Even Dr. James Hansen doesn’t believe Keystone XL itself will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions
Video follows below
At today’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Keystone XL, Chairman Robert Menendez (D-NJ) asked well-known climate scientist James Hansen to clarify what he meant when he made his famous “game over” comment, which has been used widely by Keystone XL opponents to justify their erroneous claims. Of course, “game over” has been the main rallying cry for the Sierra Club’s Michael Brune who sat next to Hansen at today’s hearing. In response to Senator Menendez’s question, Hansen explained,
“I’m glad you asked me that question because my comment continues to be misinterpreted […] It has been clear that conventional oil and gas are limited. We’re probably close to peak-oil for conventional oil. The science was clear that we cannot burn all the coal, we’re going to have to phase that out and that’s a solvable problem because coal is used mainly for electricity production and we can generate electricity in other ways including nuclear power, which is carbon-free. Then there is this other huge source of carbon, unconventional fossil fuels and my statement was that if we are going to now open up that other source of unconventional fossil fuels, that’s what tar sands are: the first big step into that unconventional fossil fuels. But the science tells us we can’t do that. We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels. The science is crystal clear on that and the world is just ignoring the science. The scientists are saying ‘wait you can’t do that,’ and that’s what I was saying. This is game over if you don’t understand; we have to leave that extremely large amount of carbon in the ground.”
So not even James Hansen, the very person Keystone XL opponents quote incessantly, believes that Keystone XL itself will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.
But that’s not all. Senator Menendez followed up on Hansen’s clarification, offering yet another blow to Keystone XL opponents. As he explained,
“So I now have the greater definition. I just personally don’t think that the approval or disapproval of the pipeline is a decline in global leadership, nor do I believe that the specific approval or disapproval is necessarily game over. I understand what you’re saying, there is a broader context which is whether you have access to this fuel and you start down that road. I just wanted to refine this as it relates to the question before the committee, which is the question of approval of the pipeline.”
Of note, this question came after the State Department, numerous energy and climate experts, and Obama administration officials disputed activists’ claims. Looks like it’s officially “game over” for opponents’ “game over” claims.
Watch:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Would have been better if Hansen himself had said it, rather than Menendez doing it for him. I was hoping the video might catch Hansen nodding or something but it stayed locked on Menendez. However, like others trying to read the tea leaves, I am wondering if it is possible that Democrat Menendez has an inkling as to the likely recommendation and is thus downplaying the importance of Keystone?
The first quote block appeared to me as a double down on “game over”.
It is the second quoteblock that was (cough) approval of KeystoneXL will not necessarily be “game over.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0 ‘Never mind.’
We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels.
I’m not certain how that differs from “game over”?
Keystone XL is more and more irrelevant. Railways will be moving the oil … right through the center of your cities and towns.
“We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels.”
Shouldn’t impress pro abortion Democrats.
Only kidding. I know they don’t use logic.
Who thinks Canada can’t sell its tar sands oil to Asian countries? Hansen is a citizen of the USA not of Canada. Hansen is finally going to come smacking head first with fossil fuel reality, people want and need cheap energy, no matter if they are going to fry their grandchildren. That’s the reality.
sunshinehours1 says:
March 13, 2014 at 3:35 pm
“Keystone XL is more and more irrelevant. Railways will be moving the oil … right through the center of your cities and towns.”
Well, relevant for Railroad Tycoon Warren Buffet, and for the consumer. Rail transport is twice as expensive in this case, as transport via pipeline.
The point here seems to be that Keystone itself does not spell “game over,” but rather tapping into all of the unconventional oil and gas in the world would spell game over, and Keystone is the first step down that path.
When is it going to be game over for James Hansen? None to soon for me. I’ve had enough of his B.S..
He doesn’t even seem aware of the fact that the only difference between “conventional” fossil fuels and “unconventional” is the technology used to produce them – the fuels themselves are the same. It’s like saying that “news” is only worthwhile if it’s printed on good old fashioned paper, and is dangerous if it shows up on one a’ these newfangled electronic thingamajigs.
He also missed the memo that the “peak oil” scare officially collapsed about 3 – 4 years ago.
What does GAME OVER mean? I don’t know but let’s see what Think Progress ‘thinks’.
Now that’s stating the obvious. Why didn’t they mention temperature instead of concentrations?
Panic over, 16+ years of a global surface temperature standstill in the face of ever rising co2 concentrations, it really is game over. It was GAME OVER over when co2 concentrations in geological time was 800ppm, 1,000ppm, 2,000ppm, 3,000ppm and even more! These people are a bunch of deceivers and jokers of the highest order. They make me sick.
After the Florida special election – democrats have enough trouble with Obamacare – the curse that keeps on giving. Hansen is smart enough to know the writing is on the wall. They’re all just going through the motions now.
Quiz.
What happened here?
See Fig. 7, left graphic for co2.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2013.02.003
http://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0277379113000553-gr7.jpg
Am I stupid, or is there no money quote in that video or this post. What does “game over” mean per the global moroning crowd? And what did Hansen say to upset that? Can someone verify my stupidity (or disprove it), please?
By the way, the global moroning folk want “game over” to mean that if KXL would represent 0.33% of oil pipelines in North America, so I don’t understand how this cuts big either way.
Correction: By the way, the global moroning folk want “game over” to mean that if KXL is built, the end of the world will follow. But KXL would only represent 0.33% of oil pipelines in North America, so I don’t understand how this cuts big either way. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/372896/keystone-xl-would-swell-us-pipeline-coverage-0033-percent-deroy-murdock
He looks tired. I think he should take a long vacation… best place would be a monastery where they take a vow of silence.
What has been the scientific skill of the astronomer and physicist Dr. James Hansen? Today he wants to disown his earlier speculations. You decide on the air-conditioner tampering astronomer. If he was right about soot and non-co2 greenhouse gases then he is going against the consensus up to 2000 and 2003.
FAIL?
FAIL?
EXTRA FAIL.
Why should any sane person listen to a person that argued that the world’s oceans would end up in the atmosphere? This man has been one of the most dangerous people this world has ever known.
So if I understand this correctly, Mann said it was game over if this oil came out of the ground and his opposition was to keep that from happening. But, it has become clear over the past few years that the oil will be put on the market no matter what. I think that is Obama’s way out of this. He says, “If not building the pipeline would keep the oil in the ground, I would oppose it, but since there is nothing we can do to stop it, I believe it should be delivered Americans in as safe and economically as possible”.
-Grant A. Brown says:
March 13, 2014 at 3:42 pm
The point here seems to be that Keystone itself does not spell “game over,” but rather tapping into all of the unconventional oil and gas in the world would spell game over, and Keystone is the first step down that path.-
So game over is a good thing?
I would say mining the vast amount unconventional natural gas in the ocean is a game changer.
But realize that conventional ways to mine oil and gas will continue for centuries- but they will be comparatively less significant.
When it comes to deciding between protecting our grandchildren from a possible degree rise in global temperature some time in the distant future and meeting our present day energy needs, most of us favor the latter. Smart politicians recognize that and will vote accordingly. “Game over”.
Hansen is saying that the pipeline provides access to a large volume of unconventional oil; he seems to be against the pipeline for that purpose. Menendez seems to be backing away from that view. He seems to be leaning towards approval, at least in the video.
According to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), oil sands (ie, unconventional) production was 2.15 mbpd in 2013, forecast to rise to 5.5 mbpd by 2030. Current global oil production is 90 mbpd; 2030 oil production is variably estimated at 95-107 mbpd, depending on the source. Thus, Canadian unconventional production today–without Keystone XL–amounts to 2.4% of global oil production; and in 2030 is forecast to provide 5.1-5.7% of global oil supply.
Thus, the most at stake in Canada at present is about 3.3% of global production in 2030, as that 2.4 mbpd is already being produced, and therefore would be unaffected whether Keystone is built or not.
In any event, the numbers are not particularly material, either today or in 2030. For a bit of context, in the four years since Feb. 2010, production from just the US Bakken, Eagle Ford and Permian plays has increased by 2.5 mbpd, compared to a forecast increase of 3.2 mbpd from Canadian oil sands between now and 2030.
It’s hard to see what the big deal is.
What can I say? Why should any sane person listen to a man suffering from the Messiah Syndrome?
That’s Hansen going against the consensus again. What can I say?
Pull out the popcorn and listen to the loon.
I sure hope it’s “Game Over” so we can get back to reality.
Given the fact that, according to Tol, global warming is net beneficial for the 60 years, we “will be screwing our children and grandchildren” if we don’t use our fossil fuels.
Because if we don’t use readily available fossil fuels , then energy prices will rise, and so the complete cost of living, in particular for the poor.
James Hansen looks like Homer Simpson. Know I know why.