Home » Posts tagged 'energy policy'

Tag Archives: energy policy

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

The Economic Superorganism: Excerpt

For the last 200 years, increasing global energy consumption has translated to increasing global GHG emissions. While this might not be the case in the future, how do we consider the conflict between our instincts to react to immediate circumstances (i.e., consume more energy now, grow the economy now) and the political will to choose a different path based upon a future goal (i.e., limit human-caused climate change)? As Daniel Dennett asks in Freedom Evolves:

Where does the oomph come from to overrule our own instincts? Tradition would say it comes from some psychic force called willpower, but this just names the phenomenon and postpones explanation. How is “willpower” implemented in our brains?64—Daniel Dennett (2003)

Psychologists and economists use the term discount rate to describe how people make decisions, within our brains, when there are multiple options that present benefits at different points in time. Do I want one dollar now or two dollars ten years from now? Largely driven by natural selection and perhaps some idea similar to the maximum power principle, humans tend to have “steep” discount rates indicating that we tend to select rewards that come sooner rather than later.

Dennett uses the story of Ulysses and the Sirens in Homer’s The Odyssey to demonstrate the link between willpower and the idea of the discount rate. The goddess Circe warns Ulysses that during his journey home, he will sail past the Island of the Sirens. The Sirens appear to have exquisite beauty and a sweet song that lures sailors to their shores. But on approach, the sailboats crash on the rocks, and the sailors remain on the island, unwilling to leave as they listen to the song of the Sirens until they wither and die.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Bizarro World: The Herd Has Truly Gone MadYou’re not crazy. The world we now live in is

Bizarro World: The Herd Has Truly Gone MadYou’re not crazy. The world we now live in is

Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

~ Charles Mackay (1841)

Like me, you may often feel gobsmacked when looking at the world around you.

How did things get so screwed up?

The simple summary is: the world has gone mad.

It’s not the first time.

History is peppered with periods when the minds of men (and women) deviated far from the common good. The Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the rise of the Third Reich, Stalin’s Great Purge, McCarthy’s Red Scares — to name just a few.

Like it or not, we are now living during a similar era of self-destructive mass delusion. When the majority is pursuing — even cheering on — behaviors that undermine its well-being. Except this time, the stakes are higher than ever; our species’ very existence is at risk.

Bizarro Economics

Evidence that the economy is sliding into recession continues to mount.

GDP is slowing. Earnings warnings issued by publicly-traded companies are at a 13-year high. The most reliable recession predictor of the past 50 years, an inverted US Treasury curve, has been in place for the past quarter.

Yet the major stock indices hit all-time highs earlier this week. And every one of the 38 assets in the broad-based asset basket tracked by Deutsche Bank was up for the month of June — something that has never happened in the 150 years prior to 2019.

It has become all-too clear that markets today are no longer driven by business fundamentals. Only central bank-provided liquidity matters. As long as the flood of cheap credit continues to flow (via rock-bottom/negative interest rates and purchase programs), keeping cash-destroying companies alive and enabling record share buybacks, all boats will rise.

 …click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Shale Oil Revolution Actually Reflects a Nation in Decline

Shutterstock

The Shale Oil Revolution Actually Reflects a Nation in Decline

Faster consumption + no strategy = diminished prospects

Here in the opening month of 2019, as the US consumes itself with hot debate over a border wall, far more important topics are being ignored completely.

Take US energy policy. In the US press and political circles, there’s nothing but crickets sounding when it comes to serious analysis or any sort of sustainable long-term plan.

Once you understand the role of energy in everything, you can begin to appreciate why there’s simply nothing more important to get right.

Energy is at the root of everything. If you have sufficient energy, anything is possible. But without it, everything grinds to a halt.

For several decades now the US has been getting its energy policy very badly wrong.  It’s so short-sighted, and rely so heavily on techno-optimism, that it barely deserves to be called a ‘policy’ at all.

Which is why we predict that in the not-too-distant future, this failure to plan will attack like a hungry wolfpack to bite down hard on the US economy’s hamstrings and drag it to the ground.

Shale Oil Snafu

America’s energy policy blunders are nowhere more obvious than in the shale oil space, where it’s finally dawning on folks that these wells are going to produce a lot less than advertised.

Vindicating our own reports — which drew from the excellent work of Art Berman, David Hughes and Enno Peters’ excellent website — the WSJ finally ran the numbers and discovered that shale wells are not producing nearly as much oil as the operators had claimed they were going to produce:

Fracking’s Secret Problem—Oil Wells Aren’t Producing as Much as Forecast

Jan 2, 2019

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Defiant Energy Policy of Mexico’s President-Elect Rattles Moody’s and Fitch

Defiant Energy Policy of Mexico’s President-Elect Rattles Moody’s and Fitch

But it’s going to be tough; he’ll need more than luck to pull it off.

Moody’s has rated the $2 billion of senior unsecured notes due 2029 that Mexico’s state-owned oil company Pemex is in the process of issuing one notch above junk. Pemex is offering to pay a coupon interest rate of 6.5%. In its report on Friday, Moody’s blamed the company’s “weak liquidity, a heavy tax burden and the resulting weak free cash flow, high financial leverage and low interest coverage; and challenges related to crude production and reserve replacement.”

Moody’s is also worried about the large amounts of debt coming due in 2020 and beyond. And Pemex will continue to be “dependent on debt capital markets to fund negative free cash flow,” it said.

Fitch Ratings downgraded the outlook for Pemex’s debt from stable to negative amid concerns about the incoming government’s proposed energy policies. It rates Pemex three notches above “junk” (BBB+), but only because the company is state-owned. Its standalone credit profile — if Pemex were not backstopped by the Mexican state — is junk, seven notches into junk (CCC).

Fitch has also warned earlier that if Pemex’s credit rating drops, so, too, will Mexico’s sovereign debt rating. Even a small deterioration in credit risk could exact a heavy toll on both the company and the country.

The outlook revision to negative from stable “reflects the increased uncertainty about Pemex’s future business strategy coupled with the company’s deteriorating standalone credit profile,” Fitch said in its report.

Fitch’s downward revision was cited by analysts as one possible factor in the fall of the peso last week to its lowest level in over a month. CI Banco analyst James Salazar said that Fitch’s Pemex assessment is a reminder that the company’s “finances should continue to be handled with great caution so as not to cause additional imbalances that will increase its debt.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Australia’s east coast gas crisis will be permanent

Australia’s east coast gas crisis will be permanent

NATIONAL ENERGY GUARANTEE TO DELIVER AFFORDABLE, RELIABLE ELECTRICITY

17/10/2017

“….delivering more gas for Australians before it’s shipped offshore”

Turnbull_NEG
Fig 1: Turnbull’s game changer and level playing field. Convincing?
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/2017-10-17/national-energy-guarantee-deliver-affordable-reliable-electricity

Let’s see how this miracle was achieved. The year 2017 didn’t start well. In February NSW had load shedding of 300 MW for a couple of peak hrs during which an aluminium smelter had to be partially turned off.

14 Feb 2017 NSW’s privatized giveaway coal plant causes load shedding in extreme weather
http://crudeoilpeak.info/nsws-privatized-giveaway-coal-plant-causes-load-shedding-in-extreme-weather

Turnbull’s gas walks to Canossa

Historical context: Prime Minister Turnbull, as Environment Minister under Howard, approved massive LNG export projects from Western Australia without a national domgas policy in place including imposing on the gas industry a condition to build a pipeline to the east, where conventional gas reserves were already known to be limited, as described in this excerpt from Howard’s energy white paper 2004:

EWP_2004_Howard_on_gas

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Alternative Geologies: Trump’s “America First Energy Plan”

Alternative Geologies: Trump’s “America First Energy Plan”

While many of the Trump administration’s “alternative facts” have been roundly and rightly ridiculed, the myths in the America First Energy Plan are still widely accepted and promoted by mainstream media.

The dream of a great America which is energy independent, an America in which oil companies make money and pay taxes, and an America in which gas is still cheap, is fondly nurtured by the major business media and by many politicians of both parties.

The America First Energy Plan expresses this dream clearly:

The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil.

And further:

Sound energy policy begins with the recognition that we have vast untapped domestic energy reserves right here in America. The Trump Administration will embrace the shale oil and gas revolution to bring jobs and prosperity to millions of Americans. … We will use the revenues from energy production to rebuild our roads, schools, bridges and public infrastructure. Less expensive energy will be a big boost to American agriculture, as well.
– www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy

This dream harkens back to a time when fossil fuel energy was indeed plentiful and cheap, when profitable oil companies did pay taxes to fund public infrastructure, and the US was energy independent – that is, when Donald Trump was still a boy who had not yet managed a single company into bankruptcy.

To add to the “flashback to the ’50s” mood, Trump’s plan doesn’t mention renewable energy, solar power, and wind turbines – it’s all fossil fuel all the way.

Nostalgia for energy independence

 

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Energy policy and uninformed opinion

Energy policy and uninformed opinion

Famed economist John Kenneth Galbraith used to respond to questions about the direction of the economy and financial markets by saying: “I answer because I’m asked not because I know.”

Such is also the case with poorly informed members of the public whose views pollsters seek on every conceivable topic including energy. A recent Gallup poll asked a sampling of Americans whether they believe the United States will face a critical energy shortage in the next five years.

Some 31 percent responded yes, the lowest number on record since the question was first asked in 1978 (though it was not asked again by Gallup until 2001.) In 2012, the last time the question appeared in a Gallup survey, the number was 50 percent. The highest result came, not surprisingly, in 2008 when oil was making its historic climb to an all-time high of $147 per barrel. In March of that year (five months before the oil price peak) some 62 percent of American respondents thought the United States would face a critical energy shortage in the next five years.

There is, of course, the problem of what “critical energy shortage” means to each respondent. Prices for all varieties of energy were elevated in 2008, but there weren’t any critical shortages–just very high prices which made it impossible for some to afford as much energy as they would like.

Currently, in the face of gasoline prices which have fallen to $2.11 per gallon nationally and natural gas prices that recently touched lows reminiscent of the late 1990s, it is remarkable that even 31 percent still think critical energy shortages could show up within five years. That belief be may the after-effect of the highest average daily prices on record for crude oil four years running from 2011 through 2014.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The U.S. Military on Peak Oil and Climate Change

The U.S. Military on Peak Oil and Climate Change

The destabilizing nature of increasingly scarce energy resources, the impacts of rising energy demand, and the impacts of climate change all are likely to increasingly drive military missions in this century.

GENERAL CHARLES F. “CHUCK” WALD, USAF (RET.) Former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European Command (USEUCOM); Chairman, CNA MAB

Retired Air Force General Chuck Wald wants to see major changes in how America produces and uses energy. He wants carbon emissions reduced to help stave off the destabilizing effects of climate change.

“We’ve always had to deal with unpredictable and diverse threats,” Gen. Wald said. “They’ve always been hard to judge, hard to gauge. Things that may seem innocuous become important. Things that seem small become big. Things that are far away can be felt close to home. Take the pirates off the African coast. To me, it’s surprising that pirates, today, would cause so much havoc. It’s a threat that comes out of nowhere, and it becomes a dangerous situation.

“I think climate change will give us more of these threats that come out of nowhere. It will be harder to predict them. A stable global climate is what shaped our civilizations. An unstable climate, which is what we’re creating now with global warming, will make for unstable civilizations. It will involve more surprises. It will involve more people needing to move or make huge changes in their lives. It pushes us into a period of nonlinear change. That is hugely destabilizing.

“Our hands are tied in many cases because we need something that others have. We need their oil.

He gives another reason for major changes in our energy policy: He wants to reduce the pressure on our military.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Fossil Fuel Companies Dominate EU Meetings on Climate and Energy Policy, Report Shows

Fossil Fuel Companies Dominate EU Meetings on Climate and Energy Policy, Report Shows

Big energy and fossil fuel companies are enjoying privileged access to the EU’s top climate policy decision makers in the run-up to December’s Paris climate conference a new report reveals.

The report by transparency research and campaign group Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) looks at all meetings held by Commissioners Miguel Arias Cañete and Maros Šefčovič during their first year in office. In total, energy companies make up 30 per cent of all lobby encounters with the commissioners and their cabinets.

When it comes to discussing climate and energy policy, three-quarters of the European Commission’s encounters with the energy industry were with fossil fuel companies including BP, Statoil, and Shell.

Renewables vs Fossil Fuels

At the same time, specialist renewable energy companies have not enjoyed a single one-to-one meeting with the Commissioners. Meanwhile, only six renewable energy associations had meeting.

In fact, for every meeting with the renewables sector, Cañete – a former director of two oil companies now responsible for energy and climate action – had 22 meetings with the fossil fuel industry. Šefčovič, who is in charge of the Energy Union, had just one meeting with renewables compared to 29 with the fossil fuel industry.
Graphs via CEO report

CEO researcher and campaigner Belén Balanyá said: “This data is extremely worrying given the sensitive topics these Commissioners have been in charge of over the past year. Industry-friendly policies on car emissions, Energy Union, the Emissions Trading Scheme, and the upcoming COP21 UN climate negotiations clearly reflect the disturbing level of access to decision-makers enjoyed by dirty energy.

While the science says we must urgently and drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions, boost renewables, and dramatically increase energy efficiency, the Commission is sadly moving in the opposite direction.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Libs Need Clearer Energy Security Plan, Says ‘After the Sands’ Author

Libs Need Clearer Energy Security Plan, Says ‘After the Sands’ Author

Increased oil patch ownership can help Canada meet emissions goals, says Gordon Laxer.

BuildingPipeline_610px.jpg

Gordon Laxer says Canada is highly vulnerable to another oil crisis. Pipeline photo via Shutterstock.

[Editor’s note: Join Dr. Gordon Laxer, political economist and co-founder of the Parkland Institute, for a free talk about ‘After the Sands,’ a new book for anyone concerned about rising sea levels, pipeline and tanker spills, climate change chaos and Canada’s future in a carbon restricted world. Tuesday, Oct. 27 at 7 p.m., The Hive, 128 W. Hastings St., Vancouver.]

Justin Trudeau has to move beyond his murky energy policy and set out clear plans to reduce carbon emissions and improve oil security, says political economist Gordon Laxer.

And the new Liberal government should take steps to increase Canadian ownership in the energy sector if it wants to achieve those goals, said Laxer, whose latest book, After the Sands, argues that Canada must improve its energy security and become a low-carbon society.

Laxer said Canada is highly vulnerable to another oil crisis, which he expects in the next couple of years. The United States is working to lower oil imports and has created strategic oil reserves, Laxer said. Other countries have also focused on energy security.

“We import 40 per cent of our oil, and we have no program,” he said. “We belong to the International Energy Agency. There are 28 countries; 26 of them have strategic petroleum reserves. Canada and Australia do not.”

Improving energy security will also play a big part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reshaping the economy, said Laxer, former head of the Parkland Institute at the University of Alberta.

The Canadian government has focused on increasing energy exports, and the country now exports about four times as much oil as it imports.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Obama’s Bipolar Approach To Energy And Climate Change

Obama’s Bipolar Approach To Energy And Climate Change

With less than two years to go in office, President Obama has already sealed his fate with regards to his legacy on climate change.

When historians look back and assess his actions on what could be one of the biggest issues of his presidency, they will undoubtedly be using the term “disappointing” quite a bit.

The main problem is not that he has ignored the issue as his predecessor, President George W. Bush, did; it is that he has consistently said one thing about the threat of climate change and then done the exact opposite of what he has called for.

When he was first running for president, Obama made it clear that his approach to energy was an “all of the above” platform that included coal, renewables, oil, natural gas, and even nuclear. This was his way of trying to appease both the fossil fuel interests and those of us who understand that renewable energy is what’s needed to protect the planet.

It isn’t unique for politicians to backtrack on campaign promises. In fact, that is the status quo for the most part, and when you take into consideration the fact that Obama was very up front with us about his energy policy, we cannot accuse him of being dishonest in this situation.

But what is unique in this situation is President Obama’s constant public reminders that climate change is a threat to the United States, proclamations that are typically followed by an anti-environment executive action.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

How the climate change debate got hijacked by the wrong standard of proof

How the climate change debate got hijacked by the wrong standard of proof

Everyone loves a courtroom drama–especially one that pits a feisty, but a determined criminal defense attorney against the awesome power of a prosecutor who has the resources of the state behind him or her. We see such David and Goliath stories every week on television.

We cheer as the defense attorney pokes one hole after another in the case of the prosecutor, raising what the audience now perceives as reasonable doubt. But will the jury see it that way? We’ll return after these messages….

This is just the sort of metaphorical setting into which the climate change denial lobby is trying to place the debate over climate change without the public or even most policymakers realizing it. The deniers in the fossil fuel industry and elsewhere are attempting by sleight-of-hand to get both the public and policymakers to abandon the preponderance of evidence standard used primarily in civil trials–and which is similar to evidence-based public policymaking–in favor of another judicial standard designed for criminal trials, namely, beyond a reasonable doubt.

So long as the deniers get to claim the role of defense attorney in this public fight, their task will be much easier. The reason that the deniers want to change the standard of proof, of course, is because climate scientists have already shown through an overwhelming preponderance of evidence that human activities are a major cause of climate change. The deniers have no hope of winning the intellectual argument if this standard of proof is used.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

 

 

Canada’s Energy Policy Should Not Be an Oil and Gas Policy

Canada’s Energy Policy Should Not Be an Oil and Gas Policy

I was out for dinner with a friend the other night and, naturally, the conversation turned to food, energy policy and how they are linked. As our server was well aware, and as almost any restaurant employee could tell you, language is important.

Culinary trends can explode on the scene or grow long in the tooth for a myriad of reasons. Ingredient availability, food cost, evolving cultural norms, changing nutritional guidelines, reality television or the whims of Gwyneth Paltrow can all have an effect on today’s food choices. Especially, however, the name of a dish or its key ingredient is a particularly crucial component of success.

An exotic dinner of sushi sounds great, but a plate of raw dead fish? Not so much.

Speaking of fish; when cod, the staple fish species of my parent’s generation, became a victim of overfishing the demand grew for new species to fill the void. In 1977 an American fish wholesaler named Lee Lantz thought he had discovered the perfect alternative, but the ugly and unfortunately named Patagonian Toothfish didn’t seem very marketable. After some consideration Lantz proposed an alternative and the newly retitled Chilean Sea Bass became the toast of North American seafood restaurants.

This brings us to energy policy and the politics that define it.

A couple of weeks ago I attended an important conference on the topic of Canada’s energy policy and the future of innovation in this realm. However, on closer inspection the topic at hand wasn’t energy policy — this was an oil and gas conference. None of the other important components of our energy infrastructure were even part of the conversation.

 

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Scotland’s Wind Dream May Turn Into A Nightmare

Scotland’s Wind Dream May Turn Into A Nightmare

I last looked into the details and consequences of Scottish energy policy in the pre-referendum post Scotch on the ROCs. The expansion of Scottish renewables is progressing at breakneck speed and the purpose of this post is to update on where we are and where we are heading whether anyone likes it or not (Figure 1). Objections to wind power normally come from rural dwelling country folks whose lives are impacted by the construction of wind turbine power stations around them. My objections tend to be rooted more in the raison d’être for renewables (CO2 reduction), their cost, grid reliability and gross environmental impact. One issue I want to draw attention to is the vast electricity surplus that Scotland will produce on windy days in the years ahead. That surplus has to be paid for. Where will it go and how will it be used?

ElectricityGenerationScotland

Figure 1 The rapidly changing face of electricity generation in Scotland. Wind power seems destined to grow from virtually nothing in 2010 to 15.8 GW come 2020. Maximum power demand in Scotland is 6 GW (red line).

This post was prompted by a couple of emails in the wake of my recent post onWWF Masters of Spin that brought my attention to two short reports prepared by Professor (emeritus) Jack Ponton that describe how operational and consented wind farms will already take Scotland beyond its 2020 target. The small pdfs can be downloaded here and here and the two key charts are reproduced below.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

WEALTH CREATION AND THE NEW ENERGY ECONOMY

WEALTH CREATION AND THE NEW ENERGY ECONOMY

Looking at the markets from a 30,000 foot level, some interesting shifts are occurring. And yet they are almost completely under the radar screen. While many in the oil and gas industry make comments that the renewable energy markets are not sufficiently mature for the world to transition, it is interesting to note that that may not be the case at all. A recent report issued by Bloomberg New Energy Finance makes some interesting prognostications. Bloomberg states:

“By 2030, the world’s power mix will have transformed: from today’s system with two-thirds fossil fuels to one with over half from zero-emission energy sources. Renewables will command over 60% of the 5,579GW of new capacity and 65% of the $7.7 trillion of power investment.”

And that is without much shift in current policy to incentivize renewable production. If countries were to get serious about climate change, these figures could presumably be accelerated. In fact, Bloomberg states that most of this global growth will be driven by economics rather than policy. Costs are falling quickly and the financial markets are becoming more comfortable with the investment profiles. That means that we don’t have to rely completely on political will. But even in this arena, all is not lost.

The World Bank issued a report on global carbon pricing in May, 2014 which stated:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress