Archives de catégorie : energy and fields

RETOUR SUR 2019

by Samuel Furfari, 21 février 2020, in ScienceClimatEnergie


L’année 2019 aurait été celle de l’hystérie climatique. Les manifestations des jeunes qui ont suivi avec enthousiasme les conseils d’une jeune suédoise ont donné à des politiciens en quête de raison d’être une opportunité pour montrer qu’ils s’occupent de la jeunesse, mais aussi de l’environnement ou plus précisément de « sauver la Planète ».
Qui n’est pas en faveur de la protection de l’environnement ?
Qui n’est pas attentif à la santé ?
L’occasion rêvée pour redonner du sens à la politique était trop belle, d’autant plus qu’il y avait en 2019 l’élection d’un nouveau parlement européen. L’inflation de promesses inconsidérées ne s’est pas fait attendre. Elle a abouti le 11 décembre 2019 à la publication d’une nouvelle stratégie de la Commission européenne appelée « Green Deal » et à son adoption par le Conseil européen le 13 décembre, avec un parlement européen qui en veut encore plus.

L’inflation des promesses est à son comble, tout comme le budget qu’il va falloir débourser pour atteindre ces promesses, destinées en fait à redonner une raison d’être à une Union européenne en manque de projets enthousiasmants pour ses citoyens et ignorée par les pays qui dirigent  les grands enjeux géopolitiques comme l’a manifestement montré le camouflet infligé à Angel Merkel lors de la conférence sur la Libye à  Berlin le 21 janvier 2020 .

Pourtant, sur le front de l’énergie, et non des politiques énergétiques, le début de la révolution annoncée n’a même pas commencé. Au contraire, la toute-puissance des énergies fossiles a été confirmée voire renforcée. La nouvelle géopolitique de l’énergie, qui a été créée grâce à l’abondance des énergies fossiles, s’est affermie et est entérinée par une grande partie du business de l’ énergie.

Economic impact of energy consumption change caused by global warming

by P. Lange & K. Gregory, February 8, 2020 in ClimateEtc.


A new paper ‘Economic impact of energy consumption change caused by global warming’ finds global warming may be beneficial.

In this blog post we reproduce the Abstract, Policy Implications and Conclusions and parts of the Introduction, Results and Discussion. We encourage you to read the entire paper.

Abstract: This paper tests the validity of the FUND model’s energy impact functions, and the hypothesis that global warming of 2 °C or more above pre-industrial times would negatively impact the global economy. Empirical data of energy expenditure and average temperatures of the US states and census divisions are compared with projections using the energy impact functions with non-temperature drivers held constant at their 2010 values. The empirical data indicates that energy expenditure decreases as temperatures increase, suggesting that global warming, by itself, may reduce US energy expenditure and thereby have a positive impact on US economic growth. These findings are then compared with FUND energy impact projections for the world at 3 °C of global warming from 2000. The comparisons suggest that warming, by itself, may reduce global energy consumption. If these findings are correct, and if FUND projections for the non-energy impact sectors are valid, 3 °C of global warming from 2000 would increase global economic growth. In this case, the hypothesis is false and policies to reduce global warming are detrimental to the global economy. We recommend the FUND energy impact functions be modified and recalibrated against best available empirical data. Our analysis and conclusions warrant further investigation.

Global Fossil Fuel Emissions Up 0.6% In 2019

by P. Homewood, February 6, 2020 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


Emissions from fossil fuel and industry (FF&I) are expected to reach 36.81bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2) in 2019, up by only 0.24GtCO2 (0.6%) from 2018 levels, according to the latest estimates from the Global Carbon Project (GCP).

The data is being published in Earth System Science Data Discussions, Environmental Research Letters and Nature Climate Change to coincide with the UN’s COP25 climate summit in Madrid, Spain.

The growth of global emissions in 2019 was almost entirely due to China, which increased its CO2 output by 0.26GtCO2. The rest of the world actually reduced its emissions by -0.02GtCO2, thanks to falling coal use in the US and Europe, as well as much more modest increases in India and the rest of the world, compared to previous years.

The GCP researchers say that “a further rise in emissions in 2020 is likely” as global consumption of natural gas is “surging”, oil use continues to increase and, overall, energy demand rises.

Despite the rapid rise and falling costs of renewables in many parts of the world, the majority of increases in energy demand continue to be met by fossil fuels. For example, gas met around two-fifths of the increase in demand in 2018, against just a quarter coming from renewables.

Overall, human-caused CO2 emissions, including those from FF&I and land use, are projected to increase by 1.3% in 2019. This is driven by a 0.29GtCO2 (5%) increase in land-use emissions – including deforestation –  which is the fastest rate in five years. While land use only represents around 14% of total 2019 emissions, it will contribute more than half the increase in emissions in 2019.

While more modest than in recent years, the increase in emissions in 2019 puts the world even further away from meeting its climate change goals under the Paris Agreement.

Japan Races to Build New Coal-Burning Power Plants, Despite the Climate Risks

by Hiroko Tabuchi, February 5, 2020 in TheNewYorkTimes


It is one unintended consequence of the Fukushima nuclear disaster almost a decade ago, which forced Japan to all but close its nuclear power program. Japan now plans to build as many as 22 new coal-burning power plants — one of the dirtiest sources of electricity — at 17 different sites in the next five years, just at a time when the world needs to slash carbon dioxide emissions to fight global warming.

Il faut prolonger la durée de vie des centrales nucléaires belges

by Furfari S. & Mund E., 31 janvier 2020 in ScienceClimatEnergie


Les plus chauds partisans de l’énergie nucléaire sont convaincus que la technologie actuelle des réacteurs à eau légère sous pression (PWR) est loin d’être parfaite. Mais elle dispose d’énormes qualités qui rendent son utilisation indispensable. Au nombre de celles-ci, principalement une absence d’émission de CO2 [1] la sécurité d’approvisionnement au sens où la production d’électricité et de chaleur peut satisfaire la demande à tout instant, hormis bien sûr les périodes de maintenance des installations et les pannes éventuelles, et la rentabilité économique au sens où les importants investissements en capitaux peuvent être amortis en des temps beaucoup plus courts que la durée de vie fonctionnelle de ces installations, etc… Dernière qualité, moins évidente pour les non-initiés : la mise en œuvre de la technologie PWR peut revêtir des formes très variées dont certaines (les SMR, petits réacteurs modulaires) renforcent la sûreté déjà très élevée  du nucléaire actuel, considérée néanmoins comme insuffisante par les opposants.

Green Energy: German Electricity Prices Skyrocket To Record Highs

by P. Gosselin & H. Douglas, Jan 27, 2020 in ClimateChangeDispatch


For a long time, electricity prices have known only one direction: upwards! Ever faster, ever more clearly.

Now the shock for many families: The Federal Government has presented official figures in an answer to an inquiry from the FDP Free Democrats parliamentary group in the Bundestag and announced the true extent of the electricity price increase.

320 euros extra annually per household

In the past ten years, the price of electricity for households and industry has risen by a third.

According to the Augsburger Allgemeine, which quotes from the paper, the price of electricity rose by 35 percent between 2009 and 2019.

For a typical household with 4,000 kWh per year, this means 320 euros in additional costs for electricity alone.

This is even more than the various comparison websites had previously calculated.

China Thermal Power Up 2.4% Last Year

by P. Homewood, January 28, 2020 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


Provisional figures from the China Energy Portal indicate that thermal generation continues to rise in China, albeit at a slower rate then the last few years

https://chinaenergyportal.org/en/2019-electricity-other-energy-statistics-preliminary/

As I noted in November, there are three factors behind the slower rise in thermal (which is almost certainly predominantly coal-fired):

  • Overall demand for electricity has increased at a much slower rate in 2019 – 4.7% against 8.4% in 2019. This reflects the dramatic slowdown in Chinese economic growth.
  • New nuclear capacity has been added in the last two years.
  • Better hydro generation, presumably due to wetter weather.

Significantly, thermal generating capacity has continued to grow in 2019, by 4.1%. Just as significant is the dramatic slowdown in new solar power capacity being added. In 2018, 45GW was added, but this dropped to 26GW last year, following the restriction of subsidies.

New wind capacity increased marginally in 2019, from 21GW in 2018 to 25GW.

Also  China’s Coal Power To Remain Dominant Till At Least 2035

Transition énergétique : une régression sans précédent ?

par J.P. Bardinet, 16 janvier 2020 in Contrepoints


L ’éolien ne sert à rien et la politique gouvernementale, voulue par l’Union européenne, Emmanuel Macron et ses deux prédécesseurs, est néfaste pour notre pays.

Lors de son évolution, l’humanité a utilisé des énergies primaires avec des densités énergétiques de plus en plus fortes : bois, charbon, gaz, pétrole, uranium. La densité énergétique des énergies renouvelables (EnR), éolien et solaire, est très faible, ce qui est une régression sans précédent dans l’histoire de l’humanité.

Chiffres de production totale RTE 2018 : 548,6 TWh dont

  • nucléaire 71,7 %
  • thermique à combustible fossile 7,2 %
  • hydraulique 12,5 %
  • éolien 5,1 %
  • solaire 1,9 %
  • agroénergies 1,8 %

Le facteur de charge de l’éolien est de 21 % et celui du solaire de 13,6 %.

Ces EnR intermittentes ont de faibles facteurs de charge, ce sont donc des moyens de production peu efficaces, mais particulièrement onéreux.
L’Espagne et l’Allemagne en ont fait la douloureuse expérience.

Avant le développement des EnR intermittentes, nous exportions environ 10 % de notre production d’électricité. Nous pouvons donc nous demander pourquoi nos gouvernants, à la suite des Directives de la Commission européenne, ont imposé  manu militari ces EnR intermittentes alors qu’une politique de prolongation de la durée de vie des centrales nucléaires, un programme de construction de plusieurs EPR, et un financement approprié de la R&D sur la surgénération à uranium appauvri auraient été les meilleures options.

La filière des SMR (small size reactors) qui utilise la technologie des sous-marins nucléaires, serait également une piste à développer, car elle permettrait de produire de l’électricité à proximité des centres de consommation, rendant ainsi les pertes lors du transport quasiment nulles.

LE CO2 LOURDEMENT TAXÉ

Les politiques climat-énergie de notre pays et de la plupart de pays de l’UE sont basées sur l’hypothèse non prouvée que nos émissions de CO2 ont une action mesurable sur la température moyenne annuelle globale (TMAG) et sur le climat de notre planète.

 

L’hydrogène, l’éternelle illusion

by M. Gay & S. Furfari, 8 janvier 2020 in Contrepoints


L’hydrogène (H2) est une terrible illusion comme énergie alternative aux combustibles fossiles. Les médias semblent fascinés par ce gaz perçu comme une panacée, mais entre la science et la perception publique ou politique, il y a un abîme.

Cette erreur commune persiste notamment parce que Jeremy Rifkin, un gourou dans le domaine de l’hydrogène, a présenté The Hydrogen Economy dans laquelle ce gaz remplacerait les combustibles fossiles pour la production d’électricité et les transports.

Bon orateur répétant son mantra depuis maintenant plus de 15 ans, Rifkin a réussi à convaincre de nombreux politiciens, en particulier dans l’Union européenne (UE), que la révolution de l’hydrogène était en marche. Mais l’effet magique « abracadabra » ne fonctionne pas dans la science et l’économie.

The Fracking Decade

by Noah Rothman, January 2020, in Commentary


The malady afflicting the country was unmistakable, according to George W. Bush. “America is addicted to oil,” the president observed in his 2006 State of the Union address. This wasn’t just an observation. It was a call to arms. If the U.S. failed to wean itself off foreign oil, the consequences for the domestic economy and U.S. foreign policy would be grave. Doing so would require substantial investments in America’s ethanol industry as well as the development of oil deposits in pristine natural parks and off the nation’s shores.

In 2008, the U.S. produced an average of just 5 million barrels of oil per day—the nadir of domestic energy production since the exploitation of fossil fuels began in the late 19th century. By 2009, the price of West Texas Intermediate crude was approaching $150 per barrel. The U.S., therefore, was obliged to spend over $1 billion per day on oil imports from foreign countries, few of which could be considered models of good governance. America’s thirst for oil propped up abusive governments in places such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Venezuela, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Mauritania, and Syria.

 

Energies du monde et perspectives d’un MIX 2050?

by E. Simon, 27 décembre 2019 in ScienceClimatEnergie


1/ Introduction

Face aux gesticulations de masses organisées contre les énergies fossiles et le CO2, dits nuisibles, nos amis logiciens examineront utilement la situation à l’échelle planétaire. Une situation où nos 500 millions d’habitants d’UE ne pèsent finalement que 1/15e de l’actuelle population mondiale !

Tâchons d’identifier des faits chiffrés, ils reflètent la vie réelle sur notre globe. Leurs ‘tendances lourdes’ y échappent à l’emprise des idéologues ! Si nos besoins capacitaires belges post-2025 provoquent déjà l’entrechoc d’avis entre la CREG (régulateur belge) et l’administration SPF (Energie, plus experts), il sera plus éclairant de raisonner dans une atmosphère sans frontières, à l’échelle planétaire. Là s’ajoutent les dimensions géopolitiques et divers facteurs de sensibilités culturelles. Les joutes de pouvoirs institutionnels y deviennent alors titanesques ! L’Union Européenne en restera-t-elle subordonnée aux thèses du GIEC et aux manoeuvres aux COP21 (… COP25) onusiennes ? Une thèse vaut ici : les 5 pays dits BRICS (ou Brésil/Russie/Inde/Chine/Afrique du Sud) et d’autres Etats ne suivront pas les dogmes prônés par l’ONU. Sa démonstration par l’absurde en est perceptible dans les faits. Explorons-la davantage ?

Cette note consacrée au MIX mondial passe en revue les points suivants :

• Où en sommes-nous (UE, monde) actuellement ?
• Vers où le reste du monde se dirige-t-il, à l’horizon planifié de 2040/2050 ?
• Trancher le noeud gordien des perspectives exige de chiffrer les + et les – !
• Combien cela coûtera-t-il à l’humanité (celle apte à le payer) ?
• En guise de conclusion, à ce stade …

China Burns Over Half Of The World’s Coal And Will Account For 50% Of Global CO2 Emissions By 2030

by K. Richard, December 19, 2019 in NoTricksZone


Today, 30% of the globe’s CO2 emissions come from China. In 10 years, China’s emissions alone will match the rest of world’s emissions combined. China continues to build hundreds of coal plants today. So why are the rest of us spending $600 billion every year on CO2 emissions mitigation?

China overtook the United States as the world’s largest CO2 emitter in 2008 (Liu et al., 2019).

L’avenir incertain de l’éolien terrestre européen

by JP Schaeken Willemaers, 20 décembre 2019 in ScienceClimatEnergie


L’avenir de l’éolien terrestre des pays européens s’inscrit dans le cadre de la politique climatique de l’UE.

La concrétisation d’une politique énergétique européenne commune a du mal à voir le jour en raison, notamment, de la diversité des approches et des intérêts des Etats-membres.
Ceci n’a pas empêché la Commission européenne de présenter, en 2011, sa feuille de route pour l’énergie (Roadmap 2050), affichant ainsi sa volonté de “décarboner” de l’économie.
A l’origine, cet objectif était soumis à la condition que d’autres régions du monde prennent également l’initiative d’un tel effort. Depuis lors, l’UE se dit prête, le cas échéant, à s’engager seule dans cette aventure. En fait, elle s’est focalisée sur une réduction drastique des émissions des gaz à effet de serre (GES), à tout prix, sans se préoccuper de considérations économiques et sociales.
Le secteur électrique a été ciblé en premier lieu alors qu’il ne représente que 22% de la consommation totale d’énergie de l’UE.
La nouvelle Commission souhaite être encore plus ambitieuse que la précédente, portant la diminution des émissions de GES à 50/55% au lieu de 40% à l’horizon 2030 par rapport à 1990, négligeant ainsi les difficultés de certains Etats-membres, dont l’Allemagne, d’atteindre ne fût-ce que le niveau des 40% précités.

Coal consumption likely to rise as growing demand for electricity generation in developing countries

by P. Homewood, December 17, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


Coal consumption is set to rise in the coming years as growing demand for electricity in developing countries outpaces a shift to cleaner sources of electricity in industrialised nations.

While use of the most polluting fossil fuel had a historic dip in 2019, the International Energy Agency anticipates steady increases in the next five years. That means the world will face a significant challenge in meeting pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.

Annual coal report

“There are few signs of change,” the agency wrote in its annual coal report released in Paris on Tuesday. “Despite all the policy changes and announcements, our forecast is very similar to those we have made over the past few years.”

While this year is on track for biggest decline ever for coal power, that is mostly due to high growth in hydroelectricity and relatively low electricity demand in India and China, said Carlos Fernandez Alvarez, senior energy analyst at the Paris-based IEA.

Despite the drop, global coal consumption is likely to rise over the coming years, driven by demand in India, China and Southeast Asia. Power generation from coal rose almost 2% in 2018 to reach an all-time high, remaining the world’s largest source of electricity.

Some Facts About Energy

by Wallace Manheimer, December 5, 2019 in WUWT


The industrial age, namely using coal, oil and gas to generate power instead of human and animal muscle, and wind and solar have lifted billions out of poverty. Before the industrial age, civilization was a thin veneer on top of a vast mound of human misery, that civilization maintained by such things as slavery, colonies, and tyranny. The recent calls to reject fossil fuel and go back to the former ways motivates one to see in a quantitative way just how important fossil fuel is and how we rely on it. It takes some numbers, which generally bore people as compared to generalities and preposterous claims, but numbers are important, and in fact are simpler to understand than the vague generalities.

First let us look at the power that the world uses. BP is one of many organizations that publishes this data. Below is their graph of the power used by different parts of the world at various years and with projections for the future. The unit on the vertical axis is billions of tons per year of oil equivalent. Since this is not the usual units we think of, just think of a billion tons of oil per year as approximately equal to a trillion Watts, or a terawatt (TW). These Watts are the same units we are all use to, for instance we know what a 100-Watt light bulb is. Keep it on for 10 hours and you have used a kilowatt hour of energy and added about a dime to your electric bill. Here we will reduce all units of power to Watts, so everything will be in the same units and we can compare the power usage of one aspect of our lives to another.

 

China plans new coal plants, trims support for clean energy

by The Japan Times, December 2, 2019


As world leaders gather in Spain to discuss how to slow the warming of the planet, a spotlight falls on China — the top emitter of greenhouse gases.

China burns about half the coal used globally each year. Between 2000 and 2018, its annual carbon emissions nearly tripled, and it now accounts for about 30 percent of the world’s total. Yet it’s also the leading market for solar panels, wind turbines and electric vehicles, and it manufactures about two-thirds of solar cells installed worldwide.

“We are witnessing many contradictions in China’s energy development,” said Kevin Tu, a Beijing-based fellow with the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. “It’s the largest coal market and the largest clean energy market in the world.”

That apparent paradox is possible because of the sheer scale of China’s energy demands.

But as China’s economy slows to the lowest level in a quarter century — around 6 percent growth, according to government statistics — policymakers are doubling down on support for coal and other heavy industries, the traditional backbones of China’s energy system and economy. At the same time, the country is reducing subsidies for renewable energy.

COP25 : LA PLACE DU NUCLÉAIRE DANS LA TRANSITION ÉNERGÉTIQUE MONDIALE

by l’EnerGeek, 3 décembre 2019


Lundi 2 décembre, la COP25 s’ouvre dans un climat tendu à Madrid. Le 28 novembre dernier, le Parlement Européen a décrété l’urgence climatique. Le Parlement appelle la COP25 à “prendre des mesures audacieuses et ambitieuses”. Et la plus ambitieuse de toutes pourrait être une résolution votée en faveur de l’énergie nucléaire. Car avec la mise en place d’un nouveau mix électrique mondial, cette énergie bas carbone est plus que jamais en bonne position pour devenir le moteur de la transition énergétique.

Le Parlement Européen soutient le nucléaire

Le texte du Parlement Européen revient sur l’importance de l’énergie nucléaire dans le cadre de la transition énergétique et estime que “l’énergie nucléaire peut jouer un rôle dans la réalisation des objectifs climatiques, car elle n’émet pas de gaz à effet de serre et peut également assurer une part significative de la production d’électricité en Europe ; considère néanmoins que, en raison des déchets qu’elle génère, cette énergie nécessite une stratégie à moyen et long terme prenant en compte les avancées technologiques (laser, fusion, etc.) visant à améliorer la durabilité de l’ensemble du secteur”

Valérie Faudon, de la Société Française d’énergie nucléaire (SFEN), François Momboisse, Tristan Kamin et autres experts, consultants ou ingénieurs se sont félicités sur les réseaux sociaux de cette prise de position estimant que le nucléaire est “une solution efficace pour lutter contre le réchauffement climatique, aux côtés des autres énergies bas carbone.” A l’inverse, Michèle Rivasi, députée européenne, a par exemple expliqué par le biais d’un tweet pourquoi elle a voté contre cette résolution :

Energy Returned on Capital Invested: Ohio “Shale” vs Green “Schist”

by D. Middleton, December 2, 2019 in WUWT


Ohio’s shale energy industry attracts nearly $78 billion in investment since 2011
11/20/2019

COLUMBUS, OHIO – Total investment in Ohio’s resource rich shale energy sector has reached $78 billion since tracking began in 2011, according to a Cleveland State University (CSU) study.

Prepared for JobsOhio, the report represents the most recent data available and covers shale investment through the second half of 2018. Earlier in the year, IHS Markit released estimates that by 2040, the Utica and Marcellus shale region, of which Ohio is a significant part, will supply nearly half of all U.S. natural gas production.

The study from CSU’s Energy Policy Center at the Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, showed drilling investments were slightly down in the second half of 2018 compared to the first half, but total upstream investments were up. Total shale-related investment in Ohio for the second half of 2018, including upstream, midstream and downstream, was around $3.82 billion. Total investment from 2011-2018 totaled about $77.7 billion.

[…]

World Oil

Geothermal Energy: The Great COP25 Climate Surprise?

by Eric Worrall, November 30, 2019 in WUWT


For a long time Geothermal energy has been an expensive joke, even for people who claim solar and wind power is viable. History is littered with Geothermal projects which failed to live up to their early promise, such as the Tim Flannery inspired Cooper Basin project, which obliterated at least $90 million in government grant money before the project was abandoned.

But there are some hints that COP25 might include an attempt to breath new government money into this failed renewable energy technology.

From Chile, posted in April this year

New Report Says Fracking Saved Americans $1.1 Trillion Over Past Decade

by A. Watts, November 21, 2019 in WUWT


Research & Commentary by Tim Benson

A new report prepared by Kleinhenz & Associates for the Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program shows increased oil and natural gas production from hydraulic fracturing  (“fracking”) has saved American consumers $1.1 trillion in the decade from 2008 to 2018. This breaks down to more than $900 in annual savings to each American family, or $9,000 in cumulative savings. Continuer la lecture de New Report Says Fracking Saved Americans $1.1 Trillion Over Past Decade

China Set for Massive Coal Expansion in Threat to Climate Goals

by  Bloomberg News, November 20, 2019


China has enough coal-fired power plants in the pipeline to match the entire capacity of the European Union, driving the expansion in global coal power and confounding the movement against the polluting fossil fuel, according to a report.

The nation has almost 148 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity under active construction or likely to be resumed after being suspended, Global Energy Monitor, a non-profit group that tracks coal stations, said in the report Thursday based on plant-by-plant data. That’s almost equivalent to 150 gigawatts of existing coal fleet capacity in the EU and more than the combined 105 gigawatts under construction in the rest of the world, it said.

In contrast to many other countries, including the U.K.’s pledge to shut all coal plants by 2025, Beijing remains committed to coal as its biggest source of power, representing a major challenge to global emissions reduction targets. Its additions in the 18 months to June dwarf declines elsewhere in the world, according to the report.

The Fossil Fuel Dilemma

by David L. Debertin, November 9, 2019 in WUWT


California again easily could become one of the top three fossil fuel producing states in the nation, but the largely liberal state has made drilling for fossil fuels within the state very difficult if not impossible. So the drillers have wisely looked elsewhere for locations that pose less of a political burden. North Dakota and its leaders welcomed the drillers. The result is tax dollars flowing into the state treasury from a variety of oil-related taxes levied not only on the drillers, but on individuals receiving mineral royalty income. In the past dozen years or so this has meant that taxpayers outside the oil producing counties have seen state-level taxes drop and the state can pursue projects that benefit the residents in a host of different ways simply by using funds that would not have been available had the drilling not occurred.

The new revenue coming into New Mexico as a result of recent oil drilling on the New Mexico side of the Permian basin via fracked oil wells is a more recent phenomena, only about 3-years old. The dilemma is that New Mexico has long been left-leaning politically whereas North Dakota has been a right-leaning state. Left-leaning politicians when they hear about new state revenue from an unexpected source generally think about new government program benefiting certain favored groups (maybe the younger voters who tend to favor left-leaning politicians) rather than lowering other taxes (sales, income) that would benefit a broader base of residents both young and old. Hence, we have the New Mexico idea of offering free college tuition to the state’s residents using oil-related tax revenue.

Southeast Asia: Coal Demand To Double By 2040

by Charles the moderator, November 1, 2019 in WUWT


There’s just no stopping coal in Southeast Asia. Surging investments in wind and solar energy won’t be enough to shake the fuel’s dominance in the region for decades to come, according to the International Energy Agency.

 

Coal demand is expected to double to almost 400 million tons a year by 2040, the agency said in its Southeast Asia Energy Outlook published Wednesday. That’s 2.5% higher than its forecast from two years ago, even as renewable power capacity is seen more than tripling through 2040.

“Coal is rather resistant because it is affordable,” said Keisuke Sadamori, IEA’s director for energy markets and security. “It’s really hard for Southeast Asian countries to move away from affordable coal immediately.”

China feeds coal addiction with 17 new mines this year

by Amy Hawkins, October 22, 2019 in The Times


China is expanding its coal power infrastructure despite pledges to curb carbon emissions.

Analysis reveals that the amount allocated to large infrastructure projects by Beijing has doubled this year, with airports and high-speed rail lines among 21 schemes allocated a total of £83.9 billion.

Included in the new allocations is funding for 17 new coal mines across China, despite Beijing’s pledges to reduce reliance on the power source.

Seven mines were approved last year and, between 2017 and 2018, China added 194 million tonnes of coal mining capacity with the total number of mines reaching more than 3,000.

China, the world’s biggest coal consumer, has vowed to cap carbon emissions by 2030, although it has stopped short of the “net zero” emissions target by 2050…

China’s coal basins and coalbed methane resources. Source: Caterpillar Inc.

 

China consumes more coal than all other nations together

USGS: Marcellus/Utica Natural Gas Resource Has Nearly Doubled Since 2012

by David Middleton, October 8, 2019 in WUWT


I had the good fortune of working with Jim Reilly at Enserch Exploration back in the 1980’s and early 1990’s… Before he became a NASA astronaut and then Director of the USGS.

“Shale” comprises more than 60% of current U.S. proved natural gas reserves… The Marcellus/Utica comprise about 50% of “shale” proved reserves… And the undiscovered technically recoverable resource potential of the Marcellus/Utica is now larger than the proved reserves and nearly as large (70%) as the current proved reserves of all “shale” plays….

Figure 2. “The effects American ingenuity and new technology can have.”…

La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse