“Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
sciencedirect.com
“Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
1–10 of 77 posts
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#2Here is a pretty good Guardian article about the study, where I found this a few days ago: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2022/...
The study is linked at around the middle of the article.
It has a few supporting articles at the bottom under "More on this story", for example one headlined "Climate chaos certain if oil and gas mega-projects go ahead, warns IEA chief"
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#3Of course that the West would label everything as a "carbon bomb" right now, i.e. everything that doesn't fit its socio-political biases. Labelling nuclear power-plants the same would be met with derision, even though in our day and age the price of energy and the price of "stuff" is pretty well correlated, and seeing as nuclear power-plants are pretty damn expensive then it means that's lots and lots of energy that has been "incorporated" into them. But because there's no black smoke getting out of those nuclear power-plants then it means it's all "in our heads" or something. The same goes for most of the subsidised "green" energy.
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#4Of course that the West would label everything as a "carbon bomb" right now, i.e. everything that doesn't fit its socio-political biases. Labelling nuclear power-plants the same would be met with derision, even though in our day and age the price of energy and the price of "stuff" is pretty well correlated, and seeing as nuclear power-plants are pretty damn expensive then it means that's lots and lots of energy that…
...is the argument you're making here that somehow a nuclear plant or solar farm is somehow equally polluting as a coal-fired power plant? Everything costs time, materials, and money to produce, but only coal plants continue to actively pollute after construction...
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#5Of course that the West would label everything as a "carbon bomb" right now, i.e. everything that doesn't fit its socio-political biases. Labelling nuclear power-plants the same would be met with derision, even though in our day and age the price of energy and the price of "stuff" is pretty well correlated, and seeing as nuclear power-plants are pretty damn expensive then it means that's lots and lots of energy that…
If I understand correctly, what you're describing is often called 'embodied carbon' or 'embedded emissions' [0].
Many people spend their lives estimating embedded emissions and, more importantly, the time it will take for any emission-reducing technology (e.g. electric cars) to amortise away the CO2e emissions required to produce it.
For instance, it's been estimated that a Tesla Model 3 "needs to be driven for 13,500 miles (21,725 km) before it does less harm to the environment than a Toyota Corolla" [1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_emissions [1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lifeti...
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#6I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly.
High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source.
Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stability give the tumult we've observed to this point.
For the short run, there is unfortunately no viable alternative without enduring 5-10 years of pain. Over the long run, I hope we get more nuclear reactors online.
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#7I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…
Why would you spend more money on coal than you can spend on other options?
Power companies aren’t building Wind/PV because it’s green they are building it because it’s cheap. Yes, higher inflation means higher interest rates, but it also means higher payments from customers over time.
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#8I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…
You know what else causes social unrest? Starvation induced by crop failure. We’re already seeing the first signs with recent extreme weather and the megadrought. Wait just a short few years until it really gets moving.
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#9I hate to say it, but if energy prices keep rising this perspective is going to be disposed of rapidly. High energy prices mean rampant inflation and social unrest. With crude and natural gas prices skyrocketing, developing nations will again turn to coal as an energy source. Developed nations will return (see Germany) to coal as a heating source. Green energy will be thrown to the wayside for the sake of social stab…
Why would the world turn to a more expensive fuel source?
Even in Germany, coal is more expensive than wind and mostly more expensive than PV: https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/cost-o...
Re: “Carbon Bombs” – Mapping key fossil fuel projects
#10Of course that the West would label everything as a "carbon bomb" right now, i.e. everything that doesn't fit its socio-political biases. Labelling nuclear power-plants the same would be met with derision, even though in our day and age the price of energy and the price of "stuff" is pretty well correlated, and seeing as nuclear power-plants are pretty damn expensive then it means that's lots and lots of energy that…
If I understand correctly, what you're describing is often called 'embodied carbon' or 'embedded emissions' [0]. Many people spend their lives estimating embedded emissions and, more importantly, the time it will take for any emission-reducing technology (e.g. electric cars) to amortise away the CO2e emissions required to produce it. For instance, it's been estimated that a Tesla Model 3 "needs to be driven for 13,50…
> it's been estimated that a Tesla Model 3 "needs to be driven for 13,500 miles (21,725 km) before it does less harm to the environment than a Toyota Corolla"
Huh, that’s a factor of 5-10 less miles than I was expecting. Good to know.