Global warming news 11/15

Canada gravely threatened by climate change

A draft report says Canada is more vulnerable to climate change than any other industrialized country, but is unprepared to deal with the impacts.

The draft report from the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy was specially commissioned by Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Meanwhile, in DC, Dubya stands alone among heads of state in refusing to take any action on global warming. Even Blair has said it’s a problem, even if he is Bush’s proxy for stalling as long as possible. History will not be kind to them.

Heaps of trouble for Blair over global warming

The Government yesterday promised an intensified drive to cut emissions of greenhouse gases after Tony Blair was accused of undermining international efforts to tackle climate change.

This next story is quite fascinating. Hey, maybe it’ll get Big Oil onboard for stopping global warming…

Test to bury global warming gas a success

In experimental project in Canada to inject carbon dioxide into oil fields has proven successful, removing 5 million tons of the heat-trapping "greenhouse" gas, while enhancing oil recovery, the Energy Department said Tuesday.

If the methodology could be applied worldwide, from one-third to one-half of the carbon dioxide emissions that go into the atmosphere could be eliminated over the next century and billions of barrels of additional oil could be recovered, the department said.

Update: Or maybe’s this is just more greenwashing (read the comments!)

  • Bob

    I may be reading it wrong, but it sounds to me like the Weyburn methods may actually make global warming worse by making more oil available. I found this by googling:

    “It has been estimated that, on a full life-cycle basis, the oil produced at Weyburn by C02 EOR will release only two-thirds as much carbon dioxide to the atmosphere compared to oil produced conventionally. This level of performance makes sequestration through EOR very attractive for meeting the targets set by many national governments for the reduction/limitation of greenhouse-gas emissions.”

    In other words, as I read it, the amount of CO2 sequestered will only be about one-third of the amount of CO2 generated by burning the oil extracted. It’s like the “advantage” casinos have over state lotteries–you lose your money slower.

    In addition, that article says that the CO2 being used “will be supplied by pipeline from a major fossil fuel source in North Dakota–the Dakota Gasification Company.” To be economical, the CO2 sources will have to be near the oil fields, which is certainly not the case in today’s world. And capturing CO2 from cars and trucks seems basically impossible to me.

    Maybe there’s something there, but I suspect it’s just a bogus greenwashing project, throwing more money at the oil companies while pretending to be green.

  • Bob

    Hmmm. Good point

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes