Reporting from the negotiation room

Today's NRC, a Dutch newspaper I like akin to the NYT, heavily criticized the Copenhagen meeting, and it was not alone. All major newspapers expressed dismay after the speeches held by Chinese prime-minister Wen Jiaboa and President Obama. I was not overly enthused by their speeches either. Both repeated mostly old statements, praised their own proposed steps forward, and accused the other of hampering global progress and signing of an effective Copenhagen treaty.

Will shale gas indeed be the next big thing as suggested in today's (10/10/09) article in the NYT . The numbers in this article are correct. Shale gas estimates are indeed very high. The article does not discuss any potential negative environmental impacts. Water quality, for example, is heavily debated in Pennsylvania, which is one of the major shale gas states. I would applaud a move tomorrow to shale gas from coal, whilst going full throttle on renewable development. I worry about heavy investments in shale gas and liquid gas transport as that may halt or hinder a move to cleaner electricity.

Interesting article today in the New York Times about a (small) silver lining in the current economic and climate gloom. Emissions have gone down a bit because of the economic downturn, but more importantly China is making more rapid progress towards the reduction of its carbon dioxide emissions, mostly through nuclear energy and wind.

Mighty interesting, those developments in China. Think SE needs to visit soon....

Albertan Tar Sands: Podcast 1

In terms of oil, we are more dependent on Canada than on Saudi-Arabia. 20 % of our oil imports comes from Canada, and more than half of that is produced from the oil sands in the Albertan boreal forest. We are by far the largest consumer of oil sands and it is our increasing demand for oil that is driving the oil sands developments in Alberta.

Chicago tonight recently ran a report on Canadian oil sands created by Elizabeth Brackett whom we met in Canada last month. She interviewed me too, but I did not make it in. Too bad! Perhaps in the PBS version of this story to be broadcast later this month, but despite the lack of any Dutch accents, this is a nice piece.

A bit of controversy about the numbers. Environmental group interviewed mentions a factor of 3 over conventional oil. This is for extraction and upgrading only. In a wells-to-wheels analysis (so total emissions from production to car driving) it is around 10%.

Check out the latest Science magazine for its special issue on Carbon Sequestration and Storage. Steve Chu, Secretary of Energy, contributed to this issue as well.

As I type this I'm listening to my colleague Ilan Kroo, professor in Aerodynamics at Stanford University and a world renowned airplane designer. The topic of his lecture is Sustainable Aviation: Future Air Transportation and the Environment.
A few blogs ago I gave some current numbers on the efficiency of air travel vs car travel. A Boeing 737 with 75% occupancy gives about 80 miles/gallon for each passenger. This compares favorably to a car, but then, we would not drive across the Atlantic.

China’s economy is growing fast, and China’s demand for energy is growing right along with it. To accommodate this growth in a sustainable manner, China must move away from a largely coal-based energy portfolio. If it does not, the already severe environmental impacts of large-scale coal usage will continue to grow with possible devastating consequences. Professor Tony Kovscek believes there is hope in China if it turns to energy efficiency and clean, renewable energy sources. This podcast was taped at Stanford University, and was part of the 2007 MADE IN CHINA lecture series.

You may not be aware that coalfires, both natural and man-made, generate large amounts of carbon dioxide. In China alone, the estimated amount equals that of the U.S. transportation sector! Meet Taku Ide, a PhD student at Stanford University, who is on a quest to extinguish these fires.