Group items tagged

Who is to blame for the summit disaster? The US? China? The EU? The G-8? In fact, all of the above. It was a coming together of states that killed off a vital resource for the world: trust. In Copenhagen, the outlines of a dangerous world were there for all to see. The climate summit did not end in a fist fight between tens of thousands of people, despite the fact that serious global problems were not resolved. Barack Obama did not have to fly out from the roof of a burning conference center. Nevertheless, it was palpable that this is a world in which trust is harder to come by than oil, and where there is more mistrust than CO2 emissions. And yet Copenhagen has proven that trust is the most important resource for the transformation of the current oil-based system into a green civilization. It is more important than all the money that will be required for new technology, more efficient machines, dams and the survival of forest inhabitants.

Who is to blame for the summit disaster? The US? China? The EU? The G-8? In fact, all of the above. It was a coming together of states that killed off a vital resource for the world: trust. In Copenhagen, the outlines of a dangerous world were there for all to see. The climate summit did not end in a fist fight between tens of thousands of people, despite the fact that serious global problems were not resolved. Barack Obama did not have to fly out from the roof of a burning conference center. Nevertheless, it was palpable that this is a world in which trust is harder to come by than oil, and where there is more mistrust than CO2 emissions. And yet Copenhagen has proven that trust is the most important resource for the transformation of the current oil-based system into a green civilization. It is more important than all the money that will be required for new technology, more efficient machines, dams and the survival of forest inhabitants.

Here is a list of energy news items that the WattzOn team found most interesting in 2008: * CO2 is officially a pollutant (maybe) - In a ruling by the Environmental Appeals Board (a panel within the EPA), it was decided that the EPA has no valid reason to not limit CO2 emissions from coal plants. Confusingly, the EPA has recently overruled itself by stating that officials cannot consider greenhouse gas outputs in judging applications to build new coal-fired power plants. So, it's back up in the "air." * We need to be at 350 PPM of CO2 - James Hansen of Columbia University, and NASA's head of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, published a landmark paper: "Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?" in which he argues for an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 350 parts per million (PPM) for humanity to be safe on this planet. As some background, pre-industrial Earth had a CO2 concentration of around 275 PPM, and for years policy makers have set a target regulatory goal of 550 PM - twice that number. More recently, 450 PPM has been proposed as a better goal by the EU and a few others. Unfortunately, recent evidence has shown that the Arctic sea is melting at an alarming rate and a giant ice sheet in Greenland is starting to slide into the ocean. This is the reality with the world today at 383 PPM. Hansen points out that this means we set overly lax targets and proposes the 350 PPM goal with tons of paleo-climatic data to back him up. We need to bring the CO2 in our atmosphere back down to this concentration. * Energy scientists primed to enter government - US President-Elect Obama has nominated Steven Chu to be the Secretary of Energy, and named John Holdren as the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology / Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy / Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. As the President-Elect puts it, "Today, more than

The Worldwatch Institute has released the latest version of their State of the World series, State of the World 2009: Into a Warming World:

I've been getting a lot of calls and e-mails from people asking about the falling prices for oil in recent weeks. The immediate explanation is that world economic activity is decelerating. Demand is falling. OPEC announced cuts in output. But the markets still believe that economic decline will trump the ability of OPEC to prop up the price of oil. Enjoy it while it lasts. Just over the horizon, things are about to become dicey. This week, the International Energy Agency (IEA) will release a new report on the future of world energy. In its World Energy Outlook, the IEA will state categorically that "Current global trends in energy supply and consumption are patently unsustainable." There's not much wiggle room in that statement. According to the IEA, despite the recent fall in oil prices, the medium- and long-term outlooks for energy supply are grim. Conventional oil output is destined to decline. Demand will still grow, however, especially in the developing world. And the twain shall only meet by prices rising to clear the market. "It is," as our Arab friends like to say, "written."

So burn this into your mind: between 2007 and 2008 the IEA radically changed its assessment. Until this year's report, the agency mocked people who said that oil supplies might peak. In the foreword to a book it published in 2005, its executive director, Claude Mandil, dismissed those who warned of this event as "doomsayers". "The IEA has long maintained that none of this is a cause for concern," he wrote. "Hydrocarbon resources around the world are abundant and will easily fuel the world through its transition to a sustainable energy future."(7) In its 2007 World Energy Outlook, the IEA predicted a rate of decline in output from the world's existing oilfields of 3.7% a year(8). This, it said, presented a short-term challenge, with the possibility of a temporary supply crunch in 2015, but with sufficient investment any shortfall could be covered. But the new report, published last month, carried a very different message: a projected rate of decline of 6.7%, which means a much greater gap to fill(9).

The forthcoming IEA report continues to generate plenty of advance press. It seems some of the production decline numbers that generated so much initial chatter are actually for already declining fields - not ones growing or holding steady, so they don't really mean all that much (its the average across all fields that really counts, which may still be around the 4.5% figure CERA predicts). MSN - IEA sees oil above $100, recognizes supply limit. The world will have to live with the risk of an energy supply crunch and an oil price well above $100 a barrel in the years to come, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Thursday. Massive investment of more than $26 trillion will be needed in the next 20 years to offset the impact of falling supply at aging oilfields and ensure the world has enough energy, the IEA said. "There remains a real risk that under-investment will cause an oil supply crunch (by 2015)," the IEA said in an executive summary of the World Energy Outlook (WEO) to be released in full next week. "The gap now evident between what is currently being built and what will be needed to keep pace with demand is set to widen sharply after 2010."

The United States is falling behind in the race for clean, renewable energy and risks losing its prominence in high-tech manufacturing, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said on Monday. Green Business "America has the opportunity to lead the world in a new industrial revolution," Chu told business leaders, political leaders and engineers at a Clemson University symposium. But, he said, "The world is passing us by. We are falling behind in the clean energy race. ... China is spending $9 billion a month on clean energy ... China has now passed the United States and Europe in high-tech manufacturing. There is no reason the United States should cede high-tech manufacturing to anyone." Last week the U.S. Energy Department awarded a $45 million grant to Clemson's Restoration Institute to test the drive trains for the next generation of large-scale wind turbines.

The United States is falling behind in the race for clean, renewable energy and risks losing its prominence in high-tech manufacturing, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said on Monday. Green Business "America has the opportunity to lead the world in a new industrial revolution," Chu told business leaders, political leaders and engineers at a Clemson University symposium. But, he said, "The world is passing us by. We are falling behind in the clean energy race. ... China is spending $9 billion a month on clean energy ... China has now passed the United States and Europe in high-tech manufacturing. There is no reason the United States should cede high-tech manufacturing to anyone." Last week the U.S. Energy Department awarded a $45 million grant to Clemson's Restoration Institute to test the drive trains for the next generation of large-scale wind turbines.

The world is heading for an "ecological credit crunch" far worse than the current financial crisis because humans are over-using the natural resources of the planet, an international study warns today. The Living Planet report calculates that humans are using 30% more resources than the Earth can replenish each year, which is leading to deforestation, degraded soils, polluted air and water, and dramatic declines in numbers of fish and other species. As a result, we are running up an ecological debt of $4tr (£2.5tr) to $4.5tr every year - double the estimated losses made by the world's financial institutions as a result of the credit crisis - say the report's authors, led by the conservation group WWF, formerly the World Wildlife Fund.

Fellow Americans we must stop investing in roads, highways and parking lots. The automobile must go the way of the horse as an antiquated way of getting around. Find a better way now, before desperation forces us to do so. Let's lead the world to a better future, not follow the status quo into pollution and sprawl. I worked in the oil and gas exploration and production industry for 25 years. Few citizens fully understand the scope of the current oil and gas production infrastructure in this country. There are tens, if not hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells across this country all pumping oil and gas continuously around the clock. Pipelines criss-cross the sea bottom and the landscape carrying millions of gallons of fuel, yet the domestic production meets only a fraction of the current demand for the products. No amount of domestic drilling can meet the country's demand. This world must change its energy infrastructure and transportation systems, and America should lead the way.

Fellow Americans we must stop investing in roads, highways and parking lots. The automobile must go the way of the horse as an antiquated way of getting around. Find a better way now, before desperation forces us to do so. Let's lead the world to a better future, not follow the status quo into pollution and sprawl. I worked in the oil and gas exploration and production industry for 25 years. Few citizens fully understand the scope of the current oil and gas production infrastructure in this country. There are tens, if not hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells across this country all pumping oil and gas continuously around the clock. Pipelines criss-cross the sea bottom and the landscape carrying millions of gallons of fuel, yet the domestic production meets only a fraction of the current demand for the products. No amount of domestic drilling can meet the country's demand. This world must change its energy infrastructure and transportation systems, and America should lead the way.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is today expected to adopt the most radical global warming plan in the U.S., and possibly the world. If passed, it will force individuals, as well as the state's utilities, refineries and large factories to fundamentally change the way they do business, and slash greenhouse gas emissions. The plan will outline for the first time how people and businesses will be required to meet the state's 2006 'Global Warming Solutions Act' and transform California into a global leader in the fight against climate change. The board will be in session all day to consider approval of the AB 32 Scoping Plan to Reduce GHG Emissions in California. Key aspects of the plan include: * The creation of a carbon-credit 'cap and trade' market designed to give the state's major polluters cheaper ways to cut emissions; * A Low Carbon Fuel standard; * Stringent transport related greenhouse gas targets; * A target of generating 33% of the states's electricity from renewable energy by 2020; * Ambitious vehicle efficiency measures; * Implementation of a high speed rail system; * A radical green building strategy.

This system will let your wife run her home by push-buttons in a few short years. For example, with this Home Electronic Center setup your wife will dial the electronic controls the night before to wake you gently to music in the morning. The system will shut the window when you get up or turn up the heat or air conditioning.... RCA engineers call this wonder system the Home Electronic Center Kid, or HECK. While your wife snoozes on, silent HECK is busy preparing your breakfast-chilled juice, hot coffee, eggs and toast-which will be served by HECK as you approach the kitchen table.

Most climate experts accept that, in order to avoid catastrophic effects of global warming, greenhouse gas emissions (mostly CO2) must be cut by 60-80% by 2050 (though the figure may need to be a 95% cut in the US). The belief that replacing fossil fuels with solar and wind technology can accomplish this reduction tends to overlook several factors: 1. Corporations bombard the world with the message that everyone should consume like Americans do; 2. Corporations tell those in the US that they should ape after the playthings of the rich; 3. Population is growing; 4. Market economics force pathological expansion; and, 5. Solar and wind comprise a minute fraction of current energy. Let's combine these to get an idea of how much solar and wind would need to expand to replace coal, oil, nukes and gas by 2050. First, the US consumes about 25% of the world's energy while having only 5% of the world's population. For the rest of the world to consume at the rate of the US would require global production to increase by a factor of 6.33.

Four years, aka one presidential term, is all the time Obama has to save the Earth according to NASA scientist James Hansen. Hansen testifed to Congress over twenty years ago alerting the world that climate change was under way. Five presidential terms later, Obama is left with a crisis of epic proportion. Hansen warns: We cannot afford to put off change any longer. We have to get on a new path within this new administration. We have only four years left for Obama to set an example to the rest of the world. America must take the lead.

The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the first multinational agency focused solely on spreading clean energy across the globe, officially launched this week. The expectations are that the agency will help governments and private industry to expand renewable energy installments throughout the industrialized world, where investments are already on the rise, while also assist the developing world acquire the expertise to establish its own clean energy industries.

On the subject of apocaphilia and reversalism, Tom Whipple's latest "peak oil crisis" column in the FCNP is heavy on doom - The Peak Oil Crisis: Civil Unrest. No mention of green new deals or rapid shifts to clean energy sources and transport systems to be found unfortunately - just talk about "involuntary changes" that people will need to make to their lifestyles that seems rather totalitarian to me (did all that time in the CIA make Tom start to think like the Soviets ?). Why not go for persuading people to make the necessary adaptive changes voluntarily ? We'll all end up with a better world in the end (rather than the locked down world of rationing and limited transport that some seem to think inevitable).

Energy leaders at the World Economic Forum debated the true cost of fuel on Thursday as they grappled with the implications of world recession and how to navigate out of it. Record-high oil prices close to $150 a barrel in July last year added to the pain of economic slowdown, and now much cheaper prices of near $40 a barrel could help the global economy to rally. But for consumers, producers and the planet, oil at that level could be too cheap as it slows investment in new supplies of fossil fuel as well as in alternative energy. Saudi Arabia, the world's leading oil exporter, said late last year $75 was a fair price for crude -- at the top end of the $60-$80 a barrel many in the industry consider a desirable level. "That seems to be what you need to get investment," BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward on Thursday told the forum in Davos, with reference to the $60-$80 range.

"Even if oil demand was to remain flat to 2030, 45m bpd of gross capacity - roughly four times the current capacity of Saudi Arabia - would need to be built by 2030 just to offset the effect of oilfield decline", according to Nobuo Tanaka, executive director of the IEA, speaking at a news conference in London. Oil reached a record peak of more than $147 a barrel in July, but has fallen back below $60, a drop of more than 50pc. Given the high cost of bringing on new output and the struggle to match supplies with demand, the IEA has assumed consumers will pay an average of $100 a barrel for oil over the next seven years and more beyond that. "Current trends in energy supply and consumption are patently unsustainable - environmentally, economically and socially - they can and must be altered," said Mr Tanaka. * o Text Size o click here to increase the text size o click here to decrease the text size * Email this article * Print this article * Share this article o delicious o Digg o Facebook o Fark o Google o Newsvine o NowPublic o Reddit o StumbleUpon http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/3448385/Credit-crunch-risks-world-oil-supply.html Related Content * More on Oil and Gas More on ... Oil and Gas Get feed updates Finance Get feed updates Energy Get feed updates telegraph tools Switch Utilities Save on fuel bills Search the market for the best prices on gas and electricity. Telegraph Utilities Comparison Service Advertisement telegraph financial partners Investment solutions * Investor services * Portfolio management * Investing for income guide * Inheritance tax advice * Reader guides Finance most viewed * TODAY * PAST WEEK * PAST MONTH 1. Row breaks out at easyJet 2. Abandon all hope once you enter deflation 3. B

Got your attention now? That amount of oil equivalent, three cubic miles, is how much the world uses in a year if you take into account all sources of energy, says Ripudaman Malhotra of SRI International's Chemical Science and Technology Laboratory in Greentech Media. What's more, is that by 2050 at current rates of increase the world will consume nine cubic miles of oil. Pretty sobering, but what is more sobering (it does indeed feel like cold water thrown on the renewable energy industry) is that to replace that amount of energy usage with renewable sources is nigh impossible. Here's Malhotra on the challenge laid before us in a nutshell:

TomDispatch has a new article from Michael Klare on peak oil and America's upcoming energy challenges - America's Energy Crunch Comes Home. No other major power relies on getting so much of its energy from oil. Making that 40% figure especially daunting is this: the world supply of oil is about to contract. The competition for remaining supplies will then intensify, while most of what remains is located in inherently unstable regions, threatening to lead the U.S. into unceasing oil wars. Just how much of the world's untapped oil supply remains to be exploited, and how quickly we will reach a peak of sustainable daily world oil output, are matters of some contention, but recently the scope of debate on this question has narrowed appreciably.