Pt.3 The Media - Information sources - Electric/Hydrogen/Natural Gas Vehicles/ Nuclear Energy
"Oh dear". This blog is about how to engage positively and effectively with the Media (TV, Radio, Press, Social Media, Bloggers. Vloggers) - mainstream, regional, local, international - from my own "mainstream" experience: e.g. BBC World Service.
The content I use will be controversial and often, given that this is a fossil fuels website, not pleasing to some. All the content is sourced and available in the mainstream Media.
My consultancy work is giving Media advice to all industry sectors, face-to-face and via Skype - e.g. DHL. KIA Motors, Nord Stream, UK Independent Schools' Council.
The different Media, like individuals, will often choose the sources of information that reflect their wishes, values and bias.
Thus, understanding the (often political) agenda of different Media before you or your company engages with them is extremely important.
Two key professional interests of mine are:
1. Investigating why the Fossil Fuel Industry has never fought back against claims such as:
- it is destroying the planet and that CO2 emissions are a Climate problem
- "Big Oil" is throwing money to Climate Sceptic individuals and organisations; which is demonstrably not so, but is the result of a clever and long-term campaign by Greenpeace who targetted Exxon some years ago to label it "Evil Empire".
2. The philosophy of science: especially Popper v Kuhn.
Posts will not normally be this long, but here are a few bullet points with regard to the above title and in relation to various comments:
- yes, pollution is a factor and is increasingly being limited
- CO2, however, is not a pollutant and is vital for life on Earth.
- produced and are still producing the high standard of living we expect and want
- are not subsidised everywhere, and the use of them is usually very highly taxed to provide national governments with a massive source of income for public services
- there are different grades of all these fuels; varying down to low-level pollutants
- even coal can be non-polluting: e.g. Professor Rosemary Falcon heads the Sustainable Coal Research Group at the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits), Johannesburg (where Nelson Mandela studied law in the 1950's).
LPG/LNG vehicles: I too drive an LPG vehicle and gas, having done so for years
- are all subsidised and paid for by taxpayers either in their domestic energy bills and in the government subsidies - often both
- produce less energy than was used to manufacture, erect and dismantle them after their short life (20-30 yrs). These three processes create large amounts of industrial pollution.
Global energy needs are expected to increase by 250% by 2050 as living standards rise. Estimates vary on global energy use and production - e.g. in 2017 renewables produced 8% of global energy according to BP. The most optimistic projections from the pro-renewables IEA estimate that by 2040 renewables will still represent only 30% of global energy production - and of that the biggest contributors will be Hydro-Electric Power and Waste, not the beloved wind and solar sources. Sources are contradictory and confusing because of inherent political (not scientific) agendas).
On average it seems that global energy use has risen by 150% in the last 20 years, and as a percentage of energy production the world is even more reliant on fossil sources than before.
Solar panelscannot be simply buried in landfill because they contain toxic chemicals such as lead, cadmium, antimony; the glass is usually not pure enough to recycle; plastics are an integral part of construction.
The problem of solar panel disposal “will explode with full force in two or three decades and wreck the environment”because of "a huge amount of waste and they are not easy to recycle. Contrary to previous assumptions, pollutants such as lead or carcinogenic cadmium can be almost completely washed out of the fragments of solar modules over a period of several months, for example by rainwater.”
40-year veteran of US solar industry
Research scientists - German Stuttgart Institute for Photovoltaics.
The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in 2016 estimated there were about 250,000 metric tonnes of solar panel waste in the world at the end of that year. IRENA projected that this amount could reach 78 million metric tonnes by 2050.
Wind power is even less efficient than solar for all the production reasons above and is more unpredictable as an energy source; kills flying creatures to such an extent that in some areas it has become the "apex predator" where it takes out birds of prey. Nuclear towers do not create such carnage because they do not move and are highly visible.
Nuclear Energy is the cleanest, safest and most reliable energy source we have. When there are problems they can certainly be on a large scale (Three Mile island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) but result in very few deaths. If you consider CO2 to be a major problem, nuclear energy produces none at all.
Ironically, this year (2018) the floating wind turbine erected as at Fukushima as a symbol of renewal is being dismantled because of its high maintenance costs.
"The price tag to remove the ¥15.2 billion turbine, which has an output capacity of 7,000 kilowatts, is expected to be around 10 percent of the building cost. Studies on the two other turbines are due to conclude in fiscal 2018, but the study period is
expected to be extended to seek any possibility of commercialization. ... Its utilization rate over the year through June 2018 was 3.7 percent, well below the 30 percent necessary for commercialization. The two other turbines, of different sizes, have utilization rates of 32.9 percent and 18.5 percent, respectively."
Source: Japan Times
Nuclear "waste" is in fact a resource and not to be feared!
" ... fission waste does not migrate even where there is significant groundwater, and ... ancient waste had none of the multi-layer engineered safeguards that are now developed, nor the careful geological siting."
" by far the biggest resource in radwaste is in the transuranics and unburnt uranium. This could be used to increase the energy available from nuclear fuel by several orders of magnitude using fast breeder reactors, but such use is no longer being pursued in many countries, including the UK ([which] used to be the world leader up until the early 1980s), as uranium is too cheap to make it economically attractive at present."
Source: Rolls Royce expert and recipient of the Institute of Physics Nuclear Industry Group Lifetime Achievement Award
And no, it can't be used to make a nuclear bomb; and there are much easier ways for terrorist groups to make the usual "dirty" bombs than trying to get hold of nuclear residue. It is calculated that there are about 120,000 cubic metres of nuclear waste in the world - i.e. not enough to fill a soccer stadium, since the start of the nuclear industry in the 1950's.
Nuclear use is already part of our daily lives. We already use radio cobalt in irradiating food and medical supplies; strontium or plutonium for generators in space travel; americium in smoke detectors; tritium in emergency-exit signage; various radio isotopes are used to diagnose and treat diseases. Soon it is expected that we will be able to split further uranium isotopes and all uranium's heavy metal derivatives.
Given that my first interest is helping you and your company to deal with the Media, mainstream and otherwise, it is important to judge your audience and then tailor your information to help them take it in.
My presumption so far here in this blog is that readers are well-informed, wish to be given reasons to reflect, think and debate civilly on what are very important matters affecting how we live. I also presume such readers are thinkers rather than activists. Trigger warning: further topics will include references to and buzz words such as coal, climate change, CO2, sea levels, non-AGW, geological time scales, IPCC, Greenpeace, Big Oil and the like.
This interactive presentation contains the latest oil & gas production data from 98,450 horizontal wells in 10 US states, through October 2018. Cumulative oil and gas production from these wells reached 9.9 Gbo and 108 Tcf. West Virginia and Ohio are deselected in most dashboards, as they have a greater reporting lag.
Visit ShaleProfile blog to explore the full interactive dashboard
Later this post I will be making 3 major announcements; about a new (and cheap!) analytics service, Oklahoma, and the NAPE.
But first, how has shale oil production developed in the past year?
You will find in the graph above that all these horizontal wells produced 6.2 million barrels of oil per day in October, which after revisions will be a few percents higher still. More than half of total oil production came from wells that started in 2018, as indicated by the dark blue area.
Over 20% more wells were completed in the first 10 months 2018, compared with the same period a year earlier.
Initial well productivity increased slightly further in 2018, as you’ll find in the ‘Well quality’ tab, where all the oily basins have been preselected.
All the 5 top shale producers were at, or near, production highs in October (“Top operators”).
The ‘Advanced Insights’ presentation is displayed below:
This “Ultimate recovery” overview shows the relationship between production rates and cumulative production over time. The oil basins are preselected and the wells are grouped by the quarter in which production started.
Peak rates have steadily moved higher over the years, as you’ll see here. In Q3 2018, the average peak rate was 668 bo/d, versus 285 bo/d 7 years earlier. Extrapolating these curves allows you to make a reasonable estimate of the ultimate recovery range. You can switch ‘Product’ to natural gas, to do the same for the gas stream of these wells.
Today we have 3 major announcements to make:
A new analytics subscription level is now available, ShaleProfile Analytics – Analyst, For just $52 per month you can always get access to the latest data, see the exact location of more than 100,000 horizontal wells, and their production history. Most dashboards can be viewed full-screen, and you will have more filtering options, such as between oil & gas wells. If you have been a follower of the blog, and want to stay even more informed, this may be something for you. You can try out this service for the first month for just $19. We almost lose money on this subscription, so don’t wait too long!
Oklahoma is in now! Oklahoma has so far been the big missing state in our database. By having it in, we now cover around 98% of all the horizontal wells in the US. It has been a tough state to work with, as data sources are unreliable and incomplete. We have spent a big amount of effort (and $) to add it. There are still some data issues to sort out, but we believe we can already now call it at least a 90% version. There is a greater lag time for Oklahoma than for most other states; we can currently cover production data through March 2018. Try out one of our subscriptions to get access to all this data!
Today the NAPE conference here in Houston will start for real. Come visit our booth (#2331) if you have the opportunity, and I’ll show you what we can do for you.
Early next week we will have a new post on North Dakota, which will release December data later this week.
Production data is subject to revisions. For these presentations, I used data gathered from the sources listed below.
Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. Similar as in Texas, lease/unit production is allocated over wells in order to estimate their individual production histories.
Montana Board of Oil and Gas
New Mexico Oil Conservation Commission
North Dakota Department of Natural Resources
Ohio Department of Natural Resources
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
Texas Railroad Commission. Individual well production is estimated through the allocation of lease production data over the wells in a lease, and from pending lease production data.
West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
West Virginia Geological & Economical Survey
Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Commission
Visit our blog to read the full post and use the interactive dashboards to gain more insight http://bit.ly/2MR9Mme
Follow us on Social Media:
Beginning of the New Year 2019 saw the Chinese President Xi Jinping belligerence towards Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (RoC). President Xi Jinping proclaimed that Taiwan unification must be the ultimate goal of any discourse regarding its future and laid out unyielding position that use of force is not ruled out should Taipei asserts full independence. This is not the first time that China openly declared its intention on Taiwan. In December 1995, Chinese officials asked US Assistant Secretary of State Joseph Nye directly what would the US do if China attacked Taiwan. Nye’s response was: “We don’t know and you don’t know. It would depend upon circumstances.”
Beijing considers Taiwan( Formosa) as a breakaway province. RoC is self-governed but it has never formally announced independence from Mainland. The Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen had made it clear that the island nation would never consider reunification with China under the terms offered by Beijing. United States lent its weight behind Taipei by sending guided-missile destroyer USS McCampbell and the fleet replenishment oiler USNS Walter S.Diehl through Taiwan Strait. It has further heightened tensions between the US and China. Meanwhile, US Pacific Fleet spokesperson Lieutenant Commander Tim Gorman told Cable News Network that it was a “routine Taiwan Strait Transit” under international law. On the other hand,Taiwan’s navy showcased its latest long-range surveillance drone as a push to counter China’s increasingly muscular rhetoric. Both these moves are symbolic in nature yet an attempt was made to convey to Beijing that Taiwan will not become Tibet of East Asia.
Situated in the West Pacific between Japan and Phillippines, Taiwan is of strategic importance both for China and US. Taiwan (Formosa) lies at the edge of South China Sea shipping lanes. On the eve of Japan’s surrender in the World War-II, the State Department of US published a note on Taiwan which remarked: Strategic factors greatly influence the problem of Formosa. With the exception of Singapore no location in the Far East occupies such a controlling position. Regional powers like Japan in World War-II used Taiwan as a base both for defensive and offensive startegic purposes. It was a very important supply base for Japanese armies in South East Asia during their operations in Second World War. The US Navy commented in 1944 that: The island of Taiwan dominates the China coast and all coastwise shipping between Japan and South Eastern Asia. Its airfields and ports supported the movement of Japanese troops and supplies throughout the Southern theatres of action.
For China, Taiwan is not just a matter of territorial sovereignty as it claims but is important from its security point of view. The control of Taiwan would help China’s operations in South China Sea. It can then more effectively assert and settle its territorial claims against Phillippines,Brunei,Vietnam etc. If Beijing succeeds in the unification of Taiwan then it will be able to use its deep water ports for its submarines to venture into Pacific Ocean. This will project China’s power in Pacific and will be a challenge to US naval assests. Beijing knows that if an external power occupies or make a base in Taiwan then it can cut-off China’s trade lines and a naval blockade could be a catastrophe for China’s rise as an economic and military power.
When two elephants fight, it is the grass that is trampled. But some 23 million Taiwanese people do not want their fate to be that of grass. Taiwan’s loss of the China seat at the United Nations in 1971 was internationally the culmination of a slow erosion in support for the RoC. History reminds us of the destiny of Tibetans at a time when China was not so powerful economically and militarily. The question is can Taiwan defend itself against China if it really uses the force as claimed by Chinese President Xi Jinping? Today, the Chinese expansion of naval assets and capabilities in South China Sea will definitely alter the dynamics of war should it occur between People’s Republic of China and RoC. With UK trying to overcome Brexit imbroglio and France trying to put its own house in order, US may not get the full support of allies against China over Taiwan.
Taiwan is not just a symbol of democracy at the gate of authoritarian Communist China which should be morally supported and militarily protected by Western world but its geographical location has made it a vital piece on global chess board of politics which is being played between US and China. The answer to the future of Taiwan lies in the womb of time but the clock is ticking for Taipei as China flexes its economic, diplomatic and military muscle.