She pulled a kind of Vesalius v. Galen argument (all our human anatomy knowledge is based on studying gibbons!) by pointing out that the old “GDP” data were sectorally biased, covering only a small number of volatile manufacturing sectors and extrapolating from there. That seemed a sound point to me. The Great Depression would have strengthened her argument, while the Long Depression would have weakened it, so leaving both out in order to look at higher-frequency cycles isn’t a terrible idea.
Comment on Has NOAA ‘busted’ the pause in global warming? by stevepostrel
↧
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by fernandoleanme
Here’s a link to the bp factbook of world energy oil summary:
Consider page 4 of 15, production. Compare it to page 12 of 15, refinery throughputs. As you will see, the two numbers are very far apart. The difference is mostly natural gas liquids (ethane, propane, butane).
As it turns out, these ngl are used as minor fuels, or as feedstock for plastics and other chemical products. I like to revisit this topic because I’m very familiar with the field, and I find a bit of disinformation and zigzag in the way the real picture is presented to the public by the EIA, the IEA, the EU, the IPCC and the other letter soup agencies.
The trend we see is for much lighter production, with a significant NGL fraction. This is caused by the nature of the new “shale” reservoirs, which have extremely low permeability, and thus tend to produce in commercial quantities if the “petroleum” has very low viscosity. NGL, being much smaller molecules, but heavier than methane, are found in the liquid phase “crude oil” at reservoir conditions, but they also enter the gas phase in gas reservoirs.
Why am I going over this? Because we will be getting oil from two “new sources”, the “shales” (very light oils, condensates, and NGL), and from very heavy crudes found in Canada and Venezuela. These crudes include a high asphalt fraction, and require special treatment to break down the molecules, add hydrogen, and make synthetic liquids. And, no matter how I turn this situation and look at it from different angles, I have to conclude that oil prices are going to increase so much we are going to have to change the way we do things anyway.
Which leads me ONE MORE TIME to point out the IPCC ” business as usual” ditty is baloney. They need to be called on the way they invented figures to feed their GCMs.
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by wallensworth
So how’s Governor Brown’s water planning working out? :-)
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by fernandoleanme
Quoting from NASA:
“The NASA Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled Projections (NEX-GDDP) dataset is comprised of downscaled climate scenarios for the globe that are derived from the General Circulation Model (GCM) runs conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) and across two of the four greenhouse gas emissions scenarios known as Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). The CMIP5 GCM runs were developed in support of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR5). The NEX-GDDP dataset includes downscaled projections for RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 from the 21 models and scenarios for which daily scenarios were produced and distributed under CMIP5……
The NEX-GDDP dataset is provided to assist the science community in conducting studies of climate change impacts at local to regional scales, and to enhance public understanding of possible future global climate patterns at the spatial scale of individual towns, cities, and watersheds.”
The problem I see is the rcp8.5 feed. It includes huge volumes of fossil fuels which are in turn burned to create emissions profiles (it also includes what seems to be exaggerated methane emissions they needed to reach the target forcing). I’m afraid the USA government via NASA is making a huge effort to induce research based on very soft foundations.
The other problem I see is a certain amount of false confidence oil companies are projecting about what’s going on. People whose bonuses are a function of share price aren’t about to announce they may be running out of oil.
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by jungletrunks (@jungletrunks)
We have foresight and can predict with virtual certainty that there will be a human ending cataclysmic asteroid event on earth sometime between a few years and some millions of years from now. Would designing solutions be prudent for this? Or does the potential timescale prorate the risk away for not adopting a call to action plan?
We can’t predict with certainty the future of AGW or if it is indeed bad at all. We have the foresight to continue to develop technology and can make reasonable near-term predictions for curbing CO2 concentrations. Going ever further out in time technological advancement overtakes uncertainty about AGW until fear ceases. So the question then becomes what applied methodologies are good enough on a near-term basis to buttress against perceived risks until both technology and good stewardship eliminate fear for those inclined? Also how fast is technology advancing? Faster than most perceive if one looks at the last 100 years. I would argue that the steps industry is currently taking to mitigate their own carbon footprints, the recent peak and now downward trajectory of CO2 concentrations in developed nations, increasing global forestation, decreasing paper production, and global awareness in developing nations towards curbing their carbon footprint is enough in itself to hold us over until major breakthroughs in technology squash fears entirely. We should continue to do basic science and advance our understanding of climate. IMO, that’s it, we put our financial resources to work to invigorate the economy so we can afford the technologies of the future.
↧
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by wallensworth
Well said Justin.
Have blown through cynic right to “drink heavily.” :-)
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by AK
So you’re saying anybody who cares to read your self-advertised article can go to WUWT, and search around till they find the little calender down on the right, click on “May”, wait for it to load, click on 26, wait for it to load, and scroll down till they find your post.
If they feel like bothering. Or you could copy/paste the URL from your browser into your message box, like this:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/26/the-role-of-sulfur-dioxide-aerosols-in-climate-change/
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by wallensworth
NASA. Ha!
Well, it beats having to do hard shxt like launching stuff into space.
And by the time people realize you’re wrong, you’ll be retired.
Sounds like a cush job vs. real Rocket Science.
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by wallensworth
David – not to worry.
The useful ID10Ts will bring up how Susan Crockford took $750 bucks from big oil a decade ago, and how this really means that the polar bears are all dying, even though their numbers have increased 500% in 40 years.
No kidding. Just happened to me on facebook 2 days ago.
The ID10Ts will not be denied their coolaid.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – Energy and policy edition by brentns1
@Fernando
I’m very wary of wasting NG generating baseload electricity(displacing coal), when a better use might be supplementing transport fuel later on.
In other words I’m not saying do this in addition to the misdirection wrt CAGW. CAGW should be completely ignored.
Coal and Nuclear are well suited to baseload gen. Why displace coal with NG which has more flexible usage options.
all the best
brent
Now, industry austerity may be setting the stage for an upward spike in prices in three or four years, as new projects remain on the shelf, even as demand grows by 1 per cent a year and production from existing wells declines by 4 per cent annually. Even with no demand growth, the industry would have to develop about 50 million barrels a day of new production over the next 10 years, just to offset the decline rate.
“If we don’t have the right level of returns, we cannot do it,” Mr. Pouyanné said.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/head-of-major-oil-company-warns-alberta-ndp-against-tax-hike/article24882666/
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by russellseitz
<b><a href="http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/06/whatever-happened-to-roman-warm-period.html" rel="nofollow">Three millennia of complaining about unruly sky gods"> </b> </a> has left civilization with a plenum of climate cliches.
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by climatereason
Russell
At least you have a Sense of humour.
However, from the truth is stranger than fiction dept comes the news that we do actually have the climate records of the Byzantine empire from its establishment by Constantine through to a couple of decades prior to its fall in the 15 th century.
There were some very interesting periods of exceptional climate including the time when icebergs battered the walls of Constantinople.
Tonyb
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by mosomoso
Whatever caused the extreme climate events of 535-6 AD, they didn’t result from any global warming. No more than that mess around 2200 BC.
Fortunately we now have abundant fossil fuels to take the edge off the worst Gaia can throw at us. Just the edge, mind you.
↧
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by Bad Andrew
“urge to micromanage the future”
There are some who can’t leave the past alone either.
Now the line squiggled a little THAT way.
A sickness.
Andrew
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by richardswarthout
Tim
When I retired three years ago we were in the planning stages for the M1A3 (3rd major configuration of the Abrams). It has now been operational for 35 years.
Richard
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by Willard
> It aint going to work
Is that a prediction?
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by justinwonder
I love the tank and the Warthog (Gatling with wings). My point was that the future is often very different from our predictions. Though Star Trek had it mostly right. I’m still waiting for the transporter and the green woman. Priniting organs and burgers is right around the corner. I bet we get printed organs before we get cheap and effective PV solar! :)
↧
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by justinwonder
At least with an asteroid you know the consequences are going to be severe.
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by justinwonder
The military and the tank did a great job. Obummer booted it.
↧
Comment on Driving in the dark by Salvatore del Prete
GOOD PAPER!
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
