@parados,
The flaw in your argument is that the oil companies are crazy wow about 'green' industries and are investing heavily in them. Most admit we aren't getting any bang for our buck in that, but it is highly lucrative for the oil companies. And the more 'green' regulations the government piles on in rules and regulations, the more the oil companies are prospering.
@Foxfyre,
Ok.. So if oil and gas companies and electric companies are all for cap and trade, who is against it?
@parados,
Combined Heat & Power Plant:
Coal = 48.7%
Natural Gas = 21.5%
Nuclear = 19.4%
Hydro Electric = 6.0%
Petroleum = 1.6%
Other gases = 0.4%
Other = 0.3%
Subtotal = 97.5%
Other Renewables = 2.5%
Total = 100%
2.5% is a trivial part of the whole.
Even if it were true that wind power comprised 100% of the renewables other than Hydro Electric, wind power would be a trivial part of the total power for Heat and Power plant. Of course, we know that wind power generates only a fraction of the power generated by other renewables. So wind power is definitely trivial.
What will it take to make wind power equal to natural gas plus petroleum, or 23.1%?
One thing it will take is lots of money, lots of manufacturing, lots of land and lots of off shore space.
@parados,
I don't know that the oil companies favor cap and trade all that much, but they sure like energy policy that allows them to do stuff they can charge a lot more for than they could justify just by pumping crude and making it into ordinary but adequate gasoline and diesel.
Those who are against it are those who will be seriously hurt or put out of business which will be a lot of small businesses who don't qualify for cap and trade subsidies but who could see their energy costs rise from 30 to 50 percent. And of course all of us who will be paying those high energy costs too, especially painful for the poorer people and those on very modest fixed incomes.
@ican711nm,
It only will take 10 years of the same installations as 2008.
Another problem which the left wing hysterics on Global Warming do not acknowledge is the problem of China and India--both consider themselves developing nations.
When the conference on climate convenes in December, the US will find that if they continue to cripple American Industry with Obama's Socialistic and "Green" absurdities, the US will soon fall behind China and will become the second ranking Industrial Power in the world. ANY initiatives that purport to attack Global Warming will do nothing except cripple our country SINCE China and India will emit so much pollution that, IF co2 really causes global warming, the Chinese and India will be the prime polluters.
Chang W. Lee/The New York Times
Coal has given parts of China a Dickensian feel, with miners coated with black soot and air that is thick with pollution.
Chang W. Lee/The New York Times
Coal-burning factories like the Gu Dian steel plant have given Shanxi Province in China a Dickensian feel.
In early April, a dense cloud of pollutants over Northern China sailed to nearby Seoul, sweeping along dust and desert sand before wafting across the Pacific. An American satellite spotted the cloud as it crossed the West Coast.
Researchers in California, Oregon and Washington noticed specks of sulfur compounds, carbon and other byproducts of coal combustion coating the silvery surfaces of their mountaintop detectors. These microscopic particles can work their way deep into the lungs, contributing to respiratory damage, heart disease and cancer.
Filters near Lake Tahoe in the mountains of eastern California "are the darkest that we've seen" outside smoggy urban areas, said Steven S. Cliff, an atmospheric scientist at the University of California at Davis.
Unless China finds a way to clean up its coal plants and the thousands of factories that burn coal, pollution will soar both at home and abroad. The increase in global-warming gases from China's coal use will probably exceed that for all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, surpassing by five times the reduction in such emissions that the Kyoto Protocol seeks.
The sulfur dioxide produced in coal combustion poses an immediate threat to the health of China's citizens, contributing to about 400,000 premature deaths a year. It also causes acid rain that poisons lakes, rivers, forests and crops.
The sulfur pollution is so pervasive as to have an extraordinary side effect that is helping the rest of the world, but only temporarily: It actually slows global warming. The tiny, airborne particles deflect the sun's hot rays back into space.
But the cooling effect from sulfur is short-lived. By contrast, the carbon dioxide emanating from Chinese coal plants will last for decades, with a cumulative warming effect that will eventually overwhelm the cooling from sulfur and deliver another large kick to global warming, climate scientists say. A warmer climate could lead to rising sea levels, the spread of tropical diseases in previously temperate climes, crop failures in some regions and the extinction of many plant and animal species, especially those in polar or alpine areas.
Coal is indeed China's double-edged sword " the new economy's black gold and the fragile environment's dark cloud.
Already, China uses more coal than the United States, the European Union and Japan combined. And it has increased coal consumption 14 percent in each of the past two years in the broadest industrialization ever. Every week to 10 days, another coal-fired power plant opens somewhere in China that is big enough to serve all the households in Dallas or San Diego.
To make matters worse, India is right behind China in stepping up its construction of coal-fired power plants " and has a population expected to outstrip China's by 2030.
Aware of the country's growing reliance on coal and of the dangers from burning so much of it, China's leaders have vowed to improve the nation's energy efficiency. No one thinks that effort will be enough. To make a big improvement in emissions of global-warming gases and other pollutants, the country must install the most modern equipment " equipment that for the time being must come from other nations.
Industrialized countries could help by providing loans or grants, as the Japanese government and the World Bank have done, or by sharing technology. But Chinese utilities have in the past preferred to buy cheap but often-antiquated equipment from well connected domestic suppliers instead of importing costlier gear from the West.
The Chinese government has been reluctant to approve the extra spending. Asking customers to shoulder the bill would set back the government's efforts to protect consumers from inflation and to create jobs and social stability.
But each year China defers buying advanced technology, older equipment goes into scores of new coal-fired plants with a lifespan of up to 75 years.
"This is the great challenge they have to face," said David Moskovitz, an energy consultant who advises the Chinese government. "How can they continue their rapid growth without plunging the environment into the abyss.
Monterey Jack-- I do not think you read the NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE WELL ENOUGH.
Key Section--
“The windiest sites have not been built, because there is no way to move that electricity from there to the load centers,” he said.
The basic problem is that many transmission lines, and the connections between them, are simply too small for the amount of power companies would like to squeeze through them. The difficulty is most acute for long-distance transmission, but shows up at times even over distances of a few hundred miles.
Transmission lines carrying power away from the Maple Ridge farm, near Lowville, N.Y., have sometimes become so congested that the company’s only choice is to shut down " or pay fees for the privilege of continuing to pump power into the lines.
Politicians in Washington have long known about the grid’s limitations but have made scant headway in solving them. They are reluctant to trample the prerogatives of state governments, which have traditionally exercised authority over the grid and have little incentive to push improvements that would benefit neighboring states.
Parados' ignorance about wind power is massive. Here is the truth. Of course, Parados will not read or think about the fact that the largest company in the UK providing Wind Power is closing down because the government is no longer providing subsidies. What would happen in the USA under similar circumstances?
How can Parados be so stupid?
Note:
quote-
Throwing Caution to the Wind on Wind Power
Posted April 29th, 2009 at 3.33pm in Energy and Environment.
25 by 2025.
That’s the target proposal for a federally mandated renewable portfolio standard RPS (also called renewable electricity standard RES) in which the federal government would mandate to have 25 percent of the nation’s electricity from renewable energy by 2025 - primarily wind, solar and hydro.
During the Congressional hearings last week, Congressman G. K. Butterfield (D-NC) told Chairman Henry Waxman, “Not only is [a 25% mandate] impractical, it is impossible.”
By creating a federal renewable portfolio standard, the government is essentially forcing costlier, less reliable energy on the people. This is particularly true for certain states, especially those in the Southeast, where the conditions are not conducive to wind power. It’s this unreliability that especially concerns Midwest ISO’s grid manager, Rob Benbow:
My biggest fear is if you see 20 percent wind on your system, and then it comes off at a time period where you don’t have resources to replace it " that’s going to, could, result in a blackout situation.
You can put all that wind in, but I still need to have all this other generation that I need to have available " all my coal, nuclear, all the gas " for my peak load day.”
Indeed, even if wind is built, reliable backup from the energy sources that provide most of our electricity is necessary. Reliable electricity is a basic need and this may not be a risk people are willing to take.
NPR’s Elizabeth Shrogan highlights some of the other problems with wind:
Lots of other things about wind frustrate the Benbows of the world " wind blows hardest at night when electricity demand is lowest, there currently aren’t ways to store wind for later use, and you can’t count on it on hot summer days when you need it most.”
That’s not to say doesn’t have a role to play in America’s energy profile. But the central criteria should be that it is cost-effective and able to compete without any subsidies, mandates or special tax breaks from the government.
When happens when the government isn’t there to provide the crutch?
One of the biggest renewable energy manufacturers in Britain announced yesterday it is to cut more than half its UK jobs - blaming the government for failing to support the sector.
In a grave blow to the government’s ambitions to create a “green” export industry, Vestas, the world’s biggest manufacturer of wind turbines, will axe about 600 of its 1,100 UK employees, closing its factory in the Isle of Wight and cutting jobs elsewhere in the UK.”
@genoves,
Why did you repost what Fox posted? Why didn't you deal with my rebuttal of her posting? Unable to genoves? It seems so.
Whining about how much money 50 electric companies spent lobbying while ignoring how much 10 oil and gas companies spent doesn't show much of anything other than you want to whine.
I loved this argument from Lomborg..
Quote:There would be an outcry -- and rightfully so -- if big oil organized a climate change conference and invited only climate-change deniers.
So Lomborg thinks there should be an outcry when electric companies lobby, but Lomborg is completely silent about the lobbying of oil companies which match almost dollar for dollar what the electric companies are spending.
10 to 15 degrees cooler than normal here...
@genoves,
genoves wrote:Of course, Parados will not read or think about the fact that the largest company in the UK providing Wind Power is closing down because the government is no longer providing subsidies.
Quote:One of the biggest renewable energy manufacturers in Britain announced yesterday it is to cut more than half its UK jobs - blaming the government for failing to support the sector.
In a grave blow to the government’s ambitions to create a “green” export industry, Vestas, the world’s biggest manufacturer of wind turbines, will axe about 600 of its 1,100 UK employees, closing its factory in the Isle of Wight and cutting jobs elsewhere in the UK.”
Vestas doesn't provide wind power genoves.. It manufactures wind turbines.
Perhaps you should reconsider who it is that didn't read or think about the facts.
@H2O MAN,
Gee...
And we had 2 record high days in a row...
The first beating the old record by 8 degrees.
http://www.startribune.com/local/45445622.html
It's called weather. Because temperatures are below or above normal on a given day doesn't prove anything about overall global temperatures. You need to consider every day for the entire globe.
@parados,
It is called weather and the weather is getting cooler.
Global Warming is a SCAM meant to destroy capitalism.
You need to consider the source of this SCAM and understand the motives behind it.
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:
I don't know that the oil companies favor cap and trade all that much, but they sure like energy policy that allows them to do stuff they can charge a lot more for than they could justify just by pumping crude and making it into ordinary but adequate gasoline and diesel.
Those who are against it are those who will be seriously hurt or put out of business which will be a lot of small businesses who don't qualify for cap and trade subsidies but who could see their energy costs rise from 30 to 50 percent. And of course all of us who will be paying those high energy costs too, especially painful for the poorer people and those on very modest fixed incomes.
Very funny, but also very sad for the dumbmasses.
@H2O MAN,
The weather is getting cooler when we are experiencing record highs? I posted a link to show that record highs. I suppose you think the entire world is just where you live.
You do realize that just because it is cooler where you are does NOT make the globe cooler. It only means you are experiencing cooler than normal weather which in a week could well be replaced with warmer than normal weather. Weather is rarely the average temperature.
Respond to the data below,or, as is your usual cowardly habit, run from it, Parados--
Commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news by Anthony Watts Home About Projects Policy Glossary Resources
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 2008 " 4 sources say “globally cooler” in the past 12 months
19
02
2008
January 2008 was an exceptional month for our planet, with a significant cooling, especially since January 2007 started out well above normal.
January 2008 capped a 12 month period of global temperature drops on all of the major well respected indicators. I have reported in the past two weeks that HadCRUT, RSS, UAH, and GISS global temperature sets all show sharp drops in the last year.
Also see the recent post on what the last 10 years looks like with the same four metrics " 3 of four show a flat trendline.
Here are the 4 major temperature metrics compared top to bottom, with the most recently released at the top:
UK’s Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature anomaly (HadCRUT) Dr. Phil Jones:
Reference: above data is HadCRUT3 column 2 which can be found here
description of the HadCRUT3 data file columns is here
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) Dr. James Hansen:
Reference: GISS dataset temperature index data
University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) Dr. John Christy:
Reference: UAH lower troposphere data
Remote Sensing Systems of Santa Rosa, CA (RSS):
Reference: RSS data here (RSS Data Version 3.1)
The purpose of this summary is to make it easy for everyone to compare the last 4 postings I’ve made on this subject.
I realize that not all the graphs are of the same scale, so my next task will be to run a combined graphic of all the data-sets on identical amplitude and time scales to show the agreements or differences such a graph would illustrate.
UPDATE: that comparison has been done here
Here is a quick comparison and average of ∆T for all metrics shown above:
Source: Global ∆T °C
HadCRUT - 0.595
GISS - 0.750
UAH - 0.588
RSS - 0.629
Average: - 0.6405°C
For all four metrics the global average ∆T for January 2007 to January 2008 is: " 0.6405°C
This represents an average between the two lower troposphere satellite metrics (RSS and UAH) and the two land-ocean metrics (GISS and HadCRUT). While some may argue that they are not compatible data-sets, since they are derived by different methods (Satellite -Microwave Sounder Unit and direct surface temperature measurements) I would argue that the average of these four metrics is a measure of temperature, nearest where we live, the surface and near surface atmosphere.
UPDATE AND CAVEAT:
The website DailyTech has an article citing this blog entry as a reference, and their story got picked up by the Drudge report, resulting in a wide distribution. In the DailyTech article there is a paragraph:
“Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C " a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.”
I wish to state for the record, that this statement is not mine: “"a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years”
There has been no “erasure”. This is an anomaly with a large magnitude, and it coincides with other anecdotal weather evidence. It is curious, it is unusual, it is large, it is unexpected, but it does not “erase” anything. I suggested a correction to DailyTech and they have graciously complied.
UPDATE #2 see this post from Dr. John R. Christy on the issue.
UPDATE #3 see the post on what the last 10 years looks like with the same four metrics " 3 of four show a flat trendline.
@parados,
If you consider the big picture and look back in history you will
see that the earth is in a cooling cycle and has been for some time.
Ican--This is a most impressive list. But, if you are trying to debate with Parados, give it up. He is a coward. He and his other chimpanzee friends do not want to debate, like a group of chimps, they want only to groom each other. Listen to them talk to each other.
Isn't it terrible that Greenland will melt and then the coastline of the USA will be wiped out?
Yes, and it is all Bush's fault?
Can you imagine that the right wingers want to open more Nuclear Power plants?
Yes, it seems none of them go to the movies to see what happens when a Nuclear power plant blows up.
You see, Ican. they will not debate or present pertinent evidence. They are afraid of debate since theyknow they will probably lose.
