APP - what our energy future will look like due to global climate change

Don Quixote

cancer survivor
Contributor
conservatives may deny the causes, but the reality is something very different...and we need to act on it, especially the problems with water

MATTHEW DALY 22 hours agoNature & EnvironmentEnvironmentPower stationEnergy Department





WASHINGTON (AP) — Climate change and extreme weather already are causing disruptions in the U.S. energy supply that are likely to worsen as more intense storms, higher temperatures and more frequent droughts occur, the government says in a new report.
The report, released Thursday by the Energy Department, says blackouts and other problems caused by Superstorm Sandy and other extreme weather events are likely to be repeated across the country as an aging energy infrastructure struggles to adapt to rising seas, higher storm surges and increased flooding. A range of energy sources are at risk, from coal-fired power plants to oil wells, hydroelectric dams and nuclear power plants.
Climate-related disasters have already costs tens of billions of dollars, and the report says costs could grow exponentially unless a more comprehensive and accelerated response is adopted.
On the Gulf Coast, for instance, the report cites a study by an energy company and wetland foundation projecting that by 2030, nearly $1 trillion in energy assets in the region will be at risk from rising sea levels and more intense hurricanes. Based on an analysis of hazards, assets and vulnerabilities, the Gulf Coast energy sector faces an average annual loss from climate change and extreme weather of $8 billion in 2030, the report said.
The report urges private companies, governments and research institutions to take action to further understand the risks of climate change and reduce them. The report does not offer immediate recommendations, but says power plants and oil companies should use less water and recycle what they use.
Electricity providers should harden transmission grids and build emergency backup systems, the report says, and operators of hydroelectric dams should improve turbine efficiency. The report also recommends that governments and utilities work together to reduce demand for electricity.
"Water is obviously the big question," said Jonathan Pershing, deputy assistant secretary of energy for climate change policy and technology, who oversaw the report. "In drought you don't have enough water. As seas rise, you have too much."
While the risks from drought, floods and hurricanes are clear, water plays an important role in less obvious ways as well, Pershing said. Both coal-fired and nuclear power plants, for instance, need large volumes of water for cooling. As temperatures rise, that becomes more difficult.
The report cites several examples from 2012, the hottest year in the United States since record-keeping began in 1895:
— In August, a nuclear power station in Connecticut shut down one reactor because the temperature of the intake cooling water, withdrawn from Long Island Sound, was too high. The two-week shutdown resulted in the loss of 255,000 megawatt-hours of power, worth several million dollars, the report said.
—In the Midwest, drought and low river water depths disrupted the transportation of commodities, such as petroleum and coal, delivered by barges along the Mississippi River.
—In California, reduced snowpack in the Sierra Nevada mountains limited hydroelectric power generation capacity by about 8 percent.
"Costs are already happening and it's getting worse," Pershing said. "We are seeing damages across all parts of the energy sector."
Rising heat in the West will drive a steep increase in demand for air conditioning, which has already forced blackouts and brownouts in some places, the report said. The Energy Department's Argonne National Laboratory found that air conditioning demand in the West will require 34 gigawatts of new electricity generating capacity by 2050, equivalent to the construction of 100 power plants.
The report sends a "significant message about the risks and vulnerabilities" facing the U.S. energy sector, Pershing said. It should provide a blueprint for states and municipalities to consider, along with utilities and other energy providers and even consumers, who can do their part by reducing energy use or seeking alternative forms of energy, he said.
The report is the first of many to be produced across a range of economic sectors as the Obama administration responds to climate change and makes recommendations, Pershing said.
President Barack Obama announced a wide-ranging plan last month to combat global warming. The plan for the first time would put limits on carbon pollution from new and existing power plants as well as boost renewable energy production on federal lands, increase efficiency standards and prepare communities to deal with higher temperatures


http://news.yahoo.com/report-climate-change-causing-energy-disruptions-145343432.html
 
"The report urges private companies, governments and research institutions to take action to further understand the risks of climate change and reduce them.

LOL! first you have to get the conservatives and their paid scientist shills to accept that climate change exists. That will only happen when they are personally affected by a disaster, and then maybe not.


The report does not offer immediate recommendations, but says power plants and oil companies should use less water and recycle what they use.

Spend money to help society? Please, where's the profit in that? They will only invest if the profits are there. Do something with no profit value? never.


Electricity providers should harden transmission grids and build emergency backup systems, the report says, and operators of hydroelectric dams should improve turbine efficiency. The report also recommends that governments and utilities work together to reduce demand for electricity."

Govt working with utilities is socialism, isn't that part of the radical rights beliefs? All utilities should be privatized (profitized) and govt shouldn't have any say in what a private company does, let the market sort it out... isnt that what they believe?


Thru yrs of propagandizing conservatives don't even believe that climate change is real, or influenced by man. How can we get them act when they dont believe that action isn't necessary, besides it goes against their 'money is everything' beliefs- there's no profit in it. And if the country goes down because of it, then that's good too in their eyes.
 
"The report urges private companies, governments and research institutions to take action to further understand the risks of climate change and reduce them.

LOL! first you have to get the conservatives and their paid scientist shills to accept that climate change exists. That will only happen when they are personally affected by a disaster, and then maybe not.


The report does not offer immediate recommendations, but says power plants and oil companies should use less water and recycle what they use.

Spend money to help society? Please, where's the profit in that? They will only invest if the profits are there. Do something with no profit value? never.


Electricity providers should harden transmission grids and build emergency backup systems, the report says, and operators of hydroelectric dams should improve turbine efficiency. The report also recommends that governments and utilities work together to reduce demand for electricity."

Govt working with utilities is socialism, isn't that part of the radical rights beliefs? All utilities should be privatized (profitized) and govt shouldn't have any say in what a private company does, let the market sort it out... isnt that what they believe?


Thru yrs of propagandizing conservatives don't even believe that climate change is real, or influenced by man. How can we get them act when they dont believe that action isn't necessary, besides it goes against their 'money is everything' beliefs- there's no profit in it. And if the country goes down because of it, then that's good too in their eyes.

maybe they need to realize that climate change will cost them money...oh, i forgot, they live in the bubble
 
I guess disruptions in energy supply couldn't have anything to do with the regimes war on coal and the shutting down of viable plants could it? I guess if you forcibly reduce the supply of inexpensive energy that could have an effect, but why blame that when is easier to blame something you can't change.

I am still stunned that grown people actually believe mankind can have an impact on climate.
 
I guess disruptions in energy supply couldn't have anything to do with the regimes war on coal and the shutting down of viable plants could it? I guess if you forcibly reduce the supply of inexpensive energy that could have an effect, but why blame that when is easier to blame something you can't change.

1. Coal plants are shutting down because natural gas has become so cheap that coal can't compete. I thought you understood supply and demand?
2. Coal plants are shutting down due to reduced demand. Alternative sources now contribute a significant amount of reliable clean power.
Alternatives include wind, solar, biomass, hydro-electric and tidal current.
3. Only the dirtiest plants are being shut down, since it is cheaper than bring them into compliance.



I am still stunned that grown people actually believe mankind can have an impact on climate.

I am stunned that a grown man thinks that any eco-system is immune from outside influence, except those willfully ignorant or those employed in the fossil fuel or chemical industries.
 
Back
Top