Keystone XL Pipeline Update

On Friday, January 31, 2014, the U.S. Department of State released the eleven volume Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL Pipeline. If you recall, back on May 4th 2012 TransCanada Corporation made a new application for a Presidential Permit to construct and operate the Keystone XL Pipeline after the Department of State rejected their original 2008 application in January 2012. At the time, the Department of State was under a deadline imposed by Congress and rejected the application because of inadequate time to determine the environmental impact of the proposed pipeline.

TransCanada Corporation turned around and on May 4th 2012 announced a new application for a Presidential Permit to build the northern most section of the Keystone XL pipeline (Phase IV) from the Canadian Border from where Saskatchewan meets Montana using a route that would cross South Dakota and a route (that would be determined later) to cross Nebraska and meet up with the Keystone Phase II which runs from Steel City, Nebraska to Cushing, Oklahoma. On January 22, 2013 Governor Heineman of Nebraska signed the recommendation to the U.S. Department of State for a Presidential Permit for the Keystone XL pipeline to cross the international border after the Nebraska state regulators recommended approval of the revised route selected (with their guidance) for the Keystone XL Pipeline.

There is currently a pipeline Keystone I that runs east from Hardesty Saskatchewan to Manitoba and then south through the Dakotas to Steel City, Nebraska. It is a less direct route and is a lower volume pipeline. Keystone II runs from Steel City to Cushing, Oklahoma at the Oklahoma storage facilities. Keystone III running from the Cushing Oklahoma to the Nederland, Texas began delivering crude oil from Cushing, OK, to the oil refineries in Texas on Wednesday, January 22, 2014. The Gulf Coast Project, Keystone III, did not require a Presidential Permit because it does not cross an international border.

I did not review the 11 volumes of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. I read the 38 page Executive Summary and though I spent a large portion of my professional career preparing and reviewing environmental reports, my eyes glazed over at reading more than the executive summary. Keystone XL is “unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States based on expected oil prices, oil-sands supply costs, transport costs and supply-demand scenarios.” In other words, no matter what action the Administration chooses to take on this portion of the pipeline-approve, reject, or stall- the oil sands are not staying in the ground in Canada. There is world demand for heavy crude oil and it will be met. The Texas refineries are optimized for heavy crude either from South America or Canada. The crude oil will come by pipeline, boat, and truck or rail road.

There is strong opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline. However, as the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement argues the pipeline will not determine if the oil sands resources in Canada will be mined. To account for uncertainties about oil production, consumption, and transportation, the Environmental Impact Statement modeled 16 different scenarios that combine various supply-demand assumptions and pipeline constraints. Under most scenarios examined in the report whether or not the pipeline is built had limited impact on development of the oil sands. Oil sands production and development will slow or accelerate depending on oil price trends, regulations, and technological developments. The Canadian oil sands have been known for decades, but until oil prices rose and technology improved these oil deposits were too expensive to exploit beyond the limited scope of surface mining. Advances in technology in both oil sand extraction and refining techniques and rising oil prices altered the economics and have made the extraction of oil sand possible. While the advances in extraction techniques have quadrupled recoverable oil reserves and moved Canada into second place in proved world oil reserves, it requires more energy to produce the oil and increases the carbon footprint of the crude as compared to fracked light sweet crude from Montana.

Now that the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is complete the Presidential Permit review process will now focus on whether the Keystone XL Pipeline serves our national interest. The Department of State is opening a 30 day comment period on February 5, 2014 where members of the public and other interested parties can submit comments on the Keystone XL Pipeline. Though under the executive order currently in place, Secretary Kerry is empowered to make the final decision, the next step requires consideration of: energy security; environmental, cultural, and economic impacts; foreign policy; and compliance with relevant federal regulations and issues. During this time, the Department will consult with, at least, the eight agencies identified in the executive order: the Departments of Defense, Justice, Interior, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Meanwhile, TransCanada’s proposed pipelines to Canada's West Coast, the Northern Gateway, would carry crude oil from Alberta to the Pacific port of Kitmat, for export to Asia is also facing opposition from environmentalists and the aboriginal Yinka Dene Alliance and Coastal First Nations. TransCanada is also moving forward with an east-west pipeline, the Energy East Pipeline project. The Energy East Pipeline project would convert a redundant 1,864 mile portion of the TransCanada's Canadian Mainline natural gas distribution pipeline to a crude oil pipeline and build the additional 870 miles of new pipeline to reach the port in Saint John, New Brunswick. This pipeline has more public support after the Lac-Mégantic train disaster that killed 47 and obliterated sections of the town last year and the incident this month when 19 cars derailed in New Brunswick.

The cylindrical DOT-111 rail cars used to transport oil have come under scrutiny in recent years for some of their design flaws. Last month the Canadian Minister of Transport announced proposed regulatory amendments to improve the safety of transporting oil by rail. She announced plans to alter DOT-111 regulations, requiring that all new cars be built with thicker steel, include a reinforced top fitting, and a head protection shield to lessen the risk of puncture. The new regulation does not require that older tank cars be retrofitted to come into line with new regulations, but that is expected to happen gradually. DOT-111 tank cars are non-pressurized, cylindrical railcars designed to transport a variety of liquids. They are also the most common tank cars in service with an estimated 265,000 of them operating in Canada and the United States.

Earth is Projected to Warm 10 degrees Fahrenheit this Century

from IEA presentation

On Monday the International Energy Agency (IEA) released a series of recommendation for measures that might curtail the rapid growth that has occurred in carbon dioxide emission from fuel combustion that has taken place in the past few decades despite treaties, meetings and conferences. Global greenhouse gas emissions are increasing rapidly and, in May 2013, carbon-dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere exceeded 400 parts per million for the first time in several hundred millennia.

The IEA has tracked world energy use since its creation in response to the oil embargo of the 1970’s. Energy use for electricity, industry and transportation accounts for around two-thirds of greenhouse-gas emissions, as more than 80% of global energy is based on fossil fuels.

According to the IEA, policies that are now being pursued by developed nations, are predicted (by the accepted group of climate models) to produce a long-term average temperature increase between 3.6 °C and 5.3 °C (6.5-10 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial conditions), with most of the increase occurring during this century. Unfortunately, until the planet is in severe stress, it is unlikely that a concerted effort by all the nations will even be considered. Until then, the richer nations will dally with reducing their carbon footprint while the emerging nations and China race to build wealth with only limited regard for the environment.

Though mankind has blown through the tipping point in CO2 emissions that was just a decade ago referred to as the point of no return, the IEA is making policy recommendations that might hold the global temperature increase to 2 to 4°C by cutting global CO2 emissions growth so that it does not exceed 38.75 billion metric tonnes from fossil fuels in 2020. The recommendations are:

• Installing energy efficiency measures in buildings, and requiring increased efficiency in industry and transportation. 
• Preventing the construction of and limiting use of the least-efficient and dirtiest coal-fired power plants. In addition to increasing the share of power generation from renewable sources (including nuclear) and from natural gas. 
• Reducing methane released from the processing and distribution of oil and gas by replacing aging infrastructure and improving technology implementation. 
• Finally phasing-out fossil fuel consumption subsidies to reduce consumption and support efficiency efforts. 

While trying as a first priority to reduce the generation of CO2 from fuel, they are also trying to expand the generation and availability of electricity to poorer nations as another policy program. The IEA and World Bank estimate that there are more than 1.2 billion people who still live without access to electricity and are working to increase electricity availability to the poorest nations on earth which also have the fastest growing populations. This is about 17% of the world’s population living in poverty.

The program to cut world CO2 emissions and the program to expand electricity availability to poorer nations appear to be in conflict, though I suppose that there are policy wonks dreaming that the poorest nations will electrify using only renewable sources of electricity or that the rest of the world will cut their CO2 emissions enough to reduce the overall CO2 trajectory with increasing portions of the earth have available electricity. Without electricity there can be little economic development. Electricity powers critical health equipment to improve the health and survival of the population. Electric lighting supports evening and indoor activities and commerce. Electricity used in classroom to support use of information technology. Electricity powers factories and businesses. Reliable, food, water, sewage and electricity are the necessary infrastructure for an advanced nation.

Global CO2 Soars Past 400 ppm

Data from IEA

The International Energy Agency (IEA) released their 2012 edition of the CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion Statistics Highlights. World CO2 (carbon dioxide) levels have climbed past 396 ppm (parts per million) in the atmosphere and will hit 400 ppm in early spring before retreating slightly over the summer. Global CO2 emissions have grown by 47% since 1990 (based on IEA estimates for 2011). The CO2 levels on earth had averaged 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, but in the past century they began rising. 

As the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere increase the warming produced by the greenhouse gas effect is strengthened. Computer modeling of the climate predicts that there will be feedbacks that significantly increase the impact from the increasing CO2. This is a feedback control loop on a global scale. Mankind produces carbon dioxide from power plants, transportation (cars, trucks, planes, trains, and ships), heating, cement manufacture, deforestation, and breathing. Methane is produced from agriculture, livestock, mining, gas pipeline leaks and well heads, landfills, and sewage plants. Nitrous oxide is produced by fertilizers, fossil fuel combustion, animal waste, polluted waters, and chemical processes. CO2, methane, nitrous oxide and water vapor are the major greenhouse gases. The IEA tells us that 65% of the global greenhouse gas emissions by mankind are from the burning of fossil fuels for energy production and in industrialized nations 83% of all greenhouse gas emissions are from power generation, heating and cooling and transportation, but it is clear that both population and industrialization drive CO2 production.  

Data from IEA

The climate models show that there is nothing that we can do to stop global warming and climate change. Even if the concentration of CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere were to stabilize at this level, global warming and sea level rising would continue for hundreds of years because of the time scales associated with climate and planetary feedback loops. In reality, the global emissions of CO2 will continue to rise for at least a generation. What is going to happen will happen. I will leave it to others to argue the case for the accuracy of climate models; however, both mankind and the earth itself will respond to changes in CO2 concentrations and temperature, but not before it becomes the pressing concern of the currently emerging nations. Though we constantly argue, discuss and meet, there is virtually nothing we can do to change what is going to happen in the next dozen generations. We can hope that mankind will move to a more sustainable course without the need for catastrophe to motivate us, but that will not change what is going to happen. 

Sorry, the scale is off.  I could not get 2011 to slide over. 

We need to face some tough realities. We cannot even stabilize the world CO2 emissions. As each region or county industrializes the world CO2 emissions have grown. World CO2 emissions are 146% of 1990 levels. Europe has stabilized their emissions and with effort under the Kyoto Treaty has decreased them 2.8% from 1990 levels. The U.S. seems to have finally begun its stabilization and reduction process in the past few years, but since 1990 has increased emissions by 9.5%. The far more populous emerging nations have blown past us in CO2 emissions. Asia (including India) has increased their CO2 emissions by 270% since 1990, and China has increased their CO2 emissions by 352% since 1990. Once the phenomenal growth in their economies that has driven the growth in CO2 emissions, slows down, the C02 emissions will stabilize at a higher level. As a county industrializes its emissions rise as Industrialization typically begins with coal fired power generation. Though coal fired power plants produce twice the CO2 as gas fired power plants they are the source of most power in China and India and still provide over 42% of power generation in the U.S. Nonetheless, except for the fall the Russian Federation, the CO2 emissions of a region or nation do not fall significantly. When populations get cars, homes with heating, air conditioning, on-demand water and power- become first world nations, they like to stay that way.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions in U.S. No Longer Matter

On Tuesday, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA released the second year of reported greenhouse gas emissions data from large sources, posting it on its website in case you want to view it, but the data is summarized above. The 2011 data was collected through the mandated Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Program, and includes information reported from facilities that emit large quantities of greenhouse gasses. Greenhouse gases are believed by the EPA to be the primary driver of climate change, and these large facilities account for about half of the greenhouse gas emissions in the nation. While the planet generates greenhouse gases, mankind has vastly increased the generation of greenhouse gases by drilling for and recovering coal, oil and gas from the earth then burning those fuels to generate electricity, power automobiles and manufacture and deliver all the products of our modern life.

The data that was reported to the EPA shows that power plants remain the largest stationary source of greenhouse gas emissions, with 2,221 million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (mmtCO2e), roughly one-third of gross U.S. emissions. (The United States has significant woodlands that absorb carbon dioxide and act as a carbon dioxide sink so that net emissions for the U.S. are approximately 1,000 million metric tons of carbon dioxide less than CO2e generated.)  The transportation sector which consists of small non-stationary sources is the second largest generator of greenhouse gas emissions, but is not tracked by the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.  Petroleum and natural gas systems were the third largest sector, with emissions of 225 mmtCO2e in 2011. This was the first year this group of generators were required to report. Refineries were the next largest emitting source, with 182 mmtCO2e, slight increase over 2010. The major uses of energy in the United States are heating of residential and commercial buildings (11%), industry (20%), transportation including cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships (27.4%), and electric power generation (40%). Overall, CO2 emissions in the United States in 2011 fell by 1.7% to an estimated 5,32o million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions net of the carbon sinks that are our vast forests and open lands.  U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide are less than 10% higher than they were in 1990 while the population has grown by 24% over the same period.

US Greenhouse Gas Emissions from EPA

To achieve this reduction the EPA has used regulations that will ensure that total CO2 emissions are reduced over time. In 2012 EPA proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for carbon dioxide. Under the new rule, new power plants will have to emit no more than 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of energy produced. That standard effectively changes the fuel of choice for all future power capacity additions to natural gas, nuclear, or the renewable category (with government subsidies), and EPA has begun action to reduce CO2 emissions from existing plants.  In addition the EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) new millage and emission standards for automobiles and light trucks for model year 2012 through 2025 requiring continued improvement of about a 5% per year in average fuel economy from 2016 when they are required to have at least a 35.5 mpg fleet average for vehicles sold in the U.S. and will have to boost car and light truck fuel economy to an average 56.2 miles per gallon by 2025 significantly reducing the use of fuel.   Passenger cars, light trucks and motorcycles represent 17% of the national greenhouse gas emissions. With the CO2 standard and fuel economy standards the U.S is on track to reduce their CO2 emission in the coming decades, but that will have little if any impact on global CO2 concentrations. Though we remain the nation with the highest CO2 emissions per citizen, we are no longer the nation with the highest total CO2 emissions.

According to the annual report ‘Trends in global CO2 emissions’, released  by the Joint Research Centre and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), global emissions of CO2 reached 34 billion metric tons in 2011. The top emitters of CO2 in 2011 were: China (29%), the United States (16%), the European Union (11%), India (6%), the Russian Federation (5%) and Japan (4%). China, the largest emitter of CO2 increased their emissions the most. China contributed almost three quarters of the global increase, with its emissions rising by 720 million metric tons, or 9.3% to 8,460 million metric tons of CO2, and is now driving global CO2 emissions bringing China within the range of 6 to 19 metric tons of CO2 per capita emissions of the industrialized countries.  It is estimate that China will emit around 10 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2013 entirely negating reductions from all other nations.  There is no interest in reducing CO2 emissions or even stopping emissions growth in China. They are not yet a rich nation and are currently experiencing the coldest winter in 28 years. Though Beijing is becoming aware of the impacts of particulate air pollution, they are far from being concerned about global CO2 emissions. China remains focused on food and growth. 

The climate of the earth is constantly changing on a geological time scale, but the geological record hints that sudden shifts can happen. The controversy over both the science and policy relating to climate change is far from over, but clearly the rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and oceans will have significant impact on the ecology of the planet and mankind. Policy mandates to have the United States adopt constraints on fossil fuel energy consumption will have little impact on the global level of CO2, and our CO2 emission and economy no longer appear to be in a growth phase.  However, the earth’s atmosphere is interconnected and worldwide CO2 emissions will continue to grow powered by China and India in the short run. We need now to appropriately respond to the changing planet and prepare to respond to those changes to ensure that mankind survives.

2012 the Warmest Year for U.S., but not for the Earth

NOAA 2012 Temperature Map

On Tuesday the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climate Data Center announced that 2012 had been the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States  with average temperatures 3.2°F above the 20th century average. While global temperatures are unlikely to reach a record for 2012 (only data through November 2012 is available) still, according to the latest data from the National Climatic Data Center, the high average global temperatures for November 2012 combined with record to near-record warmth over land from April to September and warmer-than-average global ocean temperatures contributed to the first 11 months of 2012 ranking as the eighth warmest 11 month period on record with 1998 remaining the warmest year on record for the earth.

According to the weather scientists at NOAA the average temperature for the contiguous United States for 2012 was 55.3°F, which was 3.2°F above the 20th century average and 1.0°F above the previous record from 1998. Every state in the contiguous United States had an above-average annual temperature for 2012. On the national scale, 2012 started off much warmer than average, with the fourth-warmest winter (December 2011–February 2012) on record, but the real and immediate problem is water.  The winter snow cover for the contiguous United States last winter was the third smallest on record, and snowpack totals across the Central and Southern Rockies were less than half of normal. The warm spring resulted in an early start to the 2012 growing season in many places, which increased water demand on the soil earlier than what is typical. In combination with the lack of winter snow and lingering dryness from 2011, the record-warm spring laid the foundation for the great drought of 2012. The average precipitation total for the contiguous U.S. for 2012 was 26.57 inches, 2.57 inches below average, and the 15th driest year on record for the nation.  

Regulators at the Environmental Protection Agency remain focused on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, but if CO2 is the main driver of climate change and these new temperature highs in the United States are evidence of climate change and not just extreme weather, then it is too late and the United States at about 16% of global carbon emissions and falling cannot stop the growth in CO2 emissions. According to the International Energy Agency, IEA, 2011 estimates of world CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, World CO2 emissions rose by 1 billion metric tons in 2011, a 3.2 % increase  to reach 31.6 billion metric tons. In 2011 the top four world generators of CO2 emission from fossil fuels were in descending order China, the United States, the European Union and India who edged out Russia to take the number four slot. China, the largest emitter of CO2 increased their emissions the most. China contributed almost three quarters of the global increase, with its emissions rising by 720 million metric tons, or 9.3% to 8.46 billion metric tons of CO2, and are now driving global CO2 emissions. It is estimate that China will emit around 10 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2013. CO2 emissions in the United States in 2011 fell by 92 million metric tons of CO2 or 1.7% to an estimated 5.32 billion metric tons.  U.S. emissions have now fallen by 430 million metric tons or 7.7% since 2006, the largest reduction of all countries or regions and no real growth is forecast. There is no interest in reducing CO2 emissions or even stopping emissions growth in China. They are not yet a rich nation and are currently experiencing the coldest winter in 28 years. China remains focused on food and growth. 

In the U.S. the EPA has used regulation to ensure that total CO2 emissions are reduced over time. In 2012 EPA proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for carbon dioxide. Under the new rule, new power plants will have to emit no more than 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of energy produced. That standard effectively changes the fuel of choice for all future power capacity additions to natural gas, nuclear, or the renewable category (with government subsidies).  In addition the EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) new millage and emission standards for automobiles and light trucks for model year 2012 through 2025 requiring continued improvement of about a 5% per year in average fuel economy from 2016 when they are required to have at least a 35.5 mpg fleet average for vehicles sold in the U.S. and will have to boost car and light truck fuel economy to an average 56.2 miles per gallon by 2025 significantly reducing the use of fuel.   The major users of energy in the United States are heating of residential and commercial buildings (11%), industry (20%), transportation including cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships (27.4%), and electric power generation (40%). Passenger cars, light trucks and motorcycles represent 17% of the national greenhouse gas emissions. With the CO2 standard and fuel economy standards the U.S is on track to reduce their CO2 emission in the coming decades.

The climate of the earth is constantly changing on a geological time scale, but the geological record hints that sudden shifts can happen. The controversy over both the science and policy relating to climate change is far from over, but policy mandates to have the United States adopt constraints on fossil fuel energy consumption will have little impact on the global level of CO2. The earth’s atmosphere is interconnected and worldwide CO2 emissions will continue to grow powered by China and India in the short run. We need now to appropriately respond to the continuing drought.

Drought conditions November 2012 NOAA

The Renewable Fuel Standard, RFS, creates a regulatory mandated demand for corn in the United States. In 2012 the RFS mandated ethanol consumed 5.05 billion bushels of corn almost 50% of the corn crop. The USDA has forecast total corn production for 2012 at 10.7 billion bushels, down 13% from 2011. The lowest U.S. production of corn since 1995. Much of the Midwest remains in drought conditions, and according to the most recent USDA and NOAA reports drought could impact the corn crop next year, too. To fulfill the RFS mandate we are using up our water resources (using the Ogallala Aquifer) and we might be forced to buy corn, taking food from the mouths of poorer nations. Yes, we can buy more corn if need be. The United States is still a rich enough country and we will eat meat and the long list of food made from corn products and make lots of ethanol to dilute gasoline, but the cost is the United States is exporting hunger to fulfill the RFS.

More Climate Talks, But It's Too Late

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change meeting in Doha, Qatar to once more discuss, negotiate and talk about climate change has reached the halfway point. Concerns crystallized by the recent damage from Hurricane Sandy have resulted in 17,000 attending the conference, but that is the only good news. The goal of all these meetings is to negotiate a new agreement by 2015 that will become effective by 2020 to replace and expand the Kyoto Protocol. If an agreement can be negotiated, and this is a big if, it will extend CO2 mitigation requirements to all countries, both developed and developing. Environmental activists and climate scientists, the Alliance of Small Island States, the Africa Group and the Least Developed Countries group are all calling for deeper carbon cuts now to avert climate impacts. However, if the climate models are correct, it's too late. The die is cast.  Though many nations had pledged to keep global warming from exceeding two degrees Celsius, according to the climate models the CO2 emissions trend will produce between 3 and 5 degree Celsius increase in global temperatures and we should be planning for the future we will have and hope for a better one.

According to the International Energy Agency, IEA, 2011 estimates of world CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, World CO2 emissions rose by 1 billion metric tons in 2011, a 3.2 % increase  to reach 31.6 billion metric tons. In 2011 the top four world generators of CO2 emission from fossil fuels were in descending order China, the United States, the European Union and India who edged out Russia to take the number four slot. There is no short term action that will stop the CO2 concentrations from reaching the climate model project tipping point of 32.6 billion metric tons of CO2 emissions annually just 1 billion metric tons above current levels and the amount the world emissions increased last year.

China, the largest emitter of CO2 increased their emissions the most. China contributed almost three quarters of the global increase, with its emissions rising by 720 million metric tons, or 9.3% to 8.46 billion metric tons of CO2, primarily due to higher coal consumption. India’s emissions rose by 140 million metric tons or 8.7% to 1.75 billion metric tons. CO2 emissions in the United States in 2011 fell by 92 million metric tons of CO2 or 1.7% to an estimated 5.32 billion metric tons.  U.S. emissions have now fallen by 430 million metric tons or 7.7% since 2006, the largest reduction of all countries or regions. Unfortunately, this decrease has been made practically meaningless by the unrelenting growth in China and India.

China’s chief climate negotiator Xie Zhenhua recently announced that China’s CO2 emission would peak around 2030, pointing out that its per capita gross domestic product would have only reached half the level of other developed countries’ CO2 emissions when they peaked. No comment was made on the projected peak per capita CO2 emissions. In 2010 China surpassed the US in manufactured output, energy use and car sales. According to the International Monetary Fund, IMF, China will shortly be the world's largest economy. However, while the economy has been growing leaps and bounds, China's total fertility rate (the average number of children a woman has during her lifetime) has fallen to 1.56. The United Nations now projects that China’s population will peak in 2026. So after China’s population begins to decrease, they anticipate that their CO2 emission will peak. Yeah, I would project that, too-it is the natural course of events.  China’s delegate to the current conference,  Su Wei, indicated that they expect China and other developing countries to remain exempted from CO2 reduction requirements for the next treaty making the current discussion entirely pointless and changes the direction the negotiations should take. The world needs to develop plans to survive the bulge in CO2 emissions and any climate consequences from China's sprint to peak population and peak CO2 emissions.

From the Economist using UN data

Unlike the rest of the developed world, China's population control policy of one child will cause the nation to grow old before it grows rich. In 2010 8.2% of China's total population was over 65. The over 65 segment it is expected to grow to 26% by 2050. Right now China represents approximately 20% of the world's population. As their population ages and declines, CO2 emissions are expected to stabilize and decline. For comparison in the United States 13% of the population is over 65 and that is forecast to grow to 21% by 2050. U.S. CO2 emissions are falling and our nation is well on track to meet the President’s promise of reducing CO2 emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. Though, the CO2 emissions per capita in the United States is still three times the level in China. As the population of the United States continues to grow, to  be able to grow GDP and reduce CO2 emissions would be a significant achievement. Unfortunately, this decrease will be made almost meaningless by the unrelenting growth in CO2 emissions in China and India. We have little leverage and no control over those nations and so the global CO2 levels will continue to grow until those nations peak. Possibly we should be planning for moving population centers away from the coastal estuaries to better survive rising oceans and increasing storm intensity. 

Chart from IEA 2012 publication

The CO2 Tipping Point Not Yet Reached- Oceans and Vegetation Absorb More Carbon

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

The International Energy Agency, IEA, estimates that world CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion rose by 1 billion metric tons in 2011, a 3.2 % increase over 2010 to reach 31.6 billion metric tons (34.83 billion tons). In 2011 the top four world generators of CO2 emission from fossil fuels were in descending order China, the United States, the European Union and India who edged out Russia to take the number four slot. China contributed almost three quarters of the global increase, with its emissions rising by 720 million metric tons, or 9.3% to 8.46 billion metric tons of CO2, primarily due to higher coal consumption to produce electricity. Increases in the CO2 emission from fossil fuel combustion in 2012 is likely to be less since electricity use in China is up only 1% this year.

Nonetheless, the world CO2 emissions continue to increase. IEA not only collects data it also makes progress reports, and makes recommendations for implementing carbon dioxide controls worldwide to preventing the world from reaching the “Tipping Point” where global temperatures cannot be held within 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Initially, the climate science establishment thought the Tipping Point would be reached when world CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuel reached 32.6 billion metric tons of CO2 annually and global CO2 concentrations reached 450 parts per million. The “Tipping Point” was the 450 Scenario which limits global warming to 2 degrees by limiting concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to around 450 parts per million of CO2. We are currently very close to the 32.6 billion metric tons (just 1 billion metric tons above 2011 levels and the amount the world emissions increased last year.) However, though the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 continue to rise, the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, reports that CO2 concentrations have risen just 2.33 parts per million to 392.41 parts per million from August 2011 to August 2012.

Despite sharp increases in carbon dioxide emissions from burning fuel the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has not increased as quickly. There appears to be a buffer provided by Earth’s vegetation and oceanswhich continue to soak up about half of the carbon dioxide emissions each year (though of course impact on marine ecology should be of concern) according to arecently published study led by the University of Colorado at Boulder. The study, led by Dr. Ashley Ballantyne, looked at global CO2 emissions reports from the past 50 years and compared them with rising levels of CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere during that time. The results showed that while CO2 emissions had quadrupled, natural carbon “sinks” that sequester the greenhouse gas doubled their uptake of CO2 in the past 50 years, potentially lessening the warming impacts on Earth’s climate.

The study showed global CO2 uptake by Earth’s sinks essentially doubled from 1960 to 2010, although increased variations from year-to-year and decade-to-decade suggests some instability in the global carbon cycle. According to the study, CO2 uptake by Earth’s land and oceans decreased in the 1990s (when most of the climate models were developed), followed by increased CO2 sequestering by the planet from 2000 to 2010. “Seeing such variation from decade to decade tells us that we need to observe Earth’s carbon cycle for significantly longer periods in order to help us understand what is occurring,” said Dr. Ballantyne. Marine Biologists are deeply concerned about the impact of increasing uptake of CO2 by the world’s oceans. Dissolved CO2 in the ocean forms carbonic acid making the oceans more acidic and damaging coral, the fundamental structure of coral reef ecosystems that harbor 25% of the world’s fish species.Take a look at the article in Nature (if you want to spend the money).

Carbon Capture- Will It Save Us?

Last week a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, had “substantial record evidence” that greenhouse gases probably caused the climate to warm over the past several decades, the EPA had concluded that greenhouse gases are pollutants that endanger human health in 2009.  Opponents to that determination had essentially asked the Court to re-weigh the scientific evidence before EPA and reach their own conclusion. However, the three judge panel wrote in the opinion for the case that. “(t)his is not our role.”

 Back in  December 2009,  the EPA officially found that greenhouse gases in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations the agency,  and started on the path to regulate carbon dioxide, CO2, after the  "American Clean Energy and Security Act”, also known as the Waxman-Markley energy bill was defeated in the Senate. After collecting CO2 emission data from industry the EPA “found” in 2012 that the largest carbon dioxide generators are the largest stationary combustion sources. It was no surprise that the largest (coal) electrical generation and industrial plants in the nation- big furnaces generate more CO2. For the past decade electrical generation has accounted for approximately 40% of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and worldwide. At the end of March 2012, the EPA proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for CO2 rule targeted at power plants.  The agency plans to phase in industrial facilities covered by the carbon rules through 2016. Under the new rule, new power plants will have to emit no more than 1,000 tons of CO2 per megawatt-hour of energy produced. That standard effectively changes the fuel of choice for all future power capacity additions to natural gas, nuclear, or the renewable category (with government subsidies). All existing plants and currently permitted and built in the next 12 months will be grandfathered and exempt from this new rule for now.

Coal electrical generation plants currently produce about 1,800 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of electricity. EPA says the CO2 rule that requires new plants to produce no more than 1,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour as creating “a path forward for new technologies to be deployed at future facilities that will allow companies to burn coal, while emitting less carbon pollution.” The EPA in their new regulations and Department of Energy, DOE, in their research grants are pushing forward on the development of Carbon Capture. In June the International Energy Agency, IEA, released its preliminary 2011 estimates of world CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. World CO2 emissions rose by 1 billion metric tons, a 3.2 % increase over last year to reach 31.6 billion metric tons. The worldwide level of CO2 is now higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just five years ago and within 1 billion metric tons of the IEA point of no return. (That is the point where mankind cannot hold global warming at 2 degrees Celsius.)

 

 In 2011 the top four world generators of CO2 emission from fossil fuels were (from highest to lowest) China, the United States, the European Union and India who edged out Russia to take the number four slot. China increased emissions contributed almost three quarters of the global increase, with its emissions rising by 720 million metric tons, or 9.3% to 8.46 billion metric tons of CO2, primarily due to higher coal consumption. India’s emissions rose by 140 million metric tons or 8.7% to 1.75 billion metric tons. Since 2000, China has more than tripled its installed capacity of coal power plants, while India’s capacity has increased by 50%. Neither country has used the most efficient designs and technologies available for those plants and those plants will continue to operate 24/7 for decades to come.

CO2 emissions in the United States, in contrast, fell by 92 million metric tons in 2011, or 1.7% to an estimated 5.32 billion metric tons. The European Union increased their CO2 emissions from fossil fuel by 69 million metric tons to approximately 3.56 billion metric tons. Japan’s CO2 emissions increased by 28 million metric tons, or 2.4% to approximately 1.19 billion metric tons, as a result of a substantial increase in the use of fossil fuels in power generation post-Fukushima tsunami. Russia and Canada reportedly remained fairly stable from the previous year. Nonetheless, the IEA still believes that it is still possible to prevent the earth’s temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius if “timely and significant government policy action is taken, and a range of clean energy technologies are developed and deployed globally.” One of the key technologies according to the IEA is carbon capture.

In 2009 DOE supported eleven projects to conduct site characterization of geological formations for CO2 storage. Carbon capture is really three activities: Gathering or capturing of CO2 from point sources (power plants, industrial plants, and refineries), transporting the captured CO2 to a geological storage site, and injecting the CO2 into the ground for permanent storage and monitoring the site for eternity. Capturing and transporting CO2 from industrial plants is technologically possible but is currently prohibitively expensive, though DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory and several universities are exploring ways to bring down the costs or raise the costs of other energy sources.  A significant portion of the CO2 generated in the United States and the world is not generated from large stationary point sources, but from cars, homes, and smaller sites. Only about a quarter of the CO2 generated from fossil fuel combustion annually is generated at large point sources the only possible capture points. Storing even a portion of this amount of CO2 would require capturing the gas at many locations around the country and transporting it to facilities that could inject the CO2 into appropriate subsurface rock formations. According to the researchers efficient underground storage of CO2 requires that it be in the supercritical (liquid) phase to minimize required storage volume.

In order for CO2 to remain in a supercritical phase, the pressure in the storage reservoir must be greater than about 68 atmospheres and at temperatures above 31.1°C. (Sminchak et al., 2001). These conditions require that the CO2 be injected at high pressures, which can only be achieved at depths greater than about 2,600 feet below the earth’s surface. The supercritical CO2 will be injected into the geologic formations that are overlain by appropriate sealing formations and geologic traps that will prevent the CO2 from escaping as the CO2 injection well remains in continuous operation for years or decades. The volumes of supercritical CO2 envisioned for carbon capture are huge. A recent U.S. National Research Council report suggests that carbon capture and deep earth sequestering could potentially induce earthquakes because significant volumes of fluids are injected underground over long periods of time. However, insufficient data exists at this time to evaluate this risk. An IPCC Special Report on CO2 capture and storage suggests that between 73 and 183 million metric tons of CO2 could be captured and stored worldwide from both coal and natural gas energy plants each year (Metz, 2005).  The IPCC envision that carbon capture and well injection would take place at a number of locations, ideally places near to power plants that produce CO2 to avoid long transportation distances under pressure.

American Electric Power, AEP, participated in three DOE funded projects to advance CCS technologies. All were conducted at the Mountaineer Plant in New Haven, West Virginia (from which some of my power is supplied within the PMJ Interconnection). AEP planned to replace its pilot demonstration CO2 capture plant with a larger $668 million Carbon Capture and Storage facility, which would have buried more than 1 million metric tons of CO₂ a year, splitting construction costs evenly with the DOE, but failed to obtain the consumer rate increases necessary to fund the experiment. The project has been discontinued. In 2010 there were almost 1,400 coal fired electrical generating units in the United States if each were to be converted to carbon capture operation the total cost would be almost a trillion dollars in construction costs (assuming no cost over runs) and capture 1.4 billion metric tons of CO2 per year. This would represent 26% of the net annual CO2 emissions of the United States and increase average electrical rates 25% nationally for just building the units. Electrical rates would have to increase more if there were any annual operating costs of the Carbon Capture unit. Actual rate increases would be regional.  

The AEP projects were demonstrations of Alstom’s Chilled Ammonia Process for Post-Combustion CO2 Capture. The process uses ammonium carbonate to absorb CO2 and create ammonium bicarbonate. This resulting ammonium bicarbonate is converted back to ammonium carbonate in a regenerator and is reused to repeat the process. The flue gas, cleaned of CO2, but with the tell-tale smell of the ammonia reaction, flows back to the stack and the captured CO2 is sent for storage. Once captured, the CO2 is compressed into a liquid state and is injected 1.5 miles beneath the earth’s surface. Several major pilot projects, in Europe have also been cancelled in the last few years because of doubts over their financial and technical viability. Some are still under consideration for EU and government funding, but the need to rescue the Euro and European Banks has taken the financial resources of the European Union. Ayrshire Power in Scotland, blamed their cancelled plans for a new carbon-capture power station at Hunterston on the recession and anxieties about winning funding from the government and the same reasons were given for the cancellation of the Longannet power station in Fife.

 Globally, only a few, small-scale commercial carbon capture projects are in operation. The oil and gas fields in the North Sea are the site of the world’s first offshore commercial CO2 capture and storage project. Carbon dioxide is captured at a plant located on the offshore natural gas platforms and is stored underground in a sandstone well approximately 2,600 feet below the sea bed. The CO2 tax levied on offshore oil and gas operations by the Norwegian government made the project worthwhile and the drilling rig and available aquifer made it possible. CO2 is removed from the natural gas produced at the Sleipner field in the North Sea and re-injected it into a very porous, permeable sandstone and saline aquifer above the oil and gas reserves. Approximately 1 million metric tons of CO2 have been stored each year since 2000 when the system went into operation. This is just a small fraction of the 31.5 billion metric tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere each year.  It appears as if the United States has passed the point of peak CO2, but the atmosphere of the earth is interconnected and China and India appear to be increasing their CO2 emissions by 860 million metric tons a year. It matters what kind and how efficient a power plant is installed in China or India since they will be sending particulates and CO2 into the atmosphere for decades. Nonetheless, we have no control over the growth in India and China’s coal fired power supply, nor in the abandonment of nuclear power by Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Japan in the next decade in response to the damage to the nuclear reactors that occurred in the Japanese Fukushima tsunami. 

World CO2 Emissions Continue to Rise

The International Energy Agency, IEA, has released its preliminary 2011 estimates of world CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. World CO2 emissions rose by 1 billion metric tons, a 3.2 % increase over last year to reach 31.6 billion metric tons (34.83 billion tons). The IEA based in Paris was established in November 1974 in response to the global oil crisis created by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) oil embargo. Its primary mandate was to promote energy security amongst its member countries. Over the years the mission has evolved to include holding global warming at 2°C by providing policy recommendations for ways to ensure reliable, clean energy for its 28 member countries (which includes the United States).

In 2011 the top four world generators of CO2 emission from fossil fuels were in descending order China, the United States, the European Union and India who edged out Russia to take the number four slot. China increased their emissions the most. China contributed almost three quarters of the global increase, with its emissions rising by 720 million metric tons, or 9.3% to 8.46 billion metric tons of CO2, primarily due to higher coal consumption. India’s emissions rose by 140 million metric tons or 8.7% to 1.75 billion metric tons. CO2 emissions in the United States in 2011 fell by 92 million metric tons of CO2, or 1.7% to an estimated 5.32 billion metric tons. This reduction was primarily due to EPA regulations and increased availability of natural gas from shale deposits the cause the switching from coal to natural gas for electric power generation and helped by a mild winter in most of the United States, which reduced the demand for space heating. U.S. emissions have now fallen by 430 million metric tons or 7.7% since 2006, the largest reduction of all countries or regions. Unfortunately, this decrease has been made practically meaningless by the unrelenting growth in China and India.

Other highlights from the report were the European Union increased their CO2 emissions from fossil fuel by 69 million metric tons to approximately 3.56 billion metric tons. Japan’s CO2 emissions increased by 28 million metric tons, or 2.4% to approximately 1.19 billion metric tons, as a result of a substantial increase in the use of fossil fuels in power generation post-Fukushima tsunami when the three of the six Fukushima Daiichi nuclear  reactors  in operation at the time suffered melt downs. Now Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland have developed plans to phase out their nuclear reactors in the next decade in response to the damage to the nuclear reactors that occurred in the Japanese tsunami. So, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion is likely to increase in those countries. Russia and Canada remained fairly stable from the previous year, though Russia reports fewer data inputs than most developed countries so estimates are not as easily made.

The IEA tracks not only energy data and carbon dioxide releases but also investment in carbon control technologies and progress along various strategies to limit global temperature rise by controlling CO2 emissions from fossil fuel. IEA also makes progress reports on converting to clean energy and implementing carbon dioxide controls worldwide geared to preventing global temperatures from increasing more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels, the so called 450 Scenario which limits global warming by limiting concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to around 450 parts per million of CO2. Unfortunately,  we’re pretty much out of time since the 450 Scenario calls for CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuel to peak at 32.6 billion metric tons of CO2 emissions annually just 1 billion metric tons above current levels and the amount the world emissions increased this past year.

The IEA still believes that it is possible to prevent the earth’s temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius if “timely and significant government policy action is taken, and a range of clean energy technologies are developed and deployed globally.” The government action required is spending more money, much more money. The money is to be spent for the development and implementation of clean technologies to reduce Energy related CO2 emissions by over 5 billion metric tons before 2020 and continue to fall thereafter to less than half of the 2009 level while world population continues to grow. The IEA estimates that achieving these carbon reductions would cost $5 trillion by 2020.  The world does not appear to have the financial capacity or will for these actions on top of all the other needs of nations.

The worldwide level of CO2 emissions is higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just five years ago, but fortunately temperatures have not (yet) risen as projected by the climate models.  The relationship of climate change to worldwide CO2 levels may not be the one previously assumed as research and modeling of the climate at Oregon State University predict a lower probability of imminent extreme climatic change than previously thought. The earth is going to be their laboratory. In the meantime we really need to worry about access to clean water and safe human sanitation and animal waste disposal.

IEA Says $ 5 Trillion needed to Prevent Global Warming

International Energy Agency (IEA) was established in November 1974 in response to the global oil crisis created by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) oil embargo. Its primary mandate was to promote energy security amongst its member countries by organizing a collective response to future oil embargo's or other disruptions in the oil supply. Over the years the mission has evolved to include holding global warming at 2°C by providing policy recommendations for ways to ensure reliable, clean energy for its 28 member countries (which includes the United States). The IEA has become a tracker of carbon dioxide releases and investment in carbon control technologies. They released their annual progress report to member countries on implementing clean energy and carbon dioxide controls worldwide geared to preventing global temperatures from increasing more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels called the Energy Technology Perspectives 2012 2°C Scenario Report, EDP 2DC for short .

Though filled with cheerful statement about accomplishments in installing solar panels and the growth in wind turbines, the report tells us that the world is not really doing that well at instituting clean energy technologies. The EDP 2DC, states that it is still feasible to prevent the earth’s temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius if “timely and significant government policy action is taken, and a range of clean energy technologies are developed and deployed globally,” but we’re pretty much out of time. The government action required is spending more money, much more money. The money is to be spent for the development and implementation of clean technologies to reduce Energy related CO2 emissions by over 5 billion metric tons before 2020 and continue to fall thereafter to less than half of the current level while world population continues to grow. The IEA estimates that the  additional investment cost of achieving these carbon reductions would cost $5 trillion by 2020, but the countries would save $4 trillion (in future dollars) in fuel not burned from the scenario where the world just marches forward on its current path and doubles it’s fossil fuel use by 2050.

Worldwide CO2 emissions are up 6% from 2009, to over 30 billion metric tons, in 2010. Thirty billion metric tons of CO2 is an increase of 40% above the 1990 levels and it seems impossible that any group of policy recommendations will stop the increase in energy use in the emerging markets from continuing. The IEA estimates that the since 2000, China has more than tripled its installed capacity of coal power plants, while India’s capacity has increased by 50%. Unfortunately, they have not used to most efficient designs and technologies available in those plants. In addition, while the IEA strategy includes doubling the nuclear power capacity by 2025, almost 440 nuclear reactors in operation across the world remained virtually constant over the past decade, with 32 reactors shut down and the same number added to the grid. Overall, nuclear capacity increased by 6%, due to installation of larger reactors and power upgrades in existing reactors.  However, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Japan have developed plans to phase out their nuclear reactors in the next decade in response to the damage to the nuclear reactors that occurred in the Japanese tsunami. Finally, while wind and solar power have enjoyed significant growth in the past few years, the world economic climate has forced many nations (notably Germany and Spain) to reduce or eliminate solar incentives and IEA doubts that the growth rate in this area can be sustained. 

The worldwide level of CO2 is higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just five years ago, but fortunately temperatures have not (yet) risen as projected by the climate models.  The relationship of climate change to worldwide CO2 levels may not be the one assumed in the climate models, nonetheless, the IEA report assumes the projections of the climate models are the absolute trajectory of global temperatures.  Recently,  the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced total gross US emissions of CO2 equivalents in 2010 was to 6,822 million metric tons of carbon dioxide gross,and 5,746 million metric tons of CO2 net of the carbon sink of our forests. The peak of CO2 emissions in the US was 2007 and though emissions have increased since 2009, they are still below 2007 levels. This is true for most of the older first world nations whose carbon emission have already peaked or have slowed their growth significantly. Now the developed world is struggling with huge budget deficits, how to implement austerity measures and how to fund the entitlements programs, pensions, health care and other government promises. The emerging nations are sprinting to build power infrastructure in their nations where significant portions of their citizens do not have reliably available electric power or yet have cars. This does not seem to be a scenario where the recommended policies and strategies are likely to be implemented.

The IEA report talks about how technologies from electric vehicles, solar panels, nuclear generators, to wind farms and technologies to sequester carbon can make a decisive difference in limiting global temperature rise to 2°C above pre-industrial levels. EDS 2DC provides policies for nations on how to spend their way to a cleaner energy future. The IEA believes that the technologies with the greatest potential for energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions savings are making the slowest progress: “carbon capture and storage (CCS) is not seeing the necessary rates of investment into full-scale demonstration projects and nearly one-half of new coal-fired power plants are still being built with inefficient technology; vehicle fuel-efficiency improvement is slow; and significant untapped energy-efficiency potential remains in the building and industry sectors.”

The development of carbon sequestion technology is a one of the big leaps of faith, but the implementation of energy saving strategies like insulation, efficient lighting and higher efficiency heating and air conditioning systems, on commercial and residential buildings are seemingly easy improvements because they show a short term and immediate return on investment and are simple to do. Commercial and residential buildings account for 32% of energy use and improved insulation and changes in temperature settings, lighting efficiency and other small choices could reduce world energy use 8-10% yet nations have failed to adopt regulations and implementation strategies to promote this. We have failed to accomplish even the most straight forward of the policy goals while spending huge amounts of money on renewable energy incentives. The IEA continues to pursue a mirage of a future where renewable energy and carbon sequestion will save us. Instead, IEA needs to spend their brain power and resources in developing strategies for living in the world we are going to find ourselves in. 

Keystone Pipeline the Never Ending Story

On February 27th 2012 TransCanada Corporation announced their intension to build the Cushing Oklahoma to the Gulf Coast portion of the Keystone XL pipeline, the Keystone Phase III, a 435 mile extension of the existing Keystone pipeline to Port Arthur and Houston. The existing Keystone Pipeline Phase I runs from Hardesty, Canada to Steel City, Nebraska near the Kansas and Nebraska border. Keystone Phase II runs from Steel City to Cushing, Oklahoma where it terminates, leaving the Canadian crude oil stranded in Oklahoma along with U.S. domestic production from North Dakota that has been using the pipeline to reach the Oklahoma storage facilities. As oil prices have climbed recently the 55 million barrels of oil that can be stored in Cushing have produced a glut of oil waiting to be refined and the lowest gas prices in the nation for the mid-west.

In response to the glut of oil in Cushing, Enbridge Inc. and Enterprise Products Partners (who purchased a 50% interest in November) owners of the Seaway pipeline that runs from the gulf coast area to Cushing, Oklahoma, announced their intention to reverse the flow in their gas pipeline to move crude from Cushing to the gulf coast refineries. The reversal requires pump station additions and modifications, scheduled to be completed by June 2012, the capacity of the reversed Seaway Pipeline will be up to 150,000 barrels per day and further expansions could increase that volume. Now, TransCanada Corp. has announced that it will build a portion of the Keystone XL pipeline from the Cushing oil hub south to the Gulf Coast to compete with the Seaway pipeline while attempting to obtain approval of a revised route for the Keystone Phase IV leg to increase flow from Canada to Steel City, Nebraska.

The Keystone XL Pipeline has been very controversial. Most of the environmental controversy has focused on the porous soils of the Sandhills and fears of a possible oil leak into one of the nation's most important agricultural aquifers, TransCanada is reapplying for State Department and Presidential approval of a revised rout for the northern portion that bypasses the Sandhills. However, many who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline want to prevent the development of the oil sands resources in Canada to prevent the acceleration of global warming. The Canadian oil sands have been known for decades. Until the recent protests against the Keystone XL pipeline that labeled these oil reserves “Canadian Oil Sands,” they had been variously known as unconventional oil or crude bitumen. These oil sands have been surfaced mined in Canada with drag lines and power shovels since the late 1960’s, but until oil prices rose and technology improved these oil deposits were too expensive to exploit beyond the limited scope of surface mining. Advances in technology in both oil sand extraction and refining techniques and rising oil prices altered the economics and have made the extraction of oil sand possible.

Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) is the current method of extraction. In SAGD, two horizontal wells are drilled in the oil sands, one at the bottom of the formation and another about 15-20 feet above it. In each well pair, steam is injected into the upper well melting the bitumen, which flows into the lower well and is pumped to the surface. SAGD was the breakthrough that has quadrupled recoverable oil reserves and moved Canada into second place in proved world oil reserves. SAGD is cheaper than previous methods, allows very high oil production rates, and recovers up to 60% of the oil in place. It is the SAGD method that has created the need for a pipeline to deliver the oil to the American markets and the controversy. SAGD requires more energy to produce the oil and increases the carbon footprint of the crude. Those who believe completely in the positive feedback global warming model where increased CO2 raises global temperature, increases evaporation of water vapor to the atmosphere, and in turn increases the functional impact of CO2 on global warming see any increase in carbon as quickening the destruction of the earth. The Canadian oil sands increase the CO2 released in every gallon of gas adding to man’s carbon footprint. In addition, older methods of mining the oil sands left open pits that still need to be reclaimed, thought today groups of wells are typically drilled off a central pad and like fracking wells and can extend for miles in all directions. This reduces surface disturbances of the land and the footprint of the area to be reclaimed..

In June 2010 TransCanada commenced commercial operation of the first phase of the Keystone Pipeline System. Keystone's Phase I was the conversion of natural gas pipeline to crude oil pipeline and construction of a bullet line that brings the crude oil non-stop from Canada to Steel City at 435,000 barrels a day. Phase II of Keystone was an extension of the pipeline from Steele City, Nebraska to Cushing, Oklahoma and began operations in February 2011. Keystone Phase II increased the volume per day of Keystone Phase I with the addition of pumping stations, the system now runs at 591,000 barrels a day. The Seaway pipeline will begin operations in June completing the ability to pipe crude from Canada to the Gulf Coast carrying 150,000 barrels a day. The Keystone Phase III when it is completed will simply increase volume. The Keystone Phase IV when and if approved will increase volume of the upper portion of the pipeline from the current 591,000 barrels a day to 1.3 million barrels a day.

Durban in the End

More than 10,000 ministers, officials, activists and scientists from 194 countries met in Durban in what has become an annual ritual. Durban, the 17th annual Conference of the Parties (COP17) to be held since the United Nations' first began to coordinate an attempt to control global warming, has concluded with little results. The Conference of the Parties’ stated goal is to prevent temperatures from increasing more than 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century. They are trying to achieve this goal by reducing CO2 emissions through a treaty to expand and extend the Koyoto Protocol and to tax all the developed nations to pay for climate impacts on poorer nations through the Green Fund for climate assistance.

Since 1990 global CO2 emissions have gone from 21 billion tons of CO2 to 29 billion tons of CO2 in 2009 according to data from the International Energy Agency (IEA). Global emissions of CO2 increased 38% despite a 14.7% decrease below their 1990 level for the Kyoto Participants and the United States increased of only 6.7% above 1990 levels from 4.9 billion tons of CO2 to 5.2 billion tons of CO2. The bulk of the increase has come from China, Africa, Middle East, India and the rest of Asia. The United States and 35 Kyoto participants represent less than half the world CO2 emissions and that is shrinking every year.

In Durban, governments including China and the United States agreed to negotiate an “agreed outcome with legal force” as soon as possible, but not later than 2015 and this agreement is to take effect not later than 2020. Work will begin on this immediately under a new group called the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action. In addition governments pledged to contribute start-up costs of the Green Climate Fund, to support developing nations, as agreed last year in Cancun, Mexico, and to have more meetings. UNFCCC Climate Change Conference, COP 18/ CMP 8, is to take place 26 November to 7 December 2012 in Qatar. They agreed to keep talking and negotiating, but the movement seems to have lost momentum. The US and Europe are barely relevant in the conversation, China, India, Latin America, and the Middle East are now the engines of growth in CO2 emissions.

The 35 nations participating in Kyoto agreed a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol beginning January 1, 2013. Parties to this second period will quantify emission limits or reductions and submit them for review by May 1, 2012. As expected, Canada promptly withdrew from the Kyoto Treaty. It remains to be seen if Russia and Japan will remain within the Kyoto Treaty. The participants in the Kyoto treaty now represent less than 24% of the global CO2 emissions. Without Japan and the Russian Federation they represent 15% of global emissions.

From 2001-2010 global temperatures have not increased, but remain approximately 1.13°F warmer than the average global surface temperature from 1951 to 1980. To measure climate change, scientists look at long-term trends. The temperature trend, including data from 2010, shows the climate has warmed by approximately 0.36°F per decade since the late 1970s. Carbon dioxide has shown a less direct relationship to global temperatures than the climate models had predicted which seems fortunate given the significant increase in world CO2 emissions in the past two decades.

At the Copenhagen meeting in 2010 President Obama pledged to reduce U.S greenhouse gas emissions to 17% below the 2005 levels by 2020, though it is unclear if this commitment is in any way binding. Due to the recent drop in industrial production and electricity usage, we have already cut U.S. emissions by 6% from 2005 levels; the Administration is well on its way to achieving this goal.

United Nations Climate Summit and More Emails from East Anglia

United Nations Climate summit in Durban, South Africa began on Monday, November 28, 2011 and will run until December 9th 2011. The Durban meeting is the 17th conference of the parties to the United Nations convention on climate change or COP17. This international meeting may have been entirely ignored by the general public given the economic turmoil in Europe and the United States, but for the release last week of a new batch of emails reported to have been stolen from the servers at the University of East Anglia.

I spent couple of hours randomly reading emails and did not find any new insights. This appears to be another group of emails very much overlapping the 2009 hacked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) a collaborator with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The released emails revealed some researchers willingness to suppress or massage data and use the peer-review process to control the publication of scholarly work and suppress the publication of dissenting points of view. The hacked emails have shown some of the weaknesses in the climate data and models used to forecast global warming, as well as some rather questionable behavior by scientists in controlling information provided to the public even to the extent of reviewing and approving the BBC reports. There really does not appear to be much that is new in this latest group of emails, though the new emphasis on BBC’s lack of objective reporting seemed new to me.

After the first release of emails, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) investigated the claims of scientific wrongdoing. In its report in August 2010, it recommended improvements in the management structure of the IPCC, ensuring that the data included in its reports had been properly published in the scientific literature, and finally that the full range of scientific opinion should be reflected in the reports. Nonetheless, IPCC confirmed their conclusions that the earth is warming and that activities of mankind have caused this warming. Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study finished their analysis of global temperature studies this past fall and confirmed global warming since the industrial revolution. EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson, never wavered from the EPA’s full acceptance of findings reached by outside groups, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that Administrator Jackson explained "relied on decades of sound, peer-reviewed, extensively evaluated scientific data that the combined emissions of …greenhouse gases in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations." The EPA has proceeded to create a number of new regulations including 2025 targets for auto mileage and power plant emissions standards on mercury after putting the direct greenhouse gas regulation of power plants on hold this past fall.

This month the Department of Energy, DOE, reported that in 2009-2010 the world pumped out almost 6% more carbon dioxide than during the previous year. According to the DOE on their Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center web site the increase is due to increased emissions from the People's Republic of China. Since 2001 global carbon dioxide emissions worldwide have increased 33%. During this same period; however, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have not increased, our national impact has become less relevant. From 2001-2010 global temperatures have not increased, but remain approximately 1.13°F warmer than the average global surface temperature from 1951 to 1980. To measure climate change, scientists look at long-term trends. The temperature trend, including data from 2010, shows the climate has warmed by approximately 0.36°F per decade since the late 1970s. Carbon dioxide has shown a less direct relationship to global temperatures than the climate models had predicted.

The U.S. never ratified Kyoto, arguing it should contain 2012 goals for emerging economies and would cost U.S. jobs. The U.S. has also failed to adopt a comprehensive domestic program for reducing its own greenhouse gas emissions, despite recent regulatory activity by the EPA and DOE funding of billions of dollars of solar projects disguised as a loan guarantee program. Nonetheless, the American Clean Energy and Security Act,” also known as the Waxman-Markley energy bill, failed to pass the senate in 2010 and is seen as dead. Thought, the California Air Resources Board unanimously voted to adopt the nation's first state-administered cap-and-trade regulations for greenhouse gases in 2011. Cap-and-trade is the centerpiece of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 a California law that is designed to achieve quantifiable, reductions of greenhouse gases. At the Copenhagen meeting in 2010 President Obama pledged to reduce U.S greenhouse gas emissions to 17% below the 2005 levels by 2020. Due to the recent drop in industrial production and electricity usage, we have already cut U.S. emissions by 6%; the Administration is well on its way to achieving this goal. The California Cap and Trade program requirements will help the current crop of California renewable energy projects funded under the DOE program to reduce power consumption in California by increasing the cost of electricity by at least 15% above the cost of using natural gas according to the Division of Ratepayer Advocates at the California PUC.

The newest release of hacked emails serves to turn our attention to the proceedings in Durban more than anything else. The Kyoto Protocol, which committed developed nations to cut their emissions, is set to expire in 2012. After both the Copenhagen (2009) and Cancun (2010) Climate summits failed to produce a legally binding climate treaty, delegates to the Durban talks are under immense pressure to produce some kind of deal that will be acceptable to both rich and developing nations. However, it is reported that cap-and-trade concept is losing support among the previous signers of the Kyoto treaty. Canada, Japan and Russia have stated that they will not agree to an extension of Kyoto unless China, India and Brazil who are now major producers of greenhouse gas become subject to the requirements.

The “emerging nations,” including China, India and Brazil want an extension of Kyoto, which required the industrialized nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2% below 1990 levels from 2008-12. The world's two largest greenhouse gas emitters are China and the United States. China because of concern about employment and a slowing international demand for their products have no interest in having any climate treaty apply to their nation. China’s economy appears to be slowing down significantly based on the falling global demand for oil and copper. China was exempted as an emerging economy, and though it is now the largest greenhouse gas emitter on earth, it wants to remain exempted from reducing or even stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions under any new agreement. In September India announced that it would not accept any legally binding limits on greenhouse gas emission, and Japan announced that they are reconsidering plans to cut carbon-dioxide emissions by 25% by 2020 due to closing of a significant portion of its nuclear power generation, and the costs of the carbon-credit programs that required the spending of almost $11 billion on carbon abatement programs in other countries during a decade long economic malaise.

Overall, expectations for the future of the Kyoto Protocol are low and some doubt whether if a second commitment period is feasible with only support from EU which accounts only around 11% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions and is itself reconsidering its nuclear power generation after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactors were damaged after the recent earthquake. If nuclear reactors are going to be phased out as low greenhouse gas emission power generation there is no way to achieve carbon reductions without reducing the size of the economy, the standard of living or the size of the population. During her opening remarks to the conference, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Conventions on Climate Change Christiana Figueres said countries can take two major steps in Durban to address climate change. The first is completing a comprehensive package to help developing countries adapt to climate change and limit the growth of their greenhouse gas emissions, and the second relates to how governments can work together to limit the global temperature rise and thus prevent further natural disasters. This seems to be a stepping away from the more rigorous stance of previous conferences.