No Carbon Economy By 2100
- Thread starter Kreskin
- Start date
Did you happen to read the date of that article?
April 2, 2014
Extra salty
Also a prediction. It must not have happened. There were no follow up articles.
It leaves cheap shares to scoop for pensions and long term mutuals. Oil sitting in the ground is and always will be a sought out, highly desirable investment.
Subsidies for fossil fuels that cause climate change have soared since 2013, a new study from the International Monetary Fund has revealed.
Oil, gas and coal costs will be subsidised to the tune of US$5.3 trillion a year in 2015. The last time the IMF ran the data it calculated they were worth $1.9 trillion.
Economists say the latest figures are more accurate as they represent the “true” cost of energy, which includes the environmental, health and climate impacts of burning fossil fuels.
“Over half of the increase is explained by more refined country-level evidence on the damaging effects of energy consumption on air quality and health,” IMF officials Benedict Clements and Vitor Gaspar wrote in a blog.
- See more at: Fossil fuel subsidies to hit $5.3 trillion in 2015, says IMF
Subsidies for fossil fuels that cause climate change have soared since 2013, a new study from the International Monetary Fund has revealed.
Oil, gas and coal costs will be subsidised to the tune of US$5.3 trillion a year in 2015. The last time the IMF ran the data it calculated they were worth $1.9 trillion.
Economists say the latest figures are more accurate as they represent the “true” cost of energy, which includes the environmental, health and climate impacts of burning fossil fuels.
“Over half of the increase is explained by more refined country-level evidence on the damaging effects of energy consumption on air quality and health,” IMF officials Benedict Clements and Vitor Gaspar wrote in a blog.
Subsidies for fossil fuels that cause climate change have soared since 2013, a new study from the International Monetary Fund has revealed.
Oil, gas and coal costs will be subsidised to the tune of US$5.3 trillion a year in 2015. The last time the IMF ran the data it calculated they were worth $1.9 trillion.
Economists say the latest figures are more accurate as they represent the “true” cost of energy, which includes the environmental, health and climate impacts of burning fossil fuels.
“Over half of the increase is explained by more refined country-level evidence on the damaging effects of energy consumption on air quality and health,” IMF officials Benedict Clements and Vitor Gaspar wrote in a blog.
- See more at: Fossil fuel subsidies to hit $5.3 trillion in 2015, says IMF
Subsidies for fossil fuels that cause climate change have soared since 2013, a new study from the International Monetary Fund has revealed.
Oil, gas and coal costs will be subsidised to the tune of US$5.3 trillion a year in 2015. The last time the IMF ran the data it calculated they were worth $1.9 trillion.
Economists say the latest figures are more accurate as they represent the “true” cost of energy, which includes the environmental, health and climate impacts of burning fossil fuels.
“Over half of the increase is explained by more refined country-level evidence on the damaging effects of energy consumption on air quality and health,” IMF officials Benedict Clements and Vitor Gaspar wrote in a blog.
- See more at: Fossil fuel subsidies to hit $5.3 trillion in 2015, says IMF
Strange....if you google "super fog" you find a reptile humidifier. If you google "super smog" there is crap galore.
How the hell can you have "super smog" when "super fog" doesn't exist?
smog
smäɡ,smôɡ/
noun
noun: smog; plural noun: smogs
fog or haze combined with smoke and other atmospheric pollutants
By the definition pyroclasts, dust storms and grain dust etc with a fog would also be smog.
How the hell can you have "super smog" when "super fog" doesn't exist?
smog
smäɡ,smôɡ/
noun
noun: smog; plural noun: smogs
fog or haze combined with smoke and other atmospheric pollutants
By the definition pyroclasts, dust storms and grain dust etc with a fog would also be smog.
So... you don't think this is misleading in the slightest? Whereas TODAY actually means 14 months ago?
And did this killer smog materialize and kill Londoners over a year ago?
Speaking of salty..
OPEC oil glut is shattering Harper's superpower dream
In the battle to see who blinks first, OPEC hasn't blinked. And it looks like it isn't going to, as it meets this week in Vienna.
Six months ago the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, led by Saudi Arabia, announced it would keep pumping crude even though the world was swimming in the stuff.
While some analysts are predicting a surprise at this week's meeting, most reports now say OPEC is not considering reining in production.
And whether or not OPEC continues to pump, there are new signs that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's dream for Canada as an "emerging energy superpower" may be in trouble.
A report this week from Barclays showed Canadian production tumbling. The global giants with a stake in Canada's oil sands have stopped expansion plans and many have walked away.
Meanwhile, Alberta oil producers have threatened to put new developments on hold until they see whether Rachel Notley's new NDP government gives them what they want.
Missing a crucial window
To add insult to injury, low prices have emboldened the "dirty oil" lobby. There are new reports this week that the New York oil hub is rejecting petroleum from Canada's "tarsands."
Alberta's oilsands may still contain some of the world's largest petroleum reserves, up there with Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, but there is an increasing danger that Canada has missed a crucial window to develop and extract those resources.
"There is no doubt about it, the price fall of the last several months has deterred investors away from expensive oil including U.S. shale, deep offshore and heavy oils," a Saudi Arabian official told the Financial Times last month.
There are two reasons why the current glut has come at the worst possible time for the future of Canada's oilsands.
Last year's attempt to label Canadian oil as "dirty" came to nothing. But there are increasing signs, perhaps partly due to the feeling there is no shortage of oil, that the global mood is changing. The Keep It in the Ground movement is gathering steam.
The oil industry itself is already turning against coal. At the same time the world is just reaching the point when technology is creating economic alternatives where fossil fuels used to be indispensable.
Canadian oilsands development has always depended on the idea that the world was hungry for its production. That production depends on a huge investment, not just in extraction and processing, which is more costly than conventional liquid oil. It also requires heavy investment in infrastructure, specifically pipelines, to get bitumen to world markets.
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/business/opec-oil-glut-is-shattering-harper-s-superpower-dream-1.3097133
OPEC oil glut is shattering Harper's superpower dream
In the battle to see who blinks first, OPEC hasn't blinked. And it looks like it isn't going to, as it meets this week in Vienna.
Six months ago the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, led by Saudi Arabia, announced it would keep pumping crude even though the world was swimming in the stuff.
While some analysts are predicting a surprise at this week's meeting, most reports now say OPEC is not considering reining in production.
And whether or not OPEC continues to pump, there are new signs that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's dream for Canada as an "emerging energy superpower" may be in trouble.
A report this week from Barclays showed Canadian production tumbling. The global giants with a stake in Canada's oil sands have stopped expansion plans and many have walked away.
Meanwhile, Alberta oil producers have threatened to put new developments on hold until they see whether Rachel Notley's new NDP government gives them what they want.
Missing a crucial window
To add insult to injury, low prices have emboldened the "dirty oil" lobby. There are new reports this week that the New York oil hub is rejecting petroleum from Canada's "tarsands."
Alberta's oilsands may still contain some of the world's largest petroleum reserves, up there with Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, but there is an increasing danger that Canada has missed a crucial window to develop and extract those resources.
"There is no doubt about it, the price fall of the last several months has deterred investors away from expensive oil including U.S. shale, deep offshore and heavy oils," a Saudi Arabian official told the Financial Times last month.
There are two reasons why the current glut has come at the worst possible time for the future of Canada's oilsands.
Last year's attempt to label Canadian oil as "dirty" came to nothing. But there are increasing signs, perhaps partly due to the feeling there is no shortage of oil, that the global mood is changing. The Keep It in the Ground movement is gathering steam.
The oil industry itself is already turning against coal. At the same time the world is just reaching the point when technology is creating economic alternatives where fossil fuels used to be indispensable.
Canadian oilsands development has always depended on the idea that the world was hungry for its production. That production depends on a huge investment, not just in extraction and processing, which is more costly than conventional liquid oil. It also requires heavy investment in infrastructure, specifically pipelines, to get bitumen to world markets.
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/business/opec-oil-glut-is-shattering-harper-s-superpower-dream-1.3097133
I copied a sentence from the news article. What you choose to read into it is on you. My point still stands.
How are the Canadian producers that sell through OPEC faring with the high volume making up for price drops?
Did it happen?
maybe when fog combines with smog and it becomes so thick that people aren't suppose to go outside it's called super smog.
At the end of the day, the etymology is irrelevant. Unless splitting hairs is a hobby for you.
Super smog
More:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303448104579149390706675828