Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)

21. I looked at the EPA table, it's good, but because it's US-only...

Reply to kristopher (Reply #20)

Sun May 27, 2012, 10:57 PM

May 2012

...it wasn't what I was looking for.

They are instructive enough to separate out electricity generation, which PV and Wind and other renewable sources excel at. They consider "industry," as far as I can tell, the combined effects of refining of fuel (not the end use combustion of petrol such as cars, since these are stationary sources that, as the paper discusses later on, are useful for sequestration), the smelting of metals, the production of cement, and the production of petrochemicals (not fuels but things like plastics). When combined together they comprise 'industry.'

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

CO2 Emissions from Electrical Generation: 1980 to 2030 [View all] GliderGuider May 2012 OP

How many data points between 2003-2012 did you use? kristopher May 2012 #1

Annual points from 1980 to 2010, so 30 points in all (edited) GliderGuider May 2012 #2

There are literally hundreds of "authoritative estimates" out there GG. kristopher May 2012 #3

"Outlier"? Not hardly. GliderGuider May 2012 #4

You're right. kristopher May 2012 #6

When I look at the distribution I'm reminded of a PERT analysis. GliderGuider May 2012 #10

I'd like to respond more fully a bit later today hopefully, but in the meantime kristopher May 2012 #12

How is IRENA not the same kind of industry group XemaSab May 2012 #5

Decry? kristopher May 2012 #7

Beautifully argued but you have left some things out intaglio May 2012 #8

Did you really think I was trying to justify the building of nukes??? GliderGuider May 2012 #9

At first, yes, I did think you were being supportive intaglio May 2012 #11

One thing I'd like to see is the big 3 'C's: Concrete, Clinker, and Coke. joshcryer May 2012 #13

Thanks. That's a very useful memory graphic! GliderGuider May 2012 #14

I'm trying to find a breakdown for "industry," but generally it's "those three." joshcryer May 2012 #15

EPA kristopher May 2012 #16

US only doesn't tell you the full picture. joshcryer May 2012 #17

The report that is part of has 60 pages of references. kristopher May 2012 #18

Found the kind of breakdown I want, page 85: joshcryer May 2012 #19

"Industrial" is one sector of power kristopher May 2012 #20

I looked at the EPA table, it's good, but because it's US-only... joshcryer May 2012 #21