Shares in Blackham Resources surged as much as 83 per cent today after it signed an agreement with Synfuels China Co for the joint development of a coal-to-liquid facility near Esperance.

Both parties have signed a memorandum of understanding whereby Synfuels will carry out evaluation activities, with a view to signing a formal agreement regarding the application of its coal-to-liquids technology to the Scaddan project.

The formal agreement, subject to positive evaluation studies, is expected to be executed by the second quarter of 2010.

News of the MoU sent Blackham shares’ up 20 cents, or 83 per cent, to a high of 44c before settling at 34c at 15:37 AEDT.

Following the formal agreement, Synfuels China would have the priority opportunity to negotiate to undertake the whole project design in Blackham’s Coal-to-Liquids (CTL) Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Facility.

After the Esperance Facility is successfully started-up, Blackham and Synfuels China will establish a feasible commercial co-operation model to promote the prompt industrialisation of Synfuels China technology in Australia.

Blackham’s Chairman, Mr Brett Smith stated “Coal to liquids in China is advancing at a rapid rate, faster than any other country in the world. Blackham is excited about its relationship with Synfuels China and looks forward to working closely with one of the world’s premier CTL engineering and technology firms in the development of the Esperance Regional Facility.”

“Blackham intends to dry the lignite to an acceptable level for the gasifier prior to gasification. The innovative drying technology developed by Synfuels China is of significant interest to Blackham,” Mr Smith said.

Synfuels China is recognised as a world-leader in the development of CTL projects, having carried out long term research and development in the coal-to-liquids field and is accumulating production experience following the commissioning of the Inner Mongolia Yitai Group Co. Ltd’s, Ordos plant and the Luan Group’s Shanxi demonstration plants.

These plants are both currently operating at 4,000 barrels per day. Synfuels China’s technology is also to be used in Shenhua Group Co. Ltd’s 4,000 barrel per day FT CTL plant in Ordos, Inner Mongolia. All three of these demonstration plants are planned to be expanded to over 120,000 barrels per day within 12 months.

Prior to entering the MOU, Synfuels China reviewed the lignite analysis for the Scaddan and Zanthus Energy Projects. Blackham will now provide lignite samples to Synfuels China for testing and evaluation by Synfuels China.

Blackham is evaluating the development of the Scaddan and Zanthus Energy Projects into Australian’s premier CTL FT Diesel Facility. Blackham currently controls a combined lignite resource in excess of 1.11 billion tonnes estimated in accordance with the JORC Code.

One aspect of climate change policy that doesn’t seem to get discussed very much is that despite how much noise the coal industry makes in protesting the very idea of pricing carbon they’re not actually the ones who would have to pay for it.  Coal companies mine coal, but they don’t burn it.  Instead they sell it to electric utilities and other operators of power plants who burn it to generate electricity (and to a lesser extent individuals who use coal for home heating).  It’s the power industry, not the coal industry, that actually produces the emissions from coal.

The result of government action to price carbon, then, would largely be a shift by power plant operators away from coal and, in the short run at least, toward natural gas, which is similar enough to coal that it wouldn’t be very difficult technologically to switch to but which emits far less carbon dioxide.  The main reason utilities use so much coal is that coal is cheap.  If the externalities associated with carbon emissions were incorporated into the price of coal, however, natural gas would look much more attractive as a fuel, and many power plants could easily switch from coal to gas.  This would be good for the climate in reducing carbon emissions significantly, it would be good for the utilities in that they wouldn’t have to pay nearly as much for their emissions as they would have had to if they had stuck with coal, and it’s good for the natural gas companies, since it increases demand for gas.

It’s terrible for the coal companies, though.  There’s really no upside for them in carbon pricing.  The price of coal to utilities would effectively rise by the amount of the price of carbon (though the exact mechanism would depend on the details of the policy enacted), so the utilities would have to pay more for coal and would thus want to buy less of it, but the price received by coal companies wouldn’t change.  They would still be selling cheap coal, just less  of it.  This goes a long way to explaining why the coal industry has consistently been the most vociferous in denouncing action on climate change and pushing denialism, and it also explains why electric utilities and gas companies have not been joining in.  The utilities and gas companies can potentially benefit a lot from shaping a climate bill to suit their interests and shepherding it through Congress, and that’s exactly what they’ve been doing with the bills currently under consideration.  There’s not much coal companies can do to soften the blow, so it’s in their best interest to just kill the bill entirely.

An interesting paper from a couple of years back gives some insight into the position of the utilities in this.  It reports on research into the environmental attitudes of middle managers at two coal-based utilities.  The interviews the paper is based on were done a few years back, before climate change was a major issue in public discourse, so global warming and the issues surrounding it barely got mentioned and the focus was much more on local environmental issues.  The managers tended to present themselves as conscientious about fulfilling their environmental obligations, and as occupying a sensible, practical middle ground between the coal companies, which they saw as extreme in their opposition to any environmental regulations, and environmental groups, which they saw as uninformed about science and practical considerations and extreme in their advocacy for ever-tighter regulations.  These guys (the paper doesn’t specify gender, but I suspect they’re mostly guys) are the important players in actually following through on any changes that utilities have to make in response to carbon pricing, so their opinions are important.  Electric companies have a reputation as being full of dull, unimaginative types, but whether or not that reputation is deserved, they are in a crucial position right at the center of the US energy network, and it’s hardly surprising that the bills in Congress now are very responsive to their concerns and interests.

Fischhoff, M. (2007). Electricity company managers’ views of environmental issues: Implications for environmental groups and government Energy Policy, 35 (7), 3868-3878 DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.01.012

Katy and I drove from Washington D.C. to Indianapolis and back this Thanksgiving. This morning as we drove through central Ohio on way back to Indy we listened to This American Life’s Poultry Slam 2008; their tribute to all things fowl as Americans prepare their holiday meals.

It was a great way to spend an hour and the stories, or acts in This American Life parlance, all centered around birds and God.

The story that stuck out to me most was the act called “A Pastor and his flock.”  I’m a sucker for stories about the intersection of the labor movement and church and this was a powerful story.  Rector Bruce Walker at Grace Episcopal Church in Morganton, North Carolina, was asked by organizers at the Western Carolina Worker’s Center to get involved in a struggle between workers and management at nearby Case Farms.  The workers at Case Farms, a gigantic chicken processing facility, were organizing a union and Ken Wilson, the head of public relations and mouth piece for the vicious antiunion campaign for Case Farms, was a member at Grace.

(For more information about the struggle, check out Barry Yeoman’s Spiritual Union or read The Maya of Morganton, written by UNC Labor professor Leon Fink.)

Even though Walker was relatively new to town, none of the workers at Case Farms (mostly Guatamalan immigrants) worshipped at Grace and that Walker was part of the solidly middle-class congregation, the rector sided with the workers.  He tried to get his congregant to start rethinking his stance and role.  Wilson was a little angry when his pastor showed up on the day of the union election and he soon quit the church and moved out of town.

Though the church lost a tither that day, the low wage poultry workers of Morganton gained a friend and ally.  When asked if he had any regrets, Rector Walker only regretted that he hadn’t done more.

Its a story every pastor  and his or her flock should here.  Hopefully, the members at Grace are proud of their pastor who knows the difference between cheap and costly grace.

Sir Paul McCartney, a man whose music I enjoy and whose political campaigning so often hits the nail on the head, today commented on the need to cut down on meat consumption in a bid to stop global warming. He’s campaigning for a ‘meat-free Monday’, one day a week when people would eat no meat in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is all very well and good from a western, middle class perspective but the truth is that the United Kingdom represents only a tiny proportion of world meat production. Indeed, much of the meat we eat is not British grown at all, and reducing our consumption of it would only cause wastage and raise prices as foreign suppliers find themselves unable to survive on a reduced market. Even for the market we can control, here in the UK, farmers are the last group whose livelihoods we should be damaging after a decade of foot and mouth, bluetongue and other catastrophes. It is an industry we should be nurturing and supporting. Indeed, by buying British, and aiding the production of food in Britain, we reduce the need for imported goods in the first place; a move which does make a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Eating less meat is a well-intentioned, but ultimately naiive way of solving the climate crisis. Besides, people like meat, people are never going to be convinced to stop doing something they enjoy. Closing down all nightclubs would massively reduce power consumption on a Friday and Saturday night; twice the amount of days affected by McCartney’s plan! That doesn’t make it the right solution. I happen to like nightclubs, just as I happen to like meat! I had a very good pigeon breast starter and pork main last night, and I’m far from the only person who wouldn’t even contemplate giving that up, especially when its potential effect is questionable. Some of you may be, but your efforts will be in vain without the ultimately impossible support of the vast majority of the world’s population.

Apart from anything else, the scale of any potential impact from radically reducing meat consumption in the UK would be a token at best. It is a similar approach to those who believe we can solve global warming by turning our televisions off standby at night, by driving hybrid cars (which incidently produce more Co2 in their production, assembly and delivery process than a Range Rover!) and by freezing in your own home because turning the thermostat down five degrees will save power. Let me stress, ALL of these actions do help, but ultimately they are a half-measure; an excuse to make us believe we are fighting to stop global warming and save the planet. It is very popular, especially amongst the circles of the political elite to focus solely on what individuals can do to help themselves on this issue, and very unpopular to take the position I have adopted in this blog, but the reality is that none of these personal measures will ever be enough to avert disaster unless we begin to take some tough decisions on a much wider scale now.

A huge and very profitable market has been built up around climate change and the myth that the actions of individuals alone will be enough to make change happen – it allows industry and governments to take peoples’ minds off the true scale of the ecological changes we could be facing. If we want to make a difference, we need to start changing the production of power at source. This means pushing development of clean energy production methods such as wind, solar power and hydroelectric generation. Reducing our usage of energy will never be enough – instead we need to make the energy green in the first place. There is also a need for a new generation of nuclear power stations; the truth is that nuclear is far from a perfect solution, but there is simply not enough capacity to produce all of our energy from renewable sources, and nuclear provides a mostly safe, carbon-free option.

One area where individual actions can certainly make a difference is in micro-generation, with a number of energy providers now offering schemes which allow people to sell some of their homemade power back to the grid. In some cases, you can even turn a profit! If everybody makes the relatively small capital investment to install solar panels, or a wind turbine or perhaps a ground source heat pump, we really can start to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

As we head towards Copenhagen, we need our leaders to start getting serious about climate change and start committing to a rapid, severe and most importantly of all worldwide effort to reduce climate change before it is too late. For the first time, the United States are prepared to talk seriously on this issue, and therefore for the first time, these proceedings have a point. Let us hope that the world can unite behind a common goal, begin a huge geopolitical paradigm shift, and we can all get on with everyday life without fearing for our future, kidding ourselves that we’re making a long-term difference when we change our lightbulb.

Thanks Mr. President!

Click On Links
The World’s Most Powerful People
Obama Facing Debt Payments, $1.6 TRILLION Due By March
Millions To Repay Part Of Obama Tax Credit
Obama’s Approval Rating
Dollar Losing Value Under Obama
Obama Bank Overhaul
Obama’s 9 Trillion Dollar Deficit
Obama Gun Control
Copenhagen Climate Treaty Summary

Oughta quit that....It's a filthy habit.

-SevenCell
http://sevencell.wordpress.com

Wyoming's State Motto - "Equal Rights"...UNLESS...you happen to be talking about coal power. That's ssssspecial! Just look at it! Couldn't you just wrap your arms around it and give it a great big hug and a kiss? Nothing says "I love you" like a juicy tax break.

Don’t be shy, Wyoming lawmakers.  Tell us what you really think of wind energy.  The week before last the Wyoming legislature began simultaneously deliberating two bills.  One of the bills would increase taxes for wind power.  The other bill would provide tax breaks to coal power (helping coal overcome the other bill).

What could the Wyoming legislature be thinking?  Gee, ya don’t imagine it has anything to do with the fact that Wyoming is the largest coal digger-upper of the 50 states, do ya?  Could it beeee?   Could it…beeeeeee?

In 2008, the good state of Wyoming pried, plowed, blasted and bulldozed 468 million tons of coal…one year.  Nearly a trillion pounds.  Not million.  Not billion.  A trillion.  One state.  Oh yeah….That’s loooove.

How do I love thee?  Let me count the ways….

It loves me, it loves me not, it loves me, it loves me not, it loves me....

-SevenCell
http://sevencell.wordpress.com

.   For more information go to www.sierraclub.org/coal.

ROLE OF HYDROLOGY AND GRAVITY

Pure water doesn’t conduct electricity. Normal water too is a poor conductor of heat. Exchange of heat takes place almost entirely by convection. Molecules carrying heat travel within the system and spread heat uniformly.

Ice and snow being solid, molecules have no freedom of movement. Unlike a rod of iron, heat is not passed on from one end to the other if the rod is made of ice. This is the reason why the igloo (hutment made of ice blocks) retains warmth inside it, even when the temperature outside falls much below the freezing point. A human being may remain alive for some days, if he sleeps in the arctic region. The snow deposited on his body forms a blanket which will not allow the heat of the body to escape outside and also protects from the cold wind blowing from the Poles. Such cases have been reported. At the same time beggars sleeping outside in the cold season in north India die as reported in newspapers, as they lose their body heat easily in the absence of warm cloths.

 This unique quality of frozen water plays a very important role in preventing heat of the earth from escaping into outer space by radiation. The Polar regions, and a considerable part of temperate regions in winter, remain covered with ice and snow. This is true of the mountainous regions and the plateaus of higher altitude also. In the seas the thermal insulation provided by the snow cover allows life to flourish throughout the year but prevents escape of heat and makes considerable contribution to global warming.

 There is continuous evaporation of water from the seas (not covered by ice) and land. Each molecule of vapor carries considerable quantity of latent heat as additional calorie. When they rise in altitude, the molecules form clouds and then descend towards the earth as rain, snow, dew and mist. This circulation of water results in cyclic movement of heat. Only the latent heat released at the time of formation of clouds results in escape of heat by radiation. In areas where humidity is minimum the heat lost by radiation will be considerable. Ironically deserts help to ‘fight Global Warming’ and greenery works in the reverse direction!

 If the earth were devoid of water, transfer of heat from the earth by radiation to outer space would have been easy and enormous in quantity as in the case of  the Moon.

 GRAVITY

What is the source of geo-thermal energy?

 A stack of lignite will catch fire if left in the open. Obviously this is because of the pressure developed inside, raising the temperature to ignition point of lignite which is comparatively low. Such rise in temperature takes place inside a stack of coal, iron ore, sand etc also. The pressure is caused by gravity of the earth which continuously pulls the stack down and the surface of the earth opposing this force, causing pressure. Therefore we may say that gravity generates heat. A hill is also a stack of great dimension. As the crust of the earth is not falling down due to gravity; it is obviously subjected to pressure caused by opposing forces of gravity and forces supporting the crust to remain in position. When the pressure at a point, say 10km inside the earth, is multiplied by the area of the globe at this point, we will get a mind boggling figure of the thrust, capable of generating heat, comparable to that produced by thousands of hydrogen bombs.

 Well, this may be the source of geo thermal energy and not radiation as maintained by geologists. The above theory is borne out by the fact that as we go deeper into the earth the temperature rises. In depressions like the Grand Canyon in America and the Dead Sea it is very hot.

 “Hence, omitting all reference to the active volcanoes, and to thermal springs at all temperatures below that of boiling water, found in all parts of the world, it is well-known fact, that in descending into deep mines the temperature is greatly above that of the mean of the exterior air, and increases progressively with the depth. This was first remarked by Gensanne, about the year 1740, in the lead mines of Giromagny, near Beport. Saussure afterwards observed the same fact in the salt mines at Bex, in Switzerland; but the attention of naturalists was not generally directed to the temperature of the lower strata, till Humboldt has executed an extensive and interesting series of experiments in the mines of Freyburg, in 1791. The best set of observations we possess on the temperature of deep places, is that which has been uninterruptedly continued for more than half a century in the caves under the observatory of Paris. In 1783 the Count de Cassini, in concert with Lavoisier, placed a very delicate thermometer in one of these excavations for the purpose of observing the curious phenomenon of an invariable temperature, which had been noticed to exist in the same place, by the first Cassini, in 1671, and by La Hire, in 1730. The thermometer is placed at the depth of rather more than thirty yards under the surface, in a bed of fine sand, and has indicated no change of temperature, or at least its oscillations have not exceeded the 1/33 of centesimal degree. The constant temperature exceeds at that depth, by 2.16 degree Fahrenheit’s scale, the mean tempreture at the surface: and supposing a uniform increase at the same rate, we would arrive at the temperature of boiling water at the depth of 2542 yards under the city of Paris. We may quote a few other results of observation. In the coal mines of the north of England the temperature is 70° at the depth of 800 or 900 feet, when the air at the surface is only 48° or 49°; and in the mines of Valenciana in Mexico, it is 92° when the surface-air is at 60°. The following are additional examples:-. In a copper mine at Dolcoath, in Cornwall, a thermometer was kept eighteen months buried in the rock to the depth of a yard. The depth of the mine was 1377 feet. The temperature indicated was 75.5°, while that of the country is 50°; and consequently the increase of heat there is at the rate of 1° for every 54 feet.

 At Giromagny, in the Vosges, the annual temperature at the surface is 49°; at 330 feet depth it is 53.6°; at 1008 feet, 65.8°; at 1416 feet 74.6°. in four of the deepest mines of Saxony the annual tempreture at the surface is 46.4degree at from 510 to 600 feet depth it is 54.5 degree; at 840 feet, 58 degree; at 1080 feet, 62.6°.

 In the deepest British coal mine, that of Killingworth, the annual temperature at the surface is 48°; at 900 feet depth it is 70°; at 1200 feet, 77°. A similar gradation is found in many of the deeper mines at home and abroad.

 There is thus in the Vosges an increase of temperature in descent below the surface amounting to about 1° in every 60 feet; in Saxony 1° in every 66 feet; and in Britain 1 degreein every 45 feet. After the ratio observed in the Vosges, the tempreture of the hot springs at Bath, 113°, will be found at three-quarters of a mile in the interior of the earth, and that of boiling water at a depth of nearly two miles. “The facts strongly support three conclusions:- First, that the heat of an interior shell of the earth is greater than the superficial shell. Second, that this heat augments progressively as we descend towards this region, in a ratio bearing some relations to the depth. Third, that, even at moderate depth, this heat is greater than the mean heat of the globe ought to be, if entirely derived from the sun. The heat of such an interior mass must be constantly diffusing itself towards the surface; and at the surface it may be kept down, so as to affect the temperature derived from the solar action very feebly, by the greater or less rapidity of its dissipation. But as it is very improbable that it should be diffused with perfect equality round the whole exterior shell of the globe, it may be the true source of some of those anomalies of climate, such as the discrepancy in the annual heat under the same parallel, which cannot be easily referred to other known causes”. If the heat of the globe were entirely derived from the sun, Pekin, at an inconsiderable elevation above the sea, ought to have the same mean annual temperature as Naples, being under the same parallel of latitude; but instead of that being the case, the temperature falls short of that at Naples by nearly 9°. Other causes may contribute to produce this discrepancy; yet it is not unreasonable to suppose that the mean heat at Naples is raised by its proximity to a focus of internal heat which smokes and flashes through the chimney of Vesuvius”.

 It is amazing that pioneers like Humboldt, Lavoisier etc had done path breaking observations regarding geo thermal energy and deserve all praise. Had this line of research continued, the conclusions now reached by me would have automatically been revealed much earlier. That the scientists, especially geologists, have not cared to  study physical geography is a big loss. I have only filled up the spaces left void by the pioneers.

 To conclude: global warming is caused by the earth itself and cooling is retarded by water – our father and mother. Shall we blame our parents or thank them for giving precious life enabling us a few year’s visit to this wonderful earth to enjoy it’s beauty and sublimity?

Randy Eresman, CEO, EnCana Corp. (archive photo)

Following their shareholder meeting approving the split of Encana into two companies – EnCana Corp. (natural gas) and Cenovus Energy (oil saneds) – company CEO Randy Eresman gave his prediction that natural gas prices are likely to remain under $5.50 and likely under $6.50 for the foreseeable future as technology improves production costs.

This may be bad news for shareholders of natural gas companies, but Eresman stated that those companies like EnCana positioned in lower cost shale gas properties like the Horn River basin will do fine while higher cost conventional plays may be more challenging. Eresman is quoted as stating:

“The best producers at the lowest cost will be the ones that survive in this new environment. And with our exposure to these lower-cost plays, we are very well-positioned.”

Eresman went on to state:

“We can do well and survive and have a very strong positive cash flow. [But] I expect there will be some difficulty in bottom-line earnings for all corporations that are exposed to natural gas.”

The Horn River basin remains one of the only active basins in Canada, and one of three in North America. And while some may be concerned about their natural gas stocks, the abundance of shale gas and low prices simply reinforces the opportunity to leverage this abundant domestic resource as a low-carbon alternative to oil and coal.

Globe and Mail: EnCana sees tough terrain ahead

Renee Schoof writes for McClatchy -

“The Environmental Protection Agency is continuing its crackdown on coal pollution with a new plan to cut sulfur dioxide — a move that would clean up the air for millions of Americans and bring some relief to people who suffer from asthma and other respiratory diseases.

The new rule, which was proposed earlier this month, would be the first time since 1971 that the EPA has tightened controls on sulfur dioxide to protect the public health.

“This would be an important step to ensure the health of the American public,” said Dr. Alan H. Lockwood, a professor of neurology and nuclear medicine at the University of Buffalo. “Tens of thousands of Americans die each year from inhaling pollutants from coal burning.”

Read more at McClatchy

The SMH has begun a series of aticles on the severe water shortages and threatened drinking water supplies for 35,000 people in the Lachlan Valley. The SMH has also reported on the water wars continuing in Orange & Oberon.

Excerpts from GLOBAL WARMING IS A MYTH

IS CARBON DI OXIDE THE VILLAIN?

Such terms as carbon credit find a place in newspapers almost daily. I don’t know what is all this about. To me CO₂ sustains life on earth. Has the level of CO₂ in the atmosphere gone up? Has it been proved experimentally?

 Before Industrialization

The whole of America and most of the old world were inhabited by a comparatively small population, a majority of whom depended upon meat and fish. Farming depended entirely on rain water as big dams were unknown. The grasslands of America and Australia didn’t produce food grains. Coal and other fossil fuels were not commercially exploited. In those days we may presume that a proper balance existed between CO₂ and other ingredients of the air like N₂ and O₂ in spite of forest fires, the like of which we witnessed in California recently.

After Industrialization

Commercial exploitation of coal began first followed by oil and natural gas, resulting in increase in the level of CO₂ in the atmosphere. Simultaneously two other developments followed: increase in population (both human and animal) and corresponding growth in food grains production. Big dams were constructed and more and more areas of land were brought under cultivation. Mechanization and the use of artificial fertilizers made leaps and bounds in production of food grains, fruits and other commercial crops. The Prairies of North America became the granary of the world. Compared to grass, food grains and sugar fix a large quantity of CO₂. The major items responsible for such CO₂ fixation are:

1. food grains like wheat, corn, rice, oats, soybean etc
2. underground vegetables like potato, tapioca, beetroot etc
3. fruits like apple, grapes, banana, dates, cherry, pineapple etc
4. sugarcane etc

Experts can calculate the total quantity of CO₂ produced by industry and that absorbed by vegetation as mentioned above and the marine vegetation in order to find out whether the net balance is favoring CO₂ concentration in the air. An easier way would be to experimentally ascertain the percentage of CO₂ in the atmospheric air (being heavier than air CO₂ is available near the surface of the earth). If CO₂ level increases O₂ level should decrease. In my childhood (I am 70+) O₂ level was 20% as mentioned in my text book. Has it changed? An atom of carbon combines with two atoms of oxygen to form CO₂ which is absorbed by the leaves of the plant to form starch. In the process two atoms of oxygen are released into the atmosphere. We may say that each carbon atom burnt ultimately results in the release of two atoms of oxygen, thus resulting in increase in the level of O₂. Level of CO₂ dissolved in the ocean water should also be checked. If this level increases, fishes would die en mass. Has this happened? If the level of CO₂ dissolved in ocean waters decreases, plant life in the ocean cannot produce enough starch by photosynthesis. This will be a hazard for fishes and other marine life.

The volume of animal and hence plant life in the oceans is much more than that on the continents. This is because the area of the oceans is seven times the area of the continents. Also, the oceans are deep. Hence the volume of water is very much more and can contain a large population of marine life. The necessary starch has to come from plant life. So, the total bio mass in the oceans is considerably higher than that in the continent. The carbon di oxideàPlant starchàAnimalsàCarbon di oxide cycle is there in the watery medium, just as in our atmosphere. All the gases, including nitrogen, will be present in dissolved state in the oceans too. Here industrialization has not affected the ‘atmosphere’ of the ocean. This fact has to be recognized in any discussion on Global Warming.

[The percentage of various components of atmospheric air as obtained from the websites is given below:

Nitrogen 78.1

Oxygen 20.9

Argon 0.9

Neon 0.002

Helium 0.0005

Krypton 0.0001

Hydrogen 0.00005

Carbon di oxide 0.035!!!!!!!! (Poor, innocent CO2 has been maligned unnecessarily)

Methane 0.0002

Ozone 0.000004

This would suggest that the percentage of oxygen has slightly increased. If this is true it augers ill, as forest fires may become uncontrollable with increase in the level of oxygen in the coming years. Therefore, this line should be investigated separately by experts. My guess is that with unchecked use of nitrogenous fertilizers, the total bio mass in the earth could have increased. The requisite extra nitrogen must have been drawn from the atmosphere along with CO₂ releasing extra oxygen into the atmosphere as pointed out above.]

The importance of proper scientific study cannot be over emphasized. Mother Nature maintains her balance, whatever her children may do!

OEC and Ohio Environmental Law Center hail AMP decision to halt dirty coal plant

Decision belies myth that dirty power is cheap power

In a statement, AMP revealed it will abandon its plans to build a 960 MW coal plant near Letart Falls in Meigs County. According to the statement, the company said the change in course was the result of an unexpected 37 percent increase in the cost to build the 1,000-megawatt plant, which was last estimated at $3.25 billion.

The Ohio Environmental Council is hailing the announcement today by American Municipal Power-Ohio (AMP-Ohio) that it has cancelled plans to construct a proposed 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power plant on the Ohio River in Meigs County.

Ever-growing costs doomed the plant, as cost projections grew from $2.5 billion just two years ago to close to $4 billion, today.

Statement by Trent Dougherty, OEC Staff Attorney and Director of Legal Affairs:

“AMP-Ohio’s wise decision belies the myth that coal power is cheap power. Financial institutions, major utilities, government regulators and public power organizations across the nation have come to the conclusion that conventional coal makes little sense economically or environmentally. Today, that realization came to American Municipal Power (AMP) as AMP has abandoned plans to build yet another coal plant.

“We are pleased that AMP-Ohio has concluded that dirty power is bad business. Now, AMP Ohio can get back to the business of doing what it does best — being a leader in renewable energy and energy efficiency in this state.
“For years, we and our allies have presented data to AMP executives, to utility and environmental regulators, and to dozens of city governments that would be stuck with the bill for this plant, projecting that this old-fashioned coal plant was burdened with unknown costs to consumers and unsubstantiated risks to our environment. Years ago, AMP-Ohio’s plant and rationale for building it may have made sense, but the regulatory landscape has fundamentally shifted.”

The OEC, along with its partners Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club are in litigation over this plant, appealing air and water pollution permits issued last year by Ohio EPA. The coal plant was slated to burn at least 2.8 million tons of coal and each year release the following air pollution each year: up to 6,820 tons of sulfur dioxide, 3,194 tons of nitrogen oxide, 1,182 tons of particulate matter, 343 tons of sulfuric acid mist, 166.87 tons of volatile organic compounds, 880 pounds of lead, and 192 pounds of mercury.

Climate change, energy supply and the future for Southern African coal – the focus of global attention is now firmly placed on the twin problems of climate change and the supply of energy at acceptable prices. Energy use and climate change are inextricably linked,  Almost 90% of the world’s primary energy is provided by the burning of fossil fuels – coal, oil and gas. But the more we consume fossil fuels, the more carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere.  However the era of using these cheap fossil fuels is coming to an end… ( more)

T. Boone Pickens

Oil billionaire turned wind power and natural gas evangelist, T Boone Pickens, has been promoting and lobbying the increased use of natural gas in the U.S as a means to secure America’s energy future and reduce carbon emissions. The Bluebridge Plan is a similar grass roots movement that believes Canada needs to better leverage it’s domestic natural gas assets in order to reduce carbon emissions in Canada. Both plans would be beneficial to North America -  both economically and environmentally.

Unfortunately, consumers tend to have short memories. It was not that long ago that oil was at $147/barrel. Fact is, oil will return to those price points again, and higher. At the same time, we tend to ignore the importance of something when it is abundant. That’s where we are with natural gas. Technology in fracturing and horizontal drilling have made it economically possible to extract batural gas from tight shale rock formations. The gas has always been there but until the last couple years we have not been able to economically extract it. Today, the potential of shale gas has nearly doubled the natural gas reserves in Canada, and increased reserves in the U.S. by as much as 40%.

This is where the Picken’s Plan, the Bluebridge Plan and others are formulating message. Natural gas is a domestic resource that is a cleaner alternative to oil and coal. It is abundant, practical and proven. By increasing the usage of natural gas in the overall energy mix we can make considerable reductions in carbon emissions. Keep in mind, the natural gas is going to be developed and produced. The question is whether Canada and the U.S. take advantage of this lower carbon resource, or do they export it to the benefit of others.

As countries move forward on climate legislation, it becomes more apparent that a price tag will be added to the cost of carbon. Goods and services produced by low carbon energy will have a lower or no carbon costs, and therefore be more price competitive. By every measure, natural gas is a considerably lower carbon fuel then oil and coal.  Canada – as well as every other country in the world – need to reduce carbon emissions now. Various groups can argue all they want about how much and when but the point is implementing reductions now is a step in the right direction and natural gas can make those reductions significant.

The momentum for increased usage of natural gas in the U.S. energy mix is growing. U.S. law makers are currently considering the Natural Gas Act which will increase incentives to use natural gas as an alternative fuel in transportation. Canada needs to make comparable efforts to ensure that Canada is maximizing the benefits of natural gas to reduce carbon emissions.

The recent leaked emails from East Anglia University in the UK came as no surprise to me or many others who chose to question Global Warming myths and pseudo science. I have a math/science background and possibly more importantly, I am from NC and many of us have built in BS detectors. When confronted with numbers and theories that appeared absurd, I did some real research and reported on this blog. Watch the following video from a real scientist and then visit or revisit articles presented here going back to February of 2008.
“Climategate: Dr. Tim Ball on the hacked CRU emails”

Frem a speech given by Keith O. Rattie, Chairman, President and CEO of Questar Corporation, on April 2, 2009, at the 22nd Annual UVU Symposium on Environmental Ethics, held at Utah Valley University.
Reported here, May 15, 2009
“My perspective on global warming changed when I began to understand the limitations of the computer models that scientists have built to predict future warming. If the only variable driving the earth‟s climate were manmade CO2 then there‟d be no debate – global average temperatures would increase by a harmless one degree over the next 100 years. But the earth‟s climate is what engineers call a “non-linear, dynamic system”. The models have dozens of inputs. Many are little more than the opinion of the scientist – in some cases, just a guess.”
“Another example, water vapor is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. [The media now calls CO2 a “pollutant”. If CO2 is a “pollutant” then water vapor is also a “pollutant” – that‟s absurd, but I digress]. Some scientists believe clouds amplify human CO2 forcing, others believe precipitation acts as the earth‟s thermostat. But scientists do not agree on how to model clouds, precipitation, and evaporation, thus there‟s no consensus on this fundamental issue.”
“But the reality for American consumers is that whether you buy that the science is settled or not, the political science is settled. With the media cheering them on, Congress has promised to “do something”. CO2 regulation is coming, whether it will do any good or not. Indeed, President Obama‟s hope of shrinking the now the massive federal budget deficit depends on vast new revenues from a tax on carbon energy – so called “cap and trade”. Harry Reid has promised cap and trade legislation by August.”
Cap and trade, Global warming, Fact vs Fiction

From the Citizen Wells blog, March 10, 2008

“So, what is hampering our oil production. Environmental wackos. Let’s take Alaska for example. Of course, they always bring up environmental impact. But they also bring up animals like polar bears and whales. They use pseudo science of global warming and terms like may and could cause. They consistently use false data and science. I hear talk of polar bears becoming extinct almost every day when in fact their numbers have increased. Alleged receding ice will fundamentally have no impact on their numbers.”
Always follow the money

From the Citizen Wells blog, March 10, 2008

“Weather Channel founder John Coleman is calling global warming a fraud and says the station he founded needs to stop telling people what to think about climate change.”

“One of it’s meteorologists suggested two years ago that weathercasters who have doubts about global warming should lose their certification. Coleman advocates suing people who sell carbon credits — including Al Gore — because the attention in the courts could, in his words, “put some light on the fraud of global warming.””
 John Coleman on Al Gore Global Warming lies

From the Citizen Wells blog, February 28, 2008
“Global warming is not equivalent to climate change. Significant, societally important climate change, due to both natural- and human- climate forcings, can occur without any global warming or cooling.”
“In terms of climate change and variability on the regional and local scale, the IPCC Reports, the CCSP Report on surface and tropospheric temperature trends, and the U.S. National Assessment have overstated the role of the radiative effect of the anthropogenic increase of CO2 relative to the role of the diversity of other human climate climate forcing on global warming, and more generally, on climate variability and change.”
“Global and regional climate models have not demonstrated skill at predicting regional and local climate change and variability on multi-decadal time scales.”
R.A. Pielke Sr. provides a balanced view of climate science
 

Common sense goes a long way where I come from and the numbers and peudo science from the likes of Al Gore never made sense. I also checked some real data from time to time like summer temperatures in Antarctica.
Here is one of the better sources for information on climate change and earth facts.
http://wattsupwiththat.com

People listening to policymakers debate the nation’s energy future might think: Just erect a lot of wind turbines, and problem solved. Or install a bunch of solar panels, and let the sun do the work.  However, renewable energy alternatives present costs and challenges just like traditional energy sources — coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydropower.  (read World-Herald article)

MANUFACTURERS have also done quite well…. From The Australian. Full story

This site may contain information about: city view. The blog is also related to: city streets.

Stop Entergy Arkansas From Raising Rates
$1.04 Billion!

Today, Tuesday, November 24, is the last day to submit your comment against prolonging the life of the White Bluff coal-fired power plant in Redfield, Arkansas.

Entergy Arkansas is asking the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to approve an air permit that would prolong the life of its White Bluff coal-fired plant. If ADEQ grants the permit, Entergy will dump $1.04 billion of ratepayers’ money into retrofitting its plant. Instead of sticking ratepayers with a billion dollar charge to keep burning dirty coal, we should instead look to cleaner, less expensive ways to meet our state’s power needs.

Tell the ADEQ to say “NO” to Entergy Arkansas’ plans. Don’t let Entergy Arkansas dump your dollars into a scheme that locks Arkansas into dirty coal and out of a cleaner energy future.

Other energy providers have already expressed interest in replacing White Bluff’s dirty coal power with power from cleaner burning natural gas. With your help, we can wean Arkansas off coal and reduce the state’s carbon footprint.

Chaining ourselves to the fate of a dying coal plant will leave us years behind competing states. Now is our chance to step forward and make Arkansas a cleaner energy leader, but we just have until 4:30 p.m. today. Please take action now.