GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

2 hours ago, Boat said:

‘

Current consumption is down from 2019 levels. Even if a record was broken you could easily call it the lost 1/2 decade for oil growth. Cutting production to boost prices looks of desperation, not healthy demand. You should hire me to be the expert. One must look at the history to understand the present. Understanding 101. 
Goldman is owned by institutional investors who also own most of the oil infrastructure. Sense a conflict of interest? Meanwhile the Russians are driving up wheat prices. Less money for fuel and other commodities? Oil doesn’t do well in inflationary times. 

Inflationary or deflationary? The oil market is being held back by deflationary fears. Otherwise the price would be going gangbusters.

Oil demand is growing which explains the higher prices for oil.

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/oil-and-gas/our-insights/oil-and-gas-blog/snapshot-of-global-oil-supply-and-demand

 "Global liquids demand increased by 1.6 MMb/d in June to 102 MMb/d. Strong gains in Europe (+0.6 MMb/d) and the Middle East (+0.5 MMb/d) accounted for the majority of the demand growth"

Edited July 24, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,009]

39 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/oil-and-gas/our-insights/oil-and-gas-blog/snapshot-of-global-oil-supply-and-demand

 

 

"On the supply side, Saudi Arabia announced additional voluntary cuts of 1 MMb/d in July and August, Russia announced 500Kb/d voluntary output cuts on top of the 500Kb/d pledged in March."

"The number of active rigs has continued to decline m-o-m to 616 during June (down by 83 since the start of 2023)."

Why the production cuts?

Why reduced investment in new shale oil rigs?

The exact same article but you cherry pick what you want to see.

 

[specinho + 470]

On 7/23/2023 at 8:22 PM, NWMan said:

I don't really believe in global warming, I think it is a possibility.  I made a statement about "global warming guys".  It is all based on speed and my main problem with the theory is that fast temperature variations in the past may have been averaged out by the estimation methodology.

"Global warming" might be not appropriate to give the right impression. Some places could have experienced warming while others cooling or not much variation. 

"Climate change", however, from microclimate of a  location, state or country, to larger area, like a region or climate zone, might give clearer pictures of what is happening. 

For examples,

a) flowering season or timing,

b) change of fruiting season,

c) change in frequency and amount of rain,

d) change in fishery yield, or wind draught

e) change in occurrence direction of seabreeze- landbreeze,  etc. 

All events are likely more prominent in certain places than others. Generalization, which intends to include all in the effort,  might have blurred out the significance of each event. Consequently, it reduces the visibility of larger or whole picture. 

It might be not wrong to mention human activities have resulted in obvious temperature increment within a short 50 or 70 years since 1960s. But how they address the problem is deemed inappropriate. They grab one end of a hair and believe it is the whole. 

It is a process all of us might have gone through over the decades. An inclination might not be exaggeration. Dispute happens because most taking part are in this phase. 

This process remains unchanged until we have much time to let things sink in without judgement and float up sometimes later in a clearer image or info. It is an accidental priviledge for a very small group or very few e.g. the imposed jobless, retirees with interest in this area and such.... 'o' +~+

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

World's Largest Battery Energy Storage Scheme Gets Planning Permission

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Worlds-Largest-Battery-Energy-Storage-Scheme-Gets-Planning-Permission.html

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

16 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

"On the supply side, Saudi Arabia announced additional voluntary cuts of 1 MMb/d in July and August, Russia announced 500Kb/d voluntary output cuts on top of the 500Kb/d pledged in March."

"The number of active rigs has continued to decline m-o-m to 616 during June (down by 83 since the start of 2023)."

Why the production cuts?

Why reduced investment in new shale oil rigs?

The exact same article but you cherry pick what you want to see.

 

On the demand side:

Oil demand is growing which explains the higher prices for oil.

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/oil-and-gas/our-insights/oil-and-gas-blog/snapshot-of-global-oil-supply-and-demand

 "Global liquids demand increased by 1.6 MMb/d in June to 102 MMb/d. Strong gains in Europe (+0.6 MMb/d) and the Middle East (+0.5 MMb/d) accounted for the majority of the demand growth"

[Polyphia + 83]

Here is a look at global temperatures to this point in 2023 compared to recent years.

Also, here is an article about research on the slowing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Those of you who do not think computer modeling is a scientific endeavor probably shouldn't read it. 

https://cosmosmagazine.com/earth/oceans/earth-racing-towards-another-tipping-point-with-predictions-atlantic-circulation-will-stop-this-century/

 

Edited July 25, 2023 by Polyphia

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

1 hour ago, Polyphia said:

Here is a look at global temperatures to this point in 2023 compared to recent years.

Also, here is an article about research on the slowing of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Those of you who do not think computer modeling is a scientific endeavor probably shouldn't read it. 

https://cosmosmagazine.com/earth/oceans/earth-racing-towards-another-tipping-point-with-predictions-atlantic-circulation-will-stop-this-century/

 

Confining the research to only a few short months is cherry-picking and purely unscientific. Let's wait until the full year data is available before jumping to conclusions. It looks like a typical annual temperature curve for 2023.

One thing we do know is that CO2 is an insignificant factor in green house gas impact.

http://www.ijaos.org/article/298/10.11648.j.ijaos.20210502.12

 "From this data it is concluded that H2O is responsible for 29.4K of the 33K warming, with CO₂ contributing 3.3K and CH₄ and N₂O combined just 0.3K. Climate sensitivity to future increases in CO₂ concentration is calculated to be 0.50K, including the positive feedback effects of H₂O, while climate sensitivities to CH₄ and N₂O are almost undetectable at 0.06K and 0.08K respectively. This result strongly suggests that increasing levels of CO₂ will not lead to significant changes in earth temperature and that increases in CH₄ and N₂O will have very little discernable impact."

Edited July 25, 2023 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,255]

29 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Confining the research to only a few short months is cherry-picking and purely unscientific. Let's wait until the full year data is available before jumping to conclusions. It looks like a typical annual temperature curve for 2023.

One thing we do know is that CO2 is an insignificant factor in green house gas impact.

http://www.ijaos.org/article/298/10.11648.j.ijaos.20210502.12

 "From this data it is concluded that H2O is responsible for 29.4K of the 33K warming, with CO₂ contributing 3.3K and CH₄ and N₂O combined just 0.3K. Climate sensitivity to future increases in CO₂ concentration is calculated to be 0.50K, including the positive feedback effects of H₂O, while climate sensitivities to CH₄ and N₂O are almost undetectable at 0.06K and 0.08K respectively. This result strongly suggests that increasing levels of CO₂ will not lead to significant changes in earth temperature and that increases in CH₄ and N₂O will have very little discernable impact."

Confining the research to only a few short months is cherry-picking and purely unscientific.????

yeah and at the same time you keep ignoring the past 50 years of scientific data.........

how is 2023 shaping up....................A new record

now you just keep denying the data and the temperatures outside in 2023....... as it gets hotter and hotter  and hotter

 

Thank GOD the whole world is not siding with any of your BS (except the idiots)........

 

Enjoy the transition to renewables, I am

 

 

[notsonice + 1,255]

 

thanks to the idiots who love Coal

 

 

 

HuffPost

People In Phoenix Are Getting Third-Degree Burns From Pavement As Heat Wave Fries City

A Phoenix burn doctor is warning of the severe injuries people are experiencing after making contact with pavement as the city contends with...

.

3 days ago

 

Arizona Daily Star

Climate change impact on Phoenix, Tucson heat wave analyzed

For Star subscribers: "The simplest explanation is that while Phoenix is hotter, Tucson's temperatures have been more unusual" under...

.

2 days ago

 

Washington Post

Phoenix is too hot for some baby birds, as the heat wave persists

A wildlife rehabilitation center in Phoenix has been a frenzy of activity during the record-breaking run of extreme temperatures.

.

1 day ago

 

Bloomberg.com

Heat Wave: Can We Keep Living in Places Like Phoenix?

Extreme heat is stress-testing our ability to inhabit parts of the Southwest.

.

1 day ago

 

Esquire

On the Ground in Arizona's Heat Wave

Have you ever felt this kind of heat? That turns car seats and sidewalks into skillets?

.

3 hours ago

 

 

[Polyphia + 83]

57 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Confining the research to only a few short months is cherry-picking and purely unscientific. Let's wait until the full year data is available before jumping to conclusions. It looks like a typical annual temperature curve for 2023.

One thing we do know is that CO2 is an insignificant factor in green house gas impact.

http://www.ijaos.org/article/298/10.11648.j.ijaos.20210502.12

 "From this data it is concluded that H2O is responsible for 29.4K of the 33K warming, with CO₂ contributing 3.3K and CH₄ and N₂O combined just 0.3K. Climate sensitivity to future increases in CO₂ concentration is calculated to be 0.50K, including the positive feedback effects of H₂O, while climate sensitivities to CH₄ and N₂O are almost undetectable at 0.06K and 0.08K respectively. This result strongly suggests that increasing levels of CO₂ will not lead to significant changes in earth temperature and that increases in CH₄ and N₂O will have very little discernable impact."

You are really bad at generating inferences (they are almost always incorrect), and I can't tell when you are intentionally doing it, although I would guess it is most of the time. I am not cherry picking anything. I posted a graph that compares daily temperatures each year over the past 45 years. And I agree with you that we won't officially know if this is the hottest year on record until the calendar changes to 2024. But, barring some unusual event, such as a massive and unexpected volcanic eruption (think Mount Tambora in 1815), it is a strong likelihood that this will be the hottest year on record, and if not, it almost certainly will be in the top 3. It looks like the cooling prediction that you have been floating is unequivocally wrong.

As for the article by Coe et al. that you keep trotting out....it is one study. One study is never the be-all end-all of anything. You need a body of evidence from a multitude of studies that converge on similar conclusions. Just out of curiosity, what do you make of the fact that almost no one has cited the Coe et al. article in their own research, from either side of the debate? After 2 years in the public domain (in an open-source journal, free to everyone), a whopping total of three other researchers have cited it.

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

2 hours ago, Polyphia said:

You are really bad at generating inferences (they are almost always incorrect), and I can't tell when you are intentionally doing it, although I would guess it is most of the time. I am not cherry picking anything. I posted a graph that compares daily temperatures each year over the past 45 years. And I agree with you that we won't officially know if this is the hottest year on record until the calendar changes to 2024. But, barring some unusual event, such as a massive and unexpected volcanic eruption (think Mount Tambora in 1815), it is a strong likelihood that this will be the hottest year on record, and if not, it almost certainly will be in the top 3. It looks like the cooling prediction that you have been floating is unequivocally wrong.

As for the article by Coe et al. that you keep trotting out....it is one study. One study is never the be-all end-all of anything. You need a body of evidence from a multitude of studies that converge on similar conclusions. Just out of curiosity, what do you make of the fact that almost no one has cited the Coe et al. article in their own research, from either side of the debate? After 2 years in the public domain (in an open-source journal, free to everyone), a whopping total of three other researchers have cited it.

It is not cited because it is not currently challengeable....the climate alarmists masquerading as scientists do not know what to say at this point....give them a few more decades and they might think of something to say.

It is clear that CO2 plays no significant role in greenhouse effect warming, this study is very straightforward and is currently unchallenged.

Try educating this young and misled person. Apparently the laws of the land are for other people to obey, not her. Sad to see someone trusting the science garbage industry. Pathetic state of un-enlightenment.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/greta-thunberg-fined-sweden-court-climate-protest/

A Swedish court on Monday fined climate activist Greta Thunberg for disobeying police during an environmental protest at an oil facility last month. Thunberg, 20, admitted to the facts but denied guilt, saying the fight against the fossil fuel industry was a form of self-defense due to the existential and global threat of the climate crisis.

""We cannot save the world by playing by the rules," she told journalists after hearing the verdict, vowing she would "definitely not" back down."

"Thunberg and activists from the Reclaim the Future movement returned to an oil terminal in the southern Swedish city of Malmö to stage to another roadblock. A photo then showed her being carried away by police officers."

Edited July 25, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

Oil demand is exceeding pre-pandemic levels and is skyrocketing as people take to summer vacations.

Enjoy, everybody! Drive those fossil fuel vehicles!

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Demand-Surge-Set-To-Push-Oil-Prices-Higher-This-Year.html

"Demand is robust and likely to further strengthen during the third quarter.

China and India, the world’s largest and third-largest oil importers, respectively, will be the key drivers of rising oil demand.

Goldman Sachs expects oil prices to rise to $86 per barrel at year-end, as record-high oil demand and lowered supply will lead to a large market deficit"

Edited July 25, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

8 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

World's Largest Battery Energy Storage Scheme Gets Planning Permission

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Worlds-Largest-Battery-Energy-Storage-Scheme-Gets-Planning-Permission.html

The problem is, of course, that public bankruptcy will intervene before long and upend the wild plans for public mega-batteries.

The EU is already faced with cutting back on public expenditures to avoid hyper-inflation and economic disaster.

Here is the final statement in your quoted article. The disaster has already begun.

"More than 1,000 wind and solar projects with planning permission in the UK cannot begin construction due to challenges to connect to the national grid, the Local Government Association (LGA) warned earlier this month."

Edited July 25, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Polyphia + 83]

6 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

It is not cited because it is not currently challengeable....the climate alarmists masquerading as scientists do not know what to say at this point....give them a few more decades and they might think of something to say.

It is clear that CO2 plays no significant role in greenhouse effect warming, this study is very straightforward and is currently unchallenged.

Try educating this young and misled person. Apparently the laws of the land are for other people to obey, not her. Sad to see someone trusting the science garbage industry.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/greta-thunberg-fined-sweden-court-climate-protest/

A Swedish court on Monday fined climate activist Greta Thunberg for disobeying police during an environmental protest at an oil facility last month. Thunberg, 20, admitted to the facts but denied guilt, saying the fight against the fossil fuel industry was a form of self-defense due to the existential and global threat of the climate crisis.

""We cannot save the world by playing by the rules," she told journalists after hearing the verdict, vowing she would "definitely not" back down."

"Thunberg and activists from the Reclaim the Future movement returned to an oil terminal in the southern Swedish city of Malmö to stage to another roadblock. A photo then showed her being carried away by police officers."

It would seem that if it were the breakthrough research you think it is, at least the other climate change denier researchers would be citing it at every turn.

 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

3 hours ago, Polyphia said:

It would seem that if it were the breakthrough research you think it is, at least the other climate change denier researchers would be citing it at every turn.

 

 

Not necessarily, this research is not an attempt to refute any particular item in the agenda of the climate alarmists. It simply attempts to put the elements into proper perspective and to compare the relative importance of different contributors to greenhouse gas climate change. It is unbiased research, the combatants in the climate science field on either side do not look for unbiased work to embrace.

It is consistent with other work done on the significance of H2O and clouds in the global climate change.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334093488_Intensified_East_Asian_winter_monsoon_during_the_last_geomagnetic_reversal_transition

The Japanese team commented,

"“The Intergovernmental IPCC has discussed the impact of cloud cover on climate in their evaluations, but this phenomenon has never been considered in climate predictions due to the insufficient physical understanding of it,” Dr. Masayuki Hyodo of the University of Kobe.
Hyodo added that “When galactic cosmic rays increase, so do low clouds, and when cosmic rays decrease clouds do as well, so climate warming may be caused by an opposite-umbrella effect. The umbrella effect caused by galactic cosmic rays is important when thinking about current global warming as well as the warm period of the medieval era.”

The low cloud cover is caused by increasing cosmic rays reaching earth due to changes in the earth’s magnetic field."

A Finnish study reached similar conclusions.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

This research is consistent with the studies correlating cosmic rays (ie. solar variables) with earth temperature change. So now the pathway is solar radiation impacting earth atmospheric H20 impacting earth temperature change. The other work above showing the overwhelming significance of atmospheric H2O as a driver of climate change can be related into a larger model of solar activity with the transfer mechanism now elucidated.

Edited July 26, 2023 by Ecocharger

[bloodman33 + 22]

JoMack thanks for contributing to AOC reelection fund.  Ecocharger thanks for contributing to AOC's reelection fund.  That said, anyone on this board thread that writes more than 500 words is either retired and bored or getting paid by the oil industry to be a shill or both. Really who do you think actually reads your cholera of the typing fingers twitches.   Nobody but the handful of right wing oil shills on the board thats who:  6 old guys on this board that just pat each other on the back.  Pathetic.  Wake up Monkeys.  Oil reparations now!  Give Texas back to Mexico. 

[notsonice + 1,255]

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

The problem is, of course, that public bankruptcy will intervene before long and upend the wild plans for public mega-batteries.

The EU is already faced with cutting back on public expenditures to avoid hyper-inflation and economic disaster.

Here is the final statement in your quoted article. The disaster has already begun.

"More than 1,000 wind and solar projects with planning permission in the UK cannot begin construction due to challenges to connect to the national grid, the Local Government Association (LGA) warned earlier this month."

just for you.....ha ha ha

all the gray dots.....Batteries under construction or planned in the US ....

 

How many GW's?????? 5...that's 5 times bigger than the UK mega project

 

California and Texas......with their renewable's....and EV's.....wiping out coal and Nat gas

Enjoy 2023,  2024 and 2025....... Coal in the US????? already down this year over 50 million tonnes compared to 2022

now if you want to take about upcoming bankruptcies ....Price of Coal in the US in the past 2 months down 20 percent .......back to losing money.........

SO which will go bankrupt....Coal or Battery projects????? Enjoy the future for Coal is not good

and PS how many new coal projects in the US.....take a good look at the figure below....NADA...enjoy

 

[notsonice + 1,255]

The nail in coals coffin in the UK

and with interconnectors Germany coal getting wiped out...

Enjoy Wind in the UK with storage........

Zero Carbon a reality in the not to far future.....

oals 

Drax wins consent for Cruachan expansion

New 600MW plant will be constructed adjacent to the existing underground pumped hydro facility in Argyll

25 July 2023

 

 

Drax Group has secured development consent from the Scottish Government for its plans to build a new £500m underground pumped storage hydro plant at its Cruachan facility in Argyll, Scotland.

 

The new 600MW plant will be constructed adjacent to the existing underground facility, effectively more than doubling the site’s total generation capacity to over 1GW.

 

Will Gardiner, Drax Group CEO, said: “This is a major milestone in Drax’s plans to build Britain’s first new pumped storage hydro plant in a generation.

“These plants play a critical role in stabilising the electricity system, helping to balance supply and demand through storing excess power from the national grid.

 

“When Scotland’s wind turbines are generating more power than we need, Cruachan steps in to store the renewable electricity so it doesn’t go to waste.”

 

The announcement was made during a visit by Scotland’s First Minister Humza Yousaf to Drax’s Cruachan power station on the shores of Loch Awe.

 

Morag Watson, Director of Policy at Scottish Renewables, said: “Long-duration electricity storage, such as pumped storage hydro, will be essential for ensuring energy security and keeping energy bills low for consumers as we decarbonise our energy system.

 

"And the extension to the plant at Cruachan is one vital step towards maximising the benefits available from this technology.

 

“More pumped storage hydro means we can store cheap renewable electricity for when it is needed most, but much more needs to be done to support investment in the technology.”

[NWMan + 89]

22 hours ago, notsonice said:

.A new record

You show a plot that has a 1 degree increase from 1850.  this is the nasa plot.  how did they calculate the average temperature of the earth in 1850 and what is the range of uncertainty on that calculation?

 

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

10 hours ago, notsonice said:

The nail in coals coffin in the UK

and with interconnectors Germany coal getting wiped out...

Enjoy Wind in the UK with storage........

Zero Carbon a reality in the not to far future.....

oals 

Drax wins consent for Cruachan expansion

New 600MW plant will be constructed adjacent to the existing underground pumped hydro facility in Argyll

25 July 2023

 

 

Drax Group has secured development consent from the Scottish Government for its plans to build a new £500m underground pumped storage hydro plant at its Cruachan facility in Argyll, Scotland.

 

The new 600MW plant will be constructed adjacent to the existing underground facility, effectively more than doubling the site’s total generation capacity to over 1GW.

 

Will Gardiner, Drax Group CEO, said: “This is a major milestone in Drax’s plans to build Britain’s first new pumped storage hydro plant in a generation.

“These plants play a critical role in stabilising the electricity system, helping to balance supply and demand through storing excess power from the national grid.

 

“When Scotland’s wind turbines are generating more power than we need, Cruachan steps in to store the renewable electricity so it doesn’t go to waste.”

 

The announcement was made during a visit by Scotland’s First Minister Humza Yousaf to Drax’s Cruachan power station on the shores of Loch Awe.

 

Morag Watson, Director of Policy at Scottish Renewables, said: “Long-duration electricity storage, such as pumped storage hydro, will be essential for ensuring energy security and keeping energy bills low for consumers as we decarbonise our energy system.

 

"And the extension to the plant at Cruachan is one vital step towards maximising the benefits available from this technology.

 

“More pumped storage hydro means we can store cheap renewable electricity for when it is needed most, but much more needs to be done to support investment in the technology.”

The transition has barely begun in Europe and  already the EU is throwing up its hands in frustration and public financial bankruptcy. 

Entirely predictable.

[turbguy + 1,545]

1 hour ago, NWMan said:

You show a plot that has a 1 degree increase from 1850.  this is the nasa plot.  how did they calculate the average temperature of the earth in 1850 and what is the range of uncertainty on that calculation?

 

The error bounds on NASA's Earth's temperature measurements in 1850 are relatively small.  The typical error bounds on NASA's Earth's temperature measurements in 1850 are about 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.36 degrees Fahrenheit). This means that the actual temperature of the Earth in 1850 could have been anywhere between 13.8 degrees Celsius (56.8 degrees Fahrenheit) and 14.2 degrees Celsius (57.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

NASA calculates the average temperature of the Earth by averaging measurements of air temperatures over land and ocean surface temperatures. These measurements are taken from thousands of weather stations around the world, including over the ocean, in Antarctica, and from satellites.

However, there were not as many weather stations in 1850 as there are today. So, NASA uses a variety of methods to reconstruct the temperature record back to 1850. These methods include:

• Using proxy data: Proxy data is information about past climate conditions that is not directly measured. For example, tree rings can be used to reconstruct past temperatures because the width of tree rings is affected by the amount of sunlight and water that the tree receives.
• Using statistical methods: Statistical methods can be used to fill in gaps in the temperature record. For example, if there are no temperature measurements for a particular year, scientists can use statistical methods to estimate the temperature based on measurements from nearby years.

[NWMan + 89]

14 hours ago, turbguy said:

0.2 degrees Celsius

NASA can calculate the average temperature of the earth (a stunningly difficult calculation with thousands of variables) to an accuracy of 0.2 degrees in 1850! really!  

[turbguy + 1,545]

4 hours ago, NWMan said:

NASA can calculate the average temperature of the earth (a stunningly difficult calculation with thousands of variables) to an accuracy of 0.2 degrees in 1850! really!  

That is what is claimed.  Feel free to doubt the statement.

[notsonice + 1,255]

On 7/26/2023 at 1:21 PM, Ecocharger said:

The transition has barely begun in Europe and  already the EU is throwing up its hands in frustration and public financial bankruptcy. 

Entirely predictable.

as usual you post BS with nothing to back up your comments

the only ones throwing up its their hands in frustration are drama Queens ...such as yourself.

the EU is throwing up its hands in frustration and public financial bankruptcy. ???????? my my so much drama out of you these days.......

How many storage battery facilities have gone bankrupt?????

once again you have proven yourself to be nothing but a drama queen

 

in the mean time the transition to renewables is happening at full speed....

 

enjoy the future.....Coal is not part of it......

[Ecocharger + 1,477]

Coal demand is ramping up worldwide, you just can't beat that coal for a reliable affordable and easy energy source.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Coal/Why-The-World-Just-Cant-Kick-Coal.html

"Despite the decline in the US, global coal consumption, especially in Asia and China, which consumes 55% of the world's coal, continues to rise due to the relative cheapness and abundance of coal, and rapid industrialization.

Coal demand rebounded in the US and EU in 2021 and 2022 due to the European energy crisis and increased coal burning as an emergency measure, raising concerns over the ability to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions."

Edited July 27, 2023 by Ecocharger