Energy and carbon.

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Neil
    Admin

    • May 2004
    • 6129

    #1

    Energy and carbon.

    Energy is to Homo sapiens as water is to life on Earth.

    Exerpted from the The New York Times

    Friday, April 4, 2008

    Are Carbon Cuts Just a Fantasy?

    By John Tierney


    We must acknowledge up front that the world needs more energy – vast amounts more. The International Energy Agency projects that global energy demand will increase by 60% by 2030 and recent trends in China and elsewhere suggest that this may even be an underestimate. Consider also that published estimates suggest that 2 billion people or more currently lack access to electricity. Their energy needs have only one direction to go.

    If the world needs more energy, and this fact seems inescapable, then the first question to ask is not “how do we reduce emissions?” but instead, “In a world that needs vast amounts of more energy, how can we provide that energy in ways that do not lead to the accumulation of carbon in the atmosphere?”

    t becomes a bit more clear that we may have set ourselves down the wrong path when we framed the challenge of mitigating greenhouse gases in terms of “reducing emissions”. Characterizing the policy challenge in this way leads people in rich countries to focus on things like changing light bulbs and driving less thirsty cars – all good things, to be sure – but which can hardly make a dent in the overall challenge of stabilizing atmospheric concentrations. And it leads people in developing countries shaking their head – how can they “reduce emissions” when they hardly have any to begin with?


    Then, from this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/we.../06revkin.html

    "What is needed, Mr. Sachs and others say, is the development of radically advanced low-carbon technologies, which they say will only come about with greatly increased spending by determined governments on what has so far been an anemic commitment to research and development. A Manhattan-like Project, so to speak … Each will require a combination of factors to succeed: more applied scientific research, important regulatory changes, appropriate infrastructure, public acceptance and early high-cost investments,” he said. “A failure on one or more of these points could kill the technologies.”

    In short, what is needed, he said, is a “major overhaul of energy technology” financed by “large-scale public funding of research, development and demonstration projects.”

    But, China is building, on average, one large coal-burning power plant a week.

    And, China and India continue to insist that economic growth is both their priority and right. They argue that the established economic powers should be responsible for spearheading the research to reduce carbon emissions. After all, the United States and Europe spent more than a century growing wealthy by burning fossil fuels.

    Then, from Nature:

    One reason for the current rise in global energy and carbon intensities is the economic transformation taking place in the developing world, especially in China and India. As development proceeds, rural populations move to high-rise buildings that consume energy and energy-intensive materials. This process is likely to continue, not only in these countries, but all over populous south Asia, and eventually Africa, until well beyond 2050. An analysis of China's carbon-dioxide emissions estimated them to be rising at a rate of between 11% and 13% per year9 for the period 2000–2010, which is far higher than that assumed by the SRES scenarios for Asian emissions (2.6–4.8% per year).
    Last edited by Neil; 04-06-2008, 06:26 PM.
    The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.
  • DRIFTER
    .
    • Sep 2007
    • 897

    #2
    Carbon study could help reduce harmful emissions;http://www.physorg.com/news122223023.html

    Earth scientists at The University of Manchester have found that carbon dioxide has been naturally stored for more than a million years in several gas fields in the Colorado Plateau and Rocky Mountains of the United States.

    Researchers say lessons learned from these natural gas fields will help to find sites suitable for injecting CO2 captured from power station chimneys.

    Academics have been investigating five natural CO2 gas fields from the southwest United States, as they are examples of natural CO2 storage.

    Their findings are published in the latest issue of the Geochemistry Journal Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta.

    In order for CO2 storage - also known as CO2 sequestration - to be considered as a viable method of reducing CO2 emissions to the atmosphere the public must be reassured that the CO2 pumped underground will be stored safely for a long time.

    Dr Stuart Gilfillan, the University of Manchester researcher who led the project, said: "By measuring the noble gases within the Colorado carbon dioxide, we have been able to 'fingerprint' the CO2 for the first time. This has allowed us to show that the gas in all of the fields is the result of the degassing of molten magma within the Earth's crust.





    "In all of these gas fields, the last known magma melting event was over eight thousand years ago. In three of the fields magma melting last occurred over a million years ago, and in one it was at least 40 million years ago.

    "We already know that oil and gas have been stored safely in oil and gas fields over millions of years and this study clearly shows that the CO2 has been stored naturally and safely for a very long time in these fields.

    "So, underground CO2 storage, in the correct place, should be a safe option to help us cope with emissions until we can develop cleaner energy sources."

    The team hope that this study will pave the way for selection of similar safe sites for storage of CO2 captured in power plants in both the UK and abroad.

    Comment

    • backwoodsman
      Member
      • Feb 2008
      • 327

      #3
      Everything will be ok,just keep shopping at Walmart.Greed and overpopulation will eventually ruin everything good about this planet.

      Comment

      • Neil
        Admin

        • May 2004
        • 6129

        #4
        Originally posted by backwoodsman
        Everything will be ok,just keep shopping at Walmart.Greed and overpopulation will eventually ruin everything good about this planet.
        It will be overpopulation and the survival instinct, slightly enhanced by greed.
        The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.

        Comment

        • backwoodsman
          Member
          • Feb 2008
          • 327

          #5
          Originally posted by Neil
          It will be overpopulation and the survival instinct, slightly enhanced by greed.
          time will tell

          Comment

          • DRIFTER
            .
            • Sep 2007
            • 897

            #6
            Perhaps instead of concentrating on the Kyoto protocol, which favors China and India, we should have all like minded nations pool their resources to find a scientific, technological and financial solution to our our core problems and develop clean energy sources!......Oh yea, and buy American!







            ** There are still a few hat badges left, hurry before they're all gone!
            Last edited by DRIFTER; 04-06-2008, 07:48 PM.

            Comment

            • backwoodsman
              Member
              • Feb 2008
              • 327

              #7
              Buy American? Where do you go to do that? We'll have to cut our cord to china first.

              Comment

              • redhawk
                Senior Resident Curmudgeon
                • Jan 2004
                • 10929

                #8
                I'm waiting for America to make affordable quality goods. I used to buy only American cars which lasted about 3 years and cost more then foreign cars.

                The I got smart and bought cheaper Japanese cars that lasted 7 years and got better fuel mileage.

                I'm all for being loyal to American manufacturers, but i think they also should be loyal to the American consumer.

                Hawk
                "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

                Comment

                • DRIFTER
                  .
                  • Sep 2007
                  • 897

                  #9
                  Yea, but now the Japanese cars cost more than American....You just can't win!

                  Comment

                  • backwoodsman
                    Member
                    • Feb 2008
                    • 327

                    #10
                    and the American car companies are laying off people,closing dealerships,cutting wages.Our small town use to have a dealer,grocery store,pharmacy,lumberyard,auto parts store,insurance agent office,bank,flower shop,gas station,up to a few years ago.Now its all gone. Mainly thanks to cheap goods sold by big stores.

                    Comment

                    • Hobbitling
                      spring fever
                      • May 2006
                      • 2239

                      #11
                      Thread drift alert!! Thread drift alert!!

                      China doesnt "hate us". They're as dependent on us as we are on them. if we go down their biggest customer dissapears, and all that growth collapses. and those treasury notes they hold are an investment. why would they want to lose all that money by collapsing our currency. it would be their loss as much as ours.

                      I agree with those articles. reducing energy demand is like holding back the tide. especially if we have any intention of alleviating poverty. but energy doesn't have to cause pollution.

                      whenever I hear about some trillion dollar particle accelerator or deep space telescope being built, or some rediculous plan to land on Mars. I think what else that money could be spent on. building schools, developing clean energy technology, curing diseases.
                      He found himself wondering at times, especially in the autumn, about the wild lands, and strange visions of mountains that he had never seen came into his dreams.

                      Comment

                      • Homesick65
                        Member
                        • Apr 2008
                        • 19

                        #12
                        Thread drift alert now confirmed w/ intro of Iraq quagmire! ;-)

                        Does that put a neat bow on this thread??

                        Comment

                        • Neil
                          Admin

                          • May 2004
                          • 6129

                          #13
                          Think of the money, time, human resources and public support that went into the space program (being first to walk on the moon) and developing atomic weapons. Add to that the resources that have been more recently devoted to war. Imagine focusing that same human output to controlling world population growth and developing sustainable energy sources.

                          So far, I've only read about such planets in Arthur C. Clarke novels.
                          The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.

                          Comment

                          • Homesick65
                            Member
                            • Apr 2008
                            • 19

                            #14
                            As an Adirondacker who is now stuck in a dusty, hot northern Kuwait military base (and feeling about as far from home as that Man on the Moon you mentioned) I agree whole-heartedly with what you wrote. You may find it ironic that the high-octane gas they pump in Kuwait City to fill their Hummers, Lambos and Bentleys costs roughly 65 cents per gallon. There is no energy crisis here.

                            Comment

                            • Starshadow
                              • Apr 2007
                              • 189

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Neil
                              Think of the money, time, human resources and public support that went into the space program (being first to walk on the moon) and developing atomic weapons. Add to that the resources that have been more recently devoted to war. Imagine focusing that same human output to controlling world population growth and developing sustainable energy sources.

                              So far, I've only read about such planets in Arthur C. Clarke novels.


                              Guns or butter
                              Sitting quietly, doing nothing, spring
                              comes and the grass grows by itself.

                              Zen Proverb

                              Comment

                              Working...