New research says leave 40 per cent of existing fossil fuels in the ground

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
13,581
2,100
113
Ghawar
Lori Lee Oates
June 24, 2022

New research from Environmental Research Letters has found that existing fossil fuel developments could warm the Earth beyond 1.5 C. It points at a need to leave approximately 40 per cent of “developed reserves” unextracted. This is quite a revelation at a time when the Canadian government is still approving new oil developments, funding oil pipelines and has not ruled out further projects in the future.

On April 6, the Bay du Nord oil development offshore Newfoundland and Labrador made it through the federal government environmental assessment process. Minister Steven Guilbeault maintained that the project “is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.”

This environmental approval followed a warning from the International Energy Agency (IEA) in May 2021 that there should be no new oil developments if the world is to reach net-zero by 2050.

Meanwhile, N.L. Premier Andrew Furey continues to repeat that Newfoundland offshore oil is “low-carbon” and “ethical.” However, oil projects are among the biggest emitting facilities in the country and the IEA did not say move to lower carbon oil for a chance at net-zero by 2050. The agency recommended no new fossil fuel projects.

The world already has enough discovered reserves to get us to net-zero. However, Labour Minister and St. John’s MP Seamus O’Regan also persisted with the “low-emitting project” narrative.

Cenovus has since announced that it will resume the West White Rose project in the Newfoundland offshore.

Patrick Butler of the CBC has reported that Newfoundland offshore oil, at $60 to $70 a barrel, will likely be among the first to fall out of the global marketplace after the world reaches peak oil. This conclusion was based on research from Nature Energy.


The IEA has predicted the world could reach peak oil by 2025 if countries meet their climate pledges. Equinor has been predicting first oil for Bay du Nord by 2028. Projects like Bay du Nord and West White Rose are very likely to become stranded assets.

After decades of delay on climate change action, there is a very limited carbon budget that can be expended if the world is to limit global warming to 1.5 C. Each new project that becomes a stranded asset is a waste of the tiny remaining carbon budget.

Exploring for more oil, delineation of new fields, constructing new oil infrastructure and commissioning new projects are all activities that waste the shrinking carbon budget. They expend massive amounts of greenhouse gas emissions. At this point, we should be applying those emissions to the just transition away from fossil fuels and constructing renewable energy infrastructure.

You cannot construct wind farms or electric vehicles (EVs) without expending emissions. There are transportation emissions involved in building wind farms and mining emissions involved in constructing EVs. There's going to be a lot of emissions expended transitioning, which is why we should start sooner rather than later, while we still have a carbon budget left. After the transition, the world will have a means of providing energy and transport that expends fewer emissions. However, we have to transition to keep global warming to 1.5C.

James Vaccaro of the Climate Safe Lending Network says once average global temperatures increase beyond 1.5 C you see “tree die-offs, drying peatlands, thawing permafrost and other self-reinforcing feedback loops.” Vaccaro notes while bankers who fund fossil fuel projects think there will be a climate crisis, what we are actually headed for is collapse.

Our leaders may think we will just adapt to climate change. However, leading climate scientist Katherine Hayhoe has warned this will not be possible.

A frequent argument is that the world will need oil for a long time. However, there are many fields in the world that create fewer emissions than the Canadian oil industry and they are larger and cheaper to operate.

None of this even begins to deal with the ethics of continuing to export oil to be burned in other countries while framing your government as a climate change champion globally. Approximately 80 per cent of emissions are downstream, meaning they occur at the point of burning the fuel (Scope 3 emissions), rather than at the point of taking it out of the ground.

Oil sold to other jurisdictions still impacts the Canadian environment. In the 2022 federal emissions reduction plan, it is noted that Canada is warming at twice the global average and three times as fast in the North. Meanwhile, the federal government is also pushing a pipeline through Indigenous lands, while claiming to engage in reconciliation with Indigenous leaders.

The federal government promised no more public money would be invested in the TMX pipeline. They then provided a loan guarantee to the pipeline expansion project, for which Canadian taxpayers could be liable, at a time when energy analysts are saying no new oil projects and scientists are saying prepare to decommission fossil fuel projects early.

Parts of India are already at 60 C and parts of Pakistan are at 40 C. Intense heat waves are being experienced in parts of France and Spain. There have been extreme heat events in parts of North America. There is massive flooding in Bangladesh and India.

UN Secretary General António Guterres was recently quoted as saying “fossil fuel firms have humanity by the throat.” None more so than the Canadian government, it would seem.

 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,635
1,431
113
No one knows what 40% of fossil fuels is. There is almost limitless methane...and more is created constantly. No one also knows what the potential for carbon sequestration is. That can also be enormous.
 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
No one knows what 40% of fossil fuels is. There is almost limitless methane...and more is created constantly. No one also knows what the potential for carbon sequestration is. That can also be enormous.
I say keep drilling and digging for oil. Either that money goes to the canadian health care system or to Russian artillery.

Think about it.

Intelligent people would handle the green shift as independent of oil supply. As things become more green and less fossil fuels are used, less will be pumped out of the ground. Meanwhile, leftie policies support a massacre in Ukraine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluecolt

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,635
1,431
113
I say keep drilling and digging for oil. Either that money goes to the canadian health care system or to Russian artillery.

Think about it.

Intelligent people would handle the green shift as independent of oil supply. As things become more green and less fossil fuels are used, less will be pumped out of the ground. Meanwhile, leftie policies support a massacre in Ukraine.
Leftie polices had nothing to do with Ukraine, that as NATO and stupid Zelensky,
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Intelligent people would handle the green shift as independent of oil supply. As things become more green and less fossil fuels are used, less will be pumped out of the ground.
Yes, build renewable generation independent of supply to get us off fossil fuels as fast as possible.
 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
Yes, build renewable generation independent of supply to get us off fossil fuels as fast as possible.
Make that RELIABLE renewable.

And meanwhile drill here instead of letting money from the west(or anywhere) go over to Russia's massacre artillery.
 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
Renewables are more reliable when paired with storage than burning dead dinosaurs brought to you by despots like MBS, rump and Putin.
You see folks. Even in the face of the obvious, the frauds still deny that they are the source of so many problems. Read here about why California has blackouts. And yet these complete incompetents like Frankfooter keep intentionally misleading you down a path of destruction. I suspect it is because they want that destruction(or they are really, really stupid).

They are frauds.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bluecolt

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
Why California’s Climate Policies Are Causing Electricity Blackouts

Millions of Californians were denied electrical power and thus air conditioning during a heatwave, raising the risk of heatstroke and death, particularly among the elderly and sick.

The blackouts come at a time when people, particularly the elderly, are forced to remain indoors due to Covid-19.

At first, the state’s electrical grid operator last night asked customers to voluntarily reduce electricity use. But after power reserves fell to dangerous levels it declared a “Stage 3 emergency” cutting off power to people across the state at 6:30 pm.

The immediate reason for the black-outs was the failure of a 500-megawatt power plant and an out-of-service 750-megawatt unit not being available. “There is nothing nefarious going on here,” said a spokeswoman for California Independent System Operator (CAISO). “We are just trying to run the grid.”

But the underlying reasons that California is experiencing rolling black-outs for the second time in less than a year stem from the state’s climate policies, which California policymakers have justified as necessary to prevent deaths from heatwaves.

In October, Pacific Gas and Electric cut off power to homes across California to avoid starting forest fires. The utility and California’s leaders had over the previous decade diverted billions meant for grid maintenance to renewables.

And yesterday, California had to impose rolling blackouts because it had failed to maintain sufficient reliable power from natural gas and nuclear plants, or pay in advance for enough guaranteed electricity imports from other states.

It may be that California’s utilities and their regulator, the California Public Utilities Commission, which is also controlled by Gov. Newsom, didn’t want to spend the extra money to guarantee the additional electricity out of fears of raising California’s electricity prices even more than they had already raised them.

California saw its electricity prices rise six times more than the rest of the United States from 2011 to 2019, due to its huge expansion of renewables. Republicans in the U.S. Congress point to that massive increase to challenge justifications by Democrats to spend $2 trillion on renewables in the name of climate change.

Even though the cost of solar panels declined dramatically between 2011 and 2019, their unreliable and weather-dependent nature meant that they imposed large new costs in the form of storage and transmission to keep electricity as reliable. California’s solar panels and farms were all turning off as the blackouts began, with no help available from the states to the East already in nightfall.

Electricity from solar goes away at the very moment when the demand for electricity rises. “The peak demand was steady in late hours,” said the spokesperson for CAISO, which is controlled by Gov. Gavin Newsom, “and we had thousands of megawatts of solar reducing their output as the sunset.”

The two blackouts in less than a year are strong evidence that the tens of billions that Californians have spent on renewables come with high human, economic, and environmental costs.

Last December, a report by done for PG&E concluded that the utility’s customers could see blackouts double over the next 15 years and quadruple over the next 30.

California’s anti-nuclear policies also contributed to the blackouts. In 2013, Gov. Jerry Brown forced a nuclear power plant, San Onofre, in southern California to close.

Had San Onofre still been operating, there almost certainly would not have been blackouts on Friday as the reserve margin would have been significantly larger. The capacity of San Onofre was double that of the lost generation capacity that triggered the blackout.

California's current and former large nuclear plants are located on the coast, which allows for their electricity to travel shorter distances, and through less-constrained transmission lines than the state’s industrial solar farms, to get to the coastal cities where electricity is in highest demand.

There has been very little electricity from wind during the summer heatwave in California and the broader western U.S., further driving up demand. In fact, the same weather pattern, a stable high-pressure bubble, is the cause of heatwaves, since it brought very low wind for days on end along with very high temperatures.

Things won’t be any better, and may be worse, in the winter, which produces far less solar electricity than the summer. Solar plus storage, an expensive attempt to fix problems like what led to this blackout, cannot help through long winters of low output.

California’s electricity prices will continue to rise if it continues to add more renewables to its grid, and goes forward with plans to shut down its last nuclear plant, Diablo Canyon, in 2025.

Had California spent an estimated $100 billion on nuclear instead of on wind and solar, it would have had enough energy to replace all fossil fuels in its in-state electricity mix.

To manage the increasingly unreliable grid, California will either need to keep its nuclear plant operating, build more natural gas plants, or pay ever more money annually to reserve emergency electricity supplies from its neighbors.

After the blackouts last October, Gov. Newsom attacked PG&E Corp. for “greed and mismanagement” and named a top aide, Ana Matosantos, to be his “energy czar.”

“This is not the new normal, and this does not take 10 years to solve,” Newsom said. “The entire system needs to be reimagined.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluecolt

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
You see folks. Even in the face of the obvious, the frauds still deny that they are the source of so many problems. Read here about why California has blackouts. And yet these complete incompetents like Frankfooter keep intentionally misleading you down a path of destruction. I suspect it is because they want that destruction(or they are really, really stupid).

They are frauds.

As usual you didn't read the 2 year old article you posted. The problem was unreliable fossil fuel plants.

The immediate reason for the black-outs was the failure of a 500-megawatt power plant and an out-of-service 750-megawatt unit not being available. “There is nothing nefarious going on here,” said a spokeswoman for California Independent System Operator (CAISO). “We are just trying to run the grid.”

California is doing fine.


 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
As usual you didn't read the article you posted. The problem was unreliable fossil fuel plants.

The immediate reason for the black-outs was the failure of a 500-megawatt power plant and an out-of-service 750-megawatt unit not being available. “There is nothing nefarious going on here,” said a spokeswoman for California Independent System Operator (CAISO). “We are just trying to run the grid.”
Here is what I highlighted. Try responding to it. And in an intelligent manner please.


California’s anti-nuclear policies also contributed to the blackouts. In 2013, Gov. Jerry Brown forced a nuclear power plant, San Onofre, in southern California to close.

Had San Onofre still been operating, there almost certainly would not have been blackouts on Friday as the reserve margin would have been significantly larger. The capacity of San Onofre was double that of the lost generation capacity that triggered the blackout.

"
Had California spent an estimated $100 billion on nuclear instead of on wind and solar, it would have had enough energy to replace all fossil fuels in its in-state electricity mix."
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
" Had California spent an estimated $100 billion on nuclear instead of on wind and solar, it would have had enough energy to replace all fossil fuels in its in-state electricity mix."
They spent less than that and already replaced fossil fuels and nukes with renewables.
Holy shite is that article and your comment way behind the times.
Right wingers are always arguing for the stupidest, most expensive solution with the biggest issues for purely partisan reasons.
Facts really don't matter to you, do they?

 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
They spent less than that and already replaced fossil fuels and nukes with renewables.
Holy shite is that article and your comment way behind the times.
Right wingers are always arguing for the stupidest, most expensive solution with the biggest issues for purely partisan reasons.
Facts really don't matter to you, do they?

The fraud speaks again.

Here are the facts with the stupid renewable idea. And remember, it is hugely expensive for the consumer as well. Ahhhh, the stupid people.

"State and grid officials earlier this month revealed that California faces the possibility of electricity blackouts returning this summer because of power supply shortages (Energywire, May 9). That prediction was based on an analysis of existing power supplies, new sources expected to come online and the potential for extreme events. Friday's presentation was the first to give an in-depth look at potential gaps between electricity supply and peak demand beyond this coming summer, with analyses that also cover the summers of 2023 through 2026.

The most precarious window for electricity supply shortages is early evenings, after the state’s robust solar power is no longer working. September is the most potentially problematic month in all of the years examined.

The warnings come as the nation’s most populous state seeks more renewable energy on its grid, with the aim to have a 100 percent carbon-free electricity supply by 2045.

State officials are also trying to avoid a repeat of August 2020, when power supply shortages led to rolling blackouts on a Saturday evening and a few hours the next night. Power supplies remained tight throughout that month. Residents and businesses cut consumption, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom authorized the use of diesel generators and other moves, and the lights stayed on.

Newsom recently proposed spending $5.2 billion to improve energy reliability (Energywire, May 16). But Friday’s presentation showed the challenges the Newsom administration will face.


Climate change is altering how energy and grid officials calculate the state’s electricity supply. They used to plan to have enough supply to cover a crisis event that would happen once a decade.
After the 2020 rolling blackouts, California authorities now aim for a buffer of power supply that is 22.5 percent above projected peak demand.


 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
The fraud speaks again.

Here are the facts with the stupid renewable idea. And remember, it is hugely expensive for the consumer as well. Ahhhh, the stupid people.

Holy shite! You posted an article that says extreme weather from climate change is making the grid suffer!
And then you claim that using more climate change causing fossil fuels will fix this problem?

Wow, you constantly amaze me.
 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
Holy shite! You posted an article that says extreme weather from climate change is making the grid suffer!
And then you claim that using more climate change causing fossil fuels will fix this problem?

Wow, you constantly amaze me.
Intelligent people understand that higher energy needs can easily be satisfied with an increase in reliable power as compared to the frauds who want to reduce reliable power and increase unreliable power(Because they are stupid).

Nuclear power plants can be built in locations that are not in high risk areas. California already imports nuclear energy from out of state.

Please ignore the simple-minded responses from the frauds. They will provide you with blackouts while you pay much more for energy.

Frankfooter appears to have the thought process level of someone in their early teens. No wonder he likes Greta.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Intelligent people understand that higher energy needs can easily be satisfied with an increase in reliable power as compared to the frauds who want to reduce reliable power and increase unreliable power(Because they are stupid).

Nuclear power plants can be built in locations that are not in high risk areas. California already imports nuclear energy from out of state.

Please ignore the simple-minded responses from the frauds. They will provide you with blackouts while you pay much more for energy.

Frankfooter appears to have the thought process level of someone in their early teens. No wonder he likes Greta.
You're kinda too late, dude.
California already hit 100% renewable generation.

I'm sure you'll be calling for a return to coal powered trains next.
 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
You're kinda too late, dude.
California already hit 100% renewable generation.

I'm sure you'll be calling for a return to coal powered trains next.
You see how the frauds work folks. They give you totally misleading information.

Someone without as much knowledge as me might read this and think that California only uses renewable energy and that 100% of their energy used is renewable. Of course the frauds will tell you that they never lied with their statement. But it was meant to mislead.

California actually had a brief amount of time when it was nice and sunny as well as windy in order to be able to have 100% renewable energy supplying its needs. Of course, you might ask, what happens when the sun goes down or the wind slows down(gee...does that ever happen). They need actual, reliable energy.

But Frankfrauder won't tell you that.

Why? Because he is a fraud, always giving you lies and misleading information to make you come to the wrong conclusion. That is how the lefties work. Vote them out.

If only they had spent all that taxpayer money on reliable energy.



On a mild Sunday afternoon, California set a historic milestone in the quest for clean energy. The sun was shining, the wind was blowing and on May 8th, the state produced enough renewable electricity to meet 103% of consumer demand. That broke a record set a week earlier of 99.9%.

Energy experts say the falling records are a sign of the remarkable progress that renewable energy has made. But that doesn't mean fossil fuels were out of the picture.

Even as the record was broken, natural gas power plants were still running in California.

Because despite the dramatic growth of renewable energy, turning off natural gas power still isn't possible in California. The reason is due to a tricky time of day: when the sun sets and solar farms stop producing. California needs to replace that power quickly and seamlessly with other sources, like hydropower and natural gas.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
You see how the frauds work folks. They give you totally misleading information.

Someone without as much knowledge as me might read this and think that California only uses renewable energy and that 100% of their energy used is renewable. Of course the frauds will tell you that they never lied with their statement. But it was meant to mislead.
Nice try, but I said 'hit' 100%.

Thanks for posting an article that says that renewables are the best way forward, doesn't even consider nukes like you want and says that fossil fuels will still be used during transition.
Exactly what I've been saying.

Nobody with any brain is considering building nukes in California.
 

Czar

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2004
1,315
221
63
Nice try, but I said 'hit' 100%.

Thanks for posting an article that says that renewables are the best way forward, doesn't even consider nukes like you want and says that fossil fuels will still be used during transition.
Exactly what I've been saying.

Nobody with any brain is considering building nukes in California.
See, I told how the frauds work. After not showing you the full picture with intention to mislead, they can say that they posted accurate info. It was accurate. But meant to be misleading.

No one with ant reasonable intelligence and common sense would shut down the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant.

But that is what the leftie frauds want.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts