[speechlesstx]

AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low
By KEVIN BEGOS,

PITTSBURGH (AP) — In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.

Many of the world's leading climate scientists didn't see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere.

Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University, said the shift away from coal is reason for "cautious optimism" about potential ways to deal with climate change. He said it demonstrates that "ultimately people follow their wallets" on global warming.

"There's a very clear lesson here. What it shows is that if you make a cleaner energy source cheaper, you will displace dirtier sources," said Roger Pielke Jr. a climate expert at the University of Colorado

There's a more clear lesson here dude, the free market works. No need to keep the federal boot to the neck of corporations or make energy prices "necessarily skyrocket."

So why aren't we focusing more on our abundance of clean burning natural gas?

[smoothy]

Obama and his mindless minion horde are going to argue this its not true.. that we are all going to die if we don't all stop breathing except of course the Illuminatti whom are above being subjected to any inconvienience.. Like Al Gore, And Barry himself.

[paraclete]

One more proof that AGW is a load of hot air, But have they considered what will happen when we run out of gas, soon we will have peak gas just as we had peak oil, notice how no one speaks about that today. Put the economy back to work and build new coal fired power stations, beat the rush. Energy production is one industry they can't export

[TUT317]

AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low
By KEVIN BEGOS,



There's a more clear lesson here dude, the free market works. No need to keep the federal boot to the neck of corporations or make energy prices "necessarily skyrocket."

So why aren't we focusing more on our abundance of clean burning natural gas?

Is this THE Michael Mann of the "hockey stick" fame?

Tut

[tomder55]

Yup the same 'hide the decline 'dude. I guess people still take what he says seriously. Penn State seems to be a magnet...

[tomder55]

"Many of the world's leading climate scientists didn't see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide."

That's because the only thing that many of the world's leading climate scientists see is big government intervention as a solution . I doubt if they will go further and admit that the only reason for the natural gas boom is the technological advance application of horizontal drilling and fracking .

[paraclete]

Enough of this fracking

[tomder55]

No we need more. Obama's war on coal made it necessary that a replacement be found for America's energy needs. If it wasn't for private investment in the technology then nat. gas prices would be at the $8-10 range per thousand cubic ft. instead of the $2-3 range it is today. There would be no inexpensive alternative... we'd be looking overseas for more imported energy since the President's clean energy subisidies and tax revenue transfers have been an unmitigated failure resulting in bankruptcies and job layoffs. Meanwhile the gas boom has resulted in 100s of thousand new jobs ,and economic revivals in the states where it is permitted (North Dakota, Texas and Pennsylvania... word to NY ). .

[paraclete]

Tom we have demonstrated here that fracking has consequences for ground water, therefore it is an unsafe technology, if we want gas we will just have to get it the usual way and if we want the energy in coal we already have the technology

[speechlesstx]

Tom we have demonstrated here that fracking has consequences for ground water, therefore it is an unsafe technology, if we want gas we will just have to get it the usual way and if we want the energy in coal we already have the technology

Not a problem here...

Not only is this happening more than a mile beneath the surface, it’s also happening at a level that is separated from the closest points of the aquifer by a layer of impermeable rock three or four or five Empire State Buildings deep. “We couldn’t frack through that if we were trying to,” says one engineer working the Marcellus. “The idea that we could do so by accident is crazy. Not while we’re fracking with water and sand. Nukes, maybe, but not water and sand.”

The Truth about Fracking

[excon]

CO2 emissions down to 20 year low...
There's a more clear lesson here dude, the free market works.

Hello Steve:

That, or our environmental protection laws are working..

excon

[paraclete]

No you just exported some more industries

[talaniman]

Fracking Hazards Obscured in Failure to Disclose Wells - Bloomberg

Homeowners in Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming have complained that their well water was contaminated with chemicals or methane gas from nearby frack jobs. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last year linked the method to contaminated drinking water in Pavilion, Wyoming; the agency is now retesting some of those findings. The EPA has little authority to regulate fracking; Congress in 2005 stripped it of most such power.

Science not just the free market will guide the states to energy efficiency and independence, safely, since the fed has basically been reduced to a lab agency that recommends but can't enforce. What you call free markets is a collaboration between states, feds, and corporations.

From your own site though we have this,

The boom in gas production has come about largely because of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Large volumes of water, plus sand and chemicals, are injected to break shale rock apart and free the gas.

Environmentalists say that the fluids can pollute underground drinking water supplies and that methane leaks from drilling cause serious air pollution and also contribute to global warming. The industry and many government officials say the practice is safe when done properly. But there have been cases in which faulty wells did pollute water, and there is little reliable data about the scale of methane leakage.

"The Sierra Club has serious doubts about the net benefits of natural gas," said Deborah Nardone, director of the group's Beyond Natural Gas campaign.

"Without sufficient oversight and protections, we have no way of knowing how much dangerous pollution is being released into Americans' air and water by the gas industry. For those reason, our ultimate goal is to replace coal with clean energy and energy efficiency and as little natural gas as possible."

The evolution continues.

So why aren't we focusing more on our abundance of clean burning natural gas?

Because safety for humans has to be addressed along the way to profits, and energy viability. It's a process not an answer. Small steps because its not as safe as you think it is, nor do scientist. And you think the price of NG ain't going to go UP?

[paraclete]

Well Tal there are some who just don't want to hear it, to them every innovation must be pursued with vigour, no matter what the impact. This is, in their mind, free enterprise at work.

They have forgotten that natural gas produces CO2 when burned, just as coal does. That it produces less is in its favour, but it still contributes to the problem

[talaniman]

That's why it isn't the ultimate answer to a bigger problem, but its profitable and a viable option at this time. Coal like nuclear requires disposal of the waste bi products. Coal ash is a dangerous substance for the environment, and has poisoned entire communities. The real problem is will we let the profits slow the technology from advancing? Just as oil had us stuck for so long, will gas do the same?

I hope not.

[paraclete]

Well Tal we found a use for fly ash, we put it in concrete, sort of solves the disposal problem, and no doubt we can solve the water pollution from fracking, we have to find a way of reclaiming the water. In a sense this is where government comes in, insisting on an industry dealing with its waste products, not just leaving the mess for someone else

[talaniman]

They can easily filter and clean the water that has been contaminated from fracking. But it seems that government has to make them do it. Its those other chemicals, the ones that they don't or haven't disclosed it what the EPA is looking for. Each state regulates its own energy companies, so they will only do what the states make them do.

Investors don't like anything stupid like cleaning up its messes to interfere in its profits.

[paraclete]

You see we are starting to see how this states administration argument is flawed in so many ways in an integrated federal economy. You have to decide whether you can allow your states to go every which way or they have to comply with what everyoneelse is doing. You can't have freedom for freedom's sake, either they are part of the country or they are not. We don't need to know what investors like, over here we have recently taken the view that if you want to dig it out of the ground in any form you will pay and you will clean up your mess, remediation it's called, perhaps a new concept for some, but it is part of the profit structure.

Some have said we will take our business elsewhere and we have said, do it

[speechlesstx]

Hello Steve:

That, or our environmental protection laws are working..

excon

So you crucified enough businesses?

[excon]

So you crucified enough businesses?

Hello again, Steve:

See? I KNEW you liked throwing your trash into the air..

excon