 |
Arctic climate may be more sensitive to warming than thought, says new study: A new study shows the Arctic climate system may be more sensitive to greenhouse warming than previously thought, and that current levels of Earth’s atmospheric carbon dioxide may be high enough to bring about significant, irreversible shifts in Arctic ecosystems. … “Our findings indicate that CO2 . . . → Read More: Arctic climate sensitivity Anyone who didn’t see this coming is either hopelessly naive or dumber than a minivan full of deniers… Kerry, Lieberman Willing To Scale Back Energy Bill To Get Republican Support: The authors of sweeping energy legislation stalled in the Senate said Tuesday they were prepared to scale back their bill to get Republican support. Sens. John Kerry and Joe . . . → Read More: BOHICA alert: “Compromise” coming on energy and climate legislation From the must-read web site Circle of Blue Waters comes The Himalayas, A Special Report: Floods, droughts, wildfires, windstorms, water contamination and illnesses plague the 1.3 billion people who live in the watersheds directly supplied by glacial melt from the Hindu Kush-Himalaya (HKH) region. The waterways of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan are . . . → Read More: Doc alert: The Waters of the Third Pole (click on the image for the full . . . → Read More: Always trust Uncle Carl If you’ve spent any appreciable time delving into the minutiae of US energy statistics (and honestly, who hasn’t when perched in front of the computer, sleepless at 2AM?), you’ve no doubt encountered the US Department of Energy’s PECSS diagram (primary energy consumption by source and sector): (Click here to see the home page for this diagram.) This is . . . → Read More: US CO2 emissions by source and sector There’s been a lot of discussion over the last couple of years, including on this site, about the potential for melting permafrost and warming undersea hydrates to release a huge amount of methane and CO2, kicking climate change into high gear. These frightening scenarios go by various names: Permafrost bomb, clathrate gun, etc., but the . . . → Read More: Have we overlooked the “real” carbon bomb? Regular readers know that when talking about CCS (carbon capture and sequestration) I’ve usually taken the magic wand approach of, “OK, assume we solve all the technical problems, what will it cost?” I think this arbitrary separation of technology and economics is a simple and useful way to sanity check an idea, as it can . . . → Read More: Carbon capture: Easier said than done There’s a fascinating piece online from the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory regarding the additional water requirements of CCS carbon capture and sequestration), Determining Carbon Capture and Sequestration’s Water Demands. This is one of those numbers, or sets of numbers, I’ve been trying to track down, as I knew there was some . . . → Read More: The water footprint of carbon capture  2 comments - (Comments are closed)  Climate change, Coal, Electricity, Transportation, Uncategorized, Water . . . → Read More: BP Blowout: NASA time lapse video MIT will release today the latest in their “the future of …” reports, this time focusing on natural gas. The report isn’t available online yet, as best I can tell, but there’s already copious coverage. The best article I’ve seen so far is from the NY Times (emphasis added): Natural gas will provide an increasing . . . → Read More: MIT’s take on natural gas |
|
|
Copyright © 2003-2012 The Cost of Energy - All Rights REserved |
||