It's become the talk of the energy industry that the US love affair with energy may be given a boost with the additional production of gas and oils from increasingly successful (if environmentally controversial) "fracking" to get at shale layers to release their reserves. 

Australia is dipping into this technology as well despite well publicised "lock the gate" campaigns by farmers and those worried about water supply contamination.

A number of analysts say the USA's fortunes will fundamentally shift the energy balance in the world and potentially extend the life of fossil fuels for some time beyond the current peak oil scenarios.  America for one may close in on "energy independence" while Saudi Arabia is tipped to be importing fossil fuels by 2030.  And analysts are only now beginning to consider what will be accessed under an "ice free" Arctic.

Given that Peak Oil and the rising price of oil has been the one inescapable factor to motivate change in energy and transport policies, is a surge in fossil fuel supplies and more stable prices actually going to be unwelcome news for cycling and cyclists, more sustainable transport and those (apparently few) concerned about the impact of climate change? 

SMH article

Economist article

NYT article

Views: 3270

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

"You would have to cover half the area of Victoria in mustard"

Joe Hockey would still think that an open cut coal mine looked much nicer!

Hmmm! Now that's another snout in the trough. Perhaps methane from pig farms is a better option! 

Wikipedia has a long article on this. Says (towards the end)the new agreement is voluntary, only covers international aviation and will allow unrestricted growth until 2020, so the base line for reductions will be high. Reductions will be by offsets in other sectors, not actual reductions in aviation emissions.

Interesting section also on trying to reduce travel by plane. Banning Frequent flyer points is recommended.

I read that a trip to Europe by plane produces in a day about a years worth of CO2 emissions for the average Aussie. Alsoyouhave to consider the large amount of co2 emitted by associated activities, driving to the airport, running airports etc and the emission of NOx and water vapour into the stratosphere, which approx doubles the overall greenhouse effect.

Shared today on FB:

Today's capitulation on the Renewable Energy Target looks to ensure that Australia will not meet its emission commitment made in Paris. And transport will be a big reason why.

In brief, today's decision as stated by the PM means that each sector that contributes to CO2 output will now have to each carry their portion of the reduction. It had been argued that energy emissions would focus on the lowest cost way to reduce emissions and therefore unburden other sectors - and specifically the transport sector - from doing its share. The energy sector was assumed to be the one that would fulfil this role.

No longer.

As the graph we used at the last election clearly points out, by the government's own figures Australia is nowhere near to lowering its transport emissions. Quite the contrary, they are growing at an accelerating rate - fuelled by the government's own preoccupation on road building.

So, as it appears today, the Government is playing the shell game hoping that we won't be following the emission reduction promise and where it comes from. Because - unless they completely revise their transport priorities - it just isn't going to happen.

EV manufacturers may need to be more worried about peak Cobalt and peak Lithium...

Edward Re's post back on 28th July might be worth looking at again in regard to peak battery metals.

Edward Re 28/7/17

Perhaps like some others here though I harbour secret desire for a shortage of anything vital for cars to get their numbers down drastically, get the world a bit quieter and saner.


I'm working on plant and equipment now for a big new lithium refinery in Kwinana, WA.

Chinese owned of course ...........

Back in the 90's and early 2000's there was much debate about whether running out of oil or climate change was going to be the major problem for the world. Seems climate change has "won", according tothe latest meeting of Govts and scientists in Bonn, preparing for the next climate change meeting in 2020. Little hope of getting emissions to peak in next few years, as we must do to avoid >2 degrees warming.

With any luck we'll get to the warmth of the Minoan period when Crete flourished.

Only 3C or so to go!

Nice if you like floods and heatwaves and water lapping at your front door.

i don't think anyone will be flourishing if it gets beyond 5C warming, since that would mean polar ice caps melting.

Crete probably declined because of a warming and drying trend in the 2nd Millenium BCE.

A bit of extra heat is not as bad as the lack of food when agriculture goes down.

Agriculture loves CO2.  I'm bemused by your comment.

True, but its the extreme temperatures. Farmers in India are killing themselves during the extreme heatwaves right now. Famines are killing masses across a narrow band of Africa. Bangladesh was 2/3 under water. But laugh away mate.


© 2020   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service