• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall 3%

LowDown

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The International Energy Agency is reporting data showing that economic growth is being increasingly decoupled from carbon dioxide emissions. Basically, human beings are using less carbon dioxide intensive fuels to produce more goods and services. The IEA attributes the relatively steep drop in U.S. emissions largely to the ongoing switch by electric generating companies from coal to cheap natural gas produced using fracking from shale deposits. Renewals also contributed a bit to the decline. From the IEA:

Global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions were flat for a third straight year in 2016 even as the global economy grew.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

CO2 emissions world wide have probably not peaked, but this development is good news for those concerned about this matter. It's a bit of a stretch to say that the economy has been "decoupled" from CO2 emissions since cheap energy from carbon fuels is very much needed and will be for the foreseeable future. This progress is the result of more efficient, improved technology.

CO2 emitted by natural gas is half that of a comparable amount of coal. Electricity from natural gas now exceeds that from coal in the US.

More than half of global energy growth is from renewables, and most of that is from hydropower.

Of course, environmentalists have opposed both fracking and the damming of rivers for hydropower.

U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall 3 Percent - Hit & Run : Reason.com
 
1. Natural gas is by far the cleanest-burning fossil fuel. With the shift in economics in favor of hydraulic fracturing, combined with laws that look the other way when fracking poisons the groundwater or induces earthquakes, fracking has emerged as the biggest threat to the coal market.

2. Environmentalists have mixed feelings about hydro power and understandably so. On the one hand, it produces clean, renewable electricity for remarkably low upkeep costs. On the other hand, building large dams drowns considerably large areas. And permanent floods--which is in effect what dams induce upstream--spare nothing. Every source of energy has a catch.
 
LowDown said:
CO2 emissions world wide have probably not peaked, but this development is good news for those concerned about this matter. It's a bit of a stretch to say that the economy has been "decoupled" from CO2 emissions since cheap energy from carbon fuels is very much needed and will be for the foreseeable future. This progress is the result of more efficient, improved technology.

CO2 emitted by natural gas is half that of a comparable amount of coal. Electricity from natural gas now exceeds that from coal in the US.

More than half of global energy growth is from renewables, and most of that is from hydropower.

Of course, environmentalists have opposed both fracking and the damming of rivers for hydropower.

U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall 3 Percent - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Click to expand...

That will continue as low carbon energy becomes increasingly more usable and cheaper than high carbon alternatives.
 
Phys251 said:
1. Natural gas is by far the cleanest-burning fossil fuel. With the shift in economics in favor of hydraulic fracturing, combined with laws that look the other way when fracking poisons the groundwater or induces earthquakes, fracking has emerged as the biggest threat to the coal market.
Click to expand...

The benefits of fracking far outweigh its disadvantages and the US in particular is economically better off from this. If it replaces coal altogether the environmental benefits of that must surely outweigh any downsides

2. Environmentalists have mixed feelings about hydro power and understandably so. On the one hand, it produces clean, renewable electricity for remarkably low upkeep costs. On the other hand, building large dams drowns considerably large areas. And permanent floods--which is in effect what dams induce upstream--spare nothing. Every source of energy has a catch.
Click to expand...

Over the last 3 decades environmentalists have had mixed feelings about anything that might materially progress or benefit our species sadly

C3: Global Warming Quotes & Climate Change Quotes: Human-Caused Global Warming Advocates/Supporters

In reference to the OP I particularly liked this one ......

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: “Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”

Or perhaps ....

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

 
Last edited:
Jack Hays said:
Climate News
[h=1]If only we had listened to climate scientists back in 1979…here’s what would have happened[/h]Guest essay by Alberto Z. Comendador In two previous articles I made a point that seems inarguable but that advocates of emission cuts seldom acknowledge: the only worthy metric of progress in reducing emissions is the CO2 intensity of GDP, which one could also call CO2 efficiency. Looking at absolute emissions is absurd because absolute…
Click to expand...

Good morning, Jack. :2wave:

Interesting article, as usual, and the comments section reminded me of what the news was telling us at the time, which was scary! Several families in my immediate area did build underground homes back then as a result, and they still live in them today - they say their utility costs for heating/cooling are lower than they used to be ...year around!
 
polgara said:
Good morning, Jack. :2wave:

Interesting article, as usual, and the comments section reminded me of what the news was telling us at the time, which was scary! Several families in my immediate area did build underground homes back then as a result, and they still live in them today - they say their utility costs for heating/cooling are lower than they used to be ...year around!
Click to expand...

Good morning, Polgara.:2wave:

Glad you liked the article. It's like looking back at the clothing and haircut fads of the 1970's.:shock:
 
US emissions are falling, but what of the world?
 
flogger said:
I guess it will just get that tiny bit less greener :wink:
Click to expand...

It's not the CO2 that worries me, but the dirty burning of fossil fuels that other countries use.
 
Lord of Planar said:
It's not the CO2 that worries me, but the dirty burning of fossil fuels that other countries use.
Click to expand...

I'm sure every skeptic here completely supports every reasonable effort to combat pollution. The whole demonization of CO2 thing though is another matter entirely
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom