Joe Romm predicts US CO2 emissions will never exceed 2007 levels

[bananas]

From his blog at Climate Progress:

I predict U.S. carbon dioxide emissions peaked in 2007!

I am predicting that U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions will never exceed 2007 levels. We have peaked.

<snip>



Yes, the EIA itself, which is incredibly conservative from a forecasting perspective, doesn’t foresee CO2 emissions returning to 2007 levels until 2024! But, of course, that post-2020 return to steadily rising emissions is exceedingly unlikely to happen — thanks to peak oil and action by President Obama and Congress on energy and climate legislation.

<snip>

[NNadir]

1. My favorite part of addressing soothsayers, not one of whom who has been accurate,

is checking them out down the road a piece.

Lately it requires just one or two years to show them up for the asses they are.

The best ever of course, is Amory Lovins, whose 1976 "renewables and conservation will save us" high school term quality paper in Foreign Affairs ranks as a classic.

I keep looking for all those solar "fused salt" tanks in American backyards right near the grill, but I have found NOT ONE.

I love these fashionable bourgeois geeks who don't know shit from Shinola. The Clinton era collapse on climate change probably derives from having this guy around with his hand waving.

[bananas]

3. RMI Co-founder and Chief Scientist Amory Lovins Receives Time 100 and "Design Mind" Awards

"Back in the 1970s, in a famous Foreign Affairs article (PDF), Lovins advocated taking "the soft" energy path, comprised of efficiency and renewables, over "the hard" path, the pursuit of fossil fuel at any price. Thirty some years later Lovins continues to make the same arguments, except this time, the world seems to be heeding his counsel, and his prescience on issues from oil supply to nuclear power, is proving exceedingly accurate. See "Does a Big Economy Need Big Power Plants?" in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal's "Oil Industry Braces for Drop in U.S. Thirst for Gasoline."

www.rmi.org

RMI Co-founder and Chief Scientist Amory Lovins Receives Time 100 and "Design Mind" Awards

This week RMI Chief Scientist Amory Lovins added two more awards to his collection, TIME Magazine's 100 most influential people designation and National Design Awards' "Design Mind" honor.

The 2009 TIME 100 included Lovins with the likes of Edward Kennedy, Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel, and Barack Obama. A short write-up by Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, credited Lovins for his foresight on energy strategy.

Back in the 1970s, in a famous Foreign Affairs article (PDF), Lovins advocated taking "the soft" energy path, comprised of efficiency and renewables, over "the hard" path, the pursuit of fossil fuel at any price. Thirty some years later Lovins continues to make the same arguments, except this time, the world seems to be heeding his counsel, and his prescience on issues from oil supply to nuclear power, is proving exceedingly accurate. See "Does a Big Economy Need Big Power Plants?" in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal's "Oil Industry Braces for Drop in U.S. Thirst for Gasoline."

The National Design Awards, which granted Lovins the "design mind" honor, was started ten years ago by Smithsonian’s Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum. Recommendations were solicited from a committee of more than 800 leading designers, educators, journalists, cultural figures, and corporate leaders nationwide. The Design Committee attributed Lovins' award to his active involvement at the nexus of energy, resources, environment, development, and security in more than 50 countries for 40 years.

"His uniquely influential and innovative work combines broad syntheses of new solutions to old problems with deep analyses of underlying technical and institutional issues."

[NickB79]

2. Well, I hope he's correct, but I'm not holding my breath

If there is one thing I can reliably predict about the future, it is that humanity's ability to make and implement stupid decisions will continue to surprise me, both here in the US and in other nations.

For example, instead of seeing CO2 emissions decrease due to Peak Oil, the stupid amongst us may start the construction of a wave of Fischer-Topp coal-to-oil plants or rapidly increase oil sand extraction.

Or, President Obama's will to act on climate legislation may stumble, as seen by the latest decision not to act on protecting polar bears from climate-change-related ice losses: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8040913.stm

But even if we have peaked in 2007, simply maintaining global CO2 releases at 2007 levels is a death sentence to many species on this planet. We haven't stopped the bullet, but merely slowed it down a bit.

[JohnWxy]

4. "declining emissions from coal" power plants after 2015? what's he smoking?

"And of course I am assuming in my prediction that the United States will enact into law serious energy and climate legislation, along the lines of Waxman-Markey, sometime soon, which will lead to steadily declining coal emissions post-2015."


WEre going to have to build a helluva lot of wind farms for that to happen. I don't see people motivated enough to press Congress fro that kind of commitment. It could be done if people would email and call. But, I don't see people doing it.

[bananas]

5. "the EIA ... doesn’t foresee CO2 emissions returning to 2007 levels until 2024"

"Yes, the EIA itself, which is incredibly conservative from a forecasting perspective, doesn’t foresee CO2 emissions returning to 2007 levels until 2024! But, of course, that post-2020 return to steadily rising emissions is exceedingly unlikely to happen — thanks to peak oil and action by President Obama and Congress on energy and climate legislation."