Get ready to be cold and poor in 2025

[BlasterBates]

Everything was not shutdown



https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php

At the worst point demand for oil dropped by 15% for a quarter, then gone back up 5% below normal - obviously effect on global CO2 would be minimal

If they go full steam ahead with a renewable infrastructure, you are going to see coal demand rocket to keep up with the iron and copper ore smelters. An "electric" blast furnace isn't a practical alternative.

[mattster]

If they go full steam ahead with a renewable infrastructure, you are going to see coal demand rocket to keep up with the iron and copper ore smelters. An "electric" blast furnace isn't a practical alternative.

I think it is pretty clear at this stage that the only thing that has a chance of sorting the climate mess out is some sort of carbon capture tech. Whether that proves possible or viable, I have no idea, but what we have locked in so far, plus the inevitable missing of many targets to come doesn't offer a lot of hope otherwise.

[AtW]

If they go full steam ahead with a renewable infrastructure, you are going to see coal demand rocket to keep up with the iron and copper ore smelters. An "electric" blast furnace isn't a practical alternative.

If you really believe that then you should buy shares in coal miners

[BlasterBates]

I think it is pretty clear at this stage that the only thing that has a chance of sorting the climate mess out is some sort of carbon capture tech. Whether that proves possible or viable, I have no idea, but what we have locked in so far, plus the inevitable missing of many targets to come doesn't offer a lot of hope otherwise.

Indeed, though I doubt that carbon capture is viable. It is completely impractical to reduce CO2 emissions more than a modest amount. It is however a great crusading cause that will never come to a conclusion.

[BlasterBates]

If you really believe that then you should buy shares in coal miners

[AtW]

It is completely impractical to reduce CO2 emissions more than a modest amount

But it's totally practical and highly desireable to reduce usage of oil - even if CO2 wasn't the issue, cutting it down by 75% is good because it will keep money inside countries rather than paying them to all sort of scumbag dictators around the world.

[mattster]

Indeed, though I doubt that carbon capture is viable. It is completely impractical to reduce CO2 emissions more than a modest amount. It is however a great crusading cause that will never come to a conclusion.

I would like to state, though, that our household has now moved over to paper straws.

[BlasterBates]

But it's totally practical and highly desireable to reduce usage of oil - even if CO2 wasn't the issue, cutting it down by 75% is good because it will keep money inside countries rather than paying them to all sort of scumbag dictators around the world.

Is it practical? I have my doubts.

https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/m...ply-on-the-way

[d000hg]

When everything shutdown last year it had absolutely no impact on atmospheric CO2 levels. Measured CO2 continued to rise at exactly the same rate. We're about to move into a new era where politicians will force a new energy austerity and it will have no impact.

I'm sorry BB, but since when do you trust the measurements reported anyway?

[d000hg]

Indeed, though I doubt that carbon capture is viable. It is completely impractical to reduce CO2 emissions more than a modest amount. It is however a great crusading cause that will never come to a conclusion.

Reducing emissions is certainly possible, I just don't think it's likely. If the world wholescale caught on to vegetarianism (or at least stopped eating beef) and continued transition from fossil fuels for instance. But that takes decades and we keep being told we have only a handful of years.