We are running out of coal too

Conservative politicians insist that the United States is the Middle East of coal, and that we have no energy worries if we could only just get over our global warming worries. They often claim that the United States has enough coal to supply us for 250 years. They also insist, without any basis, that there is a way to burn coal cleanly, economically, and efficiently. There are many reasons to doubt these claims of conservatives, but let's assume that they are correct about all of them. Those who want to base our energy policy on coal have another huge problem. The November 18, 2010 issue of Nature available online only to subscribers) warns that recent forecasts suggest that coal reserves are running out much faster than most people believe. Therefore, "energy policies relying on cheap coal have no future." Authors Richard Heinberg and David Fridley indicate that "world energy policy is gripped by a fallacy--the idea that coal is destined to stay cheap for decades to come." They give two reasons for their urgent warning:

First, a spate of recent studies suggest that available, useful coal may be less abundant than has been assumed-indeed that the peak of world coal production may be only years away. One pessimistic study published in 2010 concluded that global energy derived from coal could peak as early as 2011. Second, global demand is growing rapidly, largely driven by China.… Since 2000 it has been surging at 3.8% per year… Economic shocks from rising coal prices will be felt by every sector of society.
Yet, most energy policies assume a "bottomless coal pit." The authors point out that in terms of energy output, "US coal production peaked in the late 1990s (volume continued to increase, but the coal was of lower energy content)." They point out that two key mining regions in the United States "show rapid depletion of high-quality reserves." They urge the federal government to complete a new national coal survey. It is their conclusion that it is unlikely that world coal supplies can continue to meet projected demand beyond 2020.

Continue ReadingWe are running out of coal too

Getting Science Under Control

After the election of 2008, we fans of the rational and provable had high hopes that government may give as much credence to the scientific process and conclusions as to the disproved aspects of philosophies promulgated by churches and industry shills. We watched with waning hope as a series of attempts to honor that ideal got watered down. But at least it was an improvement. But the 2010 election quickly reveals a backlash. Those whose cherished misunderstandings had been disrespected for the last couple of years now will have their day. As Phil Plait says, Energy and science in America are in big, big trouble. He begins,

"With the elections last week, the Republicans took over the House once again. The list of things this means is long and troubling, but the most troubling to me come in the forms of two Texas far-right Republicans: Congressmen Ralph Hall and Joe Barton."

He goes on to explain why. It comes down to them being proven representatives for Young Earth and fossil fuel interests, doing whatever they can to scuttle actual science by any means necessary. Especially where the science contradicts their pet ideas. Barton has published articles supporting climate change denialism. His main contributors are the extraction industries. Hall has used parliamentary tricks to attempt to scuttle funding for basic research. The Democrats offered to compromised by cutting funding, and he refused in hopes that the whole bill would fail. It passed. Then Hall publicly called Democrats on the carpet for using tricks to fatten the bill by the amount that they offered to cut. The Proxmire spirit lives on.

Continue ReadingGetting Science Under Control

Neoclassical economists have no clothes

According to Wikipedia, "Neoclassical economics dominates microeconomics, and together with Keynesian economics forms the neoclassical synthesis, which dominates mainstream economics today." At Scientific American, Robert Nadeau argues that neoclassical economists have no clothes.

[[Neoclassical economics] can no longer be regarded as useful even in pragmatic or utilitarian terms because it fails to meet what must now be viewed as a fundamental requirement of any economic theory—the extent to which this theory allows economic activities to be coordinated in environmentally responsible ways on a worldwide scale. Because neoclassical economics does not even acknowledge the costs of environmental problems and the limits to economic growth, it constitutes one of the greatest barriers to combating climate change and other threats to the planet.

What are the false assumptions of this still widely cherished model? Nadeau lists them:
* The market system is a closed circular flow between production and consumption, with no inlets or outlets. * Natural resources exist in a domain that is separate and distinct from a closed market system, and the economic value of these resources can be determined only by the dynamics that operate within this system. * The costs of damage to the external natural environment by economic activities must be treated as costs that lie outside the closed market system or as costs that cannot be included in the pricing mechanisms that operate within the system. * The external resources of nature are largely inexhaustible, and those that are not can be replaced by other resources or by technologies that minimize the use of the exhaustible resources or that rely on other resources. * There are no biophysical limits to the growth of market systems.

Continue ReadingNeoclassical economists have no clothes

A glimpse at the Expo 2010 in Shanghai, China

More than 190 countries are displaying their culture and architecture at the Expo 2010 in Shanghai, China. The Expo will run until October 31, 2010. My brother-in-law, Dan Jay (who is an architect in St. Louis at Christner, Inc.) kindly allowed me to publish some of his many photos of the pavilions of participating nations; he returned from the Expo only a few days ago. Click on the photos for expanded views. What you will see immediately below is the U.K. Pavilion, The 20-meter-high cube-like Seed Cathedral is covered by 60,000 slim, transparent acrylic 7-meter long rods, which quiver in the breeze, each of these rods containing a certain type of seed. This exhibit is designed to be a call from the UK to protect our natural species.

Continue ReadingA glimpse at the Expo 2010 in Shanghai, China

Priorities

I spotted this quote by Tom Friedman on Daily Dish:

China is doing moon shots. Yes, that’s plural. When I say “moon shots” I mean big, multibillion-dollar, 25-year-horizon, game-changing investments. China has at least four going now: one is building a network of ultramodern airports; another is building a web of high-speed trains connecting major cities; a third is in bioscience...; and, finally, Beijing just announced that it was providing $15 billion in seed money for the country’s leading auto and battery companies to create an electric car industry... Not to worry. America today also has its own multibillion-dollar, 25-year-horizon, game-changing moon shot: fixing Afghanistan.
The story doesn't end with this helpful and insightful quote. Perhaps, the above quote is an attempt by Friedman to attempt to redeem himself for his pro-war rhetoric from prior years. He has himself to thank for the fact that the U.S. warmongering mentality has caused us to fall so far behind China. And we continue to fall behind China because we can't wake up from our nightmare in which relatively few people armed with unsophisticated weapons such as box-cutters are deemed more dangerous than the Soviet Union at its height, armed with thousands of nuclear warheads. Thus, we will continue to spend more than half of our federal tax revenue on military pursuits. Our exuberant and delusional warmongering is killing our economy and our future.

Continue ReadingPriorities