Dr. Joe Romm reports on a new study that provides more detail on the drying of the western US, this winter’s Polar Vortex, and the “Warm Arctic, Cold Continents” paradox.
As readers here know, the hottest debate in atmospheric science is not whether man is causing climate change – that was settled decades ago. The debate is, HOW is that change going to manifest, as increasing global heat content drives changes to circulation patterns that have been consistent for millennia. This past winter’s “ridiculously resilient ridge”, which brought drought to the west, and arctic cold to the eastern US, is looking more and more as if it is at least partially a product of climate change.
Natural variability alone cannot explain the extreme weather pattern that has driven both the record-setting California drought and the cooler weather seen in the Midwest and East this winter, a major new study finds.
We’ve reported before that climate scientists had predicted a decade ago that warming-driven Arctic ice loss would lead to worsening drought in California. In particular, they predicted it would lead to a “blocking pattern” that would shift the jet stream (and the rain it could bring) away from the state — in this case a “Ridiculously Resilient Ridge” of high pressure.
My recent video on the California Drought featured interviews with key scientists observing the “Ridiculous Ridge” phenomenon.
A new study in Geophysical Research Letters (subs. req’d) takes the warming link to the California drought to the next level of understanding. It concludes, “there is a traceable anthropogenic warming footprint in the enormous intensity of the anomalous ridge during winter 2013-14, the associated drought and its intensity.”
The NASA-funded study is behind a pay wall, but the brief news release, offers a simple explanation of what is going on. The research provides “evidence connecting the ampliﬁed wind patterns, consisting of a strong high pressure in the West and a deep low pressure in the East [labeled a 'dipole'], to global warming.” Researchers have “uncovered evidence that can trace the ampliﬁcation of the dipole to human inﬂuences.”
April 16, 2014
In Austin, Texas, Austin Energy is poised such that by the end of next year, 1 in 3 Kwhs used by the customers of the 8th largest public utility in the country will be renewable. And when you include 15 years of efficiency programs, almost 50 % of the energy is either renewable or efficiency.And in presenting the most recent purchases of windpower and solar, the utility states that the purchases will actually reduce costs.
As reported by Renewable Energy World:
“The Austin, Texas, City Council approved a wind power contract Feb. 27 that enables Austin Energy to achieve its goal of delivering 35 percent of all of its electricity from renewable sources four years ahead of its goal, the utility said in a news release.
The contract with Lincoln Renewable Energy calls for Austin Energy to buy up to 300 MW of wind power for 18 years for $31 million a year. The price for the wind power is in the $26-to-$36/MWh price range, making it the least expensive wind purchase Austin Energy has ever entered into since it began contracting for wind power in the late 1990s.
April 16, 2014
April 16, 2014
Drilling operations at several natural gas wells in southwestern Pennsylvania released methane into the atmosphere at rates that were 100 to 1,000 times greater than federal regulators had estimated, new research shows.
Using a plane that was specially equipped to measure greenhouse gas emissions in the air, scientists found that drilling activities at seven well pads in the booming Marcellus shale formation emitted 34 grams of methane per second, on average. The Environmental Protection Agency has estimated that such drilling releases between 0.04 grams and 0.30 grams of methane per second.
The study, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, adds to a growing body of research that suggests the EPA is gravely underestimating methane emissions from oil and gas operations. The agency is expected to issue its own analysis of methane emissions from the oil and gas sector as early as Tuesday, which will give outside experts a chance to assess how well regulators understand the problem.
April 16, 2014
Above, more from Jim Byrne’s interview with Lord Nicholas Stern, on the risks inherent in fossil fuel investments.
A number of studies in recent years have warned that stock markets around the world have overvalued companies with large holdings of coal, oil and gas.
The problem stems from the fact that countries including the UK agreed at a UN meeting in Mexico in 2010 to limit global temperature rises to 2C.
To achieve this, economists including Sir Nicholas Stern have calculated that between 60 and 80% of existing reserves of fossil fuels will need to remain in the ground, unburned.
Today’s report from the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) reiterates these warnings.
“The UK Government and Bank of England must not be complacent about the risks of carbon exposure in the world economy,” said Committee chair Joan Walley MP.
“Financial stability could be threatened if shares in fossil fuel companies turn out to be overvalued because the bulk of their oil, coal and gas reserves cannot be burnt without further destabilising the climate,” she said.
Kerry Dolan in Forbes:
Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and hedge-fund-billionaire-turned-environmental-advocate Tom Steyer don’t typically agree on political issues. Bloomberg is an independent, Paulson a Republican and Steyer a die-hard Democrat. But all three men share a concern for the economic impact of climate change on U.S. business. Last fall, they decided to do something about it, and embarked on what they’re calling the Risky Business initiative, a project that will culminate in a report that will spell out the likely economic impact of climate change on U.S. business.
April 16, 2014
The well known climate denial canard – “There has been no warming in x years”, derives from the gigantic el nino event of 1998. In El Nino events, warm water from the western Pacific spreads across to the eastern Pacific and the coast of South America. The ocean surface pumps enormous amounts of heat and moisture into the atmosphere, with effects on global weather and temperatures. Historically these are warm years.
In the past decade, El Nino’s evil twin, La Nina, has been the more dominant influence – with cooler pacific waters that tend to suck more heat down into deeper levels, and are a damper on global temperatures.
The graph below shows the relationship between El Nino, La Nina, and global temperature. Note that even the “cold” La Nina years continue to warm.
If a new El Nino develops, climate experts look for a new record in Global temperature, as well as a host of other extreme events around the planet.
Since the second quarter of 2012, El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) indicators (e.g., tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures, sea level pressure, cloudiness and trade winds) have generally remained at neutral levels. This is expected to continue into the earlier part of the second quarter of 2014, according to the WMO Update.
However, since February there have been two strong westerly wind events, and a general weakening of the trade winds in the tropical Pacific. This has led to a significant warming of the waters below the surface of the central Pacific, which historically has been one of the precursors to El Niño development. While there is no guarantee this situation will lead to an El Niño event, the longer the trade winds remain weakened, and subsurface temperatures stay significantly warmer than average, the higher the likelihood of the emergence of an El Niño.
“Model forecasts indicate a fairly large potential for an El Niño, most likely by the end of the second quarter of 2014,” said the Update, which is compiled from inputs from climate experts and prediction models around the world. “For the June to August period, approximately two-thirds of the models surveyed predict that El Niño thresholds will be reached, while the remaining models predict a continuation of neutral conditions. A few models predict an earlier El Niño onset, such as in May. No model suggests a La Niña in 2014.”
However, the strength of the possible El Niño cannot be reliably estimated at the current time.
“El Niño and La Niña are major drivers of the natural variability of our climate. If an El Niño event develops – and it is still too early to be certain – it will influence temperatures and precipitation and contribute to droughts or heavy rainfall in different regions of the world,” said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud. “The major advances in our forecasting capabilities mean that we will be better prepared to manage the impact of these events especially if extreme on agriculture, water, health and many other climate-sensitive socio-economic sectors.”
Senator Charles Grassley is known to be a long time fiscal conservative Republican Senator from Iowa. Obviously, the size and scope of the Iowa wind industry belies the anti-renewable propaganda of the science denial right. In speaking up this way, Senator Grassley offers powerful support and factual underpinning scrutinizing the web of subsidies that fossil fuels have enjoyed for more than a century.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) spoke up about the “intellectually dishonest argument” that bubbled to the surface at a Senate Finance Committee hearing on April 3rd.
His remarks were in response to an amendment introduced by Sen. Toomey (R-PA), under the short title “Eliminate crony capitalist energy tax credits,” which proposed to eliminate the renewable energy Production Tax Credit (PTC), as well as credits for renewable fuels, energy efficient appliances, electric motorcycles and fuel cell vehicles. In explaining the amendment, Sen. Toomey declared wind power to be a “politically favored form of energy.”
Senator Grassley gave a powerful response that put energy tax credits in context.
Sen. Toomey’s amendment failed by a vote of 18-6 in the Senate Finance Committee. Senators Toomey (R-PA), Isakson (R-GA), Roberts (R-KS), Burr (R-NC), Hatch (R-UT) and Enzi (R-WY) supported it, and the remainder of the Committee members opposed.
The Committee later approved, via voice vote, the Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency (EXPIRE) Act of 2014. This bill includes an extension of the renewable energy production tax credit (PTC) and investment tax credit (ITC) which would let wind energy developers qualify for the tax credits if they start construction on their wind projects by the end of 2015. The next step will be for the EXPIRE Act to move to the Senate floor for consideration.
In the broader picture, the Senate Finance Committee members agree that they wish to address tax reform in a comprehensive fashion, rather than through short-term bills like this one. Chairman Wyden (D-OR) declared that this consideration of the EXPIRE ACT would be the last time that the Committee works on tax extension provisions. They plan to pivot to comprehensive tax reform in the future.
April 15, 2014
Note prices of electricity are color coded. Now note the bright red/orange blob across the west Texas Oil patch.
The far west of Texas is ground zero for the extraction of exotic fossil fuels like fracked natural gas and Shale oil. It is also prime territory for solar energy — hot, flat, and clear. Much of that solar has remained unexploited due to transmission bottlenecks that make it difficult to transmit power to the more populous eastern Texas cities.
But the explosion of gas and shale fields in West Texas means, there is a huge demand for electricity - and “solar wildcatters” are springing up to meet that demand. Traditional Texas wildcatters drill for oil, with the knowledge that most holes will be dry.
Solar wildcatters know that every panel they set up will be catching the suns rays – their only uncertainty is price.
In the existing situation – high demand from fossil fuelers jacks up those prices, feeding a blossoming solar industry, ramping up more mass production of solar panels, dropping those prices, - making solar only more inevitable by the moment, and hastening the imminent assimilation of the energy industry.
April 15, 2014
Our friends over at Business Insider have been circulating a chart called Welcome to the Terrordome, which depicts an “almost violent decline in solar pricing” globally, to the point where solar beats oil and liquid natural gas in some markets. As for how much lower solar can go, we’ve been tracking the journey of solar from an exotic space technology to a backyard standard, and BI’s arguments for a solar-dominated world dovetail with our observations.
For the record, BI sourced the chart and background information from a note by Michael Parker and Flora Chang of the investment firm AllianceBernstein via its research driven subsidiary Sandford C. Bernstein.
The BI article is provocatively titled “The Solar Industry Has Been Waiting 60 Years For This To Happen — And It Finally Just Did.” It’s well worth a read in full but for those of you on the go, here are a couple of tantalizing bits referencing the now-notorious chart.
Low Cost Solar
1. Solar is a new technology that will continue to be cheaper as the technology advances.
We’ll strongly second that, and add the observation that at least some amount of utility-scale solar, and a practically infinite amount of distributed solar, can be piggybacked on buildings, brownfields, and other sites that have already been built upon.
That includes solar windows and other building-integrated solar elements as well as rooftop and ground mounted systems.
In that context, it’s easy to see how millions of distributed solar owners will eventually blow up the now-conventional model of an energy harvesting industry dominated by large companies.
Here in the US, the Obama Administration has been aggressively pursuing the distributed solar model, both from the foundational research end and through nuts-and-bolts initiatives like the Rooftop Challenge, which is designed to reduce the overall cost of installed solar power.
High Cost Fossils
2. Fossil fuel extraction will continue to get more expensive.
We’ll strongly second that one, too. The basic idea is that as conventional reserves are tapped out, exploration moves to sites that are far more complicated and expensive to access.
When you hear that, you naturally think of deep ocean sites, but here in the US you also have two forms of land based fossil fuel extraction, mountaintop removal for coal and fracking for oil and gas, which have undergone a recent boom and are encroaching on populated areas that formerly hosted little or no such activities.
April 15, 2014
The Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis (JCAP) is the nation’s largest research program dedicated to the development of an artificial solar-fuel generation technology. Established in 2010 as a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Innovation Hub, JCAP aims to find a cost-effective method to produce fuels using only sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide as inputs.
JCAP brings together more than 140 top scientists and researchers from the California Institute of Technology and its lead partner, Berkeley Lab, along with collaborators from the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, and the University of California campuses at Irvine and San Diego.