Widgets Magazine
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Default IEA Golden Age of Gas: No Bueno for Humanity

    http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/me...ulesReport.pdf

    While they did conclude that natural gas fracking can be done safely with regards to local water supplies, the climate impact of simply allowing the widespread development of unconventional fossil fuels is horrifying.

    "The Golden Rules Case puts CO2 emissions on a long-term trajectory consistent with stabilising the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse-gas emissions at around 650 parts per million, a trajectory consistent with a probable temperature rise of more than 3.5 degrees Celsius (C) in the long term, well above the widely accepted 2C target. This finding reinforces a central conclusion from the WEO special report on a Golden Age of Gas (IEA, 2011b), that, while a greater role for natural gas in the global energy mix does bring environmental benefits where it substitutes for other fossil fuels, natural gas cannot on its own provide the answer to the challenge of climate change."

    That scenario is consistent with desertification of most of the southwestern US and the almost total loss of our breadbasket. In that scenario the United States is a big loser compared to our current standing in the world.

  2. Default Re: IEA Golden Age of Gas: No Bueno for Humanity

    Hewen,
    I respect your positions on energy, you seem to take a pretty open minded position (even though I think we disagree on Natural Gas). I just saw this 18 minute TED Talks piece from David MacKay: http://www.ted.com/talks/david_macka...enewables.html

    Are you familiar with him? He has some interesting figures (though they are aimed at Great Britain). He says he's in favor of renewables, but is also in favor of math... He believes that some of the current options (today) aren't as feasible as some may think. He closes by addressing consumption, which I think is key, regardless of which approach we take.

    I don't know much about him, but I did find this talk interesting.

  3. #3

    Default Re: IEA Golden Age of Gas: No Bueno for Humanity

    Yes he's always good for some pointed rhetoric that nobody wants to hear(which is a great quality). I do agree with the majority of his views. Massive overhauls of efficiency and energy delivery options seem necessary for any plan going forward. Did you catch Hansen's TED talk? Also enlightening.

    I just saw that his book is free online. I'll have to give it a go.

    My only beef with natural gas is methane loss rates to the atmosphere and that it isn't carbon-neutral.

  4. #4

    Default Re: IEA Golden Age of Gas: No Bueno for Humanity

    Quote Originally Posted by HewenttoJared View Post
    ---
    ---
    ---

    My only beef with natural gas is methane loss rates to the atmosphere and that it isn't carbon-neutral.


  5. #5

    Default Re: IEA Golden Age of Gas: No Bueno for Humanity

    Well it's definitely an improvement over flaring, but I'd much rather just leave the methane of ancient origins in the ground.

  6. Default Re: IEA Golden Age of Gas: No Bueno for Humanity

    Quote Originally Posted by HewenttoJared View Post
    Yes he's always good for some pointed rhetoric that nobody wants to hear(which is a great quality). I do agree with the majority of his views. Massive overhauls of efficiency and energy delivery options seem necessary for any plan going forward. Did you catch Hansen's TED talk? Also enlightening.

    I just saw that his book is free online. I'll have to give it a go.

    My only beef with natural gas is methane loss rates to the atmosphere and that it isn't carbon-neutral.
    Just watched Hansen's talk. He gave Oklahoma a mention - last year's heat wave/drought was "three standard deviations" from the norm. Seems like a pretty smart guy (as I would expect all NASA scientists to be). I guess he has been sounding the alarm of climate change for over 30 years. What's funny is, he's not calling for anything too drastic. Basically a reduction of CO2 emissions (1: Moratorium on Dirty Coal; 2: A Gradually Rising Price on Carbon Emissions; 3: Measures to improve energy efficiency.)

    My interest in Natural Gas as a primary source of fuel here in the US, has to do more with security rather than it being a "cleaner" fuel. I do like the idea of renewables, but I absolutely hate the idea of relying on OPEC to drive so much of the global economy. I think CNG can be a bridge fuel to allow us to get to something better.

    As for climate change, I take a pretty simple approach of stewardship. We live here, we should do what we can to take care of our home. The problem is, there is no money in conservation or reducing emissions. Until there is, we will continue to burn it up.

    Thanks for the heads up on Hansen's talk - "physics does not change."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Golden Phoenix
    By metro in forum Development & Buildings
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 01-24-2020, 07:07 AM
  2. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-08-2010, 04:05 PM
  3. Taco Bueno
    By SoonerQueen in forum Restaurants & Bars
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-03-2010, 08:27 AM
  4. Golden Corral Closed
    By imafish in forum Suburban & Other OK Communities
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-13-2008, 07:00 PM
  5. OCFD Recruits work with "Habitat For Humanity"
    By Keith in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-26-2007, 05:40 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO