I graphed the EIA data, shown below. What is most interesting is that this is market driven, not mandate driven.
Amazing Shale: US CO2 Emissions Plummet Towards 1990 Levels
by John Hanger (via The GWPF)
America’s carbon emissions may drop back close to 1990 levels this year. That result would have been thought impossible, even at the end of 2011. But the shale gas revolution makes a reality of many things recently thought impossible. Shale gas production has slashed carbon emissions and saved consumers more than $100 billion per year. Truly astonishing!
For US energy-related carbon emissions, fuel switching to gas is back to the future. After the first quarter, the USA’s 2012 emissions are falling sharply again and may drop to 1990 levels, or just slightly above that important milestone, according to data in EIA’s latest Monthy Energy Review.
America’s energy related carbon emissions fell about 7.5%, during the first three months of 2012 compared to the same period of 2011. And first quarter 2012 emissions are approximately 8.5% lower than emissions in the first quarter of 2010.
Total energy carbon emissions were 5,473 million tons in 2011 and last year fell below the 1996 mark of 5,501 million tons.
The first quarter 2012 reduction of 7.5% makes it possible that this year emissions will fall back essentially to the 1990 level of 5,039 million tons. That is shockingly good news.
The 1990 level of carbon emissions is an important measuring stick, as it is often used as a critical data point for judging progress in reducing a nation’s carbon emissions.
Why are US carbon emissions plummeting back to 1990 levels?
First and foremost are sharp reductions from electric power production, as a result of fuel switching from coal to gas, rising renewable energy production, and increasing efficiency. Yet, the shale gas revolution, and the low-priced gas that it has made a reality, is the key driver of falling carbon emissions, especially in the last 12 months.
As of April, gas tied coal at 32% of the electric power generation market, nearly ending coal’s 100 year reign on top of electricity markets. Let’s remember the speed and extent of gas’s rise and coal’s drop: coal had 52% of the market in 2000 and 48% in 2008.
Apart from power production, reductions of carbon emissions from the transportation sector since 2007 are pushing down US Carbon emissions. First quarter 2012 transportation emissions declined by about 0.6%, compared to the same period in 2011. Rising fuel efficiency and some switching to lower carbon fuels are the main causes of falling transportation emissions.
The bottom line is that America’s carbon emissions may drop back close to 1990 levels this year. That result would have been thought impossible, even at the end of 2011.
But the shale gas revolution makes a reality many things recently thought impossible. It was thought impossible to slash carbon US carbon emissions back to 1990 levels by 2012. It was thought impossible to massively, quickly cut carbon emissions and, at the same time, have lower energy bills.
Shale gas production has slashed carbon emissions and saved consumers more than $100 billion per year. Truly astonishing!
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Is this supposed to be good news?
America continues to starve the world’s hungry.
And all those endangered species are carbon-based life forms, too.
But at least we’re using our shale.
Fracking – saving the planet one CO2 molecule at a time (if you believe that CO2 is an issue).
Will fracking be rehabilitated by the envirozealots for this wonderful contribution – never.
The scare is the medium – not the message. (The message is control)
You are damaging the natural ecosystem by not increasing CO2 in the air!! / sarc
It is only American CO2 that is a problem so… problem solved.
And the warmists will be sure to claim the credit as a direct result of their policies and exaggerated science. GK
Comme toujours!
Quel surprise!
German government has declared moratorium on fracking.
Our parties must all be infiltrated by Putin’s KGB. Or alternatively, terminally stupid.
More CO2 = More Sugar!
It’s a “no brainer” if Obumble and Company will stop putting up road blocks to shale drilling and development. Even Scotland is getting on board…
John Hanger writes. “First and foremost are sharp reductions from electric power production as a result of fuel switching from coal to gas, rising renewable energy production, and increasing efficiency.”
In China power production has also fallen, not from increase use of natural gas or energy efficiency but, because of an economic slow down. Less power is being consumed in the manufacturing process.
My question, is how much of the decline since 2008 is due to our failing economy? Less energy is being consumed as the economy is continuing to slide down hill. Is that slide contributing to the decline in CO2 emissions? How much?
Wouldn’t it be marvelous if the governement had the ability to back winners like shale gas rather than losers like windmills or solar panels?
Our government needs to get out of the way and let the market separate the winners from the losers.
Oh no! I want more CO2.
This is good news? Hell no. Increased efficiencies mean that people are not driving as much. In plain language, when you don’t have a freaking job, you don’t drive as much. That makes you more efficient. That also means you are not buying as much. The downturn matches the slow economy and number of people out of work. This is simple math.
Too bad ENRON is not around to see the victory of gas over coal. They were busy cornering the gas supply market with a view to making big bucks from a legislated banning of coal burning in order to reduce CO2 emissions thought at that time (by some) to be responsible for unprecedented heating of the planet.
In order for this to happen it was expected that the banning of coal combustion would be required so they funded (to the tune of millions) alarmist propaganda that was intended to promote CAGW to the point of the ban becoming becoming law, guaranteeing a rise in the price of natural gas.
That couldn’t happen, right? I mean, who would promote a greedy profit-grab by a giant evil corporation intent on burning the economy to the ground by indirectly taxing energy pointlessly and trying to turn it into partisan political issue to get favourable legislation in the service of that narrow benefit?
Australia, I suppose. But is any other country dumb enough to do that?
What was the temperature in 1990?:)
No … the the sky is falling AGW proponents simply could not let “clean” natural gas from frac wells go unchallenged – lowered CO2 will never do – must maintain alarm at all costs – even if it means cooking the books and fibbing.
The NEW attack is that natural gas from shale frac’ing is WORSE THAN COAL! Yep – Horwath and Ingraffea from Cornell published a doom and gloom report claiming exactly that … claiming that the frac process releases large amounts of methane to the atmosphere – and that all that methane – a greenhouse gas more potent than CO2 – actually makes natural gas from frac processing worse than coal when it comes to CAGW.
It would be nice to say they conveniently ignore some very key facts – but the truth is they carefully crafted their report to ignore and avoid important relevant facts that disprove their claim. Worse – they are supported and cheered on by “Gas Land” filmmaker and pro scare monger Josh Fox – he of the burning faucets videos.
The most important is that while methane is more potent as a greenhouse gas – it also has a very short residence time in the atmosphere compared to CO2. A number of others who appear to actually be real scientists who care about truth and accuracy as opposed to advocacy masquerading as science all thoroughly refuted.
It was shown their claims largely ignored that most methane is burned off at the well head – never reaching the atmosphere. Data from 90,000 wells show they dramatically overstate – hard data reduced their claims by half. And that methane is a valuable commodity – that is increasingly being captured at the well head.
Paulina Jaramillo of Carnegie Mellon University is an expert on carbon footprint. She went back and studied the issue and found that even with high rates of methane leaking out, shale gas was still better than coal.
Even the geology department at Cornell thinks their claims are bordering on silly. Larry Catho’s and his colleagues authored a rebuttal paper that showed these claims were vastly overstated
AND as noted, they criticized the improper use of – or ignoring of – time scales. CO2 stays in atmosphere for 100+ years – methane a decade or less. Even if the methane had 100% of the global warming equivalency as the CO2 it reduces it is still a vast improvement. Ten years later it is gone – while the CO2 it replaces is around 100 years or more.
This is IMO simple intellectual fraud. Ignoring clear facts to promote and advocate for the “cause.”
Ingraffea says their scientific fraud doesn’t matter:
There is the smoking gun right there. You know they’re lying – that they are not scientists but simple blind advocates, when they ignore the fraud and excuse it with unsuppoorted and ridiculous scare mongering.
Bring in the Clowns ….
MORE HERE
The GUARDIANS GARBAGE HERE
Revkin weighs in HERE
I revisited the cap and trade madness persued by Waxman-Markey and the Dems in 2009. Their target was a 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020. In 2005 the USA emitted 5.997 Gt of energy related Co2 and the projected CO2 emissions of 5.039 Gt for 2012 would mean a reduction of 16% which would be just 1% shy of the cap and trade target.
Great news…no more need to strangle coal or electric companies with taxes, CO2 storage, or anything else…..BTW with this lower emission rate, how many jobs were lost?
Russell Steele says:
July 2, 2012 at 8:59 pm
…
My question, is how much of the decline since 2008 is due to our failing economy? Less energy is being consumed as the economy is continuing to slide down hill. Is that slide contributing to the decline in CO2 emissions? How much?
Russell nails it. How much energy do the unemployed consume – not as much as people with jobs.
I guess we can thank O’Bumble and his economic downturn. CO2 should be going up! That’s a sign of progress. But it’s going down because people are out of work and all of the jobs are leaving overseas because there being strangled by National Socialistic EPA policies.
Hey wait a second. Manmade co2 emissions have gone down and yet it was 118° in Kansas? There’s something wrong with “global warming” science!
Russell Steele says:
My question, is how much of the decline since 2008 is due to our failing economy?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Difficult to quantify, but it is probably a contributing factor…
http://www.google.com/search?q=u.s.%2C+manufacturing%2C+decline
US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years – July 3, 2012
“Production fell from 55.6 to 51 while new orders posted their biggest monthly drop in more than a decade, falling to 47.8 from 60.1 in May, indicating that demand is faltering dangerously.”
http://www.ndtv.com/article/profit/us-manufacturing-shrinks-for-first-time-in-3-years-307242
I haven’t felt this cold in more than 20 years.
So this is why Ken Salazar does not care for state regulation of fracking?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/25/us-energy-salazar-idUSBRE85O19Q20120625
U.S. needs Federal fracking rules: Salazar
I don’t recall seeing any big environmental problems with all the fracking. Not that the Feds haven’t been frantically seeking ways to shut this technology down. Still no documented cases of polluted waters from leaking fracking operations getting into the water supplies.
See http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/293086/truth-about-fracking-kevin-d-williamson
The radical enviros continue to oppose shale gas, and wildly exaggerate the negative impacts of fracking.
The clear agenda of the radical enviros is now even more apparent – they want to starve the world of inexpensive energy that is needed for economic growth and political stability.
They want people to be under-employed or unemployed and they want human populations to decline, in order to protect Mother Gaia from the depredations of humanity.
The target of the radical enviros is not atmospheric CO2, good people, it is YOU.
For more evidence, see
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/28/newsbytes-world-cooling-to-global-warming/#comment-1020878
and
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/28/newsbytes-world-cooling-to-global-warming/#comment-1022591