.
6/10/13, "US Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall as Global Emissions Rise," Cato.org, Paul C. 'Chip' Knappenberger
"A new report
from the International Energy Agency is sparking headlines across the
media. “Global carbon dioxide emissions soared to record high in 2012”
proclaimed USA Today; The Weather Channel led “Carbon dioxide emissions rose to record high in 2012”; and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer added “The world pumped a record amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2012.”
The figure below (taken from the IEA summary) provides the rest of the story. It shows a breakdown of the change in carbon dioxide emissions from 2011 to 2012 from various regions of the globe.
Notice that the U.S. is far and away the leader in reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, while China primarily is responsible for pushing global CO2 emissions higher. In fact, CO2 emissions growth in China more than offsets all the CO2 savings that we have achieved in the U.S.
This will happen for the foreseeable future. Domestic actions to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions will not produce a decline in the
overall atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. The best we can hope
to achieve is to slow the rate of growth of the atmospheric
concentration—an effect that we can only achieve until our emissions are
reduced to zero. The resulting climate impact is small and transient....
The primary reason for the U.S.
emissions decline is the result of new technologies from the fossil fuel industry
that are leading to cheap coal being displaced by even cheaper natural
gas for the generation of electricity. As luck would have it, the
chemistry works out that that burning natural gas produces the same
amount of energy for only about half of the CO2 emissions that burning coal does.
A new report
from the U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that as a
result of these new technologies (e.g., hydraulic fracturing and
horizontal drilling), globally, the technologically recoverable reserves
of natural gas are nearly 50% greater than prior to their development.
Currently, the U.S. is the leader in the deployment of these
technologies, and the effects are obvious (as seen in the figure
above). If and when more countries start to employ such technologies to
recover natural gas, perhaps the growth in global carbon dioxide
emissions will begin to slow (as compared to current projections).
Considering that possibility, along with the new, lower estimates for how sensitive the global average temperature is to carbon dioxide emissions, and the case for alarming climate change (and a carbon tax to try to mitigate it) is fading fast." via Climate Depot
==========================
4/25/13, "Still Another Low Climate Sensitivity Estimate," Cato.org, Michaels and Knappenberger
"The equilibrium climate sensitivity is the amount that the earth’s
surface temperature will rise from a doubling of the pre-industrial
atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide. As such, it is probably the
most important factor in determining whether or not we need to “do
something” to mitigate future climate change. Lower sensitivity means
low urgency, and, if low enough, carbon dioxide emissions confer a net
benefit.
And despite common claims that the “science is settled” when it comes
to global warming, we are still learning more and more about the earth
complex climate system—and the more we learn, the less responsive it
seems that the earth’s average temperature is to human carbon dioxide
emissions.
The latest study to document a low climate sensitivity is authored by
independent scientist Nic Lewis and is scheduled for publication in the
Journal of Climate."...
.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment