Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE International Energy Agency (IEA) Thread pt 4

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 13 Feb 2013, 18:17:48

Newfie wrote:Plant, if we can try to keep a civil discourse


I always engage in civil discourse. Name-calling such as dohboi engaged in is not civil discourse, so I asked him to stop. It would be helpful if you also try to keep a civil discourse. Thank you.

Newfie wrote:I would like to point out that while China is building plants, as you say, they are exporting goods to rest of the world, the US in particular. Thus if you look at the entire system, it is much more global than you seem to make it. There are likely some places that contribute little, say Mali, but they are the exception.


My whole point was to make it global---CO2 emissions are a global example of what is known as " the tragedy of the commons." Individual power plants (and countries) emit CO2 into the atmosphere, but the problem is global. If we don't know the local source of the FF CO2 emissions, then we can't do anything to stop the global effects of CO2.

Let me remind you that the title of this topic is "Stop Bldg FF infrastructure". If people are unwilling to even talk about where the FF infrastructure is still being built, then how in heaven's name could there be any hope of stopping it from being built?

Newfie wrote: This is just a way of finding blame.


Science isn't about blame. Science is about facts.

The facts are clear that the bulk of current CO2 emissions come from China and the majority of future FF infrastructure will be built in China, with other countries like India and Germany adding still more. Any discussion of how to "stop Bldg FF infrastructure" is stilted and incomplete without these facts being part of the discussion. :roll:

Image
China is already the world's largest CO2 emitter and plans to continue to expand its FF infrastructure in the years to come
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 20627
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 13 Feb 2013, 20:51:38

You would be more convincing if you could acknowledge that you understand that the Western world is just exporting its production and pollution and slavery to the third world.

Sticking your fingers in your ears, and covering your eyes does not make it go away.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9522
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby Lore » Wed 13 Feb 2013, 20:57:39

The rest of the planet has a long ways to go to exceed the total CO2 output over the past century and a half from that of the US. Being that CO2 remains in the atmosphere for decades, if not centuries, we will all be long dead before China can surpass us in total accumulated atmospheric volume. Furthermore, China is the only country that has just now beat us in yearly emissions. Which only makes sense, since we have exported all our dirty manufacturing over there so we can consume the finished product here.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 13 Feb 2013, 21:49:28

Newfie wrote: acknowledge that you understand that the Western world is just exporting its production and pollution and slavery to the third world.


Isn't that obvious?

Apple, Wal-Mart and many other US corporations now buy their products from Chinese subcontractors who in turn get the power for their factories from coal-fired power plants in China. China's economy is still growing by 7-8% per year, and the demand for coal-fired power is still increasing as well.

That is exactly my point---China is still building FF infrastructure at a rapid rate---supposedly about one new coal-fired electrical power plant opens in China every week.

If we are serious about addressing climate change and cutting CO2 emissions on a global basis, we have to honestly admit that China is currently the largest CO2 producer and China is still on track to greatly expand their CO2 emissions in coming years.

Image
The horrendous pollution from their coal-fired plants is the main reason for the horrible air quality in China and a big contributor to the continuing increases in global CO2 in the atmosphere.

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
"Il bel far niente"
---traditional Italian saying
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 20627
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby dohboi » Thu 14 Feb 2013, 00:06:03

What L & N said.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 16838
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 14 Feb 2013, 00:37:54

Nuclear power has its own set of problems, as seen in what happened in Japan, waste disposal, etc.

Ultimately, the world faces a combination of global warming and a resource crunch.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4699
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 14 Feb 2013, 16:51:27

The Most Influential Climate Study Few People Know About

The paper, "Greenhouse-Gas Emission Targets for Limiting Global Warming to 2C," was published in April 2009 in Nature, the prestigious science journal. It was the work of researchers from Germany, the UK and Switzerland, led by Malte Meinshausen, a climatologist at Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact.


The scientists created what is called a global "carbon budget," which details how much carbon countries have emitted in the atmosphere from burning coal, oil and natural gas—and how much more they can "spend" before crossing 2 degrees. They didn't invent the concept—many others had crunched carbon budgets. But none were as rigorous.


What they found was stark: To have a 50-50 chance of keeping temperature rise below 2 degrees, humans would have to stick to a carbon budget that allowed the release of no more than 1,437 gigatons of carbon dioxide from 2000 to 2050.
To have an 80 percent chance of avoiding that threshold, they would have to follow a stricter budget and emit just 886 gigatons.

The paper found that by 2006, nations had already spent a quarter of that amount, or 234 gigatons. Meaning, the planet's carbon budget would be exhausted by 2024—11 years from now— if emissions levels stayed the same, or even earlier if they continue their upward trend.

From a scientific point of view, burning all of the world's proven fossil fuel reserves isn't an option, the paper suggested. The reserves "vastly exceed the allowable CO2 emission budget for staying below 2C" of warming, it said.

In 2009, the findings were used by the International Energy Agency (IEA), a policy group that advises 28 countries about their energy policies, to make the case for steep reductions in climate-changing gases. "We are currently eating into these CO2 budgets at a disproportionate rate," the authors wrote in its World Energy Outlook that year.


bloomberg
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 13257
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby pstarr » Thu 14 Feb 2013, 16:58:34

dohboi wrote:What L & N said.
What that, dawg? Som'n bout stickin' ay finga's up the arse? I mean . . . in the ears :o
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26526
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby dohboi » Fri 15 Feb 2013, 19:06:08

Pstarr--LOL

G, keep in mind that that study was not considering carbon feedbacks.

We actually have essentially no "carbon cushion" left. Terrestrial permafrost alone was enough to flip us into unstoppable global warming.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 16838
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby AgentR11 » Mon 18 Feb 2013, 01:07:49

Lore wrote:The rest of the planet has a long ways to go to exceed the total CO2 output over the past century and a half from that of the US. Being that CO2 remains in the atmosphere for decades, if not centuries, we will all be long dead before China can surpass us in total accumulated atmospheric volume. Furthermore, China is the only country that has just now beat us in yearly emissions. Which only makes sense, since we have exported all our dirty manufacturing over there so we can consume the finished product here.


The problem now is that this "fairness" issue results in an incinerated planet under any politically possible projection.

If it must be fair, we are fried.

If we take fairness off the table, then the following is true: China must stop its expansion of FF infrastructure. India must not develop it. Indonesia must stop. The US has stopped, Europe has mostly stopped, Africa is too crippled to start, and South America is in idle. In the real world though, we know that China will NOT stop; India will develop; Indonesia will continue to expand; we know the US and Europe are in a depression that is restraining their growth in energy, but is not assured to continue to suppress growth.

Thus even if we do take fairness off the table, we are still fried.

I'm perfectly content for the US to be blamed for such, makes no difference to me; nor anyone out there in the less developed world who will be feeling the pain very soon, and very harshly. Knowing the US is at fault, will not make the starving child less hungry, will not make the storm destroyed town survive, knowing will not stop the tide.

Folks say there is no CC policy. I assert that the above *IS* the policy. Scientists and PR folks say, "we must not go above 2C"... Those in charge have now plainly said for any who will hear, "We are going to +6C, express, no pauses. Buck up buttercup." And yes that includes the big O.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
User avatar
AgentR11
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 08:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby ennui2 » Sun 24 Feb 2013, 22:30:26

If oil-use is so bad, the IEA probably wouldn't be necessary, as countries would be shifting off of it fast enough that the supply disruptions the IEA was set up to warn about would be irrelevant. So the IEA is kind of like the tobacco growers association telling people to stop smoking.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3921
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 09:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby GregT » Thu 07 Mar 2013, 23:10:40

Well, first post. I may as well get it off my chest, IMHO we are f-cked. So yes, I guess you can consider me to be a doomer. :-D

There is a lag time between CO2 accumulations and temperature increase, so we really don't know exactly how much damage we have already done. At this point, the best thing to do would be to entirely stop burning fossil fuels, period. Instead, we are increasing CO2 output at an unprecedented rate. None of us are exempt.

The likelihood of positive feedback mechanisms causing runaway CC in the very near future are highly probable. We need to find ways to reverse Arctic ice loss immediately. That would seem to be the logical place to start, and could buy us some time until we figure out a way to sequester atmospheric CO2 in any meaningful amount. Problem is, we have a rapidly closing window of opportunity, and there is little discussion, let alone action. It is far more than likely, too late.

Our species as a whole is incapable of moving beyond greed. We lie, cheat, demonize, demoralize, and even kill each other en mass, just to get a bigger piece of the pie. We have not evolved in this regard and we never will. We already had that chance.

There are so many insurmountable ecological problems associated with our exploitation of fossil fuels, that there is really no point banging our heads against the wall trying to come up with a solution. There simply isn't one.

So, short of alien technology, or divine intervention, acceptance seems to me to be the most logical course of action. I plan to make the most of a shitty situation, and live out my remaining time on this earth enjoying life to it's fullest, for as long as I am able.
GregT
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu 24 Jan 2013, 20:18:20
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby ennui2 » Mon 11 Mar 2013, 04:25:25

Welcome to the club. Eat drink and be merry as best you can.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3921
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 09:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: IEA: Irreversible CC in 5 yrs - Stop Bldg FF Infrastruct

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 11 Mar 2013, 15:54:54

ennui2 wrote:Welcome to the club. Eat drink and be merry as best you can.


Agreed, unfortunately agree. :cry:
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9522
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

IEA Medium Term Outlook

Unread postby Pops » Tue 14 May 2013, 06:00:36

If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide.
-- Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 17642
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: IEA Medium Term Outlook

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 14 May 2013, 14:16:25

Pops - One of the more significant points made in the report IMHO deals with refining. They say the developed economies are relinquishing market share to non-OECD regions, “a form of de facto off-shoring not unlike the trend in manufacturing sectors”. They expect in the next 5 years virtually all net crude distillation capacity growth will take place in the emerging market and developing economies. And that as the refineries move closer to the well heads more of the internationally traded crude is expected to end up in non-OECD economies.

But remember there is a lot more that’s important than where those refineries are being built. Remember my tale about Chinese refinery expansion? It wasn’t just that they were building what appeared to be an over capacity in refining but they were linking this expansion will long term access to currently exported oil. That one little example again: the Chinese/Saudi refinery to be built on the Red Sea. Those 400,000 bopd that will feed that plant will reduce oil on the world market by the same amount. Even if an EU or US refiner could match the market price for that oil it still won’t be available to them. Probably for decades, if ever. Now US refineries can buy all the Canadian oil sands production they can handle. But after the Bank of China finances that huge refinery in British Columbia with the products pipelined to the coast to be loaded on to tankers some of that oil won’t be available to them. Each of the Chinese refinery JV’s probably includes long term oil acquisitions tied to them. In the future the amount of oil produced won’t be as critical as the amount exported to the open market. And now with increased oil consumption by the producers combined with increases in the amount of oil removed from the market place by China (in addition to the oil in the ground they’ve already acquired) the US shouldn’t be as worried about global peak oil production but US peak oil imports.

The US may still have access to a lot of product if the Chinese can make a biter profit selling to us. But the day may come where having access to those products will become the factor determining distribution.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10671
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: IEA Medium Term Outlook

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 14 May 2013, 15:30:23

The IEA report predicts OPEC production will start to significantly decline by 2017-18 (illustrated in slide#8 of their presentation).

There won't be much hope of the world staying on an oil production plateau after that.

"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
"Il bel far niente"
---traditional Italian saying
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 20627
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: IEA Medium Term Outlook

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Tue 14 May 2013, 22:27:18

US boom transforming global oil trade
The surge in oil production in the U.S. and Canada and shrinking oil consumption in the developed world is transforming the global oil market.

The threat of chronic oil shortages is all but gone, U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil will continue to dwindle, and oil will increasingly flow to the developing economies of Asia, according to a five-year outlook published Tuesday by the International Energy Agency.
...
“It will affect relationships between countries. Most leaders believe they have to be nice to whoever they buy their oil from,” says Michael Levi, an energy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of a recent book on the U.S. energy boom called The Power Surge.

U.S. petroleum imports have fallen by 22 percent since hitting a record in the middle of the last decade.

With lower demand in the West and higher production in the Americas, much less oil will flow from the Middle East to Europe and the United States. Instead, Middle Eastern oil will head to Asia and likely strengthen economic and political ties between the two regions.

Levi warns against overestimating the political and economic benefits of lower U.S. imports, however. Because the oil market is global, a supply disruption in the Middle East would send prices higher everywhere — including for U.S. consumers — even if the U.S. imports no oil from the Middle East. For that reason, the U.S. will still need to help maintain stability in the region.
If (hypothetically) USA imports no oil from the Middle East, a supply disruption would only affect USA prices if exports from USA were allowed.

Will USA continue to spend $trillions keeping compliant kings, dictators, emirs and sultans in power just in case of a supply disruption? It would be much cheaper just to ban exports.

ABUNDENT.png
ABUNDENT.png (86.27 KiB) Viewed 5042 times
"I could go on, but let’s veer off in another direction instead."

– The Archdruid
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7279
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands

Re: IEA Medium Term Outlook

Unread postby ralfy » Tue 14 May 2013, 23:09:48

If we're looking at economies coupled to each other, then U.S. producers will probably sell to the highest bidders.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4699
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: IEA Medium Term Outlook

Unread postby sparky » Wed 15 May 2013, 05:29:43

.
The U.S. trade with the Middle East is crude for weapons ,
the gulf sheikdoms are paying back their dollars in useless stuff and buying federal bonds too
User avatar
sparky
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3265
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Sydney , OZ

PreviousNext

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tanada and 24 guests