Real Clear Politics
 
Real Clear Energy

 
 
April 10, 2015  
The Daily Bulletin - April 10,  2015
By _Editors_ (http://www.realclearenergy.org/authors/editors/) 



MOVE OVER TEXAS, BRITAIN DISCOVERS  OIL 
The big news in Britain today is the discovery of a  significant amount of 
oil only a few miles south of London, about halfway  between the capital and 
Brighton, which is Londoners favorite seaside  resort.  Here’s the report 
from John Moylan of the BBC:   “There could be up to 100 billion barrels of 
oil onshore beneath the South of  England, says exploration firm UK Oil & Gas 
Investments (UKOG).Last year,  the firm drilled a well at Horse Hill, near 
Gatwick airport, and analysis of  that well suggests the local area could 
hold 158 million barrels of oil per  square mile. But only a fraction of the 
100 billion total would be recovered,  UKOG admits.  The North Sea has 
produced about 45 billion barrels in 40  years.  ‘We think we've found a very 
significant discovery here, probably  the largest [onshore in the UK] in the 
last 30 years, and we think it has  national significance,’ Stephen Sanderson, 
UKOG's chief executive told the BBC.  UKOG says that the majority of the oil 
lies within the Upper Jurassic Kimmeridge  formation at a depth of between 
2,500ft (762m) and 3,000ft (914m).”   Imagine the road to Brighton bristling 
with oil derricks.  _Somehow it doesn’t seem like  it’s going to happen._ 
(http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32229203)    
WHY FRACKING IS SPLITTING  ENVIRONMENTALISM 
Brad Plumer of Vox takes note of one of the  most blatant contradictions of 
the environmental movement.  Although they  inevitably back natural gas 
when it comes to closing down a coal plant, they  don’t like DRILLING for 
natural gas.  Fracking has nearly doubled our  natural gas output and is the 
only 
thing that is making the shutdown of coal  plants possible.  Here’s the way 
he describes it:  “Here's a very  rough breakdown of the debate: Supporters 
of fracking tend to argue that the US  natural-gas boom, driven by 
hydraulic fracturing, has actually been one of the  big environmental success 
stories of the past decade. Electric utilities are now  using more cheap gas 
and 
less dirty coal to generate power. Since gas burns more  cleanly, that curbs 
air pollution: US carbon dioxide emissions have plunged  roughly 10 percent 
since 2005. A big debate: Should fracking be regulated more  tightly — or 
banned?  That, in turn, has given momentum to President  Obama's big push to 
tackle global warming and curtail power plant emissions  further via EPA 
regulations. ‘You have to ask,’ Michael Levi of the Council on  Foreign 
Relations told me last fall, ‘does the emergence of a cheap, reliable  option 
for 
cutting emissions make regulators more willing to force power plants  to cut 
their emissions? And the answer is yes. We're seeing that play  out.’  Many 
green-minded supporters of fracking will also concede that  there are real 
problems with the practice — like water pollution — but they  often focus 
more on patching those problems than on banning it altogether.  Advocates of 
this approach include the Environmental Defense Fund, as well as,  crucially, 
the Obama administration.” _  But then maybe we just shouldn’t expect 
consistency from the environmental  movement._ 
(http://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8370401/fracking-debate-environmentalists)   
THE EMERGING CLIMATE DENIER DIVIDE 
While environmentalists are divided about the virtues  of fracking, climate 
deniers have their own differences, according to David  Roberts of Grist.  
He notes that establishment Republicans such as  George Bush, Jr. and John 
McCain were willing to deal with climate change but  the Tea Party took over 
around 2010 and took a much tougher stance.  “Now  that the public and the 
media are paying more attention, denial is starting to  make the GOP look 
like, to borrow a phrase from Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, the  stupid party. 
Denialism is increasingly seen, not only among elites but in  popular 
culture, as atavistic and conspiracy-minded. Climate has become one of  those 
issues where the gulf between the insular far right and the rest of  American 
(to 
say nothing of Western) culture has become so vast that it is  serving like 
a moat, keeping out the very demographic groups the GOP needs in  coming 
years. What to do? GOP pols have been fumbling with this and they’ve  ended up 
all over the map. It’s happening but it’s not human caused. It’s  
happening but it’s not that bad. The scientists are playing politics. And  
lately: ‘
I’m not a scientist.’ They’ve been mocked plenty for that last one, but  it
’s the one that reveals what’s really going on in right-wing messaging  
meetings these days, namely a growing pressure to stop talking about the 
science  at all. There is a divide growing in the GOP between the 
establishment, 
chafing  at being associated with crank conspiracy theories, and the 
grassroots base,  where the war against ‘climate alarmists’ has taken on 
near-theological  overtones.”  Probably the real question is whether the issue 
is 
important  enough so that it’s going to be critical in deciding elections. _The 
 most telling statistic is that the voting public generally ranks climate  
concerns last among the issues they think are  important._ 
(http://grist.org/climate-energy/theres-an-emerging-right-wing-divide-on-climate-denial-heres-
what-it-means-and-doesnt/)    
INFRASTRUCTURE IS PUTTING CANADA’S ENERGY SUPERPOWER AT  RISK 
It’s been more or less assumed that Canada is going  to be an energy 
superpower with its development of tar sands, fracking for gas  and other major 
projects.  But the question of how Canada is going to  deliver all this energy 
to the world is beginning to become a real  question.  Here’s the way Rita 
Trichur of the Wall Street Journal  reports it:  “Canada’s ability to 
realize its potential as an ‘energy  superpower’ is at risk because of 
infrastructure gaps preventing oil and gas  companies from properly accessing 
global 
markets, says a top executive at Bank  of Nova Scotia.  Scotiabank Chief 
Executive Brian Porter, in remarks  prepared for the bank’s annual meeting in 
Ottawa, cautioned that stalled  energy-infrastructure projects, such as 
pipelines, coupled with Canada’s  overreliance on the United States as an 
export 
market, will have significant  consequences for the country’s economy. 
Toronto-based Scotiabank is Canada’s  third-largest bank by assets and is a 
lender to the energy industry. Even so, it  is rare for a Canadian bank CEO to 
take such a strong stance on a public policy  issue viewed as controversial by 
some. His remarks come as swooning oil prices  are weighing on Canada’s 
economic growth prospects and companies, including  TransCanada Corp. , are 
facing cost overruns and lengthy delays for its proposed  Keystone XL project 
amid political resistance in the U.S.  Although Mr.  Porter didn’t name 
Keystone specifically in the prepared text of his remarks, he  stressed that 
Canada’s inability to make headway on energy infrastructure  projects is 
hurting 
the price of exports even though the country is the world’s  fifth largest 
producer of crude oil and natural gas.” _Who  would think that all that 
energy could remain bottled up by environmental  objections?_ 
(http://www.wsj.com/articles/infrastructure-gaps-put-canadas-energy-superpower-potential-at-ris
k-1428589644) 

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to