<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18999">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman">Reuben Deumling
writes:</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman">The truth of
the matter is we would be wise to figure out how to <U>stop all burning of
fossil fuels as soon as possible and probably a lot sooner than that</U>. Why
this needs restating is a source of continuing frustration. Doing this, figuring
out how to make it happen--politically, technically, economically, ethically,
emotionally--is a big challenge, but judging from the tenor of this article what
we really need to do is figure out how to calculate more significant figures of
the coal vs natural gas difference in climate impacts. <BR><BR>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 16pt">My
comment:<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 16pt">I
appreciate this list because I find people who have a similar view. I have
begun to use depletion as my buzz word to characterize what
is happening. The complacency of depending on and rapidly depleting
finite nonrenewable resources is quite alarming. A sustainable economy is
able to renew itself without depleting. All waste is recovered (zero
waste). Anything less is a depletion economy. In transition, we
reduce our depletion to give our community more time to ultimately learn how to
not deplete.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 16pt">Eli
</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; FONT-SIZE: 16pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=9watts@gmail.com href="mailto:9watts@gmail.com">Reuben Deumling</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=eadvocates@yahoogroups.com
href="mailto:eadvocates@yahoogroups.com">eadvocates@yahoogroups.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=gillbruno@gmail.com
href="mailto:gillbruno@gmail.com">Gill & Bruno</A> ; <A
title=Cynthiakmitchell@gmail.com
href="mailto:Cynthiakmitchell@gmail.com">Cynthiakmitchell@gmail.com</A> ; <A
title=greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org
href="mailto:greenbuilding@lists.bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, January 25, 2011 3:31
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Greenbuilding] [eadvocates]
Climate Benefits of Natural GasMay Be Overstated</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>One thing that bothers me about the title of the article, and
about much that passes for energy policy language these days, is a confusion
of the relative and the absolute, of benefits, on the one hand, and varying
degrees of damage on the other. The extraction and combustion of natural gas
offers no climate benefits, properly understood. It is a fossil fuel, and
extracting and burning it is widely recognized to result in an unqualified
disbenefit to anything that might pass for climate stability. <BR>Comparing
its life cycle impacts on atmospheric GHG concentrations to coal's is
perfectly reasonable, but I take issue with the squishy phrasing, the
pathological avoidance of straight talk when it comes to climate-prudent
energy policies. <BR><BR>The spectrum of options available to us is, of
course, far greater than coal+sequestration or natural gas (why, for that
matter, are we talking about building any new power plants?) but the framing
of the issue in this article obscures that.<BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255)"><SPAN></SPAN>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P>The utilities are in a bind because they have to build new power plants
to meet the nation’s demand for energy, while anticipating an
as-yet-undefined set of federal climate and emissions regulations that they
believe are inevitable. Do they build new gas-fired plants, which can cost
$2 billion and take three years to bring online? Or do they wait for proven
systems that can capture carbon from coal-fired plants and sequester it
underground? </P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>Why the supply focus? Why so unimaginative when it comes to demand? Why
assume _always_ that electricity demand is fixed, off limits, that it will
grow forever? How helpful, how realistic is that?<BR><BR>The truth of the
matter is we would be wise to figure out how to <U>stop all burning of fossil
fuels as soon as possible and probably a lot sooner than that</U>. Why this
needs restating is a source of continuing frustration. Doing this, figuring
out how to make it happen--politically, technically, economically, ethically,
emotionally--is a big challenge, but judging from the tenor of this article
what we really need to do is figure out how to calculate more significant
figures of the coal vs natural gas difference in climate impacts.
<BR><BR>Reuben Deumling<BR> <BR></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>Greenbuilding
mailing list<BR>to Send a Message to the list, use the email
address<BR>Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org<BR><BR>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change
your List Settings use the web
page<BR>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>