Posted on 07/02/2012 10:20:09 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
I graphed the EIA data, shown below. What is most interesting is that this is market driven, not mandate driven.
Amazing Shale: US CO2 Emissions Plummet Towards 1990 Levels
by John Hanger (via The GWPF)
Americas carbon emissions may drop back close to 1990 levels this year. That result would have been thought impossible, even at the end of 2011. But the shale gas revolution makes a reality of many things recently thought impossible. Shale gas production has slashed carbon emissions and saved consumers more than $100 billion per year. Truly astonishing!
For US energy-related carbon emissions, fuel switching to gas is back to the future. After the first quarter, the USAs 2012 emissions are falling sharply again and may drop to 1990 levels, or just slightly above that important milestone, according to data in EIAs latest Monthy Energy Review.
Americas energy related carbon emissions fell about 7.5%, during the first three months of 2012 compared to the same period of 2011. And first quarter 2012 emissions are approximately 8.5% lower than emissions in the first quarter of 2010.
Total energy carbon emissions were 5,473 million tons in 2011 and last year fell below the 1996 mark of 5,501 million tons.
The first quarter 2012 reduction of 7.5% makes it possible that this year emissions will fall back essentially to the 1990 level of 5,039 million tons. That is shockingly good news.
The 1990 level of carbon emissions is an important measuring stick, as it is often used as a critical data point for judging progress in reducing a nations carbon emissions.
Why are US carbon emissions plummeting back to 1990 levels?
First and foremost are sharp reductions from electric power production, as a result of fuel switching from coal to gas, rising renewable energy production, and increasing efficiency. Yet, the shale gas revolution, and the low-priced gas that it has made a reality, is the key driver of falling carbon emissions, especially in the last 12 months.
As of April, gas tied coal at 32% of the electric power generation market, nearly ending coals 100 year reign on top of electricity markets. Lets remember the speed and extent of gass rise and coals drop: coal had 52% of the market in 2000 and 48% in 2008.
Apart from power production, reductions of carbon emissions from the transportation sector since 2007 are pushing down US Carbon emissions. First quarter 2012 transportation emissions declined by about 0.6%, compared to the same period in 2011. Rising fuel efficiency and some switching to lower carbon fuels are the main causes of falling transportation emissions.
The bottom line is that Americas carbon emissions may drop back close to 1990 levels this year. That result would have been thought impossible, even at the end of 2011.
But the shale gas revolution makes a reality many things recently thought impossible. It was thought impossible to slash carbon US carbon emissions back to 1990 levels by 2012. It was thought impossible to massively, quickly cut carbon emissions and, at the same time, have lower energy bills.
Shale gas production has slashed carbon emissions and saved consumers more than $100 billion per year. Truly astonishing!
If Global Warming is caused by the USA carbon emmissions.....then we should start cooling soon!
****************************************EXCERPT***************************************
I thought it might have been the 2000 miles I have put on my bicycle instead of my car this year. :)
That is news to me.
That is a lot of miles.
States have their own regs which have worked fine for years but now not good enuff.
NG is about as perfect a fuel as can be had and is creating tens of thousands of jobs but that ain't good enuff.
And of course we all know why...
******************************EXCERPT*******************************************
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
Hey wait a second. Manmade co2 emissions have gone down and yet it was 118° in Kansas? Theres something wrong with global warming science!
****************************************EXCERPT******************************
Shale gas production has slashed carbon emissions and saved consumers more than $100 billion per year. Truly astonishing!
So this is why Ken Salazar does not care for state regulation of fracking?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/25/us-energy-salazar-idUSBRE85O19Q20120625
U.S. needs Federal fracking rules: Salazar
I dont recall seeing any big environmental problems with all the fracking. Not that the Feds havent been frantically seeking ways to shut this technology down. Still no documented cases of polluted waters from leaking fracking operations getting into the water supplies.
See http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/293086/truth-about-fracking-kevin-d-williamson
***********************************EXCERPT********************************
Allan MacRae says:
The radical enviros continue to oppose shale gas, and wildly exaggerate the negative impacts of fracking.
The clear agenda of the radical enviros is now even more apparent they want to starve the world of inexpensive energy that is needed for economic growth and political stability.
They want people to be under-employed or unemployed and they want human populations to decline, in order to protect Mother Gaia from the depredations of humanity.
The target of the radical enviros is not atmospheric CO2, good people, it is YOU.
For more evidence, see
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/28/newsbytes-world-cooling-to-global-warming/#comment-1020878
and
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/28/newsbytes-world-cooling-to-global-warming/#comment-1022591
fyi
That is news to me.
Me too. I thought the plants sucked it up greedily, but what do I know?
The Sun has changed its character
A number of solar parameters are weak, and none is weaker than the Ap Index:
Figure 1: Ap Index 1932 to 2026
Figure 1 shows the Ap Index from 1932 with a projection to the end of Solar Cycle 24 in 2026. The Ap Index has not risen much above the previous floor of activity in the second half of the 20th Century. It is also now far less volatile. With now less than a year to solar maximum in 2013, the Ap Index is now projected to trail off to a new low next decade.
Figure 2: Mean Field, TSI, F10.7 Flux and Sunspot Count from 2008
This figure is from: http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png
What is evident from Figure 2 is that the spikes down in the F10.7 flux and sunspot count are almost to absolute minimum levels. The underlying level of activity is only a little above that of solar minimum.
Figure 3: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 2026
Similar to the Ap Index, activity is only slightly above levels of previous solar minima. The figure includes a projection to the end of Solar Cycle 24 in 2026 which assumes that the neutron count in the next minimum will be similar to that of the 23/24 minimum. Previous cold periods have been associated with significant spikes in Be10 and C14. Perhaps the neutron count might get much higher yet into the 24/25 minimum.
Figure 4: UAH Monthly Temperature versus Low Global Cloud Cover
The cloud cover data for this figure was provided by Professor Ole Humlum. There is a significant relationship between low global cloud cover and global temperature. Assuming that the relationship is linear and remains linear at higher cloud cover percentages, this figure attempts to derive what cloud cover percentage is required to get the temperature decline of 0.9°C predicted by Solheim, Stordahl and Humlum in their paper entitled The long sunspot cycle 23 predicts a significant temperature decrease in cycle 24 available at: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.1954v1.pdf
Figure 4 suggests that the predicted result will be associated with a significant increase in cloudiness.
Figure 5: Low Level Cloud Cover plotted against Oulu Neutron Count
This figure, most likely repeating other peoples work, suggests that there is little correlation between neutron count and cloud cover. Higher neutron counts may be a coincident with colder climate than a significant causative factor. Perhaps EUV, the Ap Index and other factors are more significant in climate change. Also, on a planet with a bistable climate of either ice age or interglacial, it may be that accidents of survival of snowpack over the northern summer are also important.
Perth-based scientist David Archibald is a Visiting Fellow of the Institute of World Politics in Washington where he teaches a course in Strategic Energy Policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
No the the sky is falling AGW proponents simply could not let clean natural gas from frac wells go unchallenged lowered CO2 will never do must maintain alarm at all costs even if it means cooking the books and fibbing.
The NEW attack is that natural gas from shale fracing is WORSE THAN COAL! Yep Horwath and Ingraffea from Cornell published a doom and gloom report claiming exactly that claiming that the frac process releases large amounts of methane to the atmosphere and that all that methane a greenhouse gas more potent than CO2 actually makes natural gas from frac processing worse than coal when it comes to CAGW.
It would be nice to say they conveniently ignore some very key facts but the truth is they carefully crafted their report to ignore and avoid important relevant facts that disprove their claim. Worse they are supported and cheered on by Gas Land filmmaker and pro scare monger Josh Fox he of the burning faucets videos.
The most important is that while methane is more potent as a greenhouse gas it also has a very short residence time in the atmosphere compared to CO2. A number of others who appear to actually be real scientists who care about truth and accuracy as opposed to advocacy masquerading as science all thoroughly refuted.
It was shown their claims largely ignored that most methane is burned off at the well head never reaching the atmosphere. Data from 90,000 wells show they dramatically overstate hard data reduced their claims by half. And that methane is a valuable commodity that is increasingly being captured at the well head.
Paulina Jaramillo of Carnegie Mellon University is an expert on carbon footprint. She went back and studied the issue and found that even with high rates of methane leaking out, shale gas was still better than coal.
Even the geology department at Cornell thinks their claims are bordering on silly. Larry Cathos and his colleagues authored a rebuttal paper that showed these claims were vastly overstated
AND as noted, they criticized the improper use of or ignoring of time scales. CO2 stays in atmosphere for 100+ years methane a decade or less. Even if the methane had 100% of the global warming equivalency as the CO2 it reduces it is still a vast improvement. Ten years later it is gone while the CO2 it replaces is around 100 years or more.
This is IMO simple intellectual fraud. Ignoring clear facts to promote and advocate for the cause.
Ingraffea says their scientific fraud doesnt matter:
There is the smoking gun right there. You know theyre lying that they are not scientists but simple blind advocates, when they ignore the fraud and excuse it with unsuppoorted and ridiculous scare mongering.
Bring in the Clowns .
MORE HERE
The GUARDIANS GARBAGE HERE
Revkin weighs in HERE