WTF Climate Change News

[Beebo Brink]

In case anyone was wondering how we're doing in our attempt to curb greenhouse gas emissions:

Coal Use Hits Record High Despite Clean Energy Boom | OilPrice.com

For years, climate experts have been begging the world's biggest economies to wean themselves off of fossil fuels. Instead, coal use is at an all time high, hitting a brand new record of 8.3 billion metric tons in 2022, up 3.3% from the prior year, according to figures from the International Energy Agency (IEA). The uptick in coal demand has been concurrent with a clean energy boom, as countries across the world turned to non-petroleum based energy sources last year thanks to soaring oil and gas prices.

This pretty much supports the caution I've heard, that solar/wind renewable energy is not replacing oil/gas, it's simply adding to our current energy demands. Overall energy usage goes up when more energy is made available; no one stops using old energy sources.

Renewables may help us weather the loss of oil when it's finally exhausted, but it's still going to be a rough ride because so much demand will suddenly be unmet. At best renewables (may) reduce the rate of oil consumption, although that's debatable. Either way, GHG emissions don't go down because of more renewables, they're still rising.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Capitalism will save the world because nothing else can

The future is green but the future must still be made and paid for and only capitalism can do this.

alexmassie.substack.com

 

[Innula Zenovka]

In case anyone was wondering how we're doing in our attempt to curb greenhouse gas emissions:

Coal Use Hits Record High Despite Clean Energy Boom | OilPrice.com

This pretty much supports the caution I've heard, that solar/wind renewable energy is not replacing oil/gas, it's simply adding to our current energy demands. Overall energy usage goes up when more energy is made available; no one stops using old energy sources.

Renewables may help us weather the loss of oil when it's finally exhausted, but it's still going to be a rough ride because so much demand will suddenly be unmet. At best renewables (may) reduce the rate of oil consumption, although that's debatable. Either way, GHG emissions don't go down because of more renewables, they're still rising.

Who is "us" in this context, though?

From the report:

Russia's war in Ukraine, which kicked off an entirely war over energy supply and sanctions in Europe over the course of 2022, sent shockwaves through global energy markets. To shore up energy security, global economies scrambled to find alternative energy supply chains. In the West, this mostly manifested as an intensive growth in the renewable energy sector. In China and India, however, the coal business is booming. The picture is a bit more complex in China, however, where renewables growth has outpaced every other country on earth several times over, but coal still reigns supreme in the global energy mix.

As a result, "by region, coal demand fell faster than previously expected in the first half of this year in the United States and the European Union - by 24% and 16%, respectively," the IEA said in a statement accompanying its Coal Market Update report. "However, demand from the two largest consumers, China and India, grew by over 5% during the first half, more than offsetting declines elsewhere," the statement went on to say.

 

[Beebo Brink]

Who is "us" in this context, though?

I've had my morning cup of coffee, but apparently it's not enough to jump-start my brain. Could you be a bit more specific about where my (admittedly quite broad) comments were at fault?

This article triggered a reaction from me that's based on news over the years. One of the disturbing criticisms of renewable energy that I've encountered more than once is that no country is (voluntarily) deprecating oil/gas/coal when solar/wind sources of energies are brought online. The new capacity is quickly met by increased demand, so the overall result is just increasing energy usage.

Did those quoted passages contradict this take? I couldn't see any contradiction, but I'm not feeling like the sharpest tool in the toolbox these days, so it may be staring me right in the face.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I've had my morning cup of coffee, but apparently it's not enough to jump-start my brain. Could you be a bit more specific about where my (admittedly quite broad) comments were at fault?

This article triggered a reaction from me that's based on news over the years. One of the disturbing criticisms of renewable energy that I've encountered more than once is that no country is (voluntarily) deprecating oil/gas/coal when solar/wind sources of energies are brought online. The new capacity is quickly met by increased demand, so the overall result is just increasing energy usage.

Did those quoted passages contradict this take? I couldn't see any contradiction, but I'm not feeling like the sharpest tool in the toolbox these days, so it may be staring me right in the face.

Well, you said

This pretty much supports the caution I've heard, that solar/wind renewable energy is not replacing oil/gas, it's simply adding to our current energy demands. Overall energy usage goes up when more energy is made available; no one stops using old energy sources.

But the article suggests that the US and Europe responded to Russia's invasion of Ukraine primarily by replacing fossil fuels with renewables rather than by sourcing fossil fuels elsewhere.

Certainly in the UK, while most of our energy needs are met by oil and gas, the proportion provided the UK by low carbon sources (primarily nuclear, wind and biomass) has risen from about 9% in 2000 to about 19% in 2021 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1130451/UK_Energy_in_Brief_2022.pdf p15

So I don't think it's accurate to say that renewables are supplementing carbon-based energy sources rather than replacng them.

 

[Beebo Brink]

So I don't think it's accurate to say that renewables are supplementing carbon-based energy sources rather than replacng them.

And yet, this is how the article starts off:

For years, climate experts have been begging the world's biggest economies to wean themselves off of fossil fuels. Instead, coal use is at an all time high, hitting a brand new record of 8.3 billion metric tons in 2022, up 3.3% from the prior year, according to figures from the International Energy Agency (IEA). The uptick in coal demand has been concurrent with a clean energy boom, as countries across the world turned to non-petroleum based energy sources last year thanks to soaring oil and gas prices. All told, the world produced 10,440 terawatt hours from coal in 2022 - about 36% of the world's electricity generation.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

And yet, this is how the article starts off:

That's why I sought clarity about who is using what. Coal use is certainly not at an all time high in the UK:

The UK banned Russian coal imports in August 2022. In 2022, coal comprised 2.4 per cent of UK energy demand, down from 2.7 per cent in 2021. Over a longer period the trend reflects the transition away from coal in the UK's energy mix; coal demand has fallen from a 16 per cent share of UK energy demand in 2000.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1174010/DUKES_2023_Chapter_2.pdf

Indeed,

UK demand for the fuel is now the lowest it has been for 266 years. The last time coal demand was this low was in 1757, when George II was king.

Analysis: UK emissions fall 3.4% in 2022 as coal use drops to lowest level since 1757 - Carbon Brief

The UK’s greenhouse gas emissions fell by 3.4% in 2022, according to new Carbon Brief analysis, ending a post-Covid rebound.

www.carbonbrief.org

 

[WolfEyes]

Record breaking heat may have an underlying cause besides climate change (msn.com)

 

[Beebo Brink]

Record breaking heat may have an underlying cause besides climate change (msn.com)

Hmmm. Reads more like a click-bait headline with weak sauce in the actual article. Disappointing to come from a major news source, but sadly, not surprising.

Among the surprising hypotheses being investigated are the effects of cleaner air resulting from new shipping regulations and the influence of 165 million tons (150 million metric tons) of water spewed into the atmosphere by a volcano.

Both could potentially be accelerating the Earth's warming. These ideas, while unconventional, are now under serious consideration.

Not sure who is supposed to consider this "surprising", perhaps the reporter if they've been covering sports or fashion for the past year? Neither of these are "unconventional" theories; they've been widely discussed for months and were utterly predictable. Scientists have always acknowledged the role of other factors (such as El Nino and the shipping regulations change) in creating the current above-normal global airs and ocean temperatures. There's quibbling about just how much influence each of these factors is having, but there's no controversy about the existence of multiple factors.

Ironically, it's actually the climate change influence that has been the most challenged. Some researchers have argued that the cleaner air regulations are the overriding factor in the recent spiking sea surface temperatures. The proponents of cleaner air have always known this would have an unfortunate effect in unmasking the heat potential, but the trade-off is considered necessary.

 

[WolfEyes]

It's like going to the doc. Whatever ails you, they can't cure. They can only treat the symptoms.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Prices on the spot market for electrical power in Texas increased by 6000% after a coming heat wave is expected to shatter records. Capitalism, fuck yeah, survival of the richest!

Texas Power Prices Surge 6,000% as Grid Calls for Conservation

Texas spot electricity prices soared by more than 60-fold, climbing toward the $5,000 price cap as the state grid faces some of the tightest conditions for power supplies so far this summer.

www.bloomberg.com

.

Texas electricity prices soar 6,000 percent as a fresh heat wave is expected to shatter records – Spot electricity prices jumped to $4,750 per megawatt-hour from the average of $75

Projected system-wide price for the Texas electricity grid on 20 August 2023. By 8:00 PM, the price was expected to rise to nearly $1000 per megawatt-hour. Graphic: ERCOT By Jason Ma 18 August 2023 (Insider) – Texas power prices soared 6,000% on Thursday as a fresh heat wave is expected to...

desdemonadespair.net

 

[Cindy Claveau]

I don't expect to see any massive shift in energy use without also seeing a shift in the economies - people (and companies) will use the cheapest energy they have available. It never seems to be a moral choice. It's a practical one.

I think that day is coming. It's a slow migration. It may even be way too late. I may never see it in my lifetime, but it's already begun.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

I don't expect to see any massive shift in energy use without also seeing a shift in the economies - people (and companies) will use the cheapest energy they have available. It never seems to be a moral choice. It's a practical one.

Well this is basically why some nations have introduced a CO2-tax, which only gets more expensive over the years, because otherwise market mechanics will work as always: trying to excavate more of the old same same for a slightly higher price maybe, like tar oil in Canada or fracking in America, which was economically not viable until a certain steady price level was being reached.

But even this there will be an end some day, and we will run out of more stuff to dig out. Oil and gas will still be there, but demand will be for a longer time higher than production, which still can last for decades. This then would be peak oil, and what most get wrong - peak oil is not running totally out of oil, but running out of cheap oil and the immediate impact on economy, namely oil becoming so expensive many people will have to cut expenses on it.

 

[Essence Lumin]

But even this there will be an end some day, and we will run out of more stuff to dig out. Oil and gas will still be there, but demand will be for a longer time higher than production, which still can last for decades. This then would be peak oil, and what most get wrong - peak oil is not running totally out of oil, but running out of cheap oil and the immediate impact on economy, namely oil becoming so expensive many people will have to cut expenses on it.

Yes and when at some point it becomes too expensive for say, gasoline, it will be still be used to make plastic. When it becomes too expensive for that, well... a world without plastic will be quite different.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Humanity lived for millenia in a world without plastic, so it will adapt... again.

 

[WolfEyes]

Yes and when at some point it becomes too expensive for say, gasoline, it will be still be used to make plastic. When it becomes too expensive for that, well... a world without plastic will be quite different.

A world without plastic would be very close to the world I lived in in the 60s. My mom hated plastic. Leftovers were refrigerated in Mason jars etc. She passed that dislike on to me.

I'd be very happy to live without everything being made from plastic once again.

 

[Beebo Brink]

Humanity lived for millenia in a world without plastic, so it will adapt... again.

Humanity also numbered under 2 billion people until 1900. Distribution of goods to 8 billion people is going to be challenging without plastic. Curious about how we'll manage it, but I probably will miss that chapter of history.

 

[Cindy Claveau]

Humanity also numbered under 2 billion people until 1900. Distribution of goods to 8 billion people is going to be challenging without plastic. Curious about how we'll manage it, but I probably will miss that chapter of history.

They've already demonstrated that they want to use technology to keep doing the things they've always done, rather than trusting it to give us alternatives to fossil fuels and plastics. There's a spectrum involved, of course. It's not all or nothing. It depends on the tech, but just because they can wash a bunch of ducks in Dawn detergent doesn't mean they've solved the problem. (General they). I'm not sure some people understand that.

New kinds of plastic? Easy peasy. It's still a fossil fuel product.

 

[Beebo Brink]

U.S. Glass Shortage Putting a Crack in CPG Sustainability Efforts | Consumer Goods Technology

 

[Beebo Brink]

Onward to hell.

G20 poured more than $1tn into fossil fuel subsidies despite Cop26 pledges – report | Fossil fuels | The Guardian