News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Green Energy Revolution Megathread

Started by jimmy olsen, May 19, 2016, 10:30:37 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Barrister

Quote from: Malthus on November 29, 2019, 03:53:27 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 29, 2019, 03:51:00 PM
I believe oil is attributed to point of origin.

If true, that's a significant problem with how it's accounted for. In fairness, it ought to be attributed to where it is used.

Looking again, that HAS to be the reason.  Why else would Russia, Canada and Saudi Arabia be in the top 10 global emitters otherwise?  They're certainly not top 10 in GDP, or industrial capacity.

But what they all are are large oil producers.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

The Brain

Quote from: Barrister on November 29, 2019, 04:25:44 PM
Quote from: Malthus on November 29, 2019, 03:53:27 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 29, 2019, 03:51:00 PM
I believe oil is attributed to point of origin.

If true, that's a significant problem with how it's accounted for. In fairness, it ought to be attributed to where it is used.

Looking again, that HAS to be the reason.  Why else would Russia, Canada and Saudi Arabia be in the top 10 global emitters otherwise?  They're certainly not top 10 in GDP, or industrial capacity.

But what they all are are large oil producers.

Have you ever been to Russia?
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

The Larch

Quote from: Malthus on November 29, 2019, 03:53:27 PM
Quote from: Barrister on November 29, 2019, 03:51:00 PM
I believe oil is attributed to point of origin.

If true, that's a significant problem with how it's accounted for. In fairness, it ought to be attributed to where it is used.

Maybe it's not the oil extraction, but the refining process? Or differences in accounting for production of oil in regard to natural gas? I agree that it should be attributed to where it's used.

The Larch

#768
Or maybe that graph from wiki is just not well calculated/sourced.  :P Do we have any references about it?

viper37

#769
Russia and Canada: heating.
Saudi Arabia: cooling.  People are rich enough to pay for this.

Plus extracting & refining the oil, I guess.
And transportation.  Diesel trains, gazoline cars&trucs, large distances, etc.
I don't do meditation.  I drink alcohol to relax, like normal people.

If Microsoft Excel decided to stop working overnight, the world would practically end.

The Brain

Every Russian's way: blast all the heaters in the house full maximum (on cheap fossil fuel) and open windows as required into the winter night outside to maintain a breathable atmosphere. They keep indoor temps at 80-90 degrees in winter.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Richard Hakluyt

Data from the World Bank :

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?most_recent_value_desc=true

I think you will find that the wiki figures are essentially correct.


Zoupa

France is also mostly nuclear energy, so it's hard to compare to Kazakhstan for example.

The Minsky Moment

Extraction of fossil fuels is itself a pretty carbon intensive activity and may involve significant burnoff of excess or "waste" gas or oil.
Whether it is fair to "charge" that all to the extracting nation is another question.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

The Minsky Moment

Anyway the bigger point is that the legbiter chart was wrong and US+Canada+Europe+Japan is still a big player in CO2 emissions.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Josquius

That graph is useless without an other column.
That's the top polluters. What of the total of all the smaller countries?
██████
██████
██████

Richard Hakluyt


mongers

Something for Tyr to ponder:

Watching a programme about Australian railways, the tory presenter, Michael Portillo, visited the coal port at Newcastle, NSW. It now exports 160 million tonnes of coal a year, double the amount it shipping as recently as 2007.



We're screwed.  :(
"We have it in our power to begin the world over again"

Monoriu

Quote from: mongers on December 01, 2019, 09:51:57 PM
Something for Tyr to ponder:

Watching a programme about Australian railways, the tory presenter, Michael Portillo, visited the coal port at Newcastle, NSW. It now exports 160 million tonnes of coal a year, double the amount it shipping as recently as 2007.



We're screwed.  :(

160 million tonnes per year?  China produces more than that per month  ;)

QuoteBEIJING (Reuters) - China's coal output rose in June from the previous month to a record high, official data showed on Monday, as miners ramped up production to ensure supply ahead of peak summer demand for electricity.

The world's top coal producer churned out 333.35 million tonnes of coal in June, up 6.7% from May and up 10.4% year-on-year, data from the National Bureau of Statistics showed.

Output over the first half of 2019 reached 1.76 billion tonnes, up 2.6% from the same period last year.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-output-coal/china-june-coal-output-hits-record-high-as-miners-ramp-up-ahead-of-summer-idUSKCN1UA07O

The Larch

Quote from: mongers on December 01, 2019, 09:51:57 PM
Something for Tyr to ponder:

Watching a programme about Australian railways, the tory presenter, Michael Portillo, visited the coal port at Newcastle, NSW. It now exports 160 million tonnes of coal a year, double the amount it shipping as recently as 2007.

We're screwed.  :(

Everything has a limit, Australia has been trying for several years to carry out a massive coal mine in Queensland (Carmichael, to be undertaken by Adani, an Indian company that would produce coal for the Indian market, mostly) off the ground and it has been bogged down for, amongst other things, lack of financial viability for the project given the global downturn in coal demand.