Clean North Sea Gas v Dirty Russian Gas
February 5, 2022
By Paul Homewood
And they still want to shut down North Sea gas, and instead rely on gas from Russia, Qatar and elsewhere!
32 Comments
Comments are closed.
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.
Recent Comments
Phillip Bratby on ‘Green’ renewable… vickimh234 on Labour To Keep Strategic Reser… vickimh234 on Labour To Keep Strategic Reser… vickimh234 on Labour To Keep Strategic Reser… Phoenix44 on Labour To Keep Strategic Reser… Phoenix44 on Labour To Keep Strategic Reser… Phoenix44 on Labour To Keep Strategic Reser… bnice2000 on Global Heating Will Increase P… vickimh234 on How Wet Was The Spring? vickimh234 on Labour’s Green Obsession…
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Can any reader explain the insane Green Party’s policies and why politicians accept its pleas?
Simple: They intend to glue themselves to anything that makes life work – so that it doesn’t – and if that fails they will scweam and cwy until someone does somefin’ about the world about to end – but they don’t know for sure when that will be.
It’s called “recreational outrage”, closely related to “virtue signalling” and “professional offence-taking”, all practiced by people with nothing useful to occupy what passes for their minds.
Perhaps someone needs to tell the BBC about the amount of energy that goes into liquifying LNG and then re-expanding to gas once it gets to its destination. The cost to do this adds about $2 per MBTU’s for LNG that travels by ship. The compression and refrigeration uses about 6-8% of the natural gas energy content. Also consider the environmentalist strategy of blocking pipelines. If this occurs where the gas is generated, it gets flared. If it occurs where it is consumed, liquification is used to store gas (peak shaving) or transport it via ship around the bottlenecks. I suspect if you add all this up, the amount of natural gas that does no productive heating because of blocking storage, generation and transportation might add up to a pretty hefty chuck of energy and a lot of CO2 and methane emissions.
Typical BBC – it publishes a global map showing just how well UK’s onshore and offshore oil & gas infrastructures are engineered and maintained, then forgets to mention it.
Deben and his merry bunch have to answer for this. Ably assisted by Mother Teresa who enshrined the nonsense in law. We await the train smash and the costly fallout.
I am sorry William but I have been waiting since the 80s, nothing yet >.<
It won’t cost Deben.
Reading the original report they only measured plumes over land – that’s why nothing from the North Sea.
Did they explain actually why they only measured plumes over land? Did they fully explain why they were unable to measure over most of Canada or through thick cloud? Seems a rather incomplete measuring system to make such emphatic conclusions from.
Liars will be liars, most of the time.
At least their position is non-sustainable, and I sincerely hope non-renewable.
Very light on detail as usual.These concentrations must be very low as we don’t see corresponding fires and explosions.More fear porn to justify our impoverishment.
Exactly my thoughts. Lots of innuendo but effectively no data. Terms like “huge” mean nothing unless enumerated. Noticeable how suddenly methane is becoming the big bogeyman when surely the “science was settled” that CO2 was the culprit.
“Every molecule counts as we try to minimise future warming.”
The usual evidence-free mythology.
Sorry. This Jackson Pollock imitation superimposed on a map doesn’t do it for me.
Are we supposed to be impressed? Terrified? Since it is promulgated by a set up that has unashamedly lied about almost everything for 40 years, how credible is this latest?
Let’s see a similar map from the 1709 Great Frost, so we can at least make comparisons.
That is if you can convince me that atmospheric CH4 – measured in parts per billion – is even interesting, never mind worrying. It will very soon combine with plentiful Oxygen and become Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapour. As it has since the time of the prehistoric swamps.
An infinitesimal increase in a harmless trace gas can only be beneficial for photosynthesis and likely has no other implications whatever.
It’s worth taking a look at this from Wijngaarden and Happer:
Click to access MethaneClimate_WijnGaardenHapper.pdf
Methane levels in Earth’s atmosphere are slowly increasing, as shown in Fig. 7. If the current rate of increase, about 0.0076 ppm/year for the past decade or so, were to continue unchanged it would take about 270 years to double the current concentration of C{i} = 1.8 ppm. But, as one can see from Fig.7,
methane levels have stopped increasing for years at a time (for example, between 2000 and 2008) , so it is hard to be confident about future concentrations. Methane concentrations may never double, but if they do, WH [1] show that this would only increase the forcing by 0.8 W m−2. This is a tiny fraction of representative total forcings at midlatitudes of about 140 W m−2 at the tropopause and 120 W m−2 at the top of the atmosphere.
When are you all going to wake up to the fact that klymutt is one part of an enormous marxist trojan horse. To precis Douglas Murray in an discussion with an Australian interviewer whose name sadly I forget who made the frustrated observation: “you would almost think the whole point of this stuff is to cause chaos”, Douglas Murray replied “Maybe that is their intention”.
If this truly was about global warming or climate then the repeated illogical decisions we are seeing would not occur and that a gun would be held to the head of China for one. If Gas is bad for the climate why is our gas bad and other people’s gas ok? It makes no sense except that the the real intention is to weaken and hobble the West by any means possible and that goes all the way back to the Frankfurt School and Critical Theory in the 1930’s and my, didn’t those marxists do well as they have so many useful idiots today in the British Government and across the rest of the Anglosphere. Idiots abound from Australia and New Zealand to the US and Canada all racing to the bottom.
I’ll think of believing your conspiracy theories when you learn how to spell climate. In the meantime I will continue with my informed and data based scepticism of the the warming alarmists.
Tongue in cheek.
Good to see also they differentiate between natural seeps ( THE MAJORITY) and man made seeps. I do just love the BeeeBeeeCeee and their edited version of the truth. Also strange they do not show all of the recorded natural seeps offshore either. I wonder wonder why…….a non story
The eco loons seem to be demonising methane (do they realise it is natural gas?) now, The figures on the chart really do not tell me anything, How much is natural production of methane, rotting vegetation, termites, ruminant production (eg cow belches) and natural leakage from the ground? Compare to the leaks from gas pipelines as a percentage? Their own figures show the pipeline leaks are hardly worth losing any sleep over, the reduction in temperature rise is so small, it is insignificant. More Bullshit (does that have methane in it, should be banned!)
If the Earth really is warming we should be jolly pleased. Especially if the Sun’s output could be waning. A cooling effect could produce a very unpleasant ice age with the positive feedback of ice reflecting sunlight away.
Agreed, and a grand solar minimum is imminent.
Far from the global heating alrmists’warnings, perhaps even their hopes.
“Model model model…derived ” to top it off
in this attempt to estimate the actual methane emissions from observations in Queensland coal seam gas emitting area.
‘ The inventory suggests that the total emission is 173.2 × 106 kg CH4 yr−1, with grazing cattle contributing about half of that, cattle feedlots ∼ 25 %, and CSG processing ∼ 8 %. Using the inventory emissions in a forward regional transport model indicates that the above sources are significant contributors to methane at both monitors. However, the model underestimates approximately the highest 15 % of the observed methane concentrations, suggesting underestimated or missing emissions. An efficient regional Bayesian inverse model is developed, incorporating an hourly source–receptor relationship based on a backward-in-time configuration of the forward regional transport model, a posterior sampling scheme, and the hourly methane observations and a derived methane background.”
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/15487/2020/
The blue lines appear to be the gas pipelines. You can clearly see the Moomba Sydney pipeline as well as the various other APA pipelines. The supposed “emissions” over Queensland are from the Coal Seam Methane areas , but why the bloom over Sydney. All the gas for sydney comes from Moomba and Queensland. The entire area of Sydney was rehabilitated with nylon pipe (rilsan 11) to reduce gas leakage from the system. That was dome in the 1990s. The emissions now are very small. And there is no leakafe in Victoria or Adelaide or Perth or Brisbane? There is something seriously odd about this map
Yes.
Forget not that this purports to be a map showing methane ‘plumes’ as measured (no doubt to part per billion accuracy) by an overflying satellite.
The brother of another satellite measuring sea level to an accuracy of a millimetre. Allegedly.
This reminds me of those TV ‘forensic science’ series where a spot of blood or a trace of gunsmoke fed into a sciency looking box tells the fearless investigators that the perpetrator is 1.75m high, wears red socks and has halitosis.
Someone drew lines on the map which may, or may not, represent gas pipeline.
That same X-box wizard is perfectly capable of scattering some yellow spots around. These might be supposed to show methane “plumes”. But the same map might serve for comparing the price of cheese or the number of Elvis tribute singers.
When you realise that a bunch of weapons-grade liars are trying to fiddle with your brain, best bet is to remain very sceptical.
Re the Map and the Australia content. I checked data from Jemena the gas network operator in NSW. Unaccounted Gas in NSW is about 2.5% of inlet quantity. This is a trivial amount in context. If you take account of APAs quantities it doesnt equate to a lot, So why the bloom over NSW? It doesnt make sense but Im not an engineer.
The Ukraine / Russia issue is pure political manoeuvring by the USA and Russia: the UK are sadly willing co-conspirators. The USA wants us to buy their, relatively expensive, LNG and keep Russia in its place: they still see reds-under-the-beds everywhere I’m afraid.
Russia seems to have learned rapidly the capitalist laws of supply and demand. They sold long-term gas cheap and demand market rates for extra supply. They have not breached their supply contracts. The fault is simple: lack of storage of gas causing the UK, like much of Europe to trade on the spot market; but, the Ukraine issue allows parliament to hide from the real truth.
Half of nothing is still nothing. Have they looked at the trend for the past two decades?
Forget about Gas. Its being demolished by Government, just as the Power Stations were demolished and coal mining ceased.
The UK gas pipeline infrastructure is not receiving any long term investment so it will become dilapidated, so it will have to shut down.
The cost to bring it back into sustainable use will be used as an excuse by government to close the whole thing down.
Unfortunately, a lack of investment in UK infrastructure has plagued the UK for decades; it’s one of the reasons why our GDP per head is generally lower than our direct competitors.
UK gas should be extracted from the billions of tons of coal under our feet and under our coastal waters.