Newsom, by continually decreasing in-state oil production, has the state dependent on the maritime sector for importing foreign oil that adds, every year, more than twice the annual GHG emissions than the entire Californian transportation sector!
Published March 27, 2022 at Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow https://www.cfact.org/2022/03/27/newsoms-energy-regulations-have-oil-tankers-emitting-more-than-twice-what-all-of-californias-vehicle-fleet-do/
By Ronald Stein Ambassador for Energy & Infrastructure, Irvine, California
California’s crude oil demands have been increasing year over year, since 1995, except for pandemic years, but given that maritime transportation is one of the greatest contributors of GHG emissions, Governor Newsom continues his mission to continually decrease in-state oil production, so California and the nation can be further dependent on imports via maritime transportation from foreign countries for the State’s crude oil energy demands.
In international waters, the maritime fleet fuel consumption and emissions remains one of the least regulated parts of our global transportation system. The fuel used in ships is waste oil, what is left over after the crude oil refining process. It is the same as asphalt and is so thick that when cold it can be walked upon.
There are over 50,000 merchant ships trading internationally, transporting every kind of cargo. The world fleet is registered in over 150 nations and manned by over a million seafarers of virtually every nationality.
The low-grade bunker fuel used by the worlds merchant ships is the cheapest and most polluting fuel available. The maritime fuel is consumed not by the gallons, but by tons per hour and contains up to 2,000 times the amount of sulfur compared to diesel fuel used in automobiles.
As a result of continuously decreasing in-state oil production, California has increased imported crude oil from foreign countries from 5 percent in 1992 to 58 percent today of total consumption.
In 2018, California imported a whopping 364,367,000 barrels of crude oil from foreign countries. Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCC’s) can transport 2 million barrels of crude oil.
- California’s statewide 2017 GHG emissions were more than 350 million metric tons.
- 2 million barrels of crude oil via VLCC oil tankers that are required to bring in a whopping 364,367,000 barrels of crude oil from foreign countries. Those VLCC’s, emit more than double the emissions as the entire Californian transportation sector, of annual GHG emissions.
Using smaller capacity oil tankers would require more tankers and generate even greater emissions.
Governor Newsom continues to “leak” emissions and air quality responsibilities to developing countries halfway around the world, the same countries that have virtually non-existent environmental regulations nor labor controls to protect the local workers in those developing countries.
Regarding California’s Energy Crisis, blame Sacramento, Not Moscow. California’s politicians and policy makers eagerly emulated Europe’s energy policies for years. Like Europe, California overinvested in breezes and sunshine for electricity, underinvested in crude oil, prematurely shuttered its baseload power plants, and relied overwhelmingly on imported crude oil from foreign countries, and electricity imports from neighboring states. Now, as Europe is ensnared in Vladimir Putin’s energy trap, Californians watch as the state’s energy prices head toward the stratosphere.
A Price Waterhouse Cooper (PwC) report, commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute (API), reinforces how the natural gas and oil industry—in California in particular—is critical to economic revitalization and opportunities for job creation. According to the findings, in 2019, the industry directly and indirectly:
Rather than producing oil in the most environmentally controlled location in the world, in California, the Governor remains oblivious to the negative impact to the world’s emissions from oil tankers, and the negative impacts to the health of the 8 billion on this planet that result from importing oil via polluting oil tankers. In addition, Newsom withholds the many of the economic benefits identified by PwC that would be available to Californians.
There is some good news developing out of that Maritime GHG emissions dark tunnel, as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has implemented new regulations to reduce CO2 emissions 50 percent by 2050 from 2008 levels. But the International Chamber of Shipping stated that by 2050 two-thirds of ALL ships will still be burning the same fuel they do today!!
To help the IMO achieve their emission reduction goals, I found a company, Steele Environmental, that is doing something about the problem today! Founded by Larry Parsons, this company’s ADF fuel catalyst is a drop in, market ready, scalable solution for the global shipping industry that lowers not only CO2 emissions but NO2 and black carbon at the same time! It pays for itself in fuel savings!
The Steele Environmental ADF fuel catalyst, when implemented, will help make the maritime fuels green and alleviate the GHG emissions that Newsom is inflicting upon the world’s atmosphere. Pollution does NOT stop at our borders! Stop polluting the oceans thinking California air is clean. We need to support companies like Steele Environmental that are doing something to address the GHG emissions of the maritime fleet instead of government trying to force restrictions on fossil fuel use.
California’s Governor Newsom insists on continuous efforts to “leak” emissions and air quality responsibilities to developing countries halfway around the world for California’s crude oil demands. This “leakage” has increased the use of maritime transportation that has resulted in California being a huge contributor to worldwide GHG emissions! I hope California’s Governor Newsom can sleep peacefully!
Ronald Stein, P.E.
Ambassador for Energy & Infrastructure
Bad news for EV’s, much dirtier than ICs.
“Electric cars have a very dirty secret
The technological flaws of battery-powered vehicles have not gone away.
This dirty secret was confirmed by a recent piece of research by Volvo. Researchers studied the full lifetime CO2 emissions, from resource extraction to disposal, performing a like-for-like comparison of two models of its XC40. Not all manufacturers can do this.
Volvo confirmed that EVs are far “dirtier” out of the factory gate, as the resource extraction for an electric drive train is so carbon-intensive.
Large collections of lithium batteries are also rather prone to catching fire, and these are fires we can’t put out.”
More like bad olds. This has been known for a long time.
Known, but then unknown by the propaganda main stream media. Whenever there is a bit of real info that shows the deficient reality of any green tech, sure as daybreak there’ll soon be released a handwaving report, full of emotion and scary prognostications – but empty of facts or proper calculations, showing how green tech will save the world from the CO2 boogeyman, “lower energy costs, and create good green jobs.”
It’s maddeningly stupid for governments to keep pushing that farce when there’s not enough raw material to create enough turbines, panels, generators, and storage, and ramping up wind and solar would ramp up, front load, the CO2 emissions – creating a worse, more intense greenhouse effect then the emissions from an efficient CCGT plant that would emit spread out over it’s whole life, where the biosphere has a chance to catch up.
Same with this story. The tankers might not use that many gallons of fuel but what they use has a few times as many carbon atoms per joule as would be the case with lighter fuel. Something like that.
Then there was this recent WUWT story. If you take methane into account, surface mined coal has less greenhouse potential than LNG (assuming you believe that’s a thing).
Things aren’t always what they seem on first glance. If you ask, most people can repeat that mantra. On the other hand, their actions indicate they don’t believe it.
I seriously doubt that the oil would meet the US regulations on emission standards also.
no of course not, it’s ‘bunker fuel”, international waters aren’t subject to US regs.
Ships of my day switched over to lighter gas oil for port entry and departure to allow for stopping and starting the engine. Less polluting but more expensive so we switched back to Heavy as soon s we cleared the Pilot. I think we used 135 tons a day on a 90,000 ton Crude Tanker.
The CO2 is irrelevant. Can the same be said about the sulfur and nitrous oxide emissions?
It seems that all of the lithium, nickel, etc. that is needed for EV cars and batteries are, themselves, not renewable.
Maybe Willis should run for Governor of Kalifornia?
I can’t speak for Willis, but I think he knows darn well how him being Governor of California would go…… not well.
In order to do any good, Willis would also have to run for all of the seats in the state senate and house.
Well, the post premise that Newsom is at fault is largely wrong concerning falling CA crude oil production. It’s fields are old and depleting, for example Kern River. My grandfather was a leading petroleum geologist there a century ago; my sister still receives some annual residual royalties from his initial rights earned in the 1920’s and 1930’s. And it’s massive Monterey shale (source rock for Kern River) cannot be horizontally drilled and fracked because it is tectonically folded and faulted. This was illustrated in essay ‘Reserve Reservations’ in ebook Blowing Smoke.
it is true that ocean ships are among the most polluting oil burners. But the oceans don’t much care; they are highly buffered. And the sulfur aerosols wash out into them via rain in days, so most do not reach humans on land (the old ‘acid rain’ thing in freshwater lakes isn’t remotely valid for buffered oceans).
Best not to overstate things at WUWT. Just makes it easier for warmunists to scream DENIER WRONG!
“scalable solution.. that lowers not only CO2 emissions but NO2 and black carbon at the same time.”
Too good to be true.
Rud, everything you said is probably true, I am not an oil man so I don’t know a lot about that business. It is true that California has many old wells that are past their usefulness or near it. It is true that some geological features in California present challenges for drilling. I worked with a guy from eastern Montana whose family lived through numerous boom and busts working the Montana/Dakota oilfields. None of that is new. I looked up some statistics for California, they appear to have quite a lot of proven and unproven oil reserves. What is missing is drilling discovery wells. I don’t believe California has pumped it’s accessible oil, I believe they have made a deliberate decision to not drill, to not provide fossil fuel for themselves or anyone else. In the meantime they parade Newsom out there proclaiming that California is part of the CAGW solution not the problem, all the while importing fuel or energy from other countries or other states. They are contemptible knuckle draggers and I have no respect for them.
My parents invested with Grandpa on a related Montana source rock shale. They missed the fracture fault by about 6 feet, so the well came up dry on the wrong fault side.
It’s a risky business.
Rud’s points above are telling.
CA has to import the majority of their oil and gas. Partly because their oil and gas production has been declining steadily for the last 37 years …and partly because CA is by far the highest population state in the US and therefore by far the biggest consumer of oil and gas in the US. CA is also the fourth largest oil producing state in the US.
Given that there is little pipeline capacity running between out of state refiners and CA, they get a large proportion of their oil shortfall via ships, and the nearest crude oil producing areas to CA via ship are Mexico and Venezuela. So it makes sense that CA would import a lot of foreign oil.
See – facts matter, not the ignorant emoting of MAGAs.
Everything looks simple when you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Words to live by.
Duane please don’t embarrass yourself, I got my information from the EIA (Energy Information Administration). Where did you get yours?
Duane, it would be nice if you could comment without your TDS showing. By the way, there are no pipelines because they didn’t want them.
California used to get affordable crude from Alaska. CA dems, and those in other states have every day opposed Alaska oil from before the Alyeska pipeline was build in the 60’s and continue to do so today. You say, ” So it makes sense that CA would import a lot of foreign oil”. No you’re a lib for saying that, and libs are wrong about everything, every time, everywhere IMHO.
One of the reasons why CA oil production is declining is because they have banned drilling.
No, it doesn’t.
Don’t confuse the MAGAs with facts. Their brains are hard wired to blame every ill in the world on Democrats … even though the rest of America understands that viewing all of life solely thru a partisan lens is literally insane and nonsense, the stuff of idiots, regardless of party affiliation.
Democrats Klaus socket puppet.
“blame every ill in the world on Democrats”
A very rational and provable case.. let’s just say, an overwhelming majority !.
“life solely thru a partisan lens is literally insane and nonsense,”
So wake up and stop doing it !!
Hmmm, what counter-claim might be made to Duane’s blanket denial (sort of ironic, his being in that position)? I know! Let me say the following magic word; “DETROIT”.
the MAGAsDuane with facts. TheirHis brain is hard wired to blame every ill in the world on DemocratsTrump.
Essentially every contact I have with Democrats shows them accepting and repeating the party line, no matter what the real world presents.
That doesn’t make any sense – the CO2 still goes in the air, and foreign oil delivered by tanker has much higher emissions per btu or kWh than local oil delivered by pipelines, especially for the oil Biden is trying to beg from Putin’s friends in Venezuela, the highest emissions oil on the planet, even more than oil sands, and that’s even before factoring in delivery by tanker.
In any sane warmunist’s mind, one would source the needed oil and gas from local or near-local sourses, that have the same level of environmental protection and that can be delivered efficiently by pipeline. And make sure there is enough of it, and put up environmental tariffs on an imports that weren’t up to that level. Invest in research first to get turbines that are more efficient, longer lasting, cheaper to build and recycle (or refurbish) and can generate power over a much larger range of wind speed. And only start building them out en masse when they are ready for primetime, preserving the resources not milking the subsidies.
Of course the climate crisis premise is a load of shit, but turbines and panels might have their place, especially in remote areas, or countries without significant fossil fuels, to keep the money and jobs in the country.
The sharing is caring project. The Green and inclusive Blight, with labor and environmental arbitrage features.
“The maritime fuel is consumed not by the gallons, but by tons per hour and contains up to 2,000 times the amount of sulfur compared to diesel fuel used in automobiles.”
Maybe they want the extra sulfur for its cooling effect on the atmosphere so they can say..”see, our ideas are working !”
The only answer for California is to shut down the refineries and import the batteries, except there won’t be an economy at that point to import anything to.
When the story is not politically correct the fact check works like this.
The claim is mostly false
The speaker claimed approximately 200 papers said this, but we have calculated that 243 such papers said this. Thus the claim is mostly false.
When it is politically correct the fact check work like this.
The claim is mostly True.
The speaker claimed approximately 200 papers said this, we have looked and have found no papers, but there is an opinion piece in a pamphlet written by the soul resident of Buford, Wyoming. Thus the claim is mostly true.
Starting January 1, 2020 the allowable amount of sulfur in ship fuel was reduced by a factor of 7, from 3.5% to 0.5% by weight. Ultra low sulfur diesel fuel is limited to 15 ppm. So, these days the difference is a factor 333 instead of 2000.
Note that the high sulfur content is only allowed outside designated areas. Within emission control areas it is 0.1%.
Pilot projects are now being done to litteraly sniff out high sulphur fuel use with drones in andcaround ports.
So more of our tax dollars wasted “sniffing out” sulfur from ships that should not even be coming to California port with a product that can be “locally sourced”!
Everything about environmental extremism costs taxpayers more taxes. And after a year when 57% of the US DIDNT PAY ANY TAXES!
I was surprised by the amount of development going on about nuclear power for civil marine applications -sulphur and CO2 reductions probably the culprit – looks like I got my degree 3 decades too early – ugh I feel old!
Had to go the CO2 route. Sad.
Yes, I noted Mr. Ambassador mentioned CO2 and used the word pollutant. I recently learned that WW2 resulted in over 6000 ships being sunk. The US has identified many of the wrecks and estimated the oil on board…some on the US coasts have been referred to the Coast Guard as high level hazards because of the potential of the oil to leak. Satellite images of the California coast show long white clouds that were caused by ship emissions….apparently particulates…aerosols…whatever make good cloud formation.
1/ There is something very badly wrong with the sums here..
100 metric tonnes per hour is not 261 gallons per hour
(100Tonne per hour would be about 25,000 UK gallons/hr or circa 7 gallons per second
We’d then get a CO2 emission total of 66.2 mega tonnes for the Californian annual oil shipment)
2/ You would need 182.5 tankers (included in the above calc)
3/ The stuff that Steele is peddling is an additive for low sulphur diesel
NOT bunker fuel
We’re told that it’s an additive that “coats every molecule of fuel”
yeah right, don’t you mean ‘Snake Oil’
The additive is basically a lubricant that replaces what the Sulphur did, by accident than design, in mechanically injected diesels. Nobody complained.
Doesn’t apply in computer controlled common rail engines.
btw: The emitted Sulphur would be contributing to Global Greening – certainly in the UK now, most agricultural fertilisers are not NPK – they are now = NPK+S
No, SOx in the air does not create Acid Rain = yet another climate scam hoax with zero basis in reality.
Just like the Ozone Hole also
The problem of the lost lubrication for diesel injection systems has been well solved for a long time now. What exactly is Steele trying to sell?
Those big ship’s engines are just about THE most fuel efficient heat engines us humans (The Germans, bless their little cotton socks) have ever invented.
Their overall Carnot efficiency is about 60%
and they’re ‘2-strokes’ as well
So how Steele can claim such massive efficiency increase is a bit of a puzzle..
Very impressive machines I saw a while ago in a TV documentary, before I gave the TV away.
I would have loved more detail on how they exchanged and entire piston/cylinder/liner on one of those engines, at sea, while it was still working flat out.
They actually removed a faulty cylinder and put in a new one without anybody anything missing a beat.
Let’s see Ford do that on their new Fiesta
Oh no. I’ll have to miss that – my intercontinental pig is readying for departure
“Ronald Stein, P.E.
Ambassador for Energy & Infrastructure”
Well, if the big engines turn you on…just search Youtube and I’m sure more than you want to see will turn up.
There must be a similar or better even documentary available on the web, YouTube of course, but I’ve found good documentaries on Disney+ and Prime. It would be great if you could post a link if you find it.
I thought the CCGT turbines were the most efficient, 60+% and no power wasted with reciprocating parts.
The four families of Pat Brown, William Newsom II, John Pelosi, and J. Paul Getty have dominated California politics for over sixty years.
California’s largest oil imports currently come from Ecuador, under exclusive import agreements with Getty Oil. Gordon and Ann Getty viewed Gavin Newsom as a son and supported all his political ambitions, according to interviews the couple gave to the San Francisco Chronicle and W Magazine.
California’s second largest oil imports come from Indonesia, under exclusive import agreements set up in the early 1960’s with Indonesia by Pat Brown, Jerry Brown’s father.
California’s largest oil reserves are located in it’s Tidelands, which are part of the Tidelands Public Trust, held exclusively for public benefit. No new Tidelands oil leases have been issued in California since 1967, the end of of Pat Brown’s term as Governor.
In 1994, California permanently banned all offshore or onshore slant drilling into the Tidelands Basin under the California Coastal Sanctuary Act, as it was determined to be a threat to tourism and marine ecology.
Enjoy your $6.87/gal gasoline prices California, while you further enrich the four families. You voted for it.
Great theory …until you realize that CA oil production has been declining steadily for the last 37 years for geological reasons. Blows the helloutta your Newsome conspiracy theory.
“for geological reasons”
Has the off coast drilling been stopped for political reasons? YES
Has dry land drilling been stopped for political reasons? YES
For how long?
““Our decline is because we aren’t allowed to reverse the decline,” says Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president of the Sacramento-based Western States Petroleum Assn. “There’s a boatload of crude oil in California and we have it locked up in rock.
California’s policies don’t allow us to produce it.”
Do I need to repeat the last line !
Duane’s TDS has gotten so bad, that he won’t tolerate any criticism of any Democrat.
So the fact that CA has banned new drilling makes no difference whatsoever?
As you say, facts matter, and you are impervious to them.
Note that Duane does not dispute any of the facts I presented by challenging them with his alternate reality of history.
Instead, he calls them “conspiracy theory”, as if that was acceptable justification to believe that something entirely different happened in California history.
The fact of the matter is that the California public already owns billions of barrels of crude oil in proven reserves locked away in an untouchable trust. Meanwhile the only foreign oil importers are the political families who are allowed to profit while running the government that enforces those policies.
“To help the IMO achieve their emission reduction goals, I found a company, Steele Environmental, that is doing something about the problem today!”
“market ready, scalable solution for the global shipping industry that lowers not only CO2 emissions but NO2 and black carbon at the same time! It pays for itself in fuel savings!”
I bothered to go over to the linked website.
Looks like magic. No clue as to what the secret elixir might be. Just wide eyed claims that it is super fantastic and solves all your problems.
Reduces CO: 5-20%
Reduces CO2: 9-30%
Reduces Particulate carbon: 35-50%
Increase fuel efficiency: 5-10%
You are not reducing all three, all at once unless you can pull off a *massive* increase in engine efficiency. Not believable in the modern day with engines as optimized as they are.
Increasing fuel efficiency 5-10% in no way covers for the other reduction. And I find this claim suspicious, 10% is a lot.
To top it all off:
The website is 100% marketing, complete with all the usual hyperbolic claims. As far as facts and solid information, and maybe a bit of science, or perhaps just tell us what this magic catalysist is or at least how it works. Not at all.
As far as this kind of content goes, the site rates 0%.
I smell a rat.
I would have thought that the author, Ronald Stein, would have known better.
Thanks, I did not notice that Mr. Ronald Stein, a self-appointed Ambassador, wrote this.
To Charles the Moderator: Please be more careful before reposting stuff.
His Excellency seems be be confused labeling CO2 as ‘pollution’.
Back during the ’73 oil embargo, the market was flooded with devices to increase gasoline efficiency. If you added up all the various nick knacks, it seemed you could be more than 100% efficient. Turn your gas tank into a pump! Not possible, of course, but it seems that lesson never took, hence the current claims.
If Brilliant Light Power, Inc can do what they claim, why not this Steele company?
I too went the linked site, and agree with you on the description of the site. The catalyst is fuel catalyst, so maybe it’s just a catalyst from a refinery cat-cracker. Without some words about the chemistry involved the claims seem highly questionable.
CO2 emissions have zero effect on the temperature as shown in Miskolczi 2010. Hence, any comparison of them is meaningless. It might get some people’s attention when they are paying exorbitant prices for gas.
California oil production has been declining every year since 1985 …so blaming it on Gov Newsome is ridiculously stupid. There is no state ban on fracking in CA, though several a county and municipal governments ban it. Obviously that is not the fault of Newsome.
Also, CA’s geology is very different from those states in the Great Plains and the northeast where most of the fracking takes place, and CA’s geology is not conducive to fracking.
Blaming Democratic politicians is always a very popular exercise at WUWT which is dominated my MAGAs and Breitbartians. But reality is that politicians do not control oil production in the US. First and foremost, markets control oil production since the vast majority of US oil production takes place on private lands. Secondarily technology and geology control oil production in the US.
Partisan politics is not the driver in US oil production, period, end of story.
Facts matter, not ideology and butthurt so-called (but not really) “conservative” feelings. Real conservatives understand and totally support real world markets and their normal functioning. Populist Trumpism and MAGAism are the diametric opposites of true conservatism.
re: “Partisan politics is not the driver in US oil production, period, end of story.”
Joe Biden would disagree.
And the entire US government bureaucracy which has been directed by Brandon to FORCE unreliables in any way possible. Please note that the bureaucrats AGREE with Brandon and know their jobs depend on new regulations so are energetically pushing every barrier they can to FF independence and to harass any business associated with the same.
See the recent SEC rules discussed in an earlier WUWT post.
“Our decline is because we aren’t allowed to reverse the decline,” says Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president of the Sacramento-based Western States Petroleum Assn. “There’s a boatload of crude oil in California and we have it locked up in rock.
California’s policies don’t allow us to produce it.”
Facts do matter.. Try to find some. !
Your leftism and hatred of the USA is showing.
Yes, as a deep leftist, you want America to continue its sinking to the bottom under Democrat mismanagement.
The last thing the left/Democrats want, is for America to be great again. !
So the fact that the Democrats refuse to allow drilling has absolutely nothing to do with the decrease in oil production?
Your desire to blame everything on Trump has caused your brain to stop working.
“Earlier this year, state oil and gas regulators quietly began denying hydraulic fracturing permits on climate change grounds, without waiting to finish regulations to ban fracking by 2024 that Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered.”
You’re being disingenuous, Duane. There is a de-facto ban in place right now.
Once you ban drilling, banning frakking becomes redundant.
generally, disingenuous is a nice way to say “lying son of a bitch”.
Of course Newsom is not responsible for all the crippling regulations that have been put in place over the past 70 to 80 years but he is part of the same cabal that has been promulgating those regulations for that period. Declining production under regulations that restrict production, just like pure speculation about what could or could not be done, is not evidence that production had to decline.
Progressivism is about looking good, not doing good.
And MAGAism is about emoting and raging and otherwise ignoring real world facts.
Who pays you for drivel?
Duane the swamp
Your hatred of American progress and way of life, is oozing out !
Facts, you have none., just emotive attempts to make yourself feel good.
And to think, Duane keeps telling us that he is a true conservative.
You really should buy a mirror and use it.
Ya but, liberal Californians can wear ribbons and drive Teslas and virtue signal how much their party’s climate actions are saving the planet and reducing CO2.
Just don’t tell them about these tankers, and China’s increase in CO2 output or Europe ditching the green energy ways, and the fact that lithium and other minerals needed for EVs and batteries aren’t renewable,etc.
Shhhh. Don’t tell them. It would spoil their virtue.
As a result of continuously decreasing in-state oil production, California has increased imported crude oil from foreign countries from 5 percent in 1992 to 58 percent today of total consumption
This is what Progressive’s call progress? Got it.
They have plenty underground oil in California..
Political idiocy makes them leave it there until sanity prevails under a future Republican government… if Californians ever wake up to the damage they are inflicting on themselves.
I suspect Gates and the other NWO landowners don’t want any drilling on what will become THEIR land, once we “own nothing.”
The fuel consumption of all ships worldwide is about 200 million metric tons per year. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1266963/amount-of-fuel-consumed-by-ships-worldwide-by-fuel-type/
According to the article above California imports about 50 million metric tons of crude in 2018 which is about 50% of the total consumption.
This articles compares the WORLDWIDE maritime emissions to CALIFORNIA emissions.
Like so many progressive politicians Newsom’s operating motto is “I’m from the government, I’m here to help……. myself.” Newsom’s policy is that no Californian voter should lack for snake oil on his watch.
Oil and gas drilling is a risky business. The only certainty in the business is, if you do not drill, you find nothing.
Everything else is uncertain.
Some minerals and metals have a similar challenge.
1) If you do not drill, you will find nothing.
2) If you do drill you be heavily regulated.
3) If you are heavily regulated, you are less likely to drill.
4) Duane is a dumbass.
I think, considering his overwhelming hypocrisy on so many issues, that he have continuous nightmares would be more fitting.
Only 43% of California’s foreign oil comes from the Gulf, so the calculations (in the linked article) aren’t correct where the author assumes everything is coming from the Gulf on a VLCC trip that takes 60 days. The next largest sources are much closer–Ecuador and Mexico–so the trips are shorter and produce less CO2. It is probably reasonable to estimate that tanker GHG emissions easily exceed California’s transportation sector GHG emissions (assuming the other numbers are correct of course) but it’s not more than double.