Tactless. Very much so. You can just see it now. The energy crisis will end up being the catalyst for a leadership spill. Tone, the loudest howler monkey in the troop will take back the leadership in an almost identical way that Rudd, Gillard, Rudd happened. The electorate won’t be happy.
Same could be said of prime ministers who lose their jobs due to gross ineptitude.
I was looking at Exxon’s AGM presentation earlier today…I was basically looking for whether they had some comments on the oil price outlook…anyway it has a lot of slides about energy use out to 2040 that I think are relevant to this thread. A good birds eye summary of energy use.
I know some people will dismiss Exxon as biased, but over a 20 year time frame I trust them more than any other pundit in here. And making change to energy use will be like steering the Queen Mary:
http://ir.exxonmobil.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=115024&p=irol-EventDetails&EventId=5253939
Trust is an interesting word you use there. I’m also not sure what you are showing cause no one here has said energy use will drop.
Going by page 8 on their slide every form of energy usage is increasing but on slide 11 the CO2 emmissions will drop by 20% as well. This is more what this thread is about.
Page 62 and 63 of the proxy is also interesting. They don’t want to include the outlook formally (which has rules and conditions as per business listing rules) only through their website which has none.
This is good too;
According to them Coal, Oil and Hydro are the only real losers in 2040!
What always strikes me is that the renewables component is still so small in the whole scheme of things - but when I see it plotted, it temporarily cuts through to my brain again…
And that still leaves a lot of CO2 being pumped out. A lot more than 2degs worth! (I’m not one of those warming deniers)…we’re not even close to halting emissions…
So it’s gonna get hot folks!
PS. FWIW, I know that BHP uses a 3degs scenario as the base case in all their scenario work.
3 Likes
It was an interesting read and I appreciate the share!
I’m putting my trust into technology. Which one will win though will be the surprise!
Yeah, I agree. While renewables have come a really long way, and are growing spectacularly quickly, energy transitions take a long time.
Oil took 50 years (1860-1910) to get 10% of total world generation, and 30 more years (1910-1940) to get to 25%. Natural gas took 70 years (1900-1970) to get to 20%, and hydropower took more than 100 years (1882-2008) to get to 17%. (Source: Smil 2010, Energy Transitions)
The point is that while we’ve got the impetus and the technology to move to renewables rapidly, it’s still a massive shift, particularly given the sheer demand for energy worldwide today. Then you’ve got all the other sources - electricity generation is only a relatively small proportion of global emissions.
The Paris Agreement and world governments are banking on there being a way to take carbon out of the atmosphere (less expensively than reforestation) to limit warming to less than 2 degrees. The fact that there’s not yet any proven technology that can do this economically and at scale is worrying.
And even if this technology existed, it would raise all sorts of governance issues, like who decides how much carbon is removed from the atmosphere, how is it policed etc…
Making specific predictions about what will happen is foolish, but I’m not optimistic that we’ll be able to avoid dangerous climate change.
3 Likes
I almost want it to happen so that he’ll be responsible for un-seating six Prime Ministers in a row.
1 Like
7 not long after. 8 party leaders if you include Turnbull way back when he was agreeing on environmental policy in opposition.
Rudd, Gillard, Rudd, Abbott, Turnbull, Abbott is six. A stretch to credit him with Howard’s fall, and he won’t get another chance after that.
(I said Prime Ministers, not party leaders. He’s special.)
Right you are. Damn flu!
I know this is a climate change thread. But just taking the topic a little bit off track. I was hiking through Wilson Promotory a few months ago.
The amount of rubbish along the beach which had been washed up along the shoreline was nothing short of a disgrace. It looked like a dump site. Then on top of this, there was hundreds if not thousands of birds that were dead on the beach, which I’m guessing they had be eating the bits of plastic, thinking it was food.
I noticed this when I was in tasmania a few years ago also.
It’s just devastating to see the most beautiful places in Australia look like a garbage dumps, and destroying thousands of natural species. I’m sure it’s the same in many other areas of the world.
3 Likes
Similar thing in Mallacoota. Visited there a couple of months ago for the first time. Extremely scenic place and recommend it as a holiday destination to anyone. Lot of beautiful beaches there. Each one was magnificent but when you’d look closely you’d see all of the dead sea life washed up. Then you’d notice the partially broken down rubbish that had washed up with it all.
1 Like
Humans treat the planet like a toilet. The amount of crap in the Oceans is equal to or perhaps even more of a problem than climate change.
If you haven’t heard of the Nth Pacific gyre, …(not to mention the others),… perhaps you shouldn’t, … it will make you fkn weep, …
1 Like
It’s typical of capitalist world we live in to manufacture the amount of waste with cheap unethical materials and slave labour. The earth is used as a one way resource to wealth and capital with nothing being given back to the earth in return.
2 Likes
Wrong.
We give it poison, … and by the fkn shipload.
4 Likes
I actually did a day long course on necroscopsies on seabirds and sea turtles last year largely focused on plastic. A fairly large proportion of it is industrial feedstock pellets, which isn’t something you hear much about.
2 Likes
Have you heard of servicing debt? Have you heard of interest? Guess what? If you get in debt then that debt will rise if you are unable to service more than that debt because of interest. I’m guessing these are new terms so let me know if you are unable to use Google for an explanation.
Guess what? Dumb and dumbliar unfortunately spent a load of money and got bugger all for it. In the process they put the country in a load of debt. When dumb and dumbliar (or equivalent) won’t agree to paying that debt (otherwise known as blocking spending cuts) that debt will increase. Most normal people would think that not getting into debt for pathetically implemented and rorted ludicrous green schemes would be the best way forward in the first place.
1 Like
WHAAAT??
Are you saying,…PLASTIC,… is a component of stock feed? Really?