Tag Archives: major

All Over the World, Hurricane Records Keep Breaking

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Earlier this month, Super Typhoon Haiyan stunned the meteorological community. The Navy’s Joint Typhoon Warning Center, which tracked the storm, estimated its maximum 1-minute sustained wind speeds at more than 195 miles per hour based on satellite imagery. If confirmed, that would exceed the official wind speed estimates for all other hurricanes and typhoons in the modern period. (Prior to 1969 some Pacific storms were recorded as stronger, but these measurements are now considered too high).

But here’s the thing: Haiyan isn’t the globe’s only record-breaking hurricane in recent years. Even as scientists continue to study and debate whether global warming is making hurricanes worse, hurricanes have continued to set new intensity records. Indeed, a Climate Desk analysis of official hurricane records finds that many of the globe’s hurricane basins—including the Atlantic, the Northwest Pacific, the North Indian, the South Indian, and the South Pacific—have witnessed (or, in the case of Haiyan and the Northwest Pacific, arguably witnessed) some type of new hurricane intensity record since the year 2000. What’s more, a few regions that aren’t usually considered major hurricane basis have also seen mammoth storms of late.

At the outset, we need an important caveat. Due to a number of well known problems with our hurricane data—including discrepancies in how different meteorological agencies estimate storm strength, as well as major technological changes over time in how storms are measured—we can’t simply leap to the conclusion that global warming is behind these records. That requires further discussion. But first, just consider the records themselves:

Hurricane Wilma on October 21, 2005. NOAA/Wikimedia Commons

The Atlantic Basin. The Atlantic region—which encompasses the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico as well as the open Atlantic north of the equator—is the best studied hurricane basin on Earth, thanks to the work of the Miami-based National Hurricane Center. And here, a particularly breathtaking hurricane intensity record came during the devastating 2005 season with Hurricane Wilma, whose minimum central pressure plummeted to a stunning 882 millibars, the lowest ever measured in this basin, on October 19. Atmospheric pressure is one key way of measuring hurricane strength because air rushes inward toward regions of low pressure, meaning that lower pressures generally lead to higher wind speeds. Indeed, when Wilma hit 882 millibars, the National Climatic Data Center quickly pronounced the storm “the most intense hurricane on record in the Atlantic.”

And that’s not Wilma’s only record. On its way to Category 5 strength, Wilma also had a rate of intensification that was off the charts. As the Hurricane Center writes: “Wilma’s deepening rate over the northwestern Caribbean Sea, from late on 18 October to early on 19 October, was incredible.” The storm’s 6-hour, 12-hour, and 24-hour pressure drops were “by far the largest in the available records for these periods going back to 1851.” Basically, Wilma went from a tropical storm to a Category 5 hurricane in just 24 hours.

All of that said, Wilma didn’t set this basin’s record for wind speed. The record is shared by 1969’s Hurricane Camille and 1980’s Hurricane Allen, both of which had maximum sustained winds of 190 miles per hour.

Cyclone Monica approaching landfall in Australia on April 23, 2006. Code 1390/Wikimedia Commons

The South Pacific Basin. Cyclones, as they’re called in many parts of the world, occur in a wide stretch south of the equator from the southwestern Indian Ocean off the coast of Africa all the way to the waters surrounding the islands of the South Pacific. Accordingly, the Southern Hemisphere is often divided up into two hurricane basins, the South Indian and the South Pacific.

In the South Pacific, it’s pretty clear that the strongest storm on record has occurred since the year 2000, although there’s a virtual tie between two storms: 2002-2003’s Cyclone Zoe, which devastated the small Pacific island of Tikopia, and Cyclone Monica, which struck Australia’s Northern Territory in April 2006. Estimates vary across different forecasting agencies on the strength of these two storms (something all too common once you venture outside of the Atlantic region). But if you trust the Navy’s Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC), then both had maximum winds of nearly 180 miles per hour. In addition, Zoe had a minimum central pressure of 890 millibars, according to forecasters at the Fiji Meteorological Service.

Category 5 Cyclone Gonu in the Arabian Sea on June 4, 2007. NASA/Wikimedia Commons

The North Indian Basin. The North Indian basin encompasses the Indian Ocean north of the equator (including the Bay of Bengal) and the Arabian Sea. It has long been home to the deadliest cyclones on Earth: Storms like the 1970 Bhola cyclone that struck East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and killed more than 300,000 people.

When it comes to the Arabian Sea, its strongest storm on record is 2007’s Cyclone Gonu, which sported 167 mile-per-hour winds, according to the JTWC. Gonu traveled as far northwest as Oman, where its landfall caused 49 deaths and $4 billion in damage. It then made a second landfall in Iran.

What’s more ambiguous is whether Gonu is the strongest storm for the North Indian basin as a whole. According to the JTWC, it is. But according to the Indian Meteorological Department in New Delhi, the deadly 1999 Odisha Cyclone, which may have killed as many as 10,000 people when it struck the Indian state of Odisha, holds that record.

Category 5 Cyclone Gafilo on March 6, 2004, about to strike Madagascar. NASA/Wikimedia Commons

The South Indian Basin. Perhaps the most confusing basin to analyze is the South Indian, where one key intensity record was set in 2004 by Cyclone Gafilo, an extremely intense storm whose pressure was estimated at 895 millibars by forecasters in Réunion, an island east of Madagascar. That’s the lowest pressure on record for this basin reported by any forecasting agency. However, three different forecasting offices give different answers for which storm was the strongest by wind speed, leaving no clear answer. Gafilo, at any rate, was quite a monster. The storm struck Madagascar at full Category 5 strength, leaving hundreds of thousands homeless in its wake.

But that’s not all. There are also some other regions that get hurricanes less frequently (or, aren’t supposed to get them at all) that have set eyebrow-raising records recently:

The record-breaking Hurricane and Super Typhoon Ioke on August 24, 2006. NASA/Wikimedia Commons

The Central Pacific. In the Central Pacific region near Hawaii, only a few tropical cyclones are usually seen each year, and for this reason the Central Pacific is not usually counted as an “official” hurricane basin. There are still more than enough storms for the National Weather Service to operate a Central Pacific Hurricane Center, however—and its jurisdiction, too, recently saw a dramatic new record. In 2006, Hurricane Ioke rampaged across the Central Pacific and traveled all the way into the Western North Pacific, where it was officially pronounced a typhoon (which is simply what hurricanes are called in this region). According to the Central Pacific Hurricane Center, Ioke had “the lowest estimated surface pressure for any hurricane within the central Pacific” at 900 millibars, and it set another stunning record to boot. Ioke lasted at Category 4 strength, or higher, for 198 hours straight, “the longest continuous time period at that intensity observed for any tropical cyclone anywhere on earth.” If you define hurricane intensity as the total amount of time spent as a very strong storm, then Ioke beats all the rest.

Cyclone Catarina, about to strike Brazil on March 27, 2004. NASA/Wikimedia Commons

The South Atlantic. And if you think that’s striking, just wait for the next record. The region of the Atlantic south of the equator isn’t supposed to get hurricanes at all. In 2004, though, it broke all the rules and served one up.

Cyclone Catarina, which was the equivalent of a category 1 hurricane in strength, was named after the site of its landfall, the Brazilian state of Santa Catarina. While Catarina constituted a major anomaly, one published scientific analysis suggested it might also be a harbinger. “Other possible future South Atlantic hurricanes could be more likely to occur under global warming conditions,” suggested the researchers.

To be sure, not every hurricane basin in the world has set a clear record in the last decade. But even here, you only have to go back a few years further to find a record:

Hurricane Linda on September 12, 1997. NOAA/Wikimedia Commons

The Northeast Pacific Basin. The US National Hurricane Center also monitors storms that occur in the tropical Pacific off the western coast of Mexico and Central America. Here, the strongest storm was 1997’s Hurricane Linda, which rapidly intensified south of the Baja California peninsula in mid-September of that year. With 184 mile per hour maximum winds and a minimum central pressure of 902 millibars, Linda was stunning, although the storm never actually hit land. For a while, though, there were concerns that Linda might travel northward far enough to threaten Southern California.

So What Does It All Mean? Such are the records, and now the question becomes, what exactly is their significance?

Before rushing to the conclusion that “it’s global warming,” there are some key caveats.

First, a “record” is, by definition, merely what has been recorded. We don’t know what hurricanes were like 1,000 years ago, or even 200 years ago, before we were carefully documenting their characteristics.

Second, some “records” are more likely to be records than others. That’s because our hurricane data just aren’t as good in other parts of the world as they are in the Atlantic. If there’s an intense hurricane off US shores, you can bet there are hurricane hunter planes in it taking direct measurements of wind speeds and pressure. Yet in other regions, storm intensities are largely estimated based on infrared satellite images, a less reliable technique. And then there’s a basin like the Northwest Pacific, where the Navy used to fly research flights into storms, but stopped back in 1987. “We’re just not measuring these storms at all well,” explains MIT hurricane expert Kerry Emanuel.

Finally, there have also been major technological changes over time in how we observe storms. “Geostationary satellites have only been around since the late 70s,” explains Jim Kossin, a hurricane expert at the National Climatic Data Center, meaning that “if a storm is as intense as Haiyan was, it’s much more likely now for us to be able to measure that than it was 30 years ago.” This implies a bias towards stronger storm measurements over time.

So when you see lots of storm records being set recently, it is important to keep in mind that much of this may be simply due to better measurements and better observations. And yet at the same time, one recent scientific paper that explicitly controlled for these changing measurement systems found a global shift towards more category 4 and 5 storms, and fewer Category 1s and 2s, a trend correlated with climate change. If the strongest cyclones are occurring more frequently, says study author Greg Holland of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, then breaking records makes sense. “If there’s more of them, statistics say you’re going to break more records,” Holland says.

The science of hurricanes and global warming remains highly contested, however, and we must wait for scientists to sort it all out. In the meantime, keep an eye out for more hurricane records.

View post:  

All Over the World, Hurricane Records Keep Breaking

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Ringer, Springer, The Atlantic, Uncategorized, Venta, Wiley | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on All Over the World, Hurricane Records Keep Breaking

U.S. says poor countries’ calls for climate compensation could screw up climate treaty process

U.S. says poor countries’ calls for climate compensation could screw up climate treaty process

NASA

The U.N. climate treaty process, hatched in the ’90s, was intended to fight the looming threat of climate change. But as climate negotiators meet in Warsaw this month to develop a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, they are doing so not under the looming threat of climate change — they are doing so in a world currently being throttled by climate change.

That change in the weather is changing the tone of the negotiations. And it’s doing so in a way that some say is a distraction from the original purpose of the treaty process, which was to try to arrest climate change.

No longer are poor countries asking rich ones merely to shoulder the financial burden of reducing emissions. (In past talks, wealthy countries committed to pouring $100 billion a year by 2020 into the new Green Climate Fund to help the others reduce emissions and adapt to climate change.) Now developing countries are also demanding compensation for “loss and damage” caused by climate change, such as the typhoon that just ravaged the Philippines.

And the U.S. fears that bid is going to derail climate negotiations, particularly those now under way in Warsaw. The Guardian explains:

At last year’s climate talks in Doha, the US fought off calls from African nations, the Pacific Islands and less developed nations for a “loss and damage mechanism” to channel finance to help nations cope with losses resulting from climate change, such as reduced crop production due to higher temperatures.

The member nations of the G77+China, which includes most African and some Latin American countries, cannot leave Warsaw without agreement on a loss and damage mechanism, said G77 lead negotiator Juan Hoffmaister.

“We can’t only rely on ad-hoc humanitarian aid given the reality that major climate-related disasters are becoming the new normal,” Hoffmaister said.

This issue is also a priority for other nations including India, small island states and the least developed countries. …

Trigg Talley, the US senior negotiator at Warsaw, acknowledged this week that some developing countries are experiencing costly damages and losses but said the US has “technical and political issues” with any loss and damage mechanism.

The US briefing document indicates that the Obama administration believes a focus on loss and damage will be “counterproductive from the standpoint of public support” for the UN climate talks.

There are two prickly issues for negotiators to pick through here. (1.) Should developed countries that have been responsible for most of global warming so far help the poor ones patch up damages caused by carbon-juiced storms, droughts, and floods? (2.) If so, is the U.N. climate treaty process an appropriate mechanism for dealing with that compensation?

Those are tough questions, and how they play out during the next week, and then over the coming years, will dramatically shape the future of the world.


Source
US fears climate talks will focus on compensation for extreme weather, The Guardian

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Link: 

U.S. says poor countries’ calls for climate compensation could screw up climate treaty process

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Pines, PUR, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on U.S. says poor countries’ calls for climate compensation could screw up climate treaty process

Elizabeth Warren Joins the Battle to Overhaul the Senate Filibuster

Mother Jones

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is lending her voice to the chorus of lawmakers who want substantive changes made to how US senators use the filibuster, the main tool of opposition by the minority party.

The impetus for Warren’s comments came on Tuesday, when Senate Republicans filibustered President Obama’s nominee to the influential DC Circuit Court of Appeals, Georgetown Law Professor Cornelia Pillard. If she’s ever confirmed, Pillard would be the fourth woman on this important federal appeals court, which decides often-consequential cases between the federal government and private parties. Senate Republicans have also filibustered Patricia Millett’s nomination to the appeals court and say they plan to block another appeals court nominee, Robert Wilkins, as well.

In the face of all this obstruction, Warren has joined progressive stalwarts such as Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) in demanding real changes to how the filibuster is used. “So far they have shut down the government, they have filibustered people President Obama has nominated to fill out his administration, and they are now filibustering judges to block him from filling any of the vacancies with highly qualified people,” she said. “We need to call out these filibusters for what they are: Naked attempts to nullify the results of the last election.”

Warren went on: “If Republicans continue to filibuster these highly qualified nominees for no reason other than to nullify the president’s constitutional authority, then senators not only have the right to change the filibuster, senators have a duty to change the filibuster rules,” Warren said. “We cannot turn our backs on the Constitution. We cannot abdicate our oath of office.”

Whether Warren’s call for filibuster reform results in any actual changes is unlikely. The closest we’ve come in recent years to real filibuster reform came in July, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid grew so angry at the GOP’s use (abuse, according to the Democrats) of the filibuster that he almost used the so-called “nuclear option”—changing the Senate rules so that a nominee could be confirmed with a simple 51-vote majority instead of 60 votes. At the last moment, Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) cut a deal to avoid the nuclear option and instead confirm a slate of Obama nominees, including EPA administrator Gina McCarthy and Secretary of Labor Tom Perez.

Plan for more close calls like Reid’s July showdown—but with both parties wary of losing the filibuster as a tool for minority power, don’t expect major reform any time soon.

Visit link:  

Elizabeth Warren Joins the Battle to Overhaul the Senate Filibuster

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Elizabeth Warren Joins the Battle to Overhaul the Senate Filibuster

What the AP Got Wrong on Ethanol

back

What the AP Got Wrong on Ethanol

Posted 11 November 2013 in

National

The Associated Press just released a one-sided story on renewable fuel’s impact on the environment. It’s full of the same misinformation and falsehoods that ethanol detractors have been repeating for years. Here’s what the AP got wrong on ethanol:

Claim: Ethanol production has caused 5 million acres of land to be removed from the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) since President Obama took office.

Fact: The 2008 Farm Bill removed funding for roughly 7 million acres of CRP land. Based on this law, the number of enrolled acres has decreased to fit within the programs new, smaller budget. It is legally impossible to get back to pre-2008 levels of CRP enrollment. This has nothing to do with ethanol. Since the cap was lowered, acres have been near (92%-98%) the new cap each year.

Claim: Landowners have been filling in wetlands because of ethanol production and have been plowing pristine prairies.

Fact: Current law strictly prohibits the conversion of sensitive ecosystems to cropland. The provisions of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) require that corn and other feedstocks used to produce renewable fuels for RFS may only be sourced from land that was actively engaged in agricultural production in 2007, the year of the bill’s enactment. Feedstocks grown on land converted to cropland after 2007 would not qualify as “renewable biomass,” and therefore biofuels produced from these feedstocks would not generate RIN credits for the RFS.

Acreage enrolled in the Wetlands Reserve Program hit a record high of 2.65 million acres in 2012. The land that is enrolled in the program stays for a minimum of 30 years, meaning landowners are not allowed to fill in wetlands as they please. USDA predicts that enrollment in this program will continue to rise. Moreover, according to EPA’s latest Greenhouse Gas Inventory, no new grassland has been converted to cropland since 2005 and grassland sequestered 14% more carbon in 2011 (latest data available) than 1990.

Claim: Corn prices have spent most of the year at about $7 per bushel.

Fact: Corn prices have been below $7 per bushel for most of 2013. The day the AP article was first published, corn futures were trading at the lowest price since 2010: $4.26 per bushel.

Claim: Farmers planted 15 million more acres of corn the year before the ethanol boom.

Fact: Farmers increased corn acreage in 2012 and 2013 in response to drought ravaged corn supplies, not because of ethanol. In fact, less corn was and will be used for ethanol in 2012 and 2013 than in 2011. Moreover, the increase in corn acres has been achieved through crop switching, not through the cultivation of new lands, as the story alleges.

Claim: Corn demands fertilizer, which is made using natural gas and ethanol facilities burn coal or gas both of which release carbon dioxide and that makes ethanol a climate disaster.

Fact: According to Argonne National Laboratory in a peer-reviewed study, when you tally emissions related to fertilizer and chemical production, diesel use on the farm, transportation of the corn, energy used by the ethanol plant, transportation of ethanol to the market, and land use change emission, corn ethanol on average reduces GHG emissions by 34% compared to gasoline. Argonne National Laboratory is not the only institution that has concluded ethanol provides emissions benefits relative to gasoline: Purdue University, the University of Nebraska, Michigan State University, Oak Ridge National Laboratory/Duke University, and the University of Illinois-Chicago have all published work in the past few years documenting the GHG and environmental benefits of ethanol.

Additionally, 90% of ethanol plants use natural gas a power source and only 10% use coal.

Claim: Historically, the majority of corn in the US has been turned into livestock feed. In and since 2010, fuel has been the top use of corn in America.

Fact: The story ignores that for each bushel of corn that goes into an ethanol facility, 17 pounds of animal feed is produced and returned into the market. When this major source of livestock feed is not omitted from the calculation, livestock feed remains by far the number one use of corn. In 2012, ethanol consumed 26% of the corn crop, while livestock feed accounted for 50%.

Claim: Forty-four percent of last year’s corn crop was used for fuel.

Fact: According to the USDA, 4.67 billion bushels were used for ethanol and feed co-product production out of a total of 11.93 billion bushels produced. This represents 39%, not 44%. But since much of that 39% was used to make animal feed, only 26% of the crop turned into fuel.

Claim: Corn farmers have increased their use of nitrogen fertilizer from 2005-2010.

Fact: Using a starting point of 2007, when the RFS was enacted, nitrogen use fell by 2010.

 

An Iowa farmer named Leroy Perkins was quoted extensively in the AP’s story. But in a follow up interview, Perkins said he believes his views on oil alternatives, land use and the environment were intentionally skewed to tell an inaccurate and one-sided story:

To be fair, the AP did get a few things right, particularly the environmental hazard posed by oil, which currently dominates our fuel supply. Some direct excerpts:

“Ethanol still looks good compared to the oil industry, which increasingly relies on environmentally risky tactics like hydraulic fracturing or pulls from carbon-heavy tar sands.”
“It’s impossible to precisely calculate how much ethanol is responsible for the spike in corn prices and how much those prices led to the land changes in the Midwest.”
“The environmental consequences of drilling for oil and natural gas are well documented and severe.”

Find anything else wrong with the AP’s reporting? Tweet it out using the hashtag #APFactCheck.

 

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
See more here: 

What the AP Got Wrong on Ethanol

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What the AP Got Wrong on Ethanol

Colorado Cities’ Rejection of Fracking Poses Political Test for Natural Gas Industry

Anti-drilling measures approved in the state, which has long been a major oil and gas producer, reflect growing concerns about the effect on the environment, experts said. Visit source:  Colorado Cities’ Rejection of Fracking Poses Political Test for Natural Gas Industry ; ;Related ArticlesNational Briefing | South: Arkansas: ExxonMobil Fines Proposed After Oil SpillChevron and Ukraine Set Shale Gas DealWorld Briefing | Asia: The Philippines: Strong Typhoon Lands ;

Jump to original: 

Colorado Cities’ Rejection of Fracking Poses Political Test for Natural Gas Industry

Posted in alo, Bunn, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, Pines, PUR, Ringer, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Colorado Cities’ Rejection of Fracking Poses Political Test for Natural Gas Industry

Bangladesh’s biggest power plant will harm world’s biggest mangrove forest

Bangladesh’s biggest power plant will harm world’s biggest mangrove forest

lepetitNicolas

Burning coal is a surefire way of damaging the climate, and harming mangroves is a surefire way of worsening climate impacts. Which makes the planned construction of Bangladesh’s largest coal-fired power plant at the edge of the world’s biggest mangrove forest doubly troubling.

Construction is beginning on the 1,320-megawatt Rampal power plant less than 10 miles from the Sundarbans, the sweeping mangrove system that straddles Bangladesh and India, helping to protect an eastern chunk of the Subcontinent from floods and cyclones.

An estimated 20,000 people recently marched to protest the project. Scientists warn it will produce pollution that feeds acid rain over the mangroves and suck up vast quantities of the ecosystem’s water.

The Bangladeshi government says the plant is needed as part of an effort to ease blackouts and help half the nation’s population access electricity supplies for the first time. But when it comes to the plant’s environmental impacts, government officials are stuck in obstinate-denier mode. They say the plant will be built using “the latest ultra super critical technology” and burn “high-quality imported coal” meaning that it “would not affect the environment of Sundarban.” Yeah, right. From an article in e360:

The construction of the Rampal plant is part of an ambitious government strategy to increase electricity generation to 20,000 megawatts by 2021 — a goal that relies heavily on coal. The current administration of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is proposing a dozen new coal plants, with more likely to come. Until recently, less than five percent of Bangladesh’s electricity production came from coal. Instead the country produced most of its energy from natural gas and biomass.

Critics of the Rampal plant and the country’s growing embrace of coal argue that it is a reckless strategy for a nation that is consistently rated as one of most vulnerable countries to global warming. Few nations are as low-lying as Bangladesh, and the Sundarbans is one of the country’s most important bulwarks against rising seas and intensifying typhoons and other extreme weather events.

Bangladesh endures frequent cyclones and, with much of the country laying less than five yards above sea level, it frequently floods — with deadly results. Bangladeshis deserve access to electricity, but they don’t deserve this filthy project. There are much better ways.


Source
A Key Mangrove Forest Faces Major Threat from a Coal Plant, e360

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Read article here: 

Bangladesh’s biggest power plant will harm world’s biggest mangrove forest

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bangladesh’s biggest power plant will harm world’s biggest mangrove forest

Fracking won’t fix the climate

Fracking won’t fix the climate

WCN 24/7

The claim that natural gas is saving the climate is revealed as hot air.

Perhaps you’ve heard the claim that the natural-gas boom made possible by fracking is reducing America’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The logic underpinning this claim is that natural gas is a cleaner-burning fuel than coal, and hydraulic fracturing has produced a surfeit of cheap natural gas. Ergo, fracking is helping power plants switch from coal to natural gas, helping the climate along the way.

But that’s only half the story.

A Stanford-led study, which was produced with input from 50 academic, government, and private-sector experts, concludes that natural gas is having only “modest impacts” on carbon dioxide emissions.

Yes, natural gas is helping to dig a grave for coal. It’s the lesser of two fossil-fuel evils. But natural gas’s low price is also slowing down the country’s shift toward climate-friendly solar and wind power. From the Stanford report [PDF]:

Shale development has relatively modest impacts on carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions, particularly after 2020. Since 2006, electricity generation has become less carbon intensive as its natural gas share increased from 16 to 24 percent and its coal share decreased from 52 to 41 percent. Over future years, this trend towards reducing emissions becomes less pronounced as natural gas begins to displace nuclear and renewable energy that would have been used otherwise in new powerplants under reference case conditions.

Meanwhile, the study concludes that fracking is helping to slightly expand America’s economy — but not nearly to the extent that the industry would like us to think:

Shale development also boosts the economy by $70 billion annually over the next several decades. Although this amount appears large, it represents a relatively modest 0.46 percent of the US economy. Today total natural gas expenditures represent about one percent of GDP within this country.

Joe Romm of ClimateProgress points out that the International Energy Agency recently warned that the low price of natural gas is also hampering efforts to improve energy efficiency, which is bad news for greenhouse gas emissions.

“From a climate perspective, then, the shale gas revolution is essentially irrelevant,” argues Romm, “and arguably a massive diversion of resources and money that could have gone into deploying carbon-free sources.”


Source
Changing the game?: Emissions and market implications of new natural gas supplies, Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford University
Major Study Projects No Long-Term Climate Benefit From Shale Gas Revolution, ClimateProgress

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Visit site: 

Fracking won’t fix the climate

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, Uncategorized, wind energy, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fracking won’t fix the climate

Electric Companies Not Basking in Solar’s Power

Six out of 10 major homebuilders are now offering solar options on new home construction. Photo: MorgueFile/Jusben

In today’s increasingly energy-conscious world, solar power continues gaining popularity. The Solar Energy Industries Association reports that consumer demand has grown nearly 60 percent in 2013. As more options appear, customers who want to wean themselves from fossil fuel dependence or live off the grid may find it an appealing alternative to traditional energy resources.

In some areas of the U.S., entire communities are exploring the idea of solar power cooperatives to help make this natural energy source more affordable. Around the world, the overwhelming interest in solar is rapidly changing the economics — both to the benefit and the detriment of consumers.

Until very recently, solar panels were a relatively expensive way to harness the free power of the sun, particularly when coupled with installations costs. Most consumers understood that retrofitting a home for solar meant taking on a significant debt, with the understanding that it would take about half the lifespan of the panels to recoup the purchase price.

But with new technology offering more access to solar, consumers have greater flexibility in how they can use this power source. And that is changing the way many electric companies are approaching energy delivery.

Next page: New Lease on Power

earth911

Excerpt from:  

Electric Companies Not Basking in Solar’s Power

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, Omega, ONA, PUR, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Electric Companies Not Basking in Solar’s Power

North Dakota officials might finally spill details about oil spill

North Dakota officials might finally spill details about oil spill

A major oil pipeline spill in North Dakota remained undetected by Tesoro for days.

After discovering that the public, legislature, and governor were all kept in the dark for more than a week about a major oil spill on a North Dakota wheat farm, lawmakers wanted answers on Monday. But the state department that kept news of the 20,600-barrel spill to itself had more spin than answers. (The feds also withheld the information because they were being furloughed.)

David Glatt, head of the environmental section of the North Dakota Health Department, defended his department’s secrecy during the Energy Development and Transmission Committee hearing. He said the 11-day delay in notifying the public about the spill was a proper response, adding that the spill happened in the “best place it could’ve occurred.”

But by Tuesday, following a closed-door meeting between the governor’s staff and different state departments, some officials were sounding more contrite. From the Bismarck Tribune:

North Dakota’s Oil and Gas Division director Lynn Helms said the department’s stance is that the Tesoro Corp. pipeline was a rural pipeline under federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration jurisdiction. …

The state doesn’t have any laws requiring public notification of spills.

“We’re looking at some of those other triggers, such as overall volume,” Helms said.

Helms declined to put a specific threshold on how many barrels it might take to trigger a public alert on a spill. He said much smaller spills, if near a river or other water source, can do far more damage.

Don Morrison, executive director of the Dakota Resource Council, called any improved availability of information to the public a positive development.

Meanwhile, news emerged on Tuesday that the 20-year-old pipeline only started carrying crude fracked from North Dakota’s Bakken shale deposit in August. Safety tests performed early in September detected a problem with the pipeline, but Inform reports that the results hadn’t been provided to Tesoro officials by the time the spill occurred. Naturally, they used the potentially leaky pipeline while awaiting the test results. I mean, what are the chances?


Source
Tioga oil leak prompts policy review by state, Bismarck Tribune

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Excerpt from: 

North Dakota officials might finally spill details about oil spill

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on North Dakota officials might finally spill details about oil spill

Readers to papers: Stop publishing letters that deny climate reality

Readers to papers: Stop publishing letters that deny climate reality

Shutterstock

Newspapers should be truthful. That goes for every single page.

The L.A. Times recently won national attention and praise for spelling out its policy of refusing to publish the claims of climate deniers.

“Letters that have an untrue basis (for example, ones that say there’s no sign humans have caused climate change) do not get printed,” the letters page editor wrote.

Now, readers of other major newspapers are calling on their favored media outlets to adopt the same policy.

Forecast the Facts, a project that aims to improve the quality of coverage of climate change in the press, launched a petition calling on the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, and Wall Street Journal to refuse to print letters that deny basic science.

“The Los Angeles Times has adopted a policy of refusing to publish letters that deny climate change, and you should follow suit,” the petition states. “End climate change denial in your newspaper.”

On Monday, the group told The Hill that it had already gathered 22,000 signatures in less than a day.


Source
Tell newspapers: Don’t publish climate denial, Forecast the Facts
Activists urge papers to follow LA Times on climate letters, The Hill

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Visit site – 

Readers to papers: Stop publishing letters that deny climate reality

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Readers to papers: Stop publishing letters that deny climate reality