Abiotic Oil and Climate Change

I have long believed that at least some of the Hydrocarbons we have found (deep wells) cannot be easily explained by traditional theories. The Video below is just a low level primer. Real research is needed and has not been taken seriously by the mainstream. While I do NOT agree with all that Mr. Soon said I think this is a good introduction to the idea. This discussion is also a good conversation about the historical temperatures the world has seen.

Even if you believe that the temperature is overall warming, the question is it caused by humans or are there other forces at play? Lastly, is a rise in global temperatures a bad thing? Does a rise in CO2 doom us all? I personally do not think so.

Weather, ERCOT, and Renewables

The Fallowing is a point made by a good friend of mine about the Texas grid this morning.

“Current demand this morning of 71648 mw and renewables along with batteries combine for 5003 mws yet the federal government wants to go strictly with renewables. Fossil and nuclear is the only thing keeping the grid from failing.”

Wind, Solar, and Batteries cannot replace base load thermal units. We need Gas, Coal, and Nuclear power!

Stop Breathing!!!

https://nypost.com/2023/12/19/news/humans-may-be-fueling-global-warming-by-breathing-new-study/

“Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming,” according to research released last week in the UK journal PLOS.

If it has not become clear to you yet, you are the carbon that they want to eliminate! Your mere existence is a problem for the climate religion. Humans are being compared to livestock, and our exhalations are now being linked to a threat to the rest of the planet. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/15/netherlands-announces-25bn-plan-to-radically-reduce-livestock-numbers

The Study can be found below.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0295157

“The highest reported proportion of MPs was found in African populations with up to 84% [15]. Proportions of MPs in Western populations vary from 25% [17] to 62% [18], while in Asian populations (such as Japanese) it can be as low as 15% [13]. The reasons for geographic, ethnic, diet, gender or age-based differences emissions of CH4 in human breath are not understood, and historical studies have likely suffered from issues such as poor detection limits of available analysers and limited sample populations (n < 100).”

“Results

Concentration enhancement of CO2 in the breath of the participants ranged from 26.5 to 63.4 parts per thousand (2.65–6.34%) following a Gaussian distribution, with an arithmetic mean of 4.35 (4.29–4.43) % (Fig 1A). All participants exhaled CO2, and while the data distribution skewed slightly towards higher values, overall, the data was relatively symmetrical around the mean. Concentration enhancement of CH4 in breath varied from -0.56 to 49.6 ppm, following a log-normal distribution with an arithmetic mean concentration of 5.08 and Zou’s mean of 4.26 (3.37–5.54) ppm (Fig 1B). While the lowest of these values is negative (emitted concentration below the 2 ppm background), the precision of the GC instrument is approximately 0.04 ppm (Drewer et al., 2021), thus the small number of negative values is likely to be instrumental noise as 55% of the concentration differences were less than the instrument precision. The distribution of concentration enhancement of CH4 are heavily skewed towards higher values, with a large number of concentrations near zero. A total of 32 (31%) of the participants were classed as MPs (single or mean concentrations in breath measurements exceeded the 3 ppm threshold). The arithmetic mean concentration enhancement of all samples measured from the MPs was 17.1 ppm and the Zou’s mean was 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm. The arithmetic emitted mean of the concentration enhancement among NMPs was -0.1 ppm, with most samples reporting breath concentrations around the precision limit of the GC instrument (results from NMPs were essentially instrumental noise around zero). Therefore, it is approximated that 31% of people emitted a mean concentration of 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm CH4 in their breath, while the rest emit effectively none. Concentration enhancement of N2O in the breath of the participants also followed a log-normal distribution, ranging from 0.11 to 0.88 ppm with an arithmetic mean of 0.33 and a Zou’s mean of 0.329 (0.315–0.342) ppm (Fig 1C). The skew in the distribution of N2O concentrations was more towards higher values than the CO2 distribution, but not as extreme as that of CH4 concentrations. No concentration enhancements of N2O in breath were below background levels, indicating that while there is a large variation in observed N2O concentrations, all participants emitted at least some N2O.”Concentration enhancement of CO2 in the breath of the participants ranged from 26.5 to 63.4 parts per thousand (2.65–6.34%) following a Gaussian distribution, with an arithmetic mean of 4.35 (4.29–4.43) % (Fig 1A). All participants exhaled CO2, and while the data distribution skewed slightly towards higher values, overall, the data was relatively symmetrical around the mean. Concentration enhancement of CH4 in breath varied from -0.56 to 49.6 ppm, following a log-normal distribution with an arithmetic mean concentration of 5.08 and Zou’s mean of 4.26 (3.37–5.54) ppm (Fig 1B). While the lowest of these values is negative (emitted concentration below the 2 ppm background), the precision of the GC instrument is approximately 0.04 ppm (Drewer et al., 2021), thus the small number of negative values is likely to be instrumental noise as 55% of the concentration differences were less than the instrument precision. The distribution of concentration enhancement of CH4 are heavily skewed towards higher values, with a large number of concentrations near zero. A total of 32 (31%) of the participants were classed as MPs (single or mean concentrations in breath measurements exceeded the 3 ppm threshold). The arithmetic mean concentration enhancement of all samples measured from the MPs was 17.1 ppm and the Zou’s mean was 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm. The arithmetic emitted mean of the concentration enhancement among NMPs was -0.1 ppm, with most samples reporting breath concentrations around the precision limit of the GC instrument (results from NMPs were essentially instrumental noise around zero). Therefore, it is approximated that 31% of people emitted a mean concentration of 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm CH4 in their breath, while the rest emit effectively none. Concentration enhancement of N2O in the breath of the participants also followed a log-normal distribution, ranging from 0.11 to 0.88 ppm with an arithmetic mean of 0.33 and a Zou’s mean of 0.329 (0.315–0.342) ppm (Fig 1C). The skew in the distribution of N2O concentrations was more towards higher values than the CO2 distribution, but not as extreme as that of CH4 concentrations. No concentration enhancements of N2O in breath were below background levels, indicating that while there is a large variation in observed N2O concentrations, all participants emitted at least some N2O.”

Science!!!

As Discussed on Episode 52 of Just Two Good Old Boys

https://www.iflscience.com/first-extinction-of-a-marine-fish-as-a-result-of-human-activity-declared-72193

“The Java stingaree is a species of ray about the size of a dinner plate, and it was so rare that it was only known from one specimen collected in 1862 from a fish market in Jakarta, Indonesia. Fishing was just one of several pressing threats the species faced.”

Note on the show I said 1960’s going from memory, I was wrong it was 1862.

DOE Boondoggle

Now if you think CO2 is bad then you probably disagree with me. That said even if you think CO2 is a bad thing; this technology (as it is currently envisioned) is unlikely to scale economically. More over, Coal power plants would likely not see any changes in their life expectancy or air permits from the EPA.

Original story is below

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/calpine-carbon-capture-baytown-doe-funding-18554862.php

Calpine to receive up to $270M from DOE for carbon capture at Baytown power plant

Houston Chronicle – 12/15/23

by Claire Hao

Via Dow Jones Factiva
Licensed Text: Hearst Communications, Inc.

The U.S. Department of Energy is awarding up to $270 million in a cost-sharing agreement for a new carbon capture and storage project in Baytown to be built by Calpine, a power generation company based in Houston.

The project would capture carbon dioxide emissions from Calpine’s 896-megawatt natural gas power plant in Baytown, which provides power to the Texas electric grid as well as steam and power to the adjacent Covestro chemicals facility, according to a company’s statement. One megawatt can power about 200 Texas homes, according to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the state’s grid operator.

Calpine’s Baytown carbon capture project would capture and store approximately 2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year, the company said. Carbon capture equipment will reduce the intensity of emissions at two of the plant’s three combustion turbines at a design capture rate of 95%, the statement.

The captured carbon dioxide is to be transported and stored in saline storage sites on the Gulf Coast, according to the DOE. The project might also use greywater, wastewater from showers, tubs, bathroom sinks and washing machines, for cooling the power plant instead of freshwater, according to the DOE.

“Facilities like Baytown will be part of our energy infrastructure for the foreseeable future, and now with (carbon capture and storage) technology, we can decarbonize them,” Caleb Stephenson, Calpine’s executive vice president of commercial operations, said in the company’s statement.

The Baytown cost-sharing agreement is one of three carbon capture projects receiving up to $890 million from the DOE as part of the agency’s Carbon Capture Demonstration Projects Program. The others are a Calpine natural gas power plant in California and a coal-fired power plant in North Dakota being developed by Minnkota Power Cooperative.
As of September, the only utility-scale carbon capture facility affixed to an electricity-generating plant in the country was the Petra Nova project attached to NRG’s WA Parish Plant southwest of Houston.

The DOE’s Carbon Capture Demonstration Projects Program aims to advance commercial demonstration of advanced carbon capture technologies, which the agency calls “critical to addressing the climate crisis.”

The power sector is the second-largest contributor of greenhouse gases in the U.S., according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Power Plants Owed Nothing To Uri Consumers – Nor Should They!

https://www.kirkland.com/news/in-the-news/2023/12/power-plants-owed-nothing-to-uri-consumers-panel-rules

“conclude that Texas does not currently recognize a legal duty owed by wholesale power generators to retail consumers to provide continuous electricity to the electric grid, and ultimately, to the retail consumers, under the allegations pleaded here by the retail consumers,” Justice Adams

Power plants did EVERYTHING they could to stay on line. The issue with Uri was systemic, from renewables and batteries that had issues to gas compressor stations that where NOT listed as critical infrastructure.

we came very close during Uri to a society changing event, the lesson should be (IMHO) more base load is needed to keep ERCOT stable at peak load and during major weather events!

US to Close Coal Plants by 2035

https://www.lmtonline.com/news/world/article/us-joins-in-other-nations-in-swearing-off-coal-18528616.php

If you are a regular listener to Just Two Good Old Boys then you already know my background. However, for those who are new or do not listen. I have spent a large portion of my career in the US Electric industry and I have a bit of standing to offer an opinion on this topic.

If this holds true new and clean coal plants like Luminant’s Oak Grove power plant will be shut down long before they are no longer economically viable. Oak Grove has a local mine sites that can provide decades of cheep fuel. This will not only impact the reliability of the ERCOT grid but it will also have a devastating impact on the local economy. Oak Grove and its associated mine sites employ approximately 1000 people.

~Ben