Spain's Natural Gas Consumption for 2008 Establishes a New Record.

[NNadir]

Some turkey is running around, headless - and not in Alaska with Sarah Palin either - claiming that because 43% of the electricity in Spain was provided by a ten minute gust of wind - for 10 minutes - that wind power is a success.

This is nonsense.

This summer Spain set a record for dangerous natural gas consumption in 2008, and, unsurprisingly, a record for dumping dangerous natural gas waste into earth's atmosphere.

Gas industry and national grid REE (REE.MC: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) spokesmen have said that gas-fired generating capacity in Spain will likely rise in coming years to fill in for power drops from the country's big and swiftly expanding wind parks.

Spain imports virtually all of its gas, 68 percent of it as liquid natural gas via six regasification plants and the rest via pipelines.

Total consumption in Spain last year was 406,300 gigawatt-hours and Enagas expects this to rise by 10.1 percent this year to meet increasing demand for power from combined-cycle gas generators. (Reporting by Martin Roberts; Editing by Christian Wiessner)

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssUtilitiesElectric/idUSL2357414020080623">Dangerous Natural Gas Use to Set Annual Record in Spain in 2008.

The wind industry, hyped by dangerous natural gas apologists like Gerhard Schroeder, Gazprom executive, and Amory Lovins, front man for Royal Dutch Shell and other dangerous fossil fuel companies, represents a direct subsidy in most countries for the dangerous natural gas industry.

Another country that just set a record for dangerous natural gas consumption (and, unsurprisingly, dangerous natural gas exports) is um, Denmark.

[wtmusic]

1. I got 110 miles/gallon in my Ford Windstar minivan

between Mulholland Drive and Wilshire Blvd yesterday.

OK so there's a vertical drop of 2,100 ft, but the point is this: you can either increase your mileage the hard way with expensive hybrids, or just sample it at the right time.

[NNadir]

2. That's nothing. I once turned off my engine coming out of the Eastern entrance to Yosemite

and got infinity miles per gallon while cruising comfortably at 90 mph.

I did it once in Utah too.

I am a true conservationist.

[wtmusic]

7. This is so obvious.

If we could just get more Americans to visit Yosemite, we could cut our fuel use by 47%.

[Dead_Parrot]

3. It's been a superlative year for Spain

I see they also walk off with the prize for missing Kyoto targets by the widest margin (target: +15%, actual change: +49.5%). Even Canada 'only' missed by 27.3%, and they've been boiling tar sands like buggery.

Still, there's always 5AM on Nov 24th. Cherish that fleeting moment.

[NNadir]

4. Really? They missed their Kyoto targets "only" by 49.5%?

Wow. That looks bad, even in "percent talk."

And this on a day where for 3 and a half minutes they produced a brazillion percent of their energy from wind.

It's OK. Carbon dioxide makes wind heavier, and makes the wind turbines turn better.

I heard it from a locally grown turkey.

[Dead_Parrot]

10. To be fair, a mere 34.5%

A fifteen percent growth was expected as it's still a "developing" country in some respects.

They're certainly developing that gas.

[kristopher]

5. So let's get this straight...

Your criticism is that the article about wind in spain is a non-representative snapshot and is therefore a dishonest portrayal of the capabilities and potential of wind, right?

To prove that you point to this year's increase in natural gas consumption and Spain's performance in meeting CO2 emission targets, right?


You are doing exactly what you you accuse the other post of doing - using a snapshot to misrepresent the actual state of conditions in the move to renewables.

In the wind article (it is published in an industry insider magazine) the main point is that the grid handled a record high percentage of power from wind. That is a significant milestone since 15 years ago there were dickwads from the nuclear power industry that said grids couldn't handle an input of more than 5% power from wind. Those dickwads have once again been shown wrong.

Now, what about the rise in natural gas consumption? First let's see if the interpretation of the article you got from your dickwad buddies at the Nuclear Energy Institute (the paid propaganda arm of the nuclear industry) holds water.

You headline your link "Dangerous natural gas use to set annual record in Spain in 2008" The original article, of course, doesn't mention the word "dangerous" or "annual record" at all. It was written in June and discusses summer use with speculation about annual use. Now they may or may not set an "annual record" but your source DOES NOT support your assertion (as usual).

Now, what does the article really say?

That as the transition away from coal progresses, the use of gas will increase as there is more dependence on wind. You see, what they ARE doing is shifting generation from coal plants that are 28% efficient and natural gas plants that are 35% efficient, to wind and combined cycle plants that are 58%+- efficient and shutting down the less efficient gas and coal plants.

As more renewables with different generaating profiles come on line and as more storage options come online, the amount of natural gas use will start to decline.

I've written before that this is exactly the pattern that a SUCCESSFUL transition to a renewable infrastructure will follow. Are things moving slower than they should have under Kyoto, yes they are. That isn't the technology, however; that is directly attributable to the political conservatives that support both fossil fuels and nuclear energy while doing everything they can to sabotage and hinder the deployment of renewable energy. But now that BushCo is out and Obama is in, we can expect a different political direction. NO NUKES FOR YOU OR YOUR DICKWAD BUDDIES AT THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE OR IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY.

Why are you on a progressive site where development of renewable energy is a central plank of our platform and the further deployment of nuclear energy ISN'T?

It is obvious that nothing trumps this topic for you so it is inconceivable that you voted for Obama? If you say you did vote for Obama I'm sure we sould all love to hear why...

[madokie]

6. Certifiably knutts

no doubt about it. All I read from him is hate and discontent, never honest discussion, ever.

HAGTG, have a great thanksgiving

[kristopher]

8. That's true

Hve a wonderful holiday yourself.

BTW: I love your 'woody'. Looks like it was a lot of fun to build.

[NNadir]

9. So, let me get this straight Kiddie. Your contention is that natural gas is NOT dangerous?

There is NOT ONE uneducated fundie anti-nuke, from Gerhard Schroeder to Tritten to Amory Lovins who is anything BUT an apologist for dangerous fossil fuels.

Schroeder and Lovins are highly paid by the dangerous fossil fuel industry.

100% of anti-nukes are scientifically illiterate, and seem not to recognize that climate change is real, current, and that the two largest contributing gases to this disaster are methane and carbon dioxide.

It doesn't matter to me one whit whether you are paid to fudge numbers and be oblivious, like Lovins and Schroeder, the effect is the same.

Ignorance kills.

Like all climate change denialists, including Lovins and Schroeder, you seem to be incapable of understanding the first fucking thing about numbers, a simple matter for fourth graders.

To wit: Six billion tons of the dangerous fossil fuel waste carbon dioxide were released by the burners of dangerous natural gas last year:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tableh3co2.xls

Spain set an all time record for this dumping. I am sorry that you can't tell the difference between the numbers 70.25 and 35.59, but that's not my fucking problem kiddie.

Got it?

No?

Why am not surprised?

You couldn't fucking care less, Kiddie.

You seem to feel very free about questioning my motives, although you do not know me, and I would never knowingly associate myself with you. We almost surely do not travel in the same circles, because I don't hang out with turkeys.

Spain is heavily invested in wind energy, and is therefore a natural gas hellhole. Wind energy is a grotesque failure, and is merely a tool for yuppie brats to fortify their own denial.

Spain's total greenhouse gas emissions set a record:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tableh1co2.xls

I don't care who pays you for the oblivious drivel you whine out here, Kiddie. You're in Inhofe territory, sheer denial. You're full of shit.

[kristopher]

12. All your misinformation, strawmen & insults, but still no more nukes, eh numbnuts.

The following is an overview of the status of EU and Kyoto. While world performance to date has been lackluster at best, it is generally recognized that the main obstacle is the conservative political forces in the US that are acting to obstruct instead of lead on climate change. It cannot be denied that the same forces that engage in this obstructive behavior have two preferred energy sources - fossil fuels and nuclear - and that they have spent hundreds of millions obstructing action on climate change via renewables because that will ultimately spell the death of these technologies and the unending profit stream they represent. The election of Obama is the beginning of the end for them and they know it. What we are seeing from the likes of the nuclear dickwads is nothing but the death throes of some very vile creatures.

So who did you vote for and why, numbnuts?


http://www.eea.europa.eu/pressroom/newsreleases/eu-15-on-target-for-kyoto-despite-mixed-performances

EU-15 on target for Kyoto, despite mixed performances

Published: 16 Oct 2008

Emission performance remains mixed in the EU-15. A few Member States are still off their Kyoto track. However, if the expected outstanding performance of other Member States is taken into account, the EU-15 as a whole should meet its Kyoto commitment.

Prof. Jacqueline McGlade, Executive Director of the EEA

The EU-15 should meet its collective target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 8 % for the period 2008–2012. Part of this decrease will come from emission reduction projects that EU countries will finance in other countries, according to a new report by the European Environment Agency (EEA).

Emission performance remains mixed in the EU-15. A few Member States are still off their Kyoto track. However, if the expected outstanding performance of other Member States is taken into account, the EU-15 as a whole should meet its Kyoto commitment.

Prof. Jacqueline McGlade, Executive Director of the EEA

The report, "Greenhouse gas emission trends and projections in Europe 2008" evaluates historic emissions from 1990–2006. It also looks at projections of future emissions during the Kyoto Protocol commitment period (2008–2012).

Overall, projections from Member States for the Kyoto period indicate that the EU-15 could cut emissions by more than 11 % compared to the base-year. This could be achieved by a combination of domestic policies and measures (in force and planned), carbon sink activities and credits for emission reductions outside EU.

"Emission performance remains mixed in the EU-15. A few Member States are still off their Kyoto track. However, if the expected outstanding performance of other Member States is taken into account, the EU-15 as a whole should meet its Kyoto commitment," said Professor Jacqueline McGlade, Executive Director of the European Environment Agency. "In addition, the situation would look better for some Member States if their projections took full account of the emission restrictions facing their industries covered by the EU Emission Trading Scheme."

The report also gives a long-term estimate of the emissions situation in Europe. Although emissions are projected to continue decreasing until 2020 in the EU-27, the 20 % reduction target compared to 1990, endorsed by European leaders in 2007, will remain out of reach without the implementation of additional measures, such as the EU energy and climate change package proposed by the European Commission in January 2008.

Data show that the 15 EU Member States sharing a common target under the Kyoto Protocol (EU-15) achieved a reduction of their greenhouse gases by 2.7 % between the base year and 2006. The policies and measures in place as of today will not be sufficient for the EU-15 to meet its Kyoto target, as they are expected to push down emissions between 2006 and 2010 to an average level only 3.6 % below the base-year emissions. If the additional measures planned by 10 Member States were fully implemented and on time, a further reduction of 3.3 % could be obtained. The full effect of the EU Emission Trading Scheme is not reflected in all Member States' projections.

Most EU-15 Member States intend to use carbon sinks — such as planting forests that absorb CO2 — to achieve their Kyoto target. The total amount of carbon dioxide that could be removed annually between 2008 and 2012 is relatively small (1.4 % compared to 1990), although it is somewhat higher than the projections made in 2007.

Ten EU-15 Member States have planned to use the Kyoto Mechanisms (see notes to the editor below) to achieve their targets. This is expected to reduce emissions by a further 3.0 %.

The EEA report singles out the case of those countries that have promised "significant emission reductions in a limited time frame (2006–2010) from policies and measures that have not been implemented yet". In addition, countries which project significant emission reductions from 2006 to meet their target by 2010 will actually have to sustain their efforts and further reduce emissions until 2012. In the end, some Member States might make use of Kyoto mechanisms more intensively than they are currently planning.

The overall EU-15 Kyoto target of – 8 % corresponds to differentiated emission targets for each Member State. In 2006, four EU-15 Member States (France, Greece, Sweden and the United Kingdom) had already reached a level below their Kyoto target. Eight additional EU-15 Member States (Austria, Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Portugal) project that they will achieve their targets, but projections from three Member States (Denmark, Italy and Spain) indicate that they will not meet their emission reduction goals. However, the report notes that gaps between targets and predictions are much narrower than the projections made in 2007.

Ten of the 12 Member States that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007 have individual reduction targets of 6 or 8 %. Only Cyprus and Malta do not have a target. In the EU-12, the Member States project that they will achieve their Kyoto targets despite projected increases in emissions between 2006 and 2010. Slovenia is the only one of these Member States planning to use the Kyoto mechanisms to meet its target.

The executive summary of the report and the country profiles are already available online. The full report will be published in November.

[Dead_Parrot]

15. I thought we were talking about spain? nt

[jpak]

24. Koo koo. Koo koo, Koo koo

:rofl:

[Dead_Parrot]

11. 18 years worth of change is hardly a "snapshot"

You see, what they ARE doing is shifting generation from coal plants that are 28% efficient and natural gas plants that are 35% efficient, to wind and combined cycle plants that are 58%+- efficient and shutting down the less efficient gas and coal plants.

If that's true, why have their carbon emissions increased every year since 1996?

[kristopher]

13. Why don't you do (or find) an analysis and tell us?

[Dead_Parrot]

14. Because I'm asking you, genius.

You're the one claiming Spain are shutting down the old plants and building more efficient ones: Do you have anything to back that up, or is it a statement you've just invented and are passing off as a fact?

[kristopher]

16. What a D.A.

As I wrote: what did the article really say as opposed to the shit the NDWC (Nuclear Dick Wad Club) tried to spin it into. Just like the significance of 43% of Spain's power coming from wind isn't the strawman the NDWC claimed but the grid's ability to handle that high a percentage.

Of course, you'd have to actually understand what the various elements of the grid are, how they work, and what the objective of operation is in order to derive full meaning. That obviously leaves you and numbnuts out.

MADRID, June 23 2008 (Reuters) - Spanish natural gas consumption hit a daily record for a summer day on Friday and also accounted for record demand from gas-fired power stations, distribution company Enagas (ENAG.MC: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) said on Monday.

Enagas said total demand for natural gas on June 20 was 1,403 gigawatt hours, up from a previous record of 1,239 GWh tallied on July 19, 2007.

Demand from combined-cycle gas plants meanwhile came to 754 GWh, which generated 364 GWH of electricity, or 48 percent of demand for power. That compared to a previous daily record of 742 GWh posted on Dec. 14 last year.

Normally, gas-fired generators produce around 35 percent of Spain's electricity, but Enagas said the proportion rose on Friday as wind turbines were largely becalmed and coal-powered plants were producing little.

Gas industry and national grid REE (REE.MC: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) spokesmen have said that gas-fired generating capacity in Spain will likely rise in coming years to fill in for power drops from the country's big and swiftly expanding wind parks.

Spain imports virtually all of its gas, 68 percent of it as liquid natural gas via six regasification plants and the rest via pipelines.

Total consumption in Spain last year was 406,300 gigawatt-hours and Enagas expects this to rise by 10.1 percent this year to meet increasing demand for power from combined-cycle gas generators. (Reporting by Martin Roberts; Editing by Christian Wiessner)

[Dead_Parrot]

17. Please try to stay focused, Kristopher

What happened on June the 20th is hardly representative: It it was, it wouldn't be worthy of a new article, would it?

I think we're established that Spain's use of gas has risen dramatically, and you fill fine no argument from me that it will continue to do so: Another 10% for this year seems quite likely.

I note that their coal use is also increasing: Spain’s coal demand in 2007 increased almost 9 percent from 2006, more than any other E.U. country.

And, as we've established, their carbon emissions have gone sky-high.

So, what is your justification for claiming Spain are shifting generation from coal plants that are 28% efficient and natural gas plants that are 35% efficient, to wind and combined cycle plants that are 58%+- efficient and shutting down the less efficient gas and coal plants. when the amount of coal and gas consumed, and the amount of carbon produced, seem to indicate the exact opposite?

[diane in sf]

28. Thank you Kristopher, great reply to this gasbag of nonlogic

[Fledermaus]

18. Spain's CO2 Emissions Fell in 2006 - Study

"Since 1990 this is the first time Spain has reduced its greenhouse gase emissions, and it comes in a year of strong economic growth," the report said.

The economy grew 3.9 percent last year, while primary energy use fell 1.3 percent, meaning Spain became more efficient in terms of energy.

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/41462/newsDate/19-Apr-2007/story.htm

[Dead_Parrot]

20. Didn't last very long, though...

Here's the following years report (pdf): http://www.otragranada.org/IMG/pdf/Documento_Evolucion_de_las_Emisiones_de_Gases_de_Efecto_Invernadero.pdf

[Fledermaus]

21. Spain’s energy emissions fall 4% in first half 2008: WWF

Spain’s energy sector emissions fell almost 4 per cent in the first half of 2008 “marking a clear turnaround” compared to the first half of 2007, WWF Spain said.

http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.997887

[Dead_Parrot]

22. Hmmm

That's a bit more encouraging, but I think I'd like to see a couple more consecutive drops before I break out the champagne.

[jpak]

25. pwn'd

:D

[Dead_Parrot]

26. Hardly

Even if they keep it up for the rest of the year, they're still missing their Kyoto targets by the widest margin of any signatory. That's your idea of Ecotopia, is it?

[Fledermaus]

19. Denmark’s emissions dropped 8% from 2006 to 2007

Denmark’s emissions dropped 8%. The United Kingdom and Germany reduced carbon dioxide pollution by 3%, while France and Australia cut it by 2%

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/26/nation/na-warming26

[jpak]

23. LOL!!!111 You forgot to post this part "coal-powered plants were producing little."

"The proportion rose on Friday as wind turbines were largely becalmed and coal-powered plants were producing little."

Which means natural gas and wind power replaced coal-fired electricity - coal plants emitting 2-3 times as much CO2 as natural gas plants, a 100-fold more than wind turbines.

Nice try though...

:rofl:

[Dead_Parrot]

27. Did you stop to wonder why?

Spain’s thermal coal imports are forecast to fall because of scheduled outages at a number of coal-fired plants for the completion of maintenance and upgrades... Capacity utilisation of coal-fired plants in Spain is expected to increase following outages in 2008. As a result, Spain’s coal imports are also forecast to increase. from here

Doesn't sound like they're shutting them all down just yet.

[joshcryer]

29. Honestly, when I saw that windmill thread I thought "great!" but didn't click.

I did not realize it was being misrepresented. So while I wouldn't discount alternate sources as such, it's good to have you around. ;)