Home » Posts tagged 'carbon dioxide' (Page 5)
Tag Archives: carbon dioxide
Natural Gas Needs To Clean Up Its Act
Natural Gas Needs To Clean Up Its Act
To call natural gas ‘clean’ would be a misnomer. Natural gas is a fossil fuel that emits carbon dioxide when burned and is an important contributor to climate change. The general consensus, however, is that when compared to oil (and petroleum products) or coal, natural gas it is by far the ‘cleaner’ choice for providing base-load power generation, heating homes, and for a series of other industrial and transport applications.
Still, the debate over methane emissions from natural gas production, transport, and distribution calls into question this assumption.
A new study by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) examined the methane emissions from natural gas production on federal and tribal lands. The study found that total natural gas loss, including flaring, amounted to 65 billion cubic feet (bcf) in 2013, or enough to meet the heating and cooking needs of around 1.6 million homes.
The implications of the study are serious. Not only does natural gas loss represent a waste of finite natural resources but it makes a significant and unnecessary contribution to the already seemingly impossible task of combating climate change.
Related: Can This Next Shale Hotspot Live Up To The Hype?
While methane (the major component of natural gas) has a far shorter lifespan than carbon dioxide, it is more efficient at trapping radiation, making the impacton climate change 25 times greater over a 100 year period. Over 20 years, methane’s warming potential is 84 times greater than CO2.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), methane accounts for around 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, almost 30 percent of which came from the production, transport, and distribution of oil and natural gas.
The latest study is part of a much broader effort by the Environmental Defense Fund to measure methane emissions across the United States, not just on federal and tribal lands. In an earlier study released last year, the EDF argued that adoption of existing technologies and operating practices, as simple as more frequent inspections, could help the U.S. reduce methane emissions by 40 percent by 2018.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Peabody Energy to White House: Greenhouse Gas a ‘Non-Existent Harm’
In an official submission to the White House earlier this year, U.S. coal giant Peabody Energy claims that greenhouse gas is a “non-existent harm” and a “benign gas that is essential to all life.”
The March 2015 submission from Peabody further claims that “while the benefits of carbon dioxide are proven, the alleged risks of climate change are contrary to observed data, are based on admitted speculation, and lack adequate scientific basis.”
It has become increasingly rare, especially in the last few years as countries and corporations have begun to take the issue of climate change more seriously, to see a publicly traded company like Peabody Energy (NYSE: BTU) making claims that are so contrary to the well-documented scientific consensus that greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are negatively impacting our climate, health and way of living.
While there are thousands of peer-reviewed scientific documents available on the impacts of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, the Peabody climate change document relies heavily on claims made in newspaper opinion articles and by organizations with known connections to the fossil fuel industry.
An analysis of the 304 footnote citations in the Peabody document finds that opinion articles published in media outlets, primarily the Wall Street Journal, were cited as supporting evidence 41 times ,and groups with historical ties to the fossil fuel industry (e.g. Cato Institute, American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and the Global Warming Policy Foundation) were cited 64 times.
Articles cited from peer-reviewed scientific journals made up only 8% of the evidence cited in Peabody’s arguments:
Here are some of the key quotes from the Peabody climate change document:
“There are no demonstrated foreseeable effects of any GHG emissions.” (pg.3)
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
The Carbon Ranch
The Carbon Ranch
Novelist and historian Wallace Stegner once said that every book should try to answer an anguished question. I believe the same is true for ideas, movements, and emergency efforts. In the case of climate change, an anguished question is this: what can we do right now to help reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) from its current (and future) dangerously high levels?
In an editorial published in July of 2009, Dr. James Hansen of NASA proposed an answer: “cut off the largest source of emissions—coal—and allow CO2 to drop back down . . . through agricultural and forestry practices that increase carbon storage in trees and soil.” I consider these words to be a sort of ‘Operating Instructions’ for the twenty-first century. Personally, I’m not sure how we accomplish the coal side of the equation, which requires governmental action, but I have an idea about how to increase carbon storage in soils.
I call it a carbon ranch.
The purpose of a carbon ranch is to mitigate climate change by sequestering CO2 in plants and soils, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and producing co-benefits that build ecological and economic resilience in local landscapes. “Sequester” means to withdraw for safekeeping, to place in seclusion, into custody, or to hold in solution—all of which are good definitions for the process of sequestering CO2 in plants and soils via photosynthesis and sound stewardship.
The process by which atmospheric CO2 gets converted into soil carbon is neither new nor mysterious. It has been going on for millions and millions of years, and all it requires is sunlight, green plants, water, nutrients, and soil microbes. According to Dr. Christine Jones, a pioneering Australian soil scientist, there are four basic steps to the CO2/soil carbon process:
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Iceland’s volcanic eruption stokes toxic gas fears
Iceland’s volcanic eruption stokes toxic gas fears
The Holuhraun eruption is emitting high volumes of toxic gases and raising health and environmental concerns.
Reykjavik, Iceland – For the past five months, Icelandic weather forecasts have included daily updates on the movement of noxious gas plumes emitted by the ongoing Holuhraun volcanic eruption.
Poisonous gas appeared in late August last year soon after Holuhraun began to spew molten rock. “Most of the gas is sulphur dioxide, water and carbon dioxide,” said Thorolfur Gudnason, a medical professional with Iceland’s Directorate of Health. “The other gases occur in much lower quantities.”
Sulphur dioxide, which causes respiratory, eye and throat problems, is responsible for most of the eruption-related health issues, said Gudnason.
“But carbon dioxide can be dangerous to those who work near the volcano itself,” he said, referring to scientists studying the lava field.
The 85sq km lava field is the size of Manhattan and located far from inhabited areas in a remote central part of Iceland, just north of the Vatnajokull glacier in an area known as Holuhraun, from which the volcano gets its name.
Unlike the smaller, 2010 Eyjafjallajokull eruption, which spouted ash and disrupted air traffic across Europe, Holuhraun doesn’t spew ash – this only happens when the eruption occurs beneath a glacier.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
