[GWSG] Adaptation hints; future of gvt.; gas worth considering?; no; W Ant. rising

Tilley, Al atilley at unf.edu
Sat Jun 23 11:36:08 EDT 2018

1. Anna Taylor offers three general guidelines for adapting cities to climate change: do your homework and open it to others; collaborative leadership is crucial; big and small changes matter. https://theconversation.com/here-are-three-ways-that-cities-can-adapt-to-changing-climates-98341

2. The climate emergency will call forth mutations of government through the steps we take to deal with it as well as by the stress it brings. Climate Leviathan posits four categories of possible political metamorphosis. Alyssa Battistoni reviews the book and goes on to provide cursory reviews of other books and some observations of her own. Thanks to Mary Emerson Smith for the piece. https://www.thenation.com/article/political-theory-for-an-age-of-climate-change/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Weekly%2006222018&utm_term=weekly

3. A Science article reports that methane leaks during mining and handling are 60% higher than EPA estimates, high enough to call into question whether natural gas is any improvement on other fossil fuels for the climate. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/methane-leaks-offset-much-of-the-benefits-of-natural-gas-new-study-says/2018/06/21/e381654a-7590-11e8-b4b7-308400242c2e_story.html?utm_term=.cafdc3935763

4. About five years ago I ceased listing articles maintaining that natural gas is not an appropriate bridge fuel because sufficient research had determined that due to leakage it is not any cleaner than coal and is probably worse. I have been watching for any trustworthy contradictory findings. The current story above is from an authoritative source (Science). It seems to supply evidence that natural gas is still worth considering, so I am revisiting the issue.

I notice that the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) began the current study began in 2011 and it is just seeing light. I also noticed that the EDF considers that the takeaway is that we should plug the leaks, not abandon this bridge off the cliff. The industry is supposed to have been on a leak-plugging crusade for years. https://theconversation.com/why-utilities-have-little-incentive-to-plug-leaking-natural-gas-63092

Careful reading indicates the study surely under-reports the leakage. They measured leakage only where the industry allowed.

The article measures leakage at 2.3%. Around 3% leakage is the point at which natural gas becomes useless as an emissions control. Here is a 2013 Nature article recording NOAA's measurement of leakages as high as 9%. The origins of the current EDF report is mentioned at the end of the article. https://www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/1.12123!/menu/main/topColumns/topLeftColumn/pdf/493012a.pdf?origin=ppub

I shall continue to look for trustworthy reports that natural gas is worth any consideration as a fuel, otherwise ignoring the issue. Natural gas is not even cheaper than renewables any more, the original argument for its development.  http://energyinnovation.org/2018/01/22/renewable-energy-levelized-cost-of-energy-already-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels-and-prices-keep-plunging/

5. As the West Antarctic loses ice mass, the land rises in a rebound, quickly enough that it might buy us a few decades of slower sea level rise. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/rising-bedrock-below-west-antarctica-could-delay-catastrophic-ice-sheet-collapse

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.unf.edu/pipermail/gwsg/attachments/20180623/ca3c68f4/attachment.html>

More information about the GWSG mailing list