Archives de catégorie : energy and fields

India’s thermal coal output seen growing 4.3% annually till 2028: Report

by Energy World, May 22, 2019


New Delhi: Fitch Solutions Tuesday said India’s thermal coal output is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 4.3 per cent by 2028. “In absolute volume terms, China and India will have the largest impact on the global coal market balance,” Fitch Solutions Macro Research said in a report.

It further said the surge in Chinese imports that occurred over 2015-2017 as a result of dramatic domestic production curbs was a temporary phenomenon.

“We forecast thermal coal production in China to stagnate at 0.5 per cent growth per annum from 2019 onwards, but not decline, as new coal mines in Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi and Shanxi provinces offset mine closures in the rest of the country,” it said.

Aussie Leaders Bow To Change In Political Climate And Back Coal

by Charles the moderator, May 24, 2019 in WUWT


Climate change was supposed to have won the party the Australian election. But yesterday, routed in the polls, panicking Labor Party leaders backed the opening of a coal field bigger than the UK to mining.

Fearing a wipeout in state elections next year amid a rising tide of pro-coal workers and a rebellion against its plans to halve Australia’s carbon emissions, the Labor state government in Queensland accelerated its decision on 105,000 square miles of coal-rich outback land known as the Galilee Basin.

It came days after the party lost what was dubbed as the “climate election” to the incumbent centre-right, pro-coal government of Scott Morrison, suffering the most damage with swings of up to 20 per cent in the coal country of central Queensland and the Hunter Valley of New South Wales.

Queensland’s premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, announced she was overturning all attempts to block mining and all outstanding approvals would be resolved within three weeks. She said she was “fed up” with her own government’s processes, and that the election had been a “wake-up call” on mining the basin. The move was welcomed by the federal resources minister, Matt Canavan, who told The Times yesterday that the Galilee Basin represented a victory for the “hi-vis workers’ revolution” — a reference to the armies of mine workers, dressed in high-visibility shirts, who make Australia the world’s biggest coal exporter, and seemingly a reference to the “yellow vest” movement in France which battled President Macron on his climate policies.

Uranium Markets

by World Nuclear Association, updated July 2017


  • Production from world uranium mines now supplies 90% of the requirements of power utilities.

  • Primary production from mines is supplemented by secondary supplies, formerly most from ex-military material but now the products of recycling and stockpiles built up in times of reduced demand.

  • World mine production has expanded significantly since about 2005.

All mineral commodity markets tend to be cyclical, i.e. prices rise and fall substantially over the years, but with these fluctuations superimposed on long-term trend decline in real prices, as technological progress reduces production cost at mines. In the uranium market, however, high prices in the late 1970s gave way to depressed prices in the whole of the period of the 1980s and 1990s, with spot prices below the cost of production for all but the lowest cost mines. Spot prices recovered from 2003 to 2009, but have been weak since then.

The quoted spot prices through to about 2007 applied only to day-to-day marginal trading and represented a small portion of supply, though since 2008 the proportion has approximately doubled, to about one-quarter in the last decade. Most trade is via 3-15 year term contracts with producers selling directly to utilities at a significantly higher price than the spot market, reflecting the security of supply.* The specified price in these contracts is, however, often related to the spot price at the time of delivery. However, as production has risen much faster than demand, fewer long-term contracts are being written.

Interview with Samuele Furfari: European elections

by European Scientist, May 21, 2009


In the context of the European elections, European Scientist is bringing you an series of views from experts from different countries on various topics around science and science policy in Europe, to provide an overview and analysis, which will be useful for the next commission.

 

ES: What is your assessment of energy policy in Europe? What have the major achievements of the outgoing commission been?

The greatest success of the outgoing commission is to have developed a policy to support gas interconnections by financing projects of common interest. The aim is that every single methane molecule that enters the territory of the Union can circulate to any other location. This will help to diversify gas supply sources, particularly from the south of the Union (thanks to more gas arriving as LNG and via the Southern Corridor).

 

ES: There is a wide disparity in energy policy between different countries (e.g. France and Germany). Do you think it is necessary to harmonise policy or on the contrary is it preferable to maintain diversity?

L’aluminium, symbole du désarroi climatique ? Pas pour tous….

by Prof. Samuel Furfari, 16 mai 2019, in ScienceClimatEnergie


La Commission européenne a publié dès le début de l’année 2019 son rapport sur l’évolution des prix et coûts de l’énergie en Europe.  On peut y lire que l’étude de ces coûts devrait conduire à  « veiller à̀ ce que les entreprises ne soient pas désavantagées ni écartées » et que « les prix de détail (réels) dans l’Union sont plus élevés qu’aux États-Unis, au Canada, en Russie, en Chine et en Turquie, mais inférieurs à̀ ceux observés au Japon et au Brésil. » Le graphique suivant (Figure 1) illustre bien le fait que les industries européennes sont pénalisées par rapport aux entreprises d’autres pays qui sont des concurrents directs sur les marchés internationaux, y compris pour nos importations. Le rapport ajoute pudiquement, sans y insister que « l’évolution des prix de l’électricité est dominée par les taxes et prélèvements ».

Vice-President Šefčovič joins U.S. President Trump in opening an LNG export terminal

by European Commission, May 14, 2019


LNG

German Employer’s Association Op Ed: “No Expert Politician In Berlin Believes In Switch To Green Energies Any More”

by P. Gosselin, May 14, 2019 in NoTricksZone


As the pressure mounts in Germany to switch off coal power plants and to rapidly transition over to green energies, one gets the feeling that it all has more to do with a desperate, last-ditch effort by the green energy proponents to rescue their pet green project.

Behind closed doors, no one in Berlin believes in it

Now, just days ago, energy expert Dr. Björn Peters wrote at the German Association of Employers site that the Energiewende has deteriorated to the point that: “No specialist politician in Berlin believes in the success of the Energiewende any more. Whoever you ask, everyone says this only behind closed doors and thinks that if you go to the press with it you can only lose against the ‘green’ media mainstream.”

Peters warns that what is needed in Germany is a good dose of reality and “a fresh start on energy policy.”

Advantages of fossil fuels “too great”

The German expert writes that despite the hundreds of billions of euros committed to green energies, “chemical energy from coal, oil and gas supplies about four fifths of primary energy worldwide and also in Germany and thus represents the present energy supply”.

The next ‘Ferrari of shale’ may be hiding in Australia’s outback

by Bloomberg Business,  May 3, 2019, in theJapantimes


In a corner of the Australian Outback, a drilling crew will soon try tapping shale rocks that could hold more than three times the world’s annual consumption of natural gas.

Origin Energy Ltd. plans to drill two wells later this year in the Northern Territory’s Beetaloo Basin, after the local government ended a three-year ban on fracking — the practice of extracting oil and gas from layers of shale rock deep underground. With an estimated 500 trillion cubic feet (14 trillion cubic meters) of gas, Beetaloo has been compared to famed U.S. shale regions such as Marcellus and Barnett.

But its isolated location, lack of infrastructure and the likelihood of tough environmental opposition make Beetaloo a highly speculative investment.

“There are some big numbers being quoted, and people have to realize this is exploration,” said Mark Schubert, Origin’s head of integrated gas, noting that only some of the total reserves would be extractable.

De l’avenir de la voiture à moteur thermique

by Jean-Pierre Schaeken, 10mai 2019 in ScienceClimateEnergie


Dans un contexte de remise en question des voitures à moteur thermique et de lobbying pour en interdire la vente, à brève échéance, on serait bien avisé avant de se précipiter dans un tel changement radical et brutal de paradigme, de s’interroger sur la pertinence de son urgence et, partant, sur une approche plus pragmatique tenant compte des réalités socio-économiques.

ll faut d’abord rappeler que la marché de la voiture est mondial et qu’il est de plus en plus conditionné par les politiques des pays émergents et en développement qui ont comme souci prioritaire d’assurer leur croissance économique et d’améliorer les conditions de vie et le confort de leur population. La voiture en fait partie !
Ces mêmes pays sont également fort préoccupés, à juste titre, par la pollution de leurs villes [1]. Or celle-ci provient nettement plus de la production de chaleur dans les secteurs industriels, des services et du logement, que de la circulation automobile.Ce n’est donc pas cette dernière qui, pour ces pays, est la cible prioritaire pour assainir l’air urbain, mais plutôt le mode et l’efficacité de génération de calories dans les secteurs précités.
D’ailleurs, le marché des voitures à moteur thermique, connaît une croissance soutenue dans le monde ces dernières années (en moyenne 3%/an). Sur les 98 millions de voitures neuves vendues en 2018, il n’y aurait qu’à peine plus d’un million de véhicules électriques (VE) [2] et très peu de véhicules à hydrogène. Alors que tous les fabricants investissent dans le développement des VE, la très grande majorité d’entre eux dont tous les européens et même Toyota qui y avait consacré des recherches approfondies, ont abandonné l’option hydrogène.

Methane-consuming bacteria could be the future of fuel

by Northwestern University, May 9, 2019 in ScienceDaily


Discovery illuminates how bacteria turn methane gas into liquid methanol.
Researchers have found that the enzyme responsible for the methane-methanol conversion in methanotrophic bacteria catalyzes the reaction at a site that contains just one copper ion. This finding could lead to newly designed, human-made catalysts that can convert methane — a highly potent greenhouse gas — to readily usable methanol with the same effortless mechanism.
The study will publish on Friday, May 10 in the journal Science. Rosenzweig is the Weinberg Family Distinguished Professor of Life Sciences in Northwestern’s Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. Hoffman is the Charles E. and Emma H. Morrison Professor of Chemistry at Weinberg.

By oxidizing methane and converting it to methanol, methanotrophic bacteria (or “methanotrophs”) can pack a one-two punch. Not only are they removing a harmful greenhouse gas from the environment, they are also generating a readily usable, sustainable fuel for automobiles, electricity and more.

Current industrial processes to catalyze a methane-to-methanol reaction require tremendous pressure and extreme temperatures, reaching higher than 1,300 degrees Celsius. Methanotrophs, however, perform the reaction at room temperature and “for free”.

Transition énergétique : et le grand gagnant est… le gaz !

by Michel Gay, 3 mai 2019 in Contrepoints


C’est le gaz, bien plus que les énergies renouvelables, qui répond à la hausse de la consommation mondiale d’énergie. Cette dernière a augmenté de 2,3 % en 2018 selon un rapport de l’Agence internationale de l’énergie (AIE) publié mardi 26 mars 2019 qui souligne « une performance exceptionnelle »…

Le marché du gaz naturel, auparavant limité par les possibilités des gazoducs, se mondialise rapidement avec des bateaux transportant du gaz naturel liquéfié (GNL) à travers le monde.

L ’ÂGE D’OR DU GAZ NATUREL (INCLUANT LE GAZ DE SCHISTE)

L’Association allemande des industries de l’énergie et de l’eau (BDEW) a mis en garde sur l’écart en Allemagne entre la capacité de production classique (pilotable) d’électricité (nucléaire, charbon et gaz) et la demande d’ici 2023. Elle a exhorté les décideurs politiques à aider les investisseurs en récompensant les nouvelles capacités pilotables de production d’électricité, notamment le gaz.

Big Oil goes Big Green

by David Wojick, May 4, 2019 in WUWT


Climate alarmists often accuse skeptics, like myself and independent groups like the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Heartland Institute, of being in the pay of Big Oil. This is completely false – the Big Lie repeated so often that people eventually believe it. We do not receive even a dime from Big Oil. It’s part of the green fairy tale that skepticism exists only because the oil companies are funding it.

For the record, none of us skeptics – climate realists – doubt or deny climate change. We all recognize that Earth’s climate is in nearly constant turmoil and fluctuation, locally, regionally or globally.

What we question is assertions that emissions from fossil fuel use have somehow replaced the sun and other powerful natural forces that have driven beneficial, benign, harmful or even hugely destructive climate changes throughout Earth and human history:

Changes such as at least five glacial periods that buried much of North America, Europe and Asia under mile-high rivers of ice, warm periods in between that melted those massive glaciers, Roman and Medieval Warm Periods, a Little Ice Age, the century-long Anasazi and Mayan droughts, the Dust Bowl, and countless other major and minor climate and weather changes.

The standard refrain is that ExxonMobil gave a cumulative few million dollars to various skeptical groups prior to 2007. But that was many years ago. They got scared off by alarmist pressure groups and haven’t given climate realists a dime since then. In fact, the situation today is completely the opposite.

Big Oil companies now give at least a billion dollars a year to climate alarmists, projects and lobbying, to drive the Manmade Climate Chaos narrative. Why would they do that? Two reasons come to mind.

China Building 300 New Coal Power Plants Around The World

by P. Homewood, April 30, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


China is building 300 new coal power stations around the world, according to NPR(National Public Radio), who I gather are the US equivalent of the BBC.

China, known as the world’s biggest polluter, has been taking dramatic steps to clean up and fight climate change.

So why is it also building hundreds of coal-fired power plants in other countries?

President Xi Jinping hosted the Belt and Road Forum in Beijing over the weekend, promoting his signature foreign policy of building massive infrastructure and trade links across several continents.

The forum, attended by leaders and delegates of nearly 40 countries, came amid growing criticism of China’s projects, including their effect on the environment.

Xi took the highly unusual step, for him, of meeting with international journalists, during which he repeated the slogan that he is committed to “open, clean and green development.”

Legislation Would End Oil and Gas Production In Most of California

by Katy Grimes, April 22, 2019 in CaliforniaGlobe


The “Keep it In the Ground,” anti-oil and gas industry movement is going after the industry with more legislation disguised to address health and local control issues, despite that California already has the most environmentally regulated oil and gas production in the world, regulated by more than 25 agencies.

“Keep It in the Ground” is a global protest movement opposing fossil fuel development.

California was the fourth-largest producer of crude oil among the 50 states in 2017, after Texas, North Dakota, and Alaska, and, as of January 2018, third in oil refining capacity after Texas and Louisiana.

AB 345 by Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance), would increase setback distance between oil production facilities and private and public property to 2,500 feet for every well, existing or planned in the state.

According to the Western States Petroleum Association and the California Independent Petroleum Association, this bill, if passed, would effectively end oil production in many parts of the state and threaten the future of production IN ALL PARTS OF THE STATE, for example:

  • 87% of all wells in the City of Los Angeles would be shut in

  • 66% of the well in Los Angeles County would be shut in

  • Thousands of wells in Kern County will be shut in

Énergie nucléaire : « SMR » (petits réacteurs modulaires)

by Connaissance des Energies, 29 avril 2019


À RETENIR
  • Les Small Modular Reactors (SMR) sont de petits réacteurs nucléaires réalisés en usines sous forme de modules.
  • Leur puissance varie généralement entre 10 et 300 MW.
  • Le déploiement des SMR est envisagé pour produire de l’électricité, en particulier dans des sites isolés, mais également pour des applications non électrogènes : chaleur, dessalement, production d’hydrogène, propulsion, etc.
  • Fin 2018, on dénombre une cinquantaine de projets de SMR, avec de nombreuses technologies à l’étude.

Les modules SMR » de NuScale Power pèseront près de 700 tonnes et pourront être transportés par camion ou par barge. (Image provided by NuScale Power, LLC)

Energy Returned On Energy Invested: Real(ish)Things That Don’t Matter, Part Trois

by David Middleton, April 24, 2019 in WUWT


In Part One of this series, we looked at Peak Oil and its irrelevance to energy production and also discussed the relevance of Seinfeld. In Part Deux, we looked at “abiotic oil,” a real(ish) thing that really doesn’t matter outside of academic discussions and SyFy blogs.

Part Trois will explore perhaps the most meaningless notion to ever come out of academia: Energy Returned On Energy Invested (EROEI or EROI depending on spelling skill). EROEI is like what Seinfeld would have been if it was written by Douglas Adams.

Abiotic Oil: Real(ish)Things That Don’t Matter, Part Deux

by David Middleton, April 16, 2019 in WUWT


In part one of this series, we looked at Peak Oil and its irrelevance to energy production. In Part Deux, we will look at “abiotic oil,” a real(ish) thing that really doesn’t matter outside of academic discussions and SyFy blogs.

A note on terminology

Some refer to this as “abiogenic oil.” This is not a useful term because all oil is abiogenic. The generally accepted theory of petroleum formation doesn’t state that it is a biogenic process. I discussed this in detail in a 2017 post. I don’t intend to restate it here.

In this post, “abiotic oil” refers to petroleum formed by processes that do not rely on biological source material. The carbon in “abiotic oil” must be inorganic.

A real example of abiotic “oil”

The Lost City Hydrothermal Field is located on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, about 15 km (~9 mi) west of the spreading center, in water depths ranging from 750-900 m (~2,500-3,000′) (Kelley et al., 2005).

Figure 1. Lost City location map. (University of Washington)

Peak Oil, Abiotic Oil & EROEI: Real(ish) Things That Don’t Matter, Part One: Peak Oil

by David Middleton, April 22, 2019 in WUWT


The plots of the Seinfeld TV show often revolved around trivializing important things and blowing trivial things out of proportion. While not a Seinfeld fanatic (I’m more of a Frasierfanatic), I thought the comedy routines were generally brilliant and quite effective.

Peak Oil, abiotic oil and EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) are largely academic concepts. They are the subject of books, academic publications and Internet “debates” The “debates” about Peak Oil, abiotic oil and EROEI are a lot like the Seinfeld show. They magnify the trivial and trivialize things that actually matter. The “debates” often divide into two camps:

  1. It’s the end of the world (Peak Oil, EROEI).
  2. It’s our salvation from the end of the world (Abiotic oil).

While all three of these energy-related topics are, at least to some extent, real, none of them have the slightest relevance to energy production… except for Peak Oil… But the relevance is generally missed by both sides in Internet “debates.”

I had originally intended on combining Peak Oil, abiotic oil and EROEI into one post; but realized that it would have been longer than Tolstoy’s War and Peace. So, this post will be limited to Peak Oil. Part Deux will deal briefly with abiotic oil and Part Trois will deal more extensively with EROEI.

Peak Oil: A Real Thing That Doesn’t Matter

What is Peak Oil?

Figure 4. Generalized oil & gas reservoir. (Petropedia)

Biofuels: a long-standing illusion

by Prof. S. Furfari, April 4, 2019 in EuropeanScientist


The idea of replacing petroleum products with alternative fuels produced from agriculture dates back to the 1973 and 1979 oil crises. But apart from the development of bioethanol from cane sugar in Brazil, the idea had not come to fruition because it was not economically viable. It was the frenzy for some kind of sustainable development in the mid-2000s, combined with a perfect storm of realities, that led to the emergence of a political interest in biofuels.

Peak Ghawar: A Peak Oiler’s Nightmare

by David Middleton, April 10, 2019 in WUWT


Alternate title:

No… “The biggest Saudi oil field is [NOT] fading faster than anyone guessed”… Part Trois: Why Peak Oil Is Irrelevant and the Perpetually Refilling Abiotic Oil Field Is Abject Nonsense

 

Saudi Aramco’s recent bond prospectus has generated a lot of media buzz, particularly regarding the production from Ghawar, the largest oil field in the world. Reaction has ranged from “The biggest Saudi oil field is fading faster than anyone guessed,” (not even wrong) to more subdued reactions from Ellen Wald and Robert Rapier, that the prospectus doesn’t really tell us much Ghawar’s decline rate. One thing that the bond prospectus did do, is to paint a picture of the most profitable company in the world and one that is serious when it says it will produce the last barrel of oil ever produced on Earth.

How big is Ghawar? Has it peaked? Is it “fading faster than anyone guessed”? The answer to the first question is: FRACKING YUGE. The answer to the second question was not easily answerable before Saudi Aramco began the process of becoming a publicly traded company. The answer to the third question is: Of course not.

As Saudi Aramco proceeds towards a 2021 IPO, it has had to embrace transparency. This involved an audit of the proved reserves in their largest fields, comprising about 80% of the company’s value. The audit was conducted by the highly respected DeGolyer and MacNaughton firm (D&M). The audit actually determined that the proved reserves are slightly larger than Aramco’s internal estimate.

Global Energy & CO2 Status Report

by IEA, March 2019 (.pdf)


Key Findings 2018

Global energy consumption in 2018 increased at nearly twice the average rate of growth since 2010, driven by a robust global economy and higher heating and cooling needs in some parts of the world. Demand for all fuels increased, led by natural gas, even as solar and wind posted double-digit growth. Higher electricity demand was responsible for over half of the growth in energy needs. Energy efficiency saw lacklustre improvement.

Energy-related CO2 emissions rose 1.7% to a historic high of 33.1 Gt CO2. While emissions from all fossil fuels increased, the power sector accounted for nearly two-thirds of emissions growth. Coal use in power alone surpassed 10 Gt CO2, mostly in Asia. China, India, and the United States accounted for 85% of the net increase in emissions, while emissions declined for Germany, Japan, Mexico, France and the United Kingdom.

Oil demand rose by 1.3% in 2018, led by strong growth in the United States. The start-up of large petrochemical projects drove product demand, which partially offset a slowdown in growth in gasoline demand. The United States and China showed the largest overall growth, while demand fell in Japan and Korea and was stagnant in Europe.

Natural gas consumption grew by an estimated 4.6%, its largest increase since 2010 when gas demand bounced back from the global financial crisis. This second consecutive year of strong growth, following a 3% rise in 2017, was driven by growing energy demand and substitution from coal. The switch from coal to gas accounted for over one-fifth of the rise in gas demand. The United States led the growth followed by China.

Coal demand grew for a second year, but its role in the global mix continued to decline. Last year’s 0.7% increase was significantly slower than the 4.5% annual growth rate seen in the period 2000- 10. But while the share of coal in primary energy demand and in electricity generation slowly continues to decrease, it still remains the largest source of electricity and the second-largest source of primary energy.

Nuclear Power Can Save the World

by J.S. Goldstein et al., April 6, 2019


As young people rightly demand real solutions to climate change, the question is not what to do — eliminate fossil fuels by 2050 — but how. Beyond decarbonizing today’s electric grid, we must use clean electricity to replace fossil fuels in transportation, industry and heating. We must provide for the fast-growing energy needs of poorer countries and extend the grid to a billion people who now lack electricity. And still more electricity will be needed to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by midcentury.

 

To Peak or Not to Peak? That is the question.

by Mike Jonas, April 8, 2019 in WUWT


A lot has been written about Peak Oil recently – perhaps more in comments than in WUWT articles themselves – and the “Not to Peak”-ers seem to be in the ascendancy. In other words, the opinions that “Peak Oil” is a fantasy and/or oil production will keep increasing for a century or more seem to be dominant.

But just how realistic are the “Not to Peak”-ers?

I had a look back at my article of 4 years ago (Peak Oil Re-visited), and I’m pretty comfortable with what I said back then. NB. I defined “Peak Oil” as When the rate of oil production reaches its maximum. With this definition, Peak Oil is not when we run out of oil, and it is not when we can’t increase the rate of oil production. If you want to use one of those other definitions then different rules apply. And I’m only talking about oil, not about oil and gas, and not about fossil fuels generally.

What I said in 2015 was:

  • The reason for oil production reaching its maximum is not specified.
  • Peak Oil is not necessarily a disaster, it could even be a positive.
  • One idea which surely is not open to argument is the fact that oil production will peak.
  • Predicting Peak Oil has always been an unrewarding exercise. People have predicted Peak Oil for over a century and have been wrong every time.
  • The principal factors affecting oil supply are: Geology, Politics, Demand, Price, Technology.
  • In spite of economic booms and busts, oil demand has been relatively inelastic.
  • Although Peak Oil may occur after say 2040, it could well be much earlier.

The third bullet above (oil production will peak) was justified by this graph, which looked at past and likely future oil production on a scale of thousands of years:

 

The shale revolution (as BP calls it) has made a difference, but it still can’t dramatically alter the shape of the graph in Figure 1. Basically, it can push the peak up, and it can elongate the tail, but it can’t move the peak very far to the right.

Figure 1. World Total Fossil Fuel Consumption, past and predicted – the long view.