Environment

Climate Optimism? CO2 Hits 20 Year Low Without Direct Government Intervention

PITTSBURGH (TheBlaze/AP) — In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.

Many of the world‘s leading climate scientists didn’t see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere. And, at the same time, some scientists in an op-ed this week are also saying that CO2 levels should not be given too much credence with regard to its effect on the climate in the first place.

In a little-noticed technical report, the U.S. Energy Information Agency, a part of the Energy Department, said this month that energy related U.S. CO2 emissions for the first four months of this year fell to about 1992 levels. Energy emissions make up about 98 percent of the total. The Associated Press contacted environmental experts, scientists and utility companies and learned that virtually everyone believes the shift could have major long-term implications for U.S. energy policy.

Energy Report Finds CO2 Emissions Drop to 1992 Levels: Cite Cheap Natural Gas as a Reason

(Image: EAI)

While conservation efforts, the lagging economy and greater use of renewable energy are factors in the CO2 decline, the drop-off is due mainly to low-priced natural gas, the agency said.

A frenzy of shale gas drilling in the Northeast’s Marcellus Shale and in Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana has caused the wholesale price of natural gas to plummet from $7 or $8 per unit to about $3 over the past four years, making it cheaper to burn than coal for a given amount of energy produced. As a result, utilities are relying more than ever on gas-fired generating plants.

Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University, said the shift away from coal is reason for “cautious optimism” about potential ways to deal with climate change. He said it demonstrates that “ultimately people follow their wallets” on global warming.

“There’s a very clear lesson here. What it shows is that if you make a cleaner energy source cheaper, you will displace dirtier sources,” said Roger Pielke Jr., a climate expert at the University of Colorado.

Both government and industry experts said the biggest surprise is how quickly the electric industry turned away from coal. In 2005, coal was used to produce about half of all the electricity generated in the U.S. The Energy Information Agency said that fell to 34 percent in March, the lowest level since it began keeping records nearly 40 years ago.

Energy Report Finds CO2 Emissions Drop to 1992 Levels: Cite Cheap Natural Gas as a Reason

(Image: EAI)

Energy Report Finds CO2 Emissions Drop to 1992 Levels: Cite Cheap Natural Gas as a Reason

(Image: EAI)

The question is whether the shift is just one bright spot in a big, gloomy picture, or a potentially larger trend.

Coal and energy use are still growing rapidly in other countries, particularly China, and CO2 levels globally are rising, not falling. Moreover, changes in the marketplace – a boom in the economy, a fall in coal prices, a rise in natural gas – could stall or even reverse the shift. For example, U.S. emissions fell in 2008 and 2009, then rose in 2010 before falling again last year.

Still, some are skeptical of natural gas, especially considering it still emits some CO2.

“Natural gas is not a long-term solution to the CO2 problem,” Pielke claimed.

The International Energy Agency said the U.S. has cut carbon dioxide emissions more than any other country over the last six years. Total U.S. carbon emissions from energy consumption peaked at about 6 billion metric tons in 2007. Projections for this year are around 5.2 billion, and the 1990 figure was about 5 billion.

China’s emissions were estimated to be about 9 billion tons in 2011, accounting for about 29 percent of the global total. The U.S. accounted for approximately 16 percent.

Mann called it “ironic” that the shift from coal to gas has helped bring the U.S. closer to meeting some of the greenhouse gas targets in the 1997 Kyoto treaty on global warming, which the United States never ratified. On the other hand, leaks of methane from natural gas wells could be pushing the U.S. over the Kyoto target for that gas.

Even with such questions, public health experts welcome the shift, since it is reducing air pollution.

“The trend is good. We like it. We are pleased that we‘re shifting away from one of the dirtiest sources to one that’s much cleaner,” said Janice Nolen, an American Lung Association spokeswoman. “It’s been a real surprise to see this kind of shift. We certainly didn’t predict it.”

Power plants that burn coal produce more than 90 times as much sulfur dioxide, five times as much nitrogen oxide and twice as much carbon dioxide as those that run on natural gas, according to the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress. Sulfur dioxide causes acid rain and nitrogen oxides lead to smog.

Bentek, an energy consulting firm in Colorado, said that sulfur dioxide emissions at larger power plants in 28 Eastern, Midwestern and Southern states fell 34 percent during the past two years, and nitrous oxide fell 16 percent. Natural gas has helped the power industry meet federal air pollution standards earlier than anticipated, Bentek said.

Last year the Environmental Protection Agency issued its first rules to limit CO2 emissions from power plants, but the standards don’t take effect until 2014 and 2015. Experts had predicted that the rules might reduce emissions over the long term, but they didn’t expect so many utilities to shift to gas so early. And they think price was the reason.

“A lot of our units are running much more gas than they ever have in the past,” said Melissa McHenry, a spokeswoman for Ohio-based American Electric Power Co. “It really is a reflection of what’s happened with shale gas.”

“In the near term, all that you’re going to build is a natural gas plant,” she said. Still, she warned: “Natural gas has been very volatile historically. Whether shale gas has really changed that – the jury is still out. I don’t think we know yet.”

Jason Hayes, a spokesman for the American Coal Council, based in Washington, predicted cheap gas won’t last.

“Coal is going to be here for a long time. Our export markets are growing. Demand is going up around the world. Even if we decide not to use it, everybody else wants it,” he said. Hayes also said the industry expects new coal-fired power plants will be built as pollution-control technology advances: “The industry will meet the challenge” of the EPA regulations.

The boom in gas production has come about largely because of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Large volumes of water, plus sand and chemicals, are injected to break shale rock apart and free the gas.

Environmentalists say that the fluids can pollute underground drinking water supplies and that methane leaks from drilling cause serious air pollution and also contribute to global warming. The industry and many government officials say the practice is safe when done properly. But there have been cases in which faulty wells did pollute water, and there is little reliable data about the scale of methane leakage.

“The Sierra Club has serious doubts about the net benefits of natural gas,” said Deborah Nardone, director of the group’s Beyond Natural Gas campaign.

“Without sufficient oversight and protections, we have no way of knowing how much dangerous pollution is being released into Americans’ air and water by the gas industry. For those reason, our ultimate goal is to replace coal with clean energy and energy efficiency and as little natural gas as possible.”

Still, TheBlaze reported earlier this summer that some researchers are saying the concerns over fracking are not based on scientific fact.

Others are concerned that cheap gas could hurt renewable energy efforts.

“Installation of new renewable energy facilities has now all but dried up, unable to compete on a grid now flooded with a low-cost, high-energy fuel,” two experts from Colorado’s Renewable and Sustainable Energy Institute said in an essay posted this week on Environment360, a Yale University website.

How much further the shift from coal to natural gas can go is unclear. Bentek says that power companies plan to retire 175 coal-fired plants over the next five years. That could bring coal’s CO2 emissions down to 1980 levels. However, the EIA predicts prices of natural gas will start to rise a bit next year, and then more about eight years from now.

Some also think there is not a good reason to increase efforts to curb CO2 emissions in the first place. A few scientists authored an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that brings into question the importance of CO2 levels in the first place. The op-ed is a response to a separate op-ed earlier this month by Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp about the “trend” of “hotter and wilder weather.” Roger Cohen, an American Physical Society fellow, William Happer at Princeton University, and Richard Lindzen with MIT, point out several wild weather events that “had nothing to do with CO2.”

The scientists wrote “let us debate and deal with serious, real problems facing our society, not elaborately orchestrated, phony ones, like the trumped-up need to drastically curtail CO2 emissions.”

—

Associated Press writers Seth Borenstein in Washington and Jonathan Fahey in New York contributed to this story.

Comments (63)

1 2
  • Individualism
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 12:12pm

    wonder what is causing the el nino for the past few years.

    Report Post » Individualism  
  • thegreatcarnac
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 12:06pm

    Oh no! Call the government. Now we are suffering from lack of CO2. This means all of our plants will shrink. Oh No….God help us! Tax someone to make this stop! (sarcasm)

    Report Post »  
  • gbfreak
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 11:19am

    Hmmmmmm……and they’re still screaming about climate change???? Didn’t change before, didn’t change after…now what?…lol

    Report Post » gbfreak  
  • drphil69
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 11:12am

    Gee, no mention of the unusually warm winter… which would lead to LESS HEATING, THUS LESS ENERGY USE. Amazing how ‘smart’ people miss the obvious…

    Report Post »  
    • muffythetuffy
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 11:23am

      SIMPLE

      1. Volcanic eruptions around the world have decreased which reduces CO2 emissions.

      2. More food is being grown which absorbs CO2

      If humans reduce their CO2 emissions serious world wide problems will be created. Grasses and other vegetation soak up CO2. Vegetation absorbs CO2 and exhale O2 and H2O.

      Report Post »  
    • jcldwl
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 2:55pm

      @muffy
      Exactly

      Report Post » jcldwl  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 18, 2012 at 12:48am

      muffythetuffy
      Rent seeking scientists like Mann say they have accounted for all the volcanic emissions.

      How many weather stations are at the bottom of the ocean sampling the CO2 output of the underwater volcanoes? They are not. They are guessing & then multiplying by the number of underwater volcanoes.

      Report Post »  
  • SweetOlBob
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 11:00am

    OHOOOOO NOOOOOO !
    If the government doesn’t intervene, how are they going to tax it ? If they’re not careful, they’ll make Cap & Tax totally useless as a means to rob industry and raise domestic energy prices. We can’t have that, now can we ?

    Report Post »  
  • Brainmuffin
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 10:32am

    CO2 is not a pollutant and it affect on temperature is barely measurable. The gas in the atmosphere with the greatest thermogenic potential is water vapor.

    Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 11:05am

      “Both government and industry experts said the biggest surprise is how quickly the electric industry turned away from coal.” This report of course also confirms that the Administration did not cause the reduction in the use of coal and the economic impact of that reduction on the coal industry. A clear example of you can’t have it both ways. Market forces are to blame for the downturn in the coal industry and closing of mines and production facilities, not the administration. So which is Truth and which is the Agenda.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 18, 2012 at 12:52am

      We have 2 variables at work.

      We get rid of the Obama mandates & see what happens.

      But I have a better ideal. Walk into a cafe in coal country & spout off about how Obama’s regulations had nothing to do with their economic hardship.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 18, 2012 at 12:57am

      It is just not that gas has come down in price because of fracking which the ‘envirumental’ whackadoodles want to get get rid of also. It is the emission standards. Of course we could be like Germany & potential lose jobs & a reliable electrical grid.

      I have to believe that JROOK necessarily wants electricity rate to sky rocket and to have blackouts.

      http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/up-next-obamas-new-energy-regulations-will-put-32-coal-plants-out-of-business/

      Energy Revolution Hiccups: Grid Instability Has Industry Scrambling for Solutions
      http://junkscience.com/2012/08/17/energy-revolution-hiccups-grid-instability-has-industry-scrambling-for-solutions/

      Report Post »  
  • TheFederalist
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 10:02am

    “In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.”

    No, not because cheap and plentiful natural gas. It`s because Obama has killed the coal industry.

    Report Post »  
  • ACTIONNOTTALK
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:50am

    Duh. CO2 windbag Teddy Kennedy died. When will these people connect cause and effect?

    Report Post »  
    • thegreatcarnac
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 12:02pm

      true…and algore has not been running his mouth as much as he used to.

      Report Post »  
  • deeberj
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:39am

    “While conservation efforts, the lagging economy and greater use of renewable energy are factors in the CO2 decline, the drop-off is due mainly to low-priced natural gas, the agency said.”

    Or maybe the CO2 goes up and down anyway no matter what men do. Except that we breathe out CO2 so I guess we are all producing this “toxin”. That plants need.

    This is an article to meant to slam coal and support the man-caused global warming myth.

    Report Post » deeberj  
  • Meyvn
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:35am

    I bet the trees aren’t as happy.

    Report Post » Meyvn  
  • bhelmet
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:25am

    To any Chemical Engineer out there: I thought I learned in Chemistry that “perfect combustion” yielded the by-products of CO2 and H2O. The “cleaner” something burned the MORE CO2 produced. I thought as the “efficiency” of combustion or “dirty combustion” produced less CO2 and/or H2O, but there is an increase in CO (Carbon Monoxide). Am I wrong? It is counter-intuitive to the entire global warming argument and I am confused. I assume I have something wrong b/c I never hear this counter-argument. Can anyone set me straight?

    Report Post » bhelmet  
  • TheMajority
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:23am

    Did you know, human exercise creates more CO2 also? For each set of jumping jacks, human polutant emissions are probably more than five times the average couch potato polutant emissions. I want to thank all the people who do not excercise also, for saving the planet. Americans are doing, —– their part!!! :)

    Report Post »  
  • bhelmet
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:20am

    Move along – nothing to see here – this is NOT the data you are looking for.

    Report Post » bhelmet  
  • 2AFirearmsDealerDotCom
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:19am

    One argument I LOVE giving all the greenies is this:

    Current CO2 levels are around 390 ppm. Plantlife on the planet thrives on levels around 700-800ppm, and some times up as high as 1400 ppm.

    So, greenies, do you really like starving our plantlife? You complain that high co2 levels are killing us, yet, the world lives better at twice our current level of CO2.

    Report Post » 2AFirearmsDealerDotCom  
  • floradaze
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:17am

    One lefty group says Florida has the worst air in the country. Tell that to the Owls, Hawks, and even an Ivory billed woodpecker who hang out in my yard. The ivory bills were supposed to be close to extinction in the 70′s.
    Of course they just want us to get rid of coal fired power plants.

    Report Post »  
    • rray
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 12:42pm

      Call Cornell U. they are offering a 50K reward to anyone who leads their researchers to a living Ivory Bill

      Your bird may be a Pileated (sp) Woodpecker. They look similar.

      Report Post »  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on August 18, 2012 at 3:04pm

      That person has never been to Bakersfield or Los Angeles.

      Report Post »  
  • TheMajority
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:13am

    I want to thank everybody who bought a chevy volt, for saving the planet. Can I have my subsidy back now?

    Report Post »  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:07am

    good.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
  • tothepoint
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:07am

    “Global Warming” aka “Climate Change” was outed as a hoax years ago but those folks who have a lot invested in its continued farce just can’t seem to give it up.
    But, don’t worry, folks.
    Their use of this Global Warming hoax to steal taxpayer dollars from hardworking Americans and redistribute it to their wealthy friends across the globe will be replaced by other similarly ridiculous hoaxes. And Obama and the UN will be leading the way to clean out what’s left in our wallets after Obama and his gang have taken most of it.

    Report Post »  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:02am

    Obama will take credit for it.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:00am

    Yes natural gas burns cleaner than coal but the nut job so called ‘environmentalists’ will find a problem with that as well,they’re always looking to create problems where none exist. They belong to the cult of warmers,a group of people who are irrational and dangerous to our economy.

    Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:20am

      The eco-extremists have a basic problem called “humanity” and many of them wish for us to go back to a time as the cavemen; the others of the UN and the global warming supporters are just the usual share the wealth under our greedy hands…and may they all rot, leave us alone and get us out of the UN.

      These morons who claim and speak of global warming as a new gospel and faith are mad.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
  • ricckky
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 8:57am

    WHEN IS ALL THIS INSANITY GOING TO STOP????—-get the damn Government the hell out of our lives, ethanol, epa, no drilling, teachers unions, and yes –the most important one–THE LIAR-N-CHIEF!!!!!!! Stop this madness!!!!!!

    Report Post »  
  • biohazard23
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 8:54am

    What say you, Mr Gore?

    Report Post » biohazard23  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 8:53am

    The warmer cultists would have us believe that man is destroying the earth through the emission of co2, an element that is essential to life on earth.Never mind the fact that the theory of man made global warming has never been proven on the contrary it‘s been debunked as junk science agenda driven by irrational ’scientists’ looking to cash in on a nonexistent problem. The hockey stick theory was debunked years ago but the warmer cultists in their irrational minds continue the fraud,undeterred by all the evidence that proves man made global warming is a fraud.

    http://climatedepot.com/ http://ilovecarbondioxide.com/

    Report Post » progressiveslayer  
  • lel2007
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 8:51am

    The credibility of climate “scientists” is also the lowest it’s been in 20 years.

    Report Post » lel2007  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 9:30am

      Probably somewhat lower than congressional politicians, lawyers, and journalist.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Rob in VA
      Posted on August 17, 2012 at 11:28am

      I would just call them liars and leave it at that…

      Report Post »  
  • EqualJustice
    Posted on August 17, 2012 at 8:50am

    HAHAHA Oh, this is priceless! What WILL they use NOW s an excuse to steal our money? TWEET!

    Report Post » EqualJustice  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love