The energy industry is moving ahead with emission reduction technologies – A fancy route to tearing the world apart in search of minerals – Are you up to that?
January 13, 2022 6:45 am Terry Etam
The start of a new year is often a time of reflection, stillness, and goal setting. The temperature minus 30 and the pants no longer fit makes one ponder, and we look back to learn from a year ago, adjust our position and forcefully set ourselves on a new path, in level is not new bonanza of the year on Netflix.
The hydrocarbon field is more aptly described as shell shock than reflection. Although commodity prices have rebounded, the change in ground below over the past two years has been huge. The field is said to be dying like a Shakespearean character being stabbed. It is believed to be the seventh mass extinction. That’s the plan – divesting fossil fuels, starving the capital industry, retraining the workforce, “seizing some assets”.
Mark Carney, a former investment banker and head of the Bank of England, announced in November that he had linked financial institutions with $130 trillion in capital towards net zero commitments, which Align that monetary strength with the International Energy Agency’s roadmap to net zero by 2050. That roadmap has made it pretty clear that new hydrocarbon investments are not possible, period.
That plot was firmly fixed in the media. Six months ago, before COP26, almost the whole world could see the planned roadmap. Build Back Better, Europe’s Green New Deal, the new economic relationship made possible by Trudeau’s Greenpeace… all the pieces put together. Armchair energy consultants claim oil consumption has peaked in 2019 and the stranded asset should be that of the hydrocarbon industry most urgent concern.
Yet here we find ourselves in the new year sitting under our desks, nuclear-fear style, wearing helmets, scouring the web for supplies, watching the world bid at zero prices. predictability of each hydrocarbon molecule, see the greenest countries introduce ‘fossil fuel subsidies’ to stave off civil unrest and watch a real nation disintegrate into anarchy. government for not doing so (Kazakhstan – although anarchy seems to be part of much deeper story). The only thing that keeps Europe from following is New fossil fuel subsidies apply.29dk2902lhttps://boereport.com/29dk2902l.html
Yes, the world is upside down now, at least compared to a year ago. Not only is oil consumption hitting record highs, but so are coal and natural gas. Coal, in particular, was tied a noose at COP26, but it broke and is in full swing – just a few months after the expected global collapse, we see major exporters like Indonesia halted exports to preserve important supplies, and consumption in Europe and North America increased significantly compared with previous years.
Interest in coal is just the tip of the iceberg. Europe and Asia are outbid each other for scarce LNG cargoes. Rising energy costs have reduced production of a wide range of industrial products from textiles to aluminum to fertilizers. This shortage and price hike is destabilizing supply chains for everything including renewables and EV components that have been key to reducing demand for hydrocarbons in the first place.
Even with supply chains functioning normally, Europe has demonstrated barbaric evidence that the idea of reducing emissions by forgoing hydrocarbons and using renewable energy is a recipe for disaster.
On that note, here are some pretty important ironies. Despite the ‘get it out of your dead hydrocarbon’ diagnosis, the field is adapting rapidly – making great strides towards reducing global emissions by developing new technology. The irony comes from the fact that renewable-heavy jurisdictions are heading in the opposite direction. Consider two orbitals.
Setting the stage for emission reduction initiatives in the hydrocarbon sector, it should be absolutely clear that meaningful emission reductions will come from emission reduction techniques and technologies rather than supply constraints. . (First and foremost, countries should switch from coal to natural gas, the biggest driver of emissions reductions, as the US has shown, but that’s another story.)
To proceed in a meaningful way, we must do something about the emissions that are part of the system that we cannot expect. Developments on that front are happening at a remarkable pace.
Alberta’s carbon backbone is in the works and plans have been drawn up to capture/sequester CO2 from large production sites such as oil sands in a proposed massive CO2 transport system. New emission reduction technology is being developed by hand method; Carbon Engineering, co-founded by oil sands giant Murray Edwards, is currently under construction Its first commercial direct-air carbon capture facility in Texas will sequester 1 million tons of CO2 per year.
Entropy Inc., a subsidiary of the Canadian manufacturer Energy advantage, is commercializing a point-source modular carbon capture/storage device that will be economically viable for relatively small emitters in a variety of industries; Entropy’s geologists are combining new technology with the ability to save CO2 captured in underground reservoirs. Company rexcellent announcement that they have 9 projects whose scope of work can reduce 1.8 million tons of CO2 per year. Entropy’s growth is really fast, and the company recently raised $300 million.
The University of Calgary has something much more to offer. Together with the “air separation industry”, scientists have developed a new material, a metal-organic framework, in an experiment, accounted for 95 percent emissions from a cement plant in Vancouver. If the material is truly functional and scalable, we could have the holy grail – the ability to capture emissions without destroying the trillions of infrastructure that are currently getting the job done.
Compare that progress with the goat race of the central planning committees of Western governments. Renewable energy development – including point-to-point transitions to EVs – will require, under the IEA’s realistic 2050 roadmap, four times the number of mines in existence today to extract the required minerals. for renewable technology. The idea is very absurd; ask anyone regarding new mining license anywhere.
The The IEA reports itself refers to the historical average of 16.5 years to bring a new mine into production, a number that will only increase as regulations tighten against habitat destruction. As a very current example, Chile’s new leader has put the brakes on the development of a new copper mine, and copper is absolutely vital to the regenerative transition. At the same time, the IEA report, which is becoming the cornerstone of countries’ net 2050 plans, also notes that “Today’s supply and investment plans point to a world of action.” gradual, not enough on climate change… They are not ready to support an accelerated energy transition”.
The report indicates that resource quality is declining, which means that mines will have to be larger and more environmentally intrusive to get the same output (“For example, the average copper ore in Chile has decreased. 30% in the last 15 years”). To sum up, China has been playing the mineral chess game for many years and now controls most of the world’s mineral processing capacity (“China’s refining market share is about 35% for nickel, 50-70% for nickel). with lithium and cobalt, and almost 90% for rare earth elements.”).
In other words, if the West wants to pursue the real-no-2050 path by abandoning hydrocarbons and accepting the mineral requirements of renewable and renewable energy, they will not only transform the system energy but also to create a new mineral production/processing industry – or risk being held captive by China’s strategic pursuits (In an article titled “China may ban the export of rare earth technology due to security concerns“Note that” the Chinese government is currently working on review on its rare earth policy. Officials see the technology needed to refine and purify raw materials as a stronger weapon in protecting state interests than actual minerals. “).
In a nutshell, here are the energy transition options: should a transition make full use of the trillions of dollars in existing infrastructure and leverage the knowledge that comes with it? Or should it rip the world apart with new mines, build a bunch of new processing facilities, wind hundreds of thousands of miles/bases for EVs/wind/solar, pay a much higher price, and pretend it’s power interrupt not so bad?
Yes yes, I can hear it already – the choice doesn’t have to be binary. Well, that’s a reasonable point of view, and it’s true, but that doesn’t mean the world is acting that way. COP26″exclude polluters from the summit, though, the hydrocarbon companies sent delegates to hear their fate.
Germany just shut down three nuclear reactors at the beginning of 2022 in their attempt to regenerate them all, which is implausible in any way, never mind when the continent is in the midst of a crisis. energy crisis. The energy crisis in Europe itself is leading to the worst calls for accelerating the rush to renewable energy, despite the fact that no other mineral can do that. Prime Minister Trudeau unilaterally pledged to reduce Canada’s emissions by 40-45% by 2030, improving the efficiency of the IEA’s forecasts, and assigned green energy director Jonathan Wilkinson to be in charge of the natural resource portfolio and the Organization. the above mentioned Green Peace. – Steven Guilbeault is in charge of the environment/climate change profile, which is like empowering Kim Jong Il’s levels of government over the economy.
The real truth will be in between, though governments will run the world to the brink of a terrible crisis before admitting it (see Europe for proof – after wreaking havoc on oil/gas disaster, leaders in gloves are now beginning to see the value of natural gas). New energy architects convinced leaders that hydrocarbons were no longer relevant, and the fossil-fuel divestment campaign grew uncontrollably with the encouragement of the likes of Mark Carney . So the binary aspect is, at a minimum, implicit.
Then, the solutions of the hydrocarbon industry will be the foundation of the way forward, once reality sweeps the false prophets aside. So welcome to all who are putting the wheel of progress in motion.
By 2050, the hydrocarbon industry will sequester carbon worldwide, will develop new emission reduction technologies, will coexist with reasonable levels of wind and solar, and will remain a source of energy quantity for the world.
How did we get into such an energy quagmire? Find out how and how to get out – watch “The Ultimate Fossil Fuel Insanity” at Amazon.ca, Indigo.ca, or Amazon.com. Thanks for the support.
Read more insightful analysis from Terry Etam here.
Related
