Quote: Oil man says prepare for end of cheap energy
EECA secured one of the world's most controversial energy experts as keynote speaker for the EnergyWise Councils Forum, held in Nelson on 9-10 March.
Maverick American oil-industry magnate Matthew R Simmons was in New Zealand to address a petroleum conference, but agreed to speak at the councils forum, where he proved a popular drawcard.
Author of Twilight in the Desert - the Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy, Simmons has made a career of brokering massive oil deals as an investment banker and advising the US government on energy.
looks like an oil man, sounds like an oil man, probably smells like an oil man, I'd say he's an oil man.
"I'm writing a column about rhododendrons right now. And I think my conclusion is going to have to be not to plant rhododendrons. We have heated out of the rhododendron zone."
TARA DILLARD, a landscape designer and garden writer, on the effects of warming trends on gardening.
Foxfyre wrote:Matthew Simmons is not an oil man, hard bitten or otherwise.
Right, he's an investment banker for the global energy industry.
Foxfyre wrote:I'm not saying that there is anything whatsoever wrong with Simmons or his company, but you won't find a single major oil exploration or production company listed among his clientele. This should help us better focus on where his expertise (and bread and butter) lies.
From their website (as advised by you):
Steve 41oo wrote:looks like an oil man, sounds like an oil man, probably smells like an oil man, I'd say he's an oil man.
Simmons could be a lion tamer, an astronaut or son of the pope, who cares ?
Care to know about what he predited in the past. Based on this, the probability that his credibility is down the toilet is high. Simmons is a doom whore which spells lies to line his pocket ! That's all he is.
Warning of $100-a-barrel oil
Quote:
The Scotsman, July 4 2005
ROCKETING oil prices might hit $100 (£57) this year, controversial
Texan oil analyst Matt Simmons has warned.
Crude surged past $60 a barrel last week and investors are pinning
their hopes on a build-up in US oil-stocks to bring the price down
again in the coming months. However, Simmons said surging demand will
keep prices well above $50.
"We could be at $100 by this winter," he said. "We have the biggest
risk we have ever had of demand exceeding supply. We are about to face
up to the biggest crisis we have ever had.
crude could hit $190 this winter
Quote:That could translate into natural gas prices of $40 per million British thermal units from more than $13 now, he said. Doubling or tripling
crude would put it in the range of $125 to $190 per barrel
Simmons in September predicting $10 gasoline for the winter 2005
Quote:Like the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Hurricane Katrina stands to become a defining moment in our nation's history. While the precise meaning of such moments remains to be interpreted, Matt Simmons believes the natural disaster may well be remembered as the start of "our great energy war." "We're almost at the verge of having real energy shortages," Simmons said last Friday, when he issued a wake-up call to a standing-room only audience at the Center for the Arts. "We could be looking at $10-a-gallon gas this winter."
Simmons' prediction of $330-$650 crude
Advocate wrote:"I'm writing a column about rhododendrons right now. And I think my conclusion is going to have to be not to plant rhododendrons. We have heated out of the rhododendron zone."
TARA DILLARD, a landscape designer and garden writer, on the effects of warming trends on gardening.
100 years ago, there was no rhododendron, at all, in gardens (I wonder even if there was that much landscape designer). Conclusion: the Earth has had a catastrophic GW 100 years ago.
miniTAX wrote:100 years ago, there was no rhododendron, at all, in gardens (I wonder even if there was that much landscape designer). Conclusion: the Earth has had a catastrophic GW 100 years ago.
That certainly depends on where you live - a know a couple of nuseries in Northern Germany who cultivate and sell rhododrendrons since about 1850 - at least two rhododrenparks are even even older.
Landscape designer certainly is a modern term. But actually France is quite famous for its (earlier) "gardeners" .... and at each even smallest mansion house was at least one.
Rhododrendron was introduced around 1800 by Peter Friedrich Ludwig of Oldenburg (later Grandduke of Oldeburg) in that region.
1787 was exactly the date when he opened his first (out of at least seven until 1823) rhododendron park.
He got the idea from England - as well as his principal gardeners (most famous, at about 1820, Hobbie, since rhododrendrons were quite popular in those days on the British Isles.
THE 3% SOLUTION
----------------------
a report by the united nations states that a solution to global warming will likely cost about 3% of the global economic output , but that cost does not take into account savings from improved use of energy , such as savings from improved buiding standards .
there is no doubt in my mind that plenty of energy is wasted around the world all the time and trimming our excesses should not be a difficult task .
of course , some people think that wasting our resources is the right thing to do . their motto is no doubt : the bigger , the better !
imo there is no need to be a wastrel in a world where many people don't even have the basic necessities of life .
but should i care ? "i'm allright , jack ! ".
hbg
Quote:World has 15-year window to curb emissions, experts say
MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
May 3, 2007 at 4:33 AM EDT
A respected panel of scientists organized by the UN says the world probably has only 15 years left to stabilize the growth in greenhouse-gas emissions and, at that point, will have to cut releases in half by 2050 to avoid extremely damaging warming of the planet.
The conclusion, contained in a draft summary of a report from the group of scientists known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says big cuts in emissions could be achieved through such steps as imposing carbon taxes, improving automobile efficiency and using renewable fuels.
The draft summary is circulating among environmentalists and was obtained by The Globe and Mail.
It says fighting climate change won't cost more than 3 per cent of the world's economic output, or about $2-trillion (U.S.). However, it also says many actions to reduce emissions would actually save money, such as switching to efficient lights -- a step recently announced by Canada -- because the reduced electricity bills more than offset the cost of the new bulbs.
Special report: Climate change
"There is a significant economic potential for the mitigation of greenhouse-gas emissions from all sectors over coming decades, sufficient to offset growth of global emissions or to reduce emissions below current levels," it said.
The final version of the summary is being released tomorrow in Bangkok, where scientists and officials from governments around the world are spending the week conducting a line-by-line review of the findings before making them public.
Even though global warming is usually assumed to be a problem of such great complexity it has no solutions, the 24-page draft presents evidence, mostly based on economic models, showing that huge cuts in greenhouse gases are possible at costs of less than $100 (U.S.) a tonne of emission reduction. It found the biggest reductions were to be had by improving the efficiency of buildings and implementing better agricultural practices.
The U.S. government, one of the opponents of taking international action on global warming, has been trying to water down some sections of the summary, according to excerpts from its policy paper on the draft released yesterday by U.S. environmentalists. The final document could be subject to revisions if the United States and other countries objecting to its contents get their way.
The report, on the cost of mitigating climate change, is the third in a series by the panel of scientists. The first, on the science behind global warming, said in February that the evidence for human-caused warming is now "unequivocal." The second, released last month and focusing on the impacts of climate change, warned of a dire future of droughts, mass animal extinctions and killer heat waves if humans fail to deal with climate change.
The draft summary of the new report says that if nothing is done to curb greenhouse gases, annual emissions from human activity would likely rise 25 per cent to 90 per cent by 2030, on top of the rise of 70 per cent that occurred between 1970 and 2004.
It says two-thirds to three-quarters of the increase is projected to come from developing countries, such as India and China, although their emissions per person will remain substantially lower than in advanced countries.
The latest report amounts to a blueprint for how the world could reduce emissions blamed for global warming, and also switch to less-polluting energy sources. But it also includes a discussion of futuristic schemes, such as placing mirrors in space to shade Earth and keep it from overheating.
The draft concludes that these science-fiction-like solutions to global warming "remain largely speculative" and could have unknown side effects. It focuses instead on steps that are less glamorous but more likely to yield fruit, such as improving the efficiency of refrigerators, urging better building standards and analyzing the impact of carbon taxes.
Although only the summary is being released tomorrow, the chapters of the report go into greater detail on the effects of mitigation on individual countries. Canada, with its heavy reliance on energy-intensive industries, could be one of the most affected by measures taken to curb greenhouse gases.
One section of the report, also obtained by The Globe, presented the findings of a 2002 scientific paper that showed a hypothetical phased-in $10 (U.S.) carbon tax begun in 2001 would cause Canada to suffer a 1.7-per-cent drop in industrial output by 2010.
THE 3% SOLUTION
minitax wrote:Simmons is a doom whore which spells lies to line his pocket ! That's all he is.
No he's not mt. Moderate your language and I might read the rest of your post.
Advocate wrote:"I'm writing a column about rhododendrons right now. And I think my conclusion is going to have to be not to plant rhododendrons. We have heated out of the rhododendron zone."
TARA DILLARD, a landscape designer and garden writer, on the effects of warming trends on gardening.
"Rhododendron is a very
widely distributed genus, occurring throughout most of the Northern Hemisphere except for dry areas, and extending into the Southern Hemisphere in southeastern Asia and northern Australasia. The highest species diversity is found in the Sino-Himalayan mountains from central Nepal and Sikkim east to Yunnan and Sichuan, with other significant areas of diversity in the mountains of Indo-China, Korea, Japan and Taiwan. In addition, there are a
significant number of tropical rhododendron species from southeast Asia to northern Australia, with 55 known species in Borneo and 164 in New Guinea [1]. Relatively fewer species occur in North America and Europe. Rhododendrons have not been found in South America or Africa."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhododendron
Steve 41oo wrote:No he's not mt. Moderate your language and I might read the rest of your post.
Ah ha, the facts disturb you. That's the fact's fault.
miniTAX wrote:100 years ago, there was no rhododendron, at all, in gardens (I wonder even if there was that much landscape designer). Conclusion: the Earth has had a catastrophic GW 100 years ago.
One of your fabulous facts.
Walter Hinteler wrote:One of your fabulous facts.
Come on Walter! You know well my claim on rhododendron was irony which didn't change the logic of things (that is the landscape designer compared things that are not comparable) so don't make low lying attacks.
Fact is Simmons makes doom porn with his stupid predictions to speculate on the energy market. That's all. If Steve or you or other peakoilers don't know that, read the papers. I gave links and references for my "facts", I can't do better.
But if people are fine to be deceived, so be it. No problem.
Quote:.........in the warmest times of the last 1000 years, southern England had the climate that northern France has now. For example, the difference between the northen-most vineyard in England in the past and present-day vineyard locations in France is about 350 miles....
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html
Admit it, Minitax - you don't want Cabernet grapes moving to the Hebrides
The greater variety of tree species in the US than in Europe is due to the main mountain ranges orientations - east-west in Eu, north-south here.
In glaciations plant species could move a lot better in the U.S. than in Europe, where all northern trees were pushed southwards and had no way to cross the Alps; but they came back relatively fast when the ice retreated (starting 21,000 years BC):
Quote:Most forest regions include plastic and nonplastic species. Northern Europe is an exception. It contains only adaptable species which grow well under a greater-than-expected range of conditions. This is probably a consequence of the extreme depauperization of the flora during the Pleistocene and the subsequent rapid recolonization by species which could survive under varied conditions. The modern forest flora consists of a relatively few species: [.] All these have been among the most successful introductions in the northern United States and other cool temperate regions. Evidently their rapid repopulation of northern Europe after the retreat of the glaciers was not an accident.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/e3200e/e3200e05.htm
miniTAX wrote:Steve 41oo wrote:No he's not mt. Moderate your language and I might read the rest of your post.
Ah ha, the facts disturb you. That's the fact's fault.
not at all. I thought you should be watching Sarkozy/Royal anyway.
Researchers 'seed' ocean with iron to soak up CO2
Researchers 'seed' ocean with iron to soak up CO2
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 03 May 2007
Independent UK
A research ship is about to begin a project around the Galapagos Islands, in the Pacific Ocean, that will highlight the importance of marine plankton in the fight against global warming and climate change.
Waterbird II, the research ship of an eco-restoration organisation called Planktos, is on a "voyage of recovery" to "seed" the oceans with the iron in the hope of stimulating blooms of phytoplankton, the microscopic marine plants that soak up the energy of the Sun to convert carbon dioxide into organic matter.
The organisers of the venture hope to shine a spotlight on the critical role that plankton plays in maintaining the carbon dioxide balance of the oceans and the atmosphere with the help of several tons of iron dust.
Scientists have long postulated that it may be possible to speed up the rate at which the oceans soak up atmospheric CO2 by stimulating the growth of plankton in the oceans with added iron - an essential nutrient for photosynthesis.
The research ship has a crew of 17, including eight scientists, and is scheduled to sail to the Galapagos, Tahiti, the coast of South America, and the South Pacific.
Noel Brown, a former director of the United Nations Environment Programme, said that the pilot project to fertilise the oceans with iron filings is important in terms of raising awareness of the huge potential the oceans have in mitigating rising levels of atmospheric CO2.
"I cannot overstate the importance of these Planktos pilot projects. If their applied science works as well as the early research indicates, this work will both help restore the neglected oceans and give everyone concerned about global warming truly meaningful hope," Dr Brown said.
Normally plankton forms vast blooms at certain times of the year that can be seen from space. But this occurs only under certain conditions, such as adequate mineral availability - iron is often the limiting factor.
Scientists established in the 1990s that adding iron to the oceans causes plankton to multiply in areas that would not have seen a bloom at that time of year. This led to the idea that seeding vast areas artificially with iron dust could stimulate the plankton to draw down more CO2 from the atmosphere, where it might be sequestered for many centuries when the organic matter formed by photosynthesis sinks to the seabed.
The "iron hypothesis" was first suggested by John Martin, an oceanographer at the Moss Landing Marine Laboratory in California, who died before his idea could be properly tested.
In order for it to work, however, it was important for the phytoplankton to sink quickly to about 300 metres, beyond the range of the zooplankton - the tiny animals that also live within the same surface layers, feeding on other plankton.
A number of small-scale trials tested Martin's idea but it soon emerged that zooplankton multiplied as quickly as the phytoplankton, with the result that the animals quickly ate the organic material formed as a result of adding the iron. Instead of the carbon sequestered by the phytoplankton sinking to the seabed as planned, it was emitted to the sea and air by the feeding zooplankton.
Nevertheless, the Planktos team believe that the Waterbird II mission will raise greater awareness of what the oceans can do in mitigating the effects of climate change. "Planktos is working to ensure the ocean's enormous natural carbon dioxide sequestration potential is recognised and prioritised in any future federal climate change laws, and we are finding real enthusiasm for this powerful green approach," said Kyle Hence of Planktos.
