?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
27 January 2011 @ 10:56 pm
Weather, Fracking oil, Shale gas, Wind downer, Free leccy  
Joe Bastardi explained why warming is NOT driving the cold weather: the cooling.
I want to explain to you why the idea now being put forward by the AGW crowd that the cold is being caused by global warming is out of touch. You folks, the big thing you should be concerned about is the total energy of the lower troposphere of the earth, a shadowy measurement at best. There is no reliable way to measure that. And with out proving that there is feedback that is meaning an accumulation of energy that can not escape, there is no way to say there is global warming for sure.
I am going to give you an example of this, and this is why I get incensed at people that try to use every single event that occurs as an excuse to say man is changing the climate in a way that is demonstrable or destructive.
You see, it takes much less energy to heat cold dry air than it does warmer air, or water. The rise of temperatures to 10-20 degrees ABOVE normal over Greenland, where temperatures are normally brutally cold is not nearly as big a deal in the total energy budget of the earth as the drop of 3f in the tropical pacific ocean temps. In fact, I would venture to guess that the global temperature is not "suffering" at all. A drop of 10f in temperatures in a place that has a normal of 45 is more impressive energy wise than a rise of temps of 20 degrees in a place where the normal is near 25 below 0. And without that buildup of excess energy, there is no true increase in the global temp. In fact what is going on now, we can see the OPPOSITE is occurring.
I suspect alot of the people in the AGW camp KNOW what is about to happen. With all the visibility given to this argument, its only a matter of time where people notice the up and down in relation to the enso, and will demand that the natural cycle theories are given their day in court.
As far as the blocking, I do become upset when people claim that is global warming, when I have gone to great pains to show and even forecast, the affects of low solar and volcanic activity is something that can lead to that. Its not co2 that is causing blocking and while I there is reason to debate my reasons, they make far more sense than saying c02 is causing something, that apparently must have happened before, since we are seeing weather that happened before, but in the time of solar min and in the 19-teens, after major arctic volcanic activity.
----------
La Nina (ENSO 3.4 is still 1.5 - 2C below. (Source)

Remember it takes ~6 months for the full effects to influence the N. Atlantic countries

Good news for humans, bad news for gang-green
May dysfunctional energy boondoggles (credits, bio, wind, PV energy & CCS) and their political and profit motivated proponents and implementers RIH (rot in hell).
On the heels of news that gas reserves are sufficient to supply the world for at least 250 years, US retrievable oil reserves will dramatically increase as new tech petro-fracking comes on line. Horizontal drilling will also allow access to reservoirs that were made inaccessible to vertical drilling by land conservationists and by compliance with the NWO agenda to force oil prices. Offshore discoveries and the new tech bringing more oil into the equation will fulfill the prediction of a doubling of accessible US reserves. Fielding the tech internationally will see the world well oiled through this century and much of the next, likely much longer. Plenty of time for chemists to develop home made petrol and for other tech to move forward.
More bad news for vested interests and gang-green twisters like Huhne and Oxburgh, and unjustified gov't, income derived from the CO2 fraud via energy bill hikes is set to vaporise within a few years.
Transparent, spray on anything solar energy capture that works even with radiation from street lighting will be commercially available from ~2016 and popularity will drive the price down. It will be far cheaper than solar panels. Wind energy will be redundant. Farm fields covered in panels will be redundant. Any form of expensive (gang-greened) energy will be redundant.
Probably only gas (fairly stable at $4 Mcf in the US) and cheaper coal (i.e. without pointless carbon capture boondoggles) will be competitive.
Scrap yards that deal in wind turbines, solar panel and climate and energy bureaucrats could be a good investment.
Gang-green/NWO price-forced peak oil? So sad. ROTFALMFAO

Fracking Stocks: The Top Growth Sector for Investors in 2011
"Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”, companies are overtaking drilling companies as the largest subset of the energy services sector – and research from two Canadian brokerage firms suggests that investors can expect fracking companies to continue growing strong into 2011 and beyond." /Seeking Alpha
In a comment: When an individual drills a water well on their land it would be maybe 200 ft deep, at the most. Most horinzontal fracs are 5,000 to 8,000 feet. It is difficult to imagine contamination through a mile of rock. When you see people lighting their well water on fire they have most likely hit shallow gas. It is not uncommon when you consider the water drillers are a farmers with an auger on the back of their truck. The real contamination risk from drilling comes from a poor cement job.

The Labour Party has called for a temporary halt to drilling for shale gas while its safety is checked.
Shadow energy minister Huw Irranca-Davies has called on the government to put it on hold in England and Wales.
Shale gas exploitation is beginning in Lancashire but campaigners have raised concerns that the extraction process can contaminate local ground water.
The gas is formed from deposits of mud, silt, clay and organic matter, and methane from coal beds.
It is extracted by a process called fracking, which involves the hydraulic fracturing of the ground using high-pressure liquid containing chemicals to release the gas. /more

The shale frenzy comes to Europe
In the Netherlands, Cuadrilla Resources was recently awarded a license on the margin of the London-Brabant High and West Netherlands Sub-basin of the Anglo-Dutch Basin. The Epen Formation shale (Namurian) is likely the primary target in this location. Cuadrilla Resources, through its Bowland Resources subsidiary, also has interests in the Cheshire Basin in northwest England. Spudding in March 2010, the company’s Preese Hall 1 well will test the Namurian-age Bowland Shale. The depth to top shale is estimated at 4,300 ft (1,312 m) with a gross prognosed shale thickness of some 4,000 ft (1,220 m). This well is the first known test of the Carboniferous shale gas play in Europe.
The Upper Jurassic Kimmeridge Clay (~12,000 ft) has been proposed as a possible target in the Weald Basin, but there is considerable doubt that it will be mature for significant gas generation in this basin. If there is to be shale gas potential it seems more likely that it will come from older shales (Rhaetic or older)./full pdf

Content: According to Halliburton, 98.47 percent of the material used for fracking consists of water and sand, leaving just 1.53 percent for other materials.
Some of the chemicals found in hydraulic fracturing fluid used by the company include: formaldehyde, ammonium chloride, acetic anhydride, methanol, hydrochloric acid and propargyl alcohol. /here

I don't doubt that many politicos, lobbyists and banks have heavy investments in the wind energy boondoggle and a zeal for delaying a levelling of the international playing field wrt energy costs for exporters and for consumers, dooming the future UK to high unemployment and eternal debt slavery.
I would say proceed with caution, get a restitution-compensation agreement beforehand. Stopping it completely while bureaucrats form shale gas quangos to compile reports that will likely be cherry picked to favour the bias of the quangoids is not the way to go. Other nearby countries will exploit the shale and sell the products at EC determined (high) prices. Alternatively import the damned stuff from the US and tell the Ruskies and the ecofascists to go frack.

MasterResource:
Windpower Emissions: Kleekamp Critique (Part I – Introduction) Kent Hawkins
This post is the first in a three part series that critiques the recently published article “Wind Power Always Replaces Fossil Fuels” by Chuck Kleekamp, which provides material for another in the series of my critiques of wind proponents’ claims. Previously analyzed were papers by Milligan, Komanoff and Gross. My understanding is that this author has previously made notable contributions to environmental matters. Let’s see how he does with respect to wind.
To begin, I cannot help commenting on the inclusion of “Always” in the title. The apparent certainty in this term immediately alerts me to a questionable analysis. Perhaps the author meant to be provocative, and was not serious in the use of this word. If so, this does not give due consideration to the importance of the matter.
This leads to another general comment. In a circulation of a draft of these posts to a panel of reviewers, one commented on the nature of Kleekamp’s article as that of not having sufficient knowledge of the subject, but attempting to appear so. He provides descriptions, but makes errors in the process. Cases in point are his (1) example of the Mirant Canal oil-fired plants and (2) description of electricity system markets and activities of the System Operator of New England (ISO NE).
Part II – Capacity Considerations
Part III – Cost of Wind and Nuclear Plants

Rep. Upton of Commerce and Energy: Is This the Real Deal? Glenn Schleede
Some very rational words on energy policy–long needed–have come from Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. But will Congress act on them?
It will take a lot of heretofore undemonstrated courage for members of Congress to take the actions needed to:
1.  Convince the Washington Establishment* to recognize that central planning really hasn’t and doesn’t work.
2.  Get private sector companies to devote their financial and human resources to innovative and productive efforts rather than (like GE, Duke, Exelon, many Wall St firms, and many others) focusing those resources on “milking” federal and state tax breaks and subsidies.
3.  Break the hammerlock that Federal agencies officials and employees, their favorite constituencies (who benefit from our tax dollars), Congressional committees and staff, and lobbyists have on appropriations, credit programs, and tax policies.
4.  Give members of Congress and their staff the wisdom to discern the difference between facts vs. propaganda provided by lobbyists and federal agency staff — and then the courage to act in the national and public interest, rather than in their personal interests and those of the lobbyists that befriend them and contribute to their reelection.
5.  Act on principle rather than surrendering to the siren songs of “can’t we get along,” “avoid sharp discourse,” and “get things done.”  (Personally, I prefer candidates who would go to Washington and state capitals to get things “undone.” Have you noticed that a large majority of the problems we face today are the results of government action, not government reticence to act?)

At this point, I believe the Tea Party movement remains as the most promising development to keep us from “going over the cliff.”

EU Energy Orwellianism: Ignorance Is Strength Carlo Stagnaro
In George Orwell’s masterpiece, 1984, one slogan of the party dominating Britain was: “Ignorance Is Strength.”
It actually meant that the ignorance of the people is the strength of the government: if people do not know things, or do not have the information to make informed decisions, they are like subjects, not free citizens.
Something akin to this is going on in the European Union (EU) on the energy front. Energy is an active area of EU public policy. Yet authorities are not revealing information (data it surely has) that is crucial to determine whether its policies are distorting the market and come at too high a cost to society. /continues with "High-Sounding Aims"

Oxymoronic Windpower (Part I: Howlers) Jon Boone
Oxymoronic Windpower (Part II: Windspeak)
With the right story and no accountability, Madison Avenue can sell fantasy wholesale. Rock Hudson’s ad executive did just this 50 years ago in the charming send-up to our commercial culture, Lover Come Back, when he successfully marketed a non-existent product, VIP.
Nothing illustrates this idea better than the au courant fantasia about wind technology, where public relations legerdemain has deployed the power of windspeak to give wind a complete makeover, transforming a klutzy pretender into a seemingly benevolent superhero unbound by the laws of physics and even its own history. This is due in no small part because of the way wind has been entwined in stories deeply embedded within our cultural consciousness.
_____________________

If you want cheap energy for very little outlay and maintenance, I recall reading of using a 2nd hand alternator, dispose of the brushes and replace the rotating coil with a (speaker) magnet of the same dimensions. Run in a cool place like the cellar and get over 5 years before the magnets need re-magnetizing or replacement.

Building from scratch: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromag.htm (free) or pay through the nose for a plagiarized version by magniwork with the same details. Alternatively you can download the pdf from here after a painless 30 second registration.

More complex and without any stored energy such as magnets or batteries, the quantum energy device. Quaker volts, (energy from protons, electrons and prayers).

Discussion about free energy and paranoia over releasing such info. http://www.overunity.com/