A study published in the prestigious journal Science finds that oceans are already 30% more acidic than they were at the start of the industrial revolution and are growing more acidic. Why?
Massive amounts of carbon dioxide are being released into the environment from the burning of fossil fuels and the oceans have absorbed about 67% of the released carbon dioxide, making them more acidic. The pace of acidification is greater than anytime in planetary history and could lead to the oceans being 150% more acidic by the end of this century.
Why should we care? The growing acidification of the ocean makes it harder for corals, shellfish, and plankton to build shells, and the loss of those marine organisms could disrupt entire marine ecosystems and fish populations.
The study can be found at: http://m.sciencemag.org/content/335/6072/1058.abstract. Also see:
http://mobile.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-01/oceans-acidifying-fastest-in-300-million-years.
This study confirms once more that denying global warming and the changes that it has already caused to the environment is deeply irresponsible.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Friday, March 2, 2012
Rolling Stone Magazine Sadly Regurgitates NY Times Greatest Gas "Hits"
Jeff Goodell, the author of "The Big Fracking Bubble: The Scam Behind the Gas Boom," should split his pay with the NYT gas reporter, because Goodell regurgitates all the NYT's greatest gas hits, including ones that the NYT Public Editor found to be misleading or false. Goodell even uses many of the NYT reporter's characters--Art Berman, Deborah Rogers, and Anthony Ingrafea--to voice his narrative.
So the reader of Goodell's piece in the March 15, 2012 Rolling Stone is treated once more to the narrative that shale gas drilling is a "ponzi scheme" that has inflated a "bubble" that will crash but, before it does, "fracking" is polluting Pennsylvania's water with radionuclides, where there is little regulation.
Of course, Goodell does not tell his readers about radionuclide test results or that Pennsylvania issued 1200 violations to the industry in 2010 and 1100 in 2011, many more than any other state in the country, according to the recent study by the University of Texas.
The only new twist in the Goodell piece is that he tells readers that Chesapeake Energy and its Chief Executive, Aubrey Mclendon, "dominates America's supply of natural gas" the same way the Tea Party financing Koch brothers dominate pipelines and refineries.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-big-fracking-bubble-the-scam-behind-the-gas-boom-20120301.
Normally a company that dominates a market manages to avoid a price collapse of its product. Chesapeake Energy strangely has used its supposed dominance of America's supply of natural gas to drive the price of natural gas down from $13 to $2.50 for a thousand cubic feet. In Pennsylvania alone, more than 60 companies are producing gas so perhaps Goodell means that Chesapeake Energy dominates the politics of shale gas.
Indeed, by using right from the start the words "dominate" and "right wing billionaire," comparing McClendon to the Koch Brothers, invoking Tea Party as well as the notorious Swift Boat attacks on Senator Kerry's Vietnam military service, Goodell begins with a political horror show for Blue America. He is telling his Blue America readers that Red America is controlling natural gas and to be on guard or, better still, very scared. The piece is more a political scream than a serious energy article, but it will be lapped up by many.
After his political warning to the Northeast and, as the nutty, dangerous Arizona Sheriff Arpaio and Rick Perry endorser would say, to the followers of the Kenyan, Muslim, Socialist occupying the presidency, Goodell is back to the NYT's greatest gas and fracking hits. Ponzi scheme?
America produced a record amount of natural gas in 2011 and, thanks to shale gas, is the biggest natural gas producer in the world. Shale gas production has now been booming for 5 years and provides 30% of America's world-leading natural gas suply. The truly enormous actual production numbers and the collapsed price of gas, despite rising demand for gas, destroy the credibility of the ponzi scheme smear, even without diving into the reserve numbers.
Not satisfied with the ponzi scheme lie, Goodell hurls another rhetorical bomb by charging the industry is a "bubble." Of course after the "internet bubble" and then the "housing bubble" that nearly created a depression,"bubble" is an explosive, fearful word. It is also a strange one to use here, because the price of gas is not inflating but has been driven down by huge new production. Consumers have saved about $1,000 per year in lower heating bills and electricity bills. These savings are great for all consumers but protect the health and safety of about 25% of Americans, who have difficulty affording heat for their homes, as they have incomes that don't allow purchases of Rolling Stones Magazine.
After a dose of ponzi and bubble, we got to have some radiation to scare us all. While raising one more time the Pennsylvania drinking water radiation scare, Goodell of course does not report the results of massive testing for radionuclides done by drinking water suppliers of both water in streams and water coming out of taps. The results are incovenient to the drama.
There is no radionuclide pollution of drinking water in Pennsylvania. Zero. None. See the tests results that have been documented in numerous posts in this blog. But that truth will never catch up to the lie cleverly spread and repeated.
Just about the only part of the Goodell piece that has some redeeming quality is when it highlights methane migration from poor drilling as a real problem. It is, and too many companies in the industry lawyer-up and fight victims of gas migration, as opposed to fixing the problem and working to reduce the incidence. But even here Goodell is manipulative.
Gas migration results from mistakes in gas drilling and not in the hydraulic fracturing or fracking phase. With the important possible exception of Pavillion Wyoming, there is not one case of fracking fluids, when sent down the well, returning from depth to contaminate an aquifer.
The Duke University study of water wells in Pennsylvania that Goodell cites in fact found no fracking fluids had contaminated the water wells tested but methane had. It made two basic findings: frack fluids are not contaminating water wells but methane was found at high rates.
Goodell, however, repeats the methane contamination finding of the Duke study, without telling his readers that Duke found no frack fluids in the water wells.
Goodell ends the piece by saying, without any basis, that using less gas does not mean using more coal. This assertion is false. Counting corn ethanol and big hydro, renewable energy provides about 11% of America's total energy, more than nuclear power. Wind and solar are growing fast and costs are declining, but they provide less than 2% of our total energy.
Approximately 80% of our total energy comes from oil, natural gas, and coal. There is no way that renewables can replace that 80% tomorrow or in the next 10 years. The most aggressive renewable energy state is California, and it will get 33% of its electricity (not total energy) from renewables by 2020, with about 50% of its electricity coming from natural gas at that point.
When big coal plants close, as they are doing in record numbers, they are being replaced substantially by gas, with renewables also playing a role. Yet, until energy storage breakthroughs occur, intermittent wind and solar can make important contributions but cannot replace by themselves baseload coal plants. Only gas or nuclear plants can take the place of coal plants that now run night and day.
In 2005, prior to the shale gas boom, America stood ready to build 150 new coal plants. Most of those proposed new coal plants have not been built and now old coal plants are closing. Low-priced natural gas, more than anything else, stopped another wave of big coal plants and is now making old, inefficient coal plants close. Pretending otherwise may comfort Goodell but is not real.
Stunning Fact: 331 Coal Units Announced Closing Since January 2010
Keeping track of the number of coal plants and coal units that are closing is not easy. This blog published in 2011 the Edison Electric Institute's list of coal plant closings at that time. Yesterday, Stephen Lacey wrote that the owners of 106 coal plants, with 331 coal units at them, had announced that they would retire or have retired since January 2010. The plants represent 42,895 megawatts or 13% of the coal fleet.
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/29/435012/dirty-aging-coal-plants-set-to-close/?mobile=wp.
Other data in the post includes that the retiring plants on average are 55 years old and that they represent 8% of the electricity produced by coal plants or considerably less than the 13% capacity share of the retiring coal plants. The 8% of the electricity produced by coal plants that is retiring represents about 3.3% of all electricity generated from all sources. The retiring plants also account for 9% of the carbon dioxide coming from all coal plants.
It should also be noted that America builds typically 15,000 to 20,000 megawatts of new generation every year. The closings do not pose any threat to grid reliability.
This data also confirms that the plants retiring are the ones already not operating much, because they are unable to compete for dispatch in competitive markets, during periods of low and moderate demand, which is most of the time.
Lacey's post is based on information from Bruce Niles who is the director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign.
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/02/29/435012/dirty-aging-coal-plants-set-to-close/?mobile=wp.
Other data in the post includes that the retiring plants on average are 55 years old and that they represent 8% of the electricity produced by coal plants or considerably less than the 13% capacity share of the retiring coal plants. The 8% of the electricity produced by coal plants that is retiring represents about 3.3% of all electricity generated from all sources. The retiring plants also account for 9% of the carbon dioxide coming from all coal plants.
It should also be noted that America builds typically 15,000 to 20,000 megawatts of new generation every year. The closings do not pose any threat to grid reliability.
This data also confirms that the plants retiring are the ones already not operating much, because they are unable to compete for dispatch in competitive markets, during periods of low and moderate demand, which is most of the time.
Lacey's post is based on information from Bruce Niles who is the director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Belief In Global Warming Rises & Warms With Weather
Belief of global warming is warming again, after a substantial decline from 2009 to 2010,
according to polling by the University of Michigan and Muhlenberg College. The poll found that 62% of the public believed in the reality of global warming, a rebound from 58% in the fall of 2010.
Public belief in global warming had been declining, falling substantially from 72% in the fall of 2008 to 58% in the fall of 2010. See www.ns.umich.edu/new/releases/20247-poll-belief-in-global-warming-rebounds-after-period-of-decline and http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2012/02_climate_change_rabe_borick.aspx.
The pollsters conclude that the personal observations of Americans about the weather is a key factor influencing opinions about the reality of global warming. Of those believing in global warming 24% pointed to warmer temperatures that they have observed and another 24% mentioned weather changes that they have experienced. Only 9% mentioned science research as the main basis.
Political registration partially predicts ones belief in global warming. Among Democrats, 75% accept the reality of global warming, while 47% of Republicans do. Many more rank and file Republicans accept global warming than do elected Republicans and Republican Presidential candidates. Global warming may be example of how the Republican party has been yanked to an extreme by its activists, while many rank and file Republicans don't agree with the new party orthodoxy.
The poll was conducted in the fall of 2011, obviously before what has been a very warm winter, and so expect to see a further increase in the public acceptance of global warming in the 2012. Indeed, this winter has been so warm that it almost met the global warming test of a central Pennsylvania Republican friend.
In his words, "I will believe in global warming when I don't shovel snow anymore."
My friend, we are getting there.
according to polling by the University of Michigan and Muhlenberg College. The poll found that 62% of the public believed in the reality of global warming, a rebound from 58% in the fall of 2010.
Public belief in global warming had been declining, falling substantially from 72% in the fall of 2008 to 58% in the fall of 2010. See www.ns.umich.edu/new/releases/20247-poll-belief-in-global-warming-rebounds-after-period-of-decline and http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2012/02_climate_change_rabe_borick.aspx.
The pollsters conclude that the personal observations of Americans about the weather is a key factor influencing opinions about the reality of global warming. Of those believing in global warming 24% pointed to warmer temperatures that they have observed and another 24% mentioned weather changes that they have experienced. Only 9% mentioned science research as the main basis.
Political registration partially predicts ones belief in global warming. Among Democrats, 75% accept the reality of global warming, while 47% of Republicans do. Many more rank and file Republicans accept global warming than do elected Republicans and Republican Presidential candidates. Global warming may be example of how the Republican party has been yanked to an extreme by its activists, while many rank and file Republicans don't agree with the new party orthodoxy.
The poll was conducted in the fall of 2011, obviously before what has been a very warm winter, and so expect to see a further increase in the public acceptance of global warming in the 2012. Indeed, this winter has been so warm that it almost met the global warming test of a central Pennsylvania Republican friend.
In his words, "I will believe in global warming when I don't shovel snow anymore."
My friend, we are getting there.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Dow 13,005: Happy Stock Days Are Here Again
The Dow Jones Industrial average yesterday ended at 13,005, reaching its highest level since May 19 2008. US stocks are up about 100% since the Dow ended its frightening collapse that gathered speed throughout 2008 and then hit a sickening bottom in March 2009 well below 7,000.
Indeed, the period from March 2009 to today has been one of the best periods in the history of the stock market. Stock market gains also have been important to reviving growth of the US economy that now has grown every quarter since July 1, 2009.
In the world of stocks, happy days are here again.
Indeed, the period from March 2009 to today has been one of the best periods in the history of the stock market. Stock market gains also have been important to reviving growth of the US economy that now has grown every quarter since July 1, 2009.
In the world of stocks, happy days are here again.
Top Five Facts Why High Gasoline Prices Today Do Less Damage Than In 2008
Gasoline prices are up 40 cents per gallon since January, now average $3.70 per gallon, and may reach the record of $4.11 set in July 2008. At that time, high gasoline costs were part of a perfect economic storm that nearly pushed the US already in a recession that started in 2007 into a depression.
Here are the top 5 facts why the economic impact this time of $4 gasoline will be much less, though still painful, as a 50 cent per gallon increase sustained for a year costs families $250 if they use 500 gallons annually or $500 more for 1,000 gallons.
5. New cars being sold today are more fuel efficient than in 2008. In fact today's vehicles are 14% more fuel efficient than in 2008, and more than 30 million new cars have been sold since 2008. The gasoline price rising from $3.50 to $4 rise 14% and is offset almost completely by greater fuel efficiency that also averages 14% in new cars sold. Of course, most motorists have not bought a new car since 2008, but they often do have two cars and start driving more frequently the higher mileage option. Car pooling rates and public transit use also rises when gasoline reaches $4 as people find other strategies to save gasoline money.
4. The USA has cut substantially its oil usage through efficiency and using substitutes for oil in vehicles, homes, and factories. Ethanol and biodiesel consumption are up. Oil power plants such as those in Florida operated by FPL are converting to gas. Tens of thousands of homes across the Northeast are switching to natural gas from oil. As a result, oil consumption is back to May, 1999 levels and gasoline back to September 2001 levels. The decreased oil consumption means that higher oil and gas prices in 2012 do less damage to the economy than in 2002.
3. Today electricity prices in many parts of the country like Pennsylvania are much lower than in 2008, and consumer savings in the electric bill approaching $500 per year for customers using 10,000 kilowatt-hours offset the household budget impact of $4 gasoline. It should be remembered that electricity prices during the second quarter of 2008 in America's largest wholesale electricity market (the PJM power pool) reached the equivalent of 13 cents per kilowatt-hour just for generation. High electric prices resulted from skyrocketing natural gas prices that were $13 for a thousand cubic feet in July 2008.
2. Today natural gas prices are $2.50 for a thousand cubic feet. For the 51% of America's homes that heat with natural gas, the savings on the natural gas bill can be easily $400 to $1,000 and more than offset the price increases in gasoline. Again low natural gas prices have also shaved hundreds of dollars off annual electricity bills in many parts of America. Combined natural gas and electricity bill savings of about $1,000 for many families exceed the $250 or $500 in new gasoline savings. The key to the gas and electricity savings is the record gas production in 2011, driven substantially by shale gas wells.
1. The number one fact why $4 gasoline will do much less damage is that today our economy is growing and creating jobs and is not in a frightening fall, as it was in 2008. High oil prices shoved down an economy already plummeting. Remember that in 2008 our economy was already well into a recession that began in 2007; the stock market was falling; and the global financial system froze on September 15, 2008, when the federal government did not prevent the economic collapse that followed the disastrous Lehmann Brothers bankruptcy. In the fall of 2008, monthly job loss immediately skyrocketed to 500,000 to 750,000. Truly scary.
In February 2012, our GDP has been growing every quarter since July 1, 2009. Jobs have been added for 23 months. And the stock market has roared back to 13,000 from below 7,000 in March 2009.
More fuel efficiency, less oil dependency, lower electricity bills, much lower natural gas prices, and a growing economy in 2012 all mean that America is today much better prepared to withstand $4 gasoline. Yet, to protect further our economic security, America needs to do even more to lessen its use of globally priced oil that is likely to go even higher in the coming years.
More natural gas, more biofuels, more electricity, and more energy efficiency is a recipe that works to innoculate Uncle Sam against high oil price illness.
Here are the top 5 facts why the economic impact this time of $4 gasoline will be much less, though still painful, as a 50 cent per gallon increase sustained for a year costs families $250 if they use 500 gallons annually or $500 more for 1,000 gallons.
5. New cars being sold today are more fuel efficient than in 2008. In fact today's vehicles are 14% more fuel efficient than in 2008, and more than 30 million new cars have been sold since 2008. The gasoline price rising from $3.50 to $4 rise 14% and is offset almost completely by greater fuel efficiency that also averages 14% in new cars sold. Of course, most motorists have not bought a new car since 2008, but they often do have two cars and start driving more frequently the higher mileage option. Car pooling rates and public transit use also rises when gasoline reaches $4 as people find other strategies to save gasoline money.
4. The USA has cut substantially its oil usage through efficiency and using substitutes for oil in vehicles, homes, and factories. Ethanol and biodiesel consumption are up. Oil power plants such as those in Florida operated by FPL are converting to gas. Tens of thousands of homes across the Northeast are switching to natural gas from oil. As a result, oil consumption is back to May, 1999 levels and gasoline back to September 2001 levels. The decreased oil consumption means that higher oil and gas prices in 2012 do less damage to the economy than in 2002.
3. Today electricity prices in many parts of the country like Pennsylvania are much lower than in 2008, and consumer savings in the electric bill approaching $500 per year for customers using 10,000 kilowatt-hours offset the household budget impact of $4 gasoline. It should be remembered that electricity prices during the second quarter of 2008 in America's largest wholesale electricity market (the PJM power pool) reached the equivalent of 13 cents per kilowatt-hour just for generation. High electric prices resulted from skyrocketing natural gas prices that were $13 for a thousand cubic feet in July 2008.
2. Today natural gas prices are $2.50 for a thousand cubic feet. For the 51% of America's homes that heat with natural gas, the savings on the natural gas bill can be easily $400 to $1,000 and more than offset the price increases in gasoline. Again low natural gas prices have also shaved hundreds of dollars off annual electricity bills in many parts of America. Combined natural gas and electricity bill savings of about $1,000 for many families exceed the $250 or $500 in new gasoline savings. The key to the gas and electricity savings is the record gas production in 2011, driven substantially by shale gas wells.
1. The number one fact why $4 gasoline will do much less damage is that today our economy is growing and creating jobs and is not in a frightening fall, as it was in 2008. High oil prices shoved down an economy already plummeting. Remember that in 2008 our economy was already well into a recession that began in 2007; the stock market was falling; and the global financial system froze on September 15, 2008, when the federal government did not prevent the economic collapse that followed the disastrous Lehmann Brothers bankruptcy. In the fall of 2008, monthly job loss immediately skyrocketed to 500,000 to 750,000. Truly scary.
In February 2012, our GDP has been growing every quarter since July 1, 2009. Jobs have been added for 23 months. And the stock market has roared back to 13,000 from below 7,000 in March 2009.
More fuel efficiency, less oil dependency, lower electricity bills, much lower natural gas prices, and a growing economy in 2012 all mean that America is today much better prepared to withstand $4 gasoline. Yet, to protect further our economic security, America needs to do even more to lessen its use of globally priced oil that is likely to go even higher in the coming years.
More natural gas, more biofuels, more electricity, and more energy efficiency is a recipe that works to innoculate Uncle Sam against high oil price illness.
PA DEP Must Remove Cloud Over Its Drinking Water Tests Are Sound
An Associated Press story about possible impacts of gas drilling on ten water wells in Butler county, Pennsylvania that ran in papers around the country on Friday, February 24, including in the Washington Post, creates a cloud over the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's water testing. The cloud must be removed, because doubt about the quality of DEP water testing would make impossible the already difficult task of handling water contamination complaints.
The AP story states: "DEP spokesman Kevin Sunday said on Friday that the low chemical concentrations were not a health risk, and he suggested that the contamination may have come from the agency's laboratory or from abandoned vehicles on or near the property. But Sunday didn't answer why the DEP failed to do follow-up tests if it suspected its own testing process was contaminated." See the following link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/w-pa-tests-show-possible-gas-drilling-chemicals-in-water-dep-refused-follow-up-tests/2012/02/24/gIQAXL2uXR_print.html.
The foregoing, quoted two sentences and specifically the statement that the DEP laboratory might have caused water contamination that have now appeared around Pennsylvania and the nation must be addressed by DEP. Perhaps the story misrepresents what the DEP spokesperson said or the DEP spokesperson misspoke, an easy thing to do. Or the AP story could accurately convey what Mr. Sunday said and he meant what he said.
In either case, to remove the doubt sowed about the quality of its vital water testing process, DEP should do another round of testing at the water wells in Butler county and address directly the Friday February 24 comments made about the quality of its earlier water tests and its laboratory's procedures. Does DEP have reasons to think that its test was compromised? What were those reasons if they do? Or were the comments inadvertent and mistaken?
At this point, to restore and protect public confidence, those questions need to be answered and combined with another round of DEP water testing at the Butler county sites that are now the focus of a major public controversy. See following link for another story about the case:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrip/news/regional/s_783304.html.
Whenever a water contamination complaint is received DEP is on the regulatory hot spot. The Butler county case is certainly an example of the difficult issues that DEP must resolve. Its ability to credibly address these complaints is vital to public confidence, and that indispensable credibility rests on the quality of its water testing processes and DEP transparency.
The AP story states: "DEP spokesman Kevin Sunday said on Friday that the low chemical concentrations were not a health risk, and he suggested that the contamination may have come from the agency's laboratory or from abandoned vehicles on or near the property. But Sunday didn't answer why the DEP failed to do follow-up tests if it suspected its own testing process was contaminated." See the following link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/w-pa-tests-show-possible-gas-drilling-chemicals-in-water-dep-refused-follow-up-tests/2012/02/24/gIQAXL2uXR_print.html.
The foregoing, quoted two sentences and specifically the statement that the DEP laboratory might have caused water contamination that have now appeared around Pennsylvania and the nation must be addressed by DEP. Perhaps the story misrepresents what the DEP spokesperson said or the DEP spokesperson misspoke, an easy thing to do. Or the AP story could accurately convey what Mr. Sunday said and he meant what he said.
In either case, to remove the doubt sowed about the quality of its vital water testing process, DEP should do another round of testing at the water wells in Butler county and address directly the Friday February 24 comments made about the quality of its earlier water tests and its laboratory's procedures. Does DEP have reasons to think that its test was compromised? What were those reasons if they do? Or were the comments inadvertent and mistaken?
At this point, to restore and protect public confidence, those questions need to be answered and combined with another round of DEP water testing at the Butler county sites that are now the focus of a major public controversy. See following link for another story about the case:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrip/news/regional/s_783304.html.
Whenever a water contamination complaint is received DEP is on the regulatory hot spot. The Butler county case is certainly an example of the difficult issues that DEP must resolve. Its ability to credibly address these complaints is vital to public confidence, and that indispensable credibility rests on the quality of its water testing processes and DEP transparency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)