROEI) - much more drilling, transport, chemicals... for the same quantity of energy - if production is to grow until 2040, I agree with the toaster image.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1503 on: July 11, 2017, 04:30:10 PM »
Good article from Bloomberg on how the oil and gas industry see the future of oil and gas. I hope they are wrong in assuming demand will peak at least 25 years from now. If they are right we are toast.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-11/remember-peak-oil-demand-may-top-out-before-supply-does

I think we see peak oil demand before 2025.  By then a meaningful percentage of our new cars should be EVs.  We should be seeing buses and delivery trucks switching to batteries.  And as we build toward a significant percentage of battery powered vehicles our least efficient vehicles will be aging out, replaced by the more efficient vehicles now being manufactured.


TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1504 on: July 11, 2017, 06:06:34 PM »
First we need to eliminate coal, then oil for land transportation and electrical generation, finally cut back on gas. Some gas use will be required for a very long time or it will escape into the atmosphere and do immense damage. I've no idea what to do about jet fuel for airplanes, or diesel for shipping, but high speed rail may kill a lot of both problems.
High taxes and tariffs on carbon might help to spread the pain equitably, and with the US now away from the table, Paris may grow some huge cahones.
Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1505 on: July 11, 2017, 07:17:02 PM »
Any country can put in place a high carbon tax, and tax imports based on their carbon content (e.g. higher for those using lots of coal to produce electricity) including transportation. If a few major importing countries did this (shame that the US will not be on board) the exporting countries would have to rapidly respond.

This would not be discriminatory against imports, and therefore be fine with respect to trade treaties. May stop such stupidities as flying flowers from one country to another, given the carbon tax that would be charged.

If done on a fee and dividend basis should also have a great amount of support among the population.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1506 on: July 11, 2017, 07:57:21 PM »
Royalties cuts for Gulf of Mexico's shallow water leases (US)

Exactly the opposite of an increasing carbon tax! Let's reduce royalties on fossil fuel companies to help them produce more!

https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/royalties-cuts-gulf-mexicos-shallow-water-leases-us.html

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9101
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1507 on: July 11, 2017, 08:30:10 PM »
Royalties cuts for Gulf of Mexico's shallow water leases (US)

Exactly the opposite of an increasing carbon tax! Let's reduce royalties on fossil fuel companies to help them produce more!

https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/royalties-cuts-gulf-mexicos-shallow-water-leases-us.html

They did it because demand for drill sites has plummeted.  So, yeah, trying to help ff companies produce more is bad, but... yay!  \o/
The BOEM changed the rate after considering the decline in US shallow water drilling operations, due to the low crude prices. Oil and gas producers have reduced their exploration activity to cope with the tougher market conditions and shallow water drilling has been particularly affected.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1508 on: July 11, 2017, 11:04:50 PM »
Royalties cuts for Gulf of Mexico's shallow water leases (US)

Exactly the opposite of an increasing carbon tax! Let's reduce royalties on fossil fuel companies to help them produce more!

https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/royalties-cuts-gulf-mexicos-shallow-water-leases-us.html

They did it because demand for drill sites has plummeted.  So, yeah, trying to help ff companies produce more is bad, but... yay!  \o/

They would have just come up with another excuse otherwise. It's a long-standing GOP mantra that the private sector should have unfettered access to natural resources, with royalties as low as possible. Not that the other party is all that much better.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9101
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1509 on: July 12, 2017, 09:16:23 PM »
400,000 oil industry jobs lost.  400,000 paid reservations for the all-electric Tesla Model 3.  Coincidence?  ;) ;D

Halliburton Says Oil Will Spike in 2020 After $2 Trillion in Industry Cuts
Halliburton Co. expects that the worst crude crash in a generation will lead to a spike in oil prices by 2020.

Tumbling oil prices brought on by a glut of global oil has forced the industry to slash about $2 trillion in investments, according to the world’s biggest fracking provider. Those cuts will weigh heavily on the market in a few years when oil supplies fail to keep up with demand, Mark Richard, the company’s senior vice president for global business development said Wednesday in an interview at the World Petroleum Congress in Istanbul.

"Sooner or later, the market is going to catch up," Richard said. "You’ll see some kind of spike in the price of oil. Maybe somewhere around 2020-2021, but it’s got to catch up sooner or later."

The oil industry has been struggling to climb out of a downturn that eliminated more than 400,000 jobs, forced hundreds of companies into bankruptcy and led to sharp output cuts after oil prices tumbled from more than $100 a barrel in the middle of 2014 to a low of $26.05 in February last year.
...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-12/halliburton-sees-2020-oil-spike-after-industry-cuts-2-trillion
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
    • About energy
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1510 on: July 12, 2017, 10:04:22 PM »
So we have one report saying that peak demand will come before peak oil

Good article from Bloomberg on how the oil and gas industry see the future of oil and gas. I hope they are wrong in assuming demand will peak at least 25 years from now. If they are right we are toast.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-11/remember-peak-oil-demand-may-top-out-before-supply-does

And this last one saying that prices will spike in 2020.

The first report comes from the ones who sale the crude oil  => don't worry about the availability of our product, and the second one from one who makes the infrastructure => you better use my services if you don't want to be in trouble in 3 years.

Maybe both are right. Demand will peak when price will be too high. Maybe this is a good news because it could accelerate the way toward renewable energy, and that acceleration could keep oil prices on levels that don't break our economy. 2008 was the best advertisement for renewable energy and energy efficiency.

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1511 on: July 13, 2017, 02:16:28 AM »
"Sooner or later, the market is going to catch up," Richard said. "You’ll see some kind of spike in the price of oil. Maybe somewhere around 2020-2021, but it’s got to catch up sooner or later."

This is assuming growing oil demand. That's been a safe assumption for a century, on time scales of a half-decade.

But if oil for cars stabilizes due to EVs and improved efficiency making up for an increase in cars;  and oil for heating goes down due to heat pumps; and oil for electricity goes down due to solar and wind, the oil demand will be falling.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1512 on: July 13, 2017, 02:44:38 AM »
Tumbling oil prices brought on by a glut of global oil has forced the industry to slash about $2 trillion in investments

Or - investors are now seeing a large chance that EVs and other battery powered vehicles will cause a demand decay which could mean that money spent now to find new oil sources will never be repaid.

If you're watching Henry's Model T sales rising rapidly year after year do you invest a bunch of money in a new buggy whip factory?
---

Has anyone seen a recent, rational argument from the auto or oil industry about how ICEVs will win out over EVs?

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1513 on: July 13, 2017, 02:51:41 AM »
Has anyone seen a recent, rational argument from the auto or oil industry about how ICEVs will win out over EVs?

Just talking about how they're less than 1% of the market and therefore just a fringe thing, nothing to worry about.

Pretty much exactly like what RIM was saying about the iPhone.

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
    • About energy
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1514 on: July 13, 2017, 06:56:49 AM »
"Sooner or later, the market is going to catch up," Richard said. "You’ll see some kind of spike in the price of oil. Maybe somewhere around 2020-2021, but it’s got to catch up sooner or later."

This is assuming growing oil demand. That's been a safe assumption for a century, on time scales of a half-decade.

But if oil for cars stabilizes due to EVs and improved efficiency making up for an increase in cars;  and oil for heating goes down due to heat pumps; and oil for electricity goes down due to solar and wind, the oil demand will be falling.

There is something called depletion of an oil field. If I am right, about 3 to 6% for conventionnal oil, more for non conventional. It means that to have a constant production, you need to put in production that quantity of new oil every year. So it is some kind of race between the EV increase and the depletion of the oil field.

If you look at the oil production graph of the US, you really see the depletion of the global production (which means that the new production was not able to compensate), than comes the non conventional oil, which goes up and down depending of the oil price.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IPG211111CN
Peak was at the beginning of the 70's.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1515 on: July 14, 2017, 05:52:30 PM »
Here is an article I find more disturbing than the Wallace-Wells piece. It shows there hasn't been a leveling of oil or gas use there has been a continued increase. It also shows the downturn in coal may be far smaller than that reported because, as we have discussed here on the ASIF , Chine has been under reporting.

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction


rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1516 on: July 14, 2017, 08:59:00 PM »
It makes sense that the world is becoming less efficient in the use of oil, as China is at the stage of development that drives road transport usage - i.e. cars and trucks. They have a big boom in SUV sales (just like the US), let's hope that they stick with their targets for electric car market share.

The 2015/2016 atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration numbers were skewed by the El Nino. Also, emissions have flat-lined, not fallen, so the trend rate of change in carbon dioxide will remain the same. So, may not be proof of uncounted emissions, although I am awaiting the next update of Chinese coal statistics (whenever it arrives) with trepidation.

The motivation to cheat on emission numbers is so high, in the US with methane emissions as much as in China (the AGGI numbers from NOAA, that count all GHGs, are going up by 3-4ppm per year CO2e this decade). Without an international independent counting body there will always be the suspicion of major cheating.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1517 on: July 15, 2017, 02:27:34 AM »
Jeeze Bruce


If you're link can be taken at face value, all the happy, "everything just keeps getting better everyday, in every way" messages need to be stood on their heads.
The claims that renewables are making increasing progress apparently need to read that new renewables lag new fossil fuel installations.
That the G20 and the development banks are spending and lending more for fossil fuel installations than for all other's combined is hard to spin into a hopeful message. The charts he's produced showing both gas and oil to be racing ahead of hydro, wind, solar and biomass - at increasing rates - indicate that things aren't just getting worse, they're getting worse at a rapidly increasing rate.


I'd love to read Bob Wallace's take on this. Bob?


Terrified
Terry


PS The above is in reply to Bruce Steele's message just upstream and his link to:


http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1518 on: July 15, 2017, 06:50:29 AM »
Terry, I so much wish emissions would plateau. I would give anything to see some way to verify ff use had plateaued. I am afraid however that there is no way to verify numbers issued by my government, the Chinese, the Indian government, the Russian government , the Polish government, and since they represent a large enough portion of the total ff emission I don't trust any worldwide claims.
 I really believe there is an attempt to distort our public belief or trust in the truth or what our governments tell us. This is so frickin Orwellian. And I am terrified the distortions are so damn
successful . Nobody knows where we stand. 
 Negotiating emissions targets without getting a handle on verification is pure bullshit !  Put some fricken tracers in all international sales of fuel and coal. Don't tell me this isn't possible. Hell we could probably use sulfur content of various coal deposits to correlate satellite CO2 and SO2 emissions . Just pulling straws but considering the stakes involved I would like to see some ideas from the science on why this is impossible. 
 Like I said before , the present is more terrifying than future scenarios. Jeeze
Trust but Verify is a Russian proverb. Apropos

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
    • About energy
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1519 on: July 15, 2017, 07:44:11 AM »
Well, the only good news is that OECD countries really reduce their energy use. If you take european data, where there is not so much national energy mining, which means less cheating possibilities, consumption goes globally down, so we can hope that other countries will follow.

We have too many government around the world that are not so democratic and where glasnost is not so much the main concern.

Priorities are difficult to manage, and growth needs alternatives, but this is a difficult fight. In my last job, our CFO explained us that you can't make it without growth because profit margins tend to go down and salaries tend to go up. Growth with just energy efficiency is easier when you produce services, but each kg of steel needs energy to be mined and transformed. OECD good numbers regarding energy use might only be the result of higher imports of goods with a high energy content.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2017, 09:05:20 PM by etienne »

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9101
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1520 on: July 15, 2017, 07:58:55 PM »
Here is an article I find more disturbing than the Wallace-Wells piece. It shows there hasn't been a leveling of oil or gas use there has been a continued increase. It also shows the downturn in coal may be far smaller than that reported because, as we have discussed here on the ASIF , Chine has been under reporting.

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction


Since we sometimes ;) fault clean energy companies for being overly optimistic about the rise of renewables, I think it is appropriate to be a little skeptical of fossil fuel data from BP.  If they were to report that FF use was declining significantly, it could set off a global financial oil panic. 

For example, they forecast only 5 to 6% of cars will be electric in 2035.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/25/reuters-america-global-oil-demand-to-grow-into-2040s--bp-outlook.html


We now have more detailed data on CO2 from satellites.  But that only shows total CO2, earth and human-caused, so that's not yet the answer.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/climate/nasa-s-space-based-map-of-carbon-dioxide-emissions


If we were to have "proof" of CO2 emissions by region, I wonder what the response would be.  Denial?  Anger?  War?
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1392
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1521 on: July 15, 2017, 08:23:51 PM »
The times, they are a'changin:

"OPEC quintupled its forecast for sales of plug-in EVs, and oil producers from Exxon Mobil Corp. to BP Plc also revised up their outlooks in the past year, ..."

"The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries raised its 2040 EV fleet prediction to 266 million from the 46 million it anticipated a year ago."

"    The International Energy Agency more than doubled its central forecast for EVs, raising its 2030 EV fleet size estimate from to 58 million from 23 million.
    Exxon Mobil boosted its 2040 estimate to about 100 million from 65 million.
    BP anticipates 100 million EVs on the road by 2035, a 40 percent increase in its outlook compared with a year ago.
    Statoil ASA, the Norwegian state oil company, says EVs will account for a 30 percent of new sales by 2030. "

"Yet even as oil majors lift their outlook, they remain much less optimistic than the automakers. The world’s top automakers have a combined plan to sell 6 million EVs a year by 2025, rising to 8 million in 2030, ..."

Read the whole thing:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-14/big-oil-just-woke-up-to-the-threat-of-rising-electric-car-demand

sidd


Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9101
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1522 on: July 15, 2017, 09:13:31 PM »
Wow, Sidd.  Thanks!  I'm copying your post to the Cars thread.  :)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1523 on: July 15, 2017, 10:07:39 PM »
Here is an article I find more disturbing than the Wallace-Wells piece. It shows there hasn't been a leveling of oil or gas use there has been a continued increase. It also shows the downturn in coal may be far smaller than that reported because, as we have discussed here on the ASIF , Chine has been under reporting.

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction


Since we sometimes ;) fault clean energy companies for being overly optimistic about the rise of renewables, I think it is appropriate to be a little skeptical of fossil fuel data from BP.  If they were to report that FF use was declining significantly, it could set off a global financial oil panic. 

We should remember that these charts were not compiled by BP, but by a researcher who did use BP's figures, but put them together in a way that BP had not intended. I'm arguing that the results we see are not what BP was promoting. It's still certainly possible of course that the BP data used was fudged for some other purpose, but going down that rabbit hole leads to an extremely complex maze.
Terry

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1524 on: July 15, 2017, 11:55:50 PM »
Here is an article I find more disturbing than the Wallace-Wells piece. It shows there hasn't been a leveling of oil or gas use there has been a continued increase. It also shows the downturn in coal may be far smaller than that reported because, as we have discussed here on the ASIF , Chine has been under reporting.

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction


Since we sometimes ;) fault clean energy companies for being overly optimistic about the rise of renewables, I think it is appropriate to be a little skeptical of fossil fuel data from BP.  If they were to report that FF use was declining significantly, it could set off a global financial oil panic. 

For example, they forecast only 5 to 6% of cars will be electric in 2035.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/25/reuters-america-global-oil-demand-to-grow-into-2040s--bp-outlook.html


We now have more detailed data on CO2 from satellites.  But that only shows total CO2, earth and human-caused, so that's not yet the answer.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/climate/nasa-s-space-based-map-of-carbon-dioxide-emissions


If we were to have "proof" of CO2 emissions by region, I wonder what the response would be.  Denial?  Anger?  War?


Paranoid little? BP's graphs are based on publicly available data. They are not 100% or even 90% accurate but your paranoia that they are fudged is a little too much. There are monthly and weekly and daily reports of primary energy use that would have shown a significant slowdown in your scenario much faster than the annual updated BP report.

If FF demand is significantly down do you think is in FF producing companies interest to adapt or to be in denial?
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9101
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1525 on: July 16, 2017, 02:45:04 AM »
"If FF demand is significantly down do you think is in FF producing companies interest to adapt or to be in denial?"

Denial, absolutely.  They are hell-bent on razing as much of the environment as they can, to make as much money as they can, in the few years they have left.  They are "adapting" even more slowly than the legacy auto makers, who at least have a clear path forward via EVs.

Edit:  They've known this day was coming for over 50 years.  And yet still deny it -- outwardly, anyway!
« Last Edit: July 16, 2017, 02:51:32 AM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1526 on: July 16, 2017, 03:00:47 AM »
"If FF demand is significantly down do you think is in FF producing companies interest to adapt or to be in denial?"

Denial, absolutely.  They are hell-bent on razing as much of the environment as they can, to make as much money as they can, in the few years they have left.  They are "adapting" even more slowly than the legacy auto makers, who at least have a clear path forward via EVs.

Edit:  They've known this day was coming for over 50 years.  And yet still deny it -- outwardly, anyway!

Every government the last 50 yrs or more in US Europe and Russia were equally knowledgeable...
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1527 on: July 16, 2017, 06:56:45 PM »
Jeeze Bruce


If you're link can be taken at face value, all the happy, "everything just keeps getting better everyday, in every way" messages need to be stood on their heads.
The claims that renewables are making increasing progress apparently need to read that new renewables lag new fossil fuel installations.
That the G20 and the development banks are spending and lending more for fossil fuel installations than for all other's combined is hard to spin into a hopeful message. The charts he's produced showing both gas and oil to be racing ahead of hydro, wind, solar and biomass - at increasing rates - indicate that things aren't just getting worse, they're getting worse at a rapidly increasing rate.


I'd love to read Bob Wallace's take on this. Bob?


Terrified
Terry


PS The above is in reply to Bruce Steele's message just upstream and his link to:


http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction


So far I've just glanced at the article.  What hit me first is his lumping all fossil fuels together.  Yes, we haven't cut our overall fossil fuel use very much, but the replacement of coal with natural gas is a major move.  NG allows grids to incorporate more wind and solar without adding storage.  NG is very dispatchable.

Second, we're very short years into affordable wind and solar.  Very short years.  To expect a major global decrease in FF use due to wind and solar growth would be naive.  Wind and solar are far from reaching their probable growth rates that we will see over a roughly 20 year span once they finish their growth rates.  That's when we see serious FF declines.

Third, some countries have not yet started getting off fossil fuels at a serious level.  Germany, Denmark and a few others are pioneers but they are still out in the wilderness creating trails for other countries to follow.  Denmark is now producing around 60% of its electricity with renewables and has one of the very lowest wholesale costs of electricity in Europe.  Germany produced over 30% of its electricity with renewables in 2016 and its wholesale electricity prices are lower than France's with their paid off nuclear plants.

Other countries will look at what is happening with the pioneers and that will encourage them to accelerate their efforts.

Obviously oil use isn't down.  With the tiny number of EVs and PHEVs on the world's roads we should expect to see no appreciable impact on petroleum use.  It will take a couple more years for EVs to be selling millions of units per year and, perhaps, five or so years before we start seeing a change in petroleum use.

The article is a summary of what hasn't happened yet.  It ignores what is happening. 




Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1528 on: July 16, 2017, 07:10:10 PM »
This is something that I want to dig into a bit more...

Meanwhile, construction of coal plants continues to boom around the globe and CO2 levels in our atmosphere continue to accelerate upwards.

The issue is not how many coal plants are being built, but the net change in the number of coal plants.  And any change in efficiency.

The US, for example is building essentially no new coal plants (one or two are being completed).  Significant numbers are being closed.  China is building some supercritical coal plants while closing thousands of inefficient coal plants (and cancelling several coal projects).  Germany built some supercritical coal plants and is now in the process of closing many more inefficient plants. The UK recently stopped burning coal.  Coal won't disappear overnight, it will be a gradual process.  And the process is underway.

The author says...

It's hard for me to see any sign of good news for our future climate or oceans in BP's latest energy data. There is no sign of a turning point in our dependence on fossil fuels.

You're not likely to see signs of good news if you do your best to minimize what has been accomplished and if you ignore what is building.  Look at the leaders.  Don't minimize the progress being made by adding in the laggards and averaging out progress.

It's like one person reporting that their is a hole in the dam and the hole is getting larger every day with no signs of its growth being stoppable.  The author is watching the water level behind the dam and reporting that the water level has barely dropped.  If you want to know where we will be in the near future look at what is changing now.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9101
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1529 on: July 17, 2017, 05:40:30 PM »
"Industry consultants say there isn't even enough demand in the United States for all the gas that would come from this boost in production."

Natural Gas Building Boom Fuels Climate Worries, Enrages Landowners
Beyond that, many of these pipeline contracts have an incestuous quality. Companies are building them for their own subsidiaries — mostly electric or gas utilities and gas producers. It's as if one hand wrote the contract and the other signed it.

Industry experts say this trend increases the risk of overbuilding. One reason is that interstate pipelines are more profitable than power plants and other infrastructure that utilities erect for themselves.

"It's a nice way to make money," said Greg Lander of Skipping Stone, a gas- and electric-industry consulting firm. "The market need isn't there."
http://www.npr.org/2017/07/17/536708576/natural-gas-building-boom-fuels-climate-worries-enrages-landowners
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1530 on: July 18, 2017, 06:23:20 PM »
Bloomberg:  Clean Energy Is Trouncing Oil, Gas and Coal in Trump Era
President Donald Trump took office vowing to revive the coal industry’s fortunes. So far, the smart money has been on clean energy.

An index of 40 publicly-traded solar companies, wind-turbine component makers and others that benefit from reduced fossil fuel consumption is up 20 percent this year. That’s more than double the S&P 500’s 9.8 percent gain. And better than the 8.3 percent rise by an index of leading coal companies.
...
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1531 on: July 19, 2017, 01:25:33 AM »
TOR
Have you read Bruce's link from upthread?


httwww.nationalobserver.com/2017/07/13/analysis/these-missing-charts-may-change-way-you-think-about-fossil-fuel-addiction

It's a nice piece of work that uses BP's published figures against them.
Terry


Edit
Fixed size with link
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 09:34:58 AM by TerryM »

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1532 on: July 19, 2017, 03:08:20 AM »
Not his link; just his post.  Why do you ask?
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 03:23:58 AM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1533 on: July 19, 2017, 09:40:10 AM »
Not his link; just his post.  Why do you ask?


I think it contains important data that belies much of the Green BAU & everything will be more or less OK stuff. Data that had certainly slipped past my radar.


Terry
BTW I corrected my above post to show the link, as I'd intended.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1534 on: July 19, 2017, 04:31:21 PM »
There is a complex tapestry woven by the 'truths' published here and yon, many of which attempt to reflect 'Truth'.  Bruce shared important 'there's disturbing conclusions to be drawn from industry data'.  I shared 'there's some gloom [coal is 'up' some], but not totally gloom [renewables are doing well]' information. 

I expected the housing bubble fail 'any day' from about 2000 (and sold and bought 2 homes [the 2nd time in that order] between then and 2005).  When the bubble burst in 2007-8, I wasn't surprised, but if I had more directly invested in the failure (buying some sort of futures), I would have been loosing my shirt for 7 years!

So in the short term, I think Bloomberg will often be approximately 'right'.  In the long term, Bruce's source will likely be 'right'.  In the longer term, my grand nieces and nephew will have to cope (or not) and I'll be dead.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1535 on: July 19, 2017, 05:56:30 PM »
What's the "the Green BAU"?

numerobis

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1536 on: July 19, 2017, 06:04:24 PM »
The green BAU is the view that everything will be OK because the free market has innovated and now we're saved by mass adoption of EVs and solar panels.

We need to push much faster than what the market can provide under today's incentive structures.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1537 on: July 19, 2017, 06:38:23 PM »
i think the two important data sets  in the article I linked were the continued increases in CO2 emissions.  1990 7 Gt.C
                  2000 8 Gt.C
                  2007 10 Gt.C
                  2013 11 Gt.C
                  2016 11.4 Gt.C
The second point was there has ,over the last three years, been a year over year increase similar to the yearly gains of the 1990s
 
If we are to argue that the ten year temperature flatline starting in 1998 was  cooked data then maybe we should also question " the emissions over the last three years have plateaued ".
One arguement is from the Black BAU camp, the other is from the Green BAU camp,
BAU is however color blind.

There continues to be a large misunderstanding of atmospheric CO2 increases and what we should expect to happen to those increases if we do manage to plateau our emissions.
They will not drop ! They will continue to increase for many decades . The author of the linked article doesn't understand this and I think someone like RobertScribbler should better understand what we should expect. They will not even decrease in the rate of increase until we drop back several
Giggatonnes of carbon emission per year. That simply isn't happening and if you include fugitive gas emission from gas drilling and the CO2e numbers, like Rboyd has pointed out ,we have already reached doubling. So the important number we should all consider is ECS. If ECS is 4 or higher things are going to get very hot very fast. That is where BAU has gotten us all.     
 
 

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1538 on: July 19, 2017, 06:43:57 PM »
Green BAU = pro environment but still mostly Business As Usual
non-green BAU is 'all about' getting all the oil an gas and coal we can as quickly as possible, and making our penny today with no concern for others' future.

Green BAU  is usually used in a derogatory way:  if everybody lived like [fill in the blank rich person], but used 'only' green electricity, we'd all still be doomed, goes the understanding.  There is a suggestion that 'true Green' approaches are transformational, so that society will be qualitatively different than it did before.

This sort of happened in the USA during WW2, with some food and gasoline rationed, many folks grew some of their own food and took the train.  The reverse transformation after that war, however, compensated for the wartime 'green' behavior 100 or 10,000 times over.

Will we transform or go down fighting with BAU?
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1539 on: July 19, 2017, 06:51:30 PM »
Green BAU = pro environment but still mostly Business As Usual

Who are those people?  I can't think of anyone.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1540 on: July 19, 2017, 06:57:43 PM »
I suggest it includes many of the investors that caused (from my Bloomberg quoute above):
An index of 40 publicly-traded solar companies, wind-turbine component makers and others that benefit from reduced fossil fuel consumption is up 20 percent this year.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1541 on: July 19, 2017, 08:25:32 PM »
I suggest it includes many of the investors that caused (from my Bloomberg quoute above):
An index of 40 publicly-traded solar companies, wind-turbine component makers and others that benefit from reduced fossil fuel consumption is up 20 percent this year.

Are you saying that investors in green energy are "green BAU" people?

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1542 on: July 19, 2017, 09:07:03 PM »
"many"
It is my belief.

As long as I drive a Prius (even a 15 years old one), among other 'sins' [note: it uses petrol], I count myself as being among those Green BAUers.  I've had friends and associates who are quite Green (way back to the latest 60's) so I have images of what it takes.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1543 on: July 19, 2017, 09:30:57 PM »
It feels like communication is less than desirable.  How about we define some terms?

BAU = Business as Usual.  Business as usual is to burn fossil fuels for electricity and petroleum for transportation. 

A "green BUA" would then be someone who uses less electricity and petroleum?

Someone else stated that "The green BAU is the view that everything will be OK because the free market has innovated and now we're saved by mass adoption of EVs and solar panels."

A move from FF to RE is not business as usual.  It's a transformation.

(And the free market did not innovate and give us affordable wind and solar.  Those arrived via market corruption - subsidies.  There is a huge difference between "free market" and "market forces".)

You stated - "I suggest (green BAU) includes many of the investors that caused (from my Bloomberg quoute above): An index of 40 publicly-traded solar companies, wind-turbine component makers and others that benefit from reduced fossil fuel consumption is up 20 percent this year.

Those are not BAU people.  They are investing in the transition away from fossil fuels.  (And accepting higher risk than one would encounter investing in established companies.)

I suggest we limit the term BAU to those who oppose change.

We come up with a term for those who advocate for a move to RE and EVs.  "Greens" might be OK, but the word green has been highly degraded in the US by the behavior of the Green Party.
---

A "non-green BAU is 'all about' getting all the oil an gas and coal we can as quickly as possible".

Why use the word green in the description of someone who supports fossil fuels (and, I suppose) opposes renewable energy?

Can you give us a better label?  Something that says fossil fuel advocate and renewable energy opponent.
---

What do we call the pessimists who seem to believe that we can't avoid extreme climate change?  Is "doomer" too harsh?
---




etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
    • About energy
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1544 on: July 19, 2017, 11:22:51 PM »
Hello,

I have another point of view regarding the green BAU. Somewhere between 1980 and 2000, green polititians where green to protect nature, than sometimes this changed and people became green to protect their health.
For me, green BAU are people who are more worried about themselves than about the world we live in. They use EV because they don't want the pollution for themselves. This is a little bit a caricature, nobody matches exactly this model, but I believe that if you really are green, you should also agree to reduce your standard of living because for example an EV is not carbon neutral because of the CO2 created when producing it, or even if you have money to plant trees  to compensate air travel, you should try to travel less by plane.

Best regards,

Etienne

PS : Reducing life standard is easier to say than to do. I also believe that nobody is "oldfashioned" green according to this definition.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 11:31:43 PM by etienne »

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1545 on: July 20, 2017, 12:20:12 AM »
How about we define some terms?

I take Green BAU to be transition to renewables from FF but no attempt at reducing demand for services. (i.e. reducing demand for electric by more efficient devices would be in green BAU scenario but reducing demand for such devices would not be included.)

I think greenwashing is certainly a negative term implying pretence at being green.

I agree Green BAU may well often be used in negative way often implying lack of appreciation of scale of problem. But should such negativity be more reserved for greenwashing and we should accept that green BAU may not be all we want it to be but at least it is a lot better than black/grey/brown or whatever BAU.

Not sure if green BAU could perhaps be contrasted with some other term, who think significant demand reduction is necessary? 'Full on Green'?

Perhaps also want a definition for
Treehugging Green
Maybe: not give an inch perhaps particularly on local issues. Believe environment should always be protected against any business imperitive.

oren

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1547
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1546 on: July 20, 2017, 12:36:32 AM »
Bob, I'm far from being an expert on this, JimD for example used to write a lot about it on this forum, but I'll give it a try. Note this is heading OT fast, there were some threads for this if anyone can dig them up.
Define BAU as business as usual = we do not need to change our lifestyles. Economic growth, A/C, vacations in faraway places, big homes, cars, meat, having as many children as we want, no limit on personal wealth, etc.
Black BAU - what we have today, fossil fuels based BAU.
Green BAU - how to achieve BAU while avoiding climate change. Supposedly, through technological progress, renewables and EVs becoming so cheap and compelling that the entire globe is converted, we are saved without serious pain and sacrifice.
Some of the problems with Green BAU are its speed, too slow considering where we are already, and its lack of full coverage (agriculture, cement, flights, population beyond carrying capacity, and all the rest of the unsustainable bunch). It also lulls us to sleep believing all will be well. Its biggest advantage - not a lot of backlash, it's highly marketable. Plus it's progress in the right direction even if it doesn't save us, as you explained well a few posts back.
Real Green - how to actually avoid catastrophic climate change, and avoid an uncontrolled population collapse, but giving up a lot of privileges we are used to, "cutting out the fat", with a WWII-style (or worse) joint global effort. Biggest advantage - it could work. Biggest drawback - it will not be adopted unfortunately

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1547 on: July 20, 2017, 12:37:35 AM »
I take Green BAU to be transition to renewables from FF but no attempt at reducing demand for services.
- Crandles

So a Green BAU would be someone who might install solar on their house, purchase electricity only from a renewables-only provider, drive a PHEV/EV, pick the most efficient fridge/TV/water heater that met their needs.  But don't make a significant change in their lifestyle such as not watching TV, taking cold baths and walking/biking only?

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.)


Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1548 on: July 20, 2017, 12:50:42 AM »
Define BAU as business as usual = we do not need to change our lifestyles. Economic growth, A/C, vacations in faraway places, big homes, cars, meat, having as many children as we want, no limit on personal wealth, etc.

Black BAU - what we have today, fossil fuels based BAU.

Green BAU - how to achieve BAU while avoiding climate change. Supposedly, through technological progress, renewables and EVs becoming so cheap and compelling that the entire globe is converted, we are saved without serious pain and sacrifice.

If that's what the words mean then I'm sort of a Green BAU.  But the "without serious pain" part does not apply.  We are already being hurt and the hurt will get worse.

I'm not sure that we'll avoid extreme climate change.  What I see is a route that could keep things from getting really extreme if we follow it. 

And I see us following the route, not going fast enough at this time, but accelerating.

Sacrifice?  That is not going to happen on any meaningful level now.  A few young (mostly) men may ride their bikes and feel all righteous but they won't be even 0.1% of the population.  Maybe later, if climate change starts to really, really hurt we might see a noticeable portion of the world's population start to sacrifice.  But that's likely to be too little, too late.

I have to say that I don't think the BAU part should be applied to the group I belong to.  I'm certainly not business as usual.  I'm more 'new business' in which crappy ways of doing things are replaced with sustainable ways. 

So?  I need a different term for me and those like me.  Optimistic realist greens?

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1392
    • View Profile
Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« Reply #1549 on: July 20, 2017, 06:07:22 AM »
For an extreme wing of the greens, look at "Deep Green Resistance"

There is actually a more extreme thing called "Voluntary Human Extinction"