Skip to main content

View Diary: Keystone XL: Will the State Department's shameful dishonesty become Obama's climate legacy? (182 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Explain "decreased" (4+ / 0-)

    in the context of things like the economic downturn, or personal and private investment for things like solar panels and hybrid cars on the part of some individuals and corporations, or because of the rising price of gas forcing people to drive less.

    How can you quantify just what this administration's contributions were to the decreased emissions compared to things beyond their influence?

    And now that the economy seems on an upward trajectory, will the overall US emissions begin to rise again despite the administrations efforts?

    I know they've helped move some green sectors and projects forward, but I'm just trying to put into perspective the administration's positives steps compared to the gross and devastating negative giving a green light to KXL will be.

    Physics is bulls**t. Don't let them fool you. Fire IS magic.
    (Facts brought to you by the Party of the Future - the GOP)

    by Pescadero Bill on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 03:35:20 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  See my comment above. Everyone sees what they want (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pescadero Bill

      to these days.

      Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

      by the fan man on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 03:40:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "decreased" as in the dictionary definition (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joedemocrat, 6412093, alphorn

      as in fewer tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Has little to do with the recession. It is mostly due to the very low price of natural gas brought about by fracs on gas shale. With NG sub-$4 and looking to stay close to there for another decade at least, the decision to push coal from electrical generation is a no brainer -- thus decreasing CO2 emissions.

      As for numbers, that reduction can be described generally as 90% natural gas - 9% Wind, 1% everything else. The recession isn't even in the 1%. If say we'd had $14 NG (where it would be without horizontal drilling and fracs), CO2 emissions would have continued to rise, even in the depths of that recession.

      It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

      by Fishgrease on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 03:48:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Cheap NG did not play the major role (3+ / 0-)

        The major reason US GHG emissions have decreased is public policy changes - primarily energy efficiency and EPA emissions regs.  Totaled these 8 policies accounted for 47% of the redution - more than either cheap gas of the recession.

        "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

        by oregonj on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 04:07:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I get my numbers from the EPA (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          6412093, alphorn

          You're wrong. The EPA emissions regs aren't burnable. They don't provide one single calorie of energy.

          They do make it more economical to switch power generation from coal to NG, but even there it isn't the major reason for that change. The low price of NG IS.

          It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

          by Fishgrease on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 04:13:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And regs don't play a role in fuelstock choice???? (0+ / 0-)

            FG, I think  you should talk to some power plant owners, or go to a utility regulatory hearing, before you make unsubstantiated claims.

            "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

            by oregonj on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 04:25:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  NG will not stay below $4 (0+ / 0-)

        The cost of fracked gas is between $5 and $8, depending on how long each well lasts.  They deplete quickly but we do not have enough history for definitive numbers yet .  In the long term the price cannot stay below the cost.

        The one wild card is that gas that accompanies shale oil will be produced at any price .   Right now it is being flared off in North Dakota because there is no  pipeline.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site