 North Korea Increases Aid to Russia, Mos... Tue Nov 19, 2024 12:29 | Marko Marjanovi?
Trump Assembles a War Cabinet Sat Nov 16, 2024 10:29 | Marko Marjanovi?
Slavgrinder Ramps Up Into Overdrive Tue Nov 12, 2024 10:29 | Marko Marjanovi?
?Existential? Culling to Continue on Com... Mon Nov 11, 2024 10:28 | Marko Marjanovi?
US to Deploy Military Contractors to Ukr... Sun Nov 10, 2024 02:37 | Field Empty Anti-Empire >>
A bird's eye view of the vineyard
Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
Alternative site: https://thesaker.si/saker-a... Site was created using the downloads provided Regards Herb
The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
Dear friends As I have previously announced, we are now “freezing” the blog.? We are also making archives of the blog available for free download in various formats (see below).?
What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
by Mr. Allen for the Saker blog Over the last few years, we hear leaders from both Russia and China pronouncing that they have formed a relationship where there are
Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
2023/02/27 19:00:02Welcome to the ‘Moveable Feast Cafe’. The ‘Moveable Feast’ is an open thread where readers can post wide ranging observations, articles, rants, off topic and have animate discussions of
The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker
Pepe Escobar for the Saker blog A powerful feeling rhythms your skin and drums up your soul as you?re immersed in a long walk under persistent snow flurries, pinpointed by The Saker >>
Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail?supporter? Anthony
Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony
Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony
RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony
Waiting for SIPO Anthony Public Inquiry >>
Promoting Human Rights in IrelandHuman Rights in Ireland >>
|
Shell, gas production, carbon taxes and greenhouse gases...And who pays
 national |
environment |
opinion/analysis
 Wednesday October 18, 2006 13:25 by hedgehog
In light of our kyoto obligations, the penalties we will incur for exceeding our quota for carbon emissions and our government's policy of letting the polluters off the hook by making the taxpayer shoulder the burden as a stealth tax, Where do industries like Shell fit in to the picture and can we hold them accountable for methane and carbon emissions from their gas production and refinement activities?
 As you know, we are subject to Kyoto protocols and limits on CO2 emissions.
If we exceed our allocated limits, we are taxed on the excess.
We will most likely greatly exceed our agreed allocation and will have to pay carbon taxes on the excess.
The government have chosen to hide this from view and it will be paid by the taxpayer rather than the polluters, essentially another stealth tax.
See this article for more
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/77273
Assuming shell succeed in their endeavours in Erris, there is a point I haven't heard raised regarding their projected CO2 emissions.
Are there any reliable estimates as to the amount of CO2 that will be emitted by this or a comparable gas platform and its associated refining process?
Assuming production levels projected by shell, what is the likely per annum cost to the irish taxpayer of the excess CO2 and greenhouse gases generated by the corrib field platform and the associated gas cleaning and refining process (wherever it is done!)?
I imagine it would be substantial.
It is my understanding that methane, as a greenhouse gas, can be about 21 times more potent than CO2 and there would likely be methane leakage as a result of the corrib enterprise. Is this covered by Kyoto?. If so, will we be penalised for it. if not why not. It seems illogical to exclude other more potent greenhouse gases such as methane.
there is some information here but I am uncertain as to its pedigree
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis...2.pdf
gas related info here
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/natural_gas/info_glance/....html
general energy related stuff
http://www.eia.doe.gov/
wikipedia article on greenhouse gases
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
Earth system research laboratory
http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/aggi/
Our political representatives have, for whatever reasons, negotiated a terrible deal on behalf of the irish public for our resources. I believe the carbon/methane emissions from extracting and refining the gas will result in further hidden costs to the taxpayer. We need to quantify these costs properly to fully understand the implications of this deal.
The projected environmental cleanup and terms for this is another related area that needs to be quantified and shells record in this area is not good. Such passing off of expenses from companies to the public is referred to as "externalising".
Also, the road improvements and other infrastructure costs to facilitate shell and the cost of the proposed pipeline from Erris to our gas fired power stations should all be taken into account in assessing this project.
And if we are purchasing the gas at market rate with no security of supply, is there really any benefit to building this very expensive pipeline at all?
I would like to stimulate some much needed discussion on these topics. Let the party begin :)
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (10 of 10)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Great article Hedgehog, you,ve got it in one, its their Oil and Gas, but its Eires responsibility for the clean up, the Fishermen and the Farmers are heading for the Barracade, and we must support them too, as they are the best Custodians of the Land and the Sea, Read Maritime Law it will be Eire that is brought to Book, it will be Eire that will have to clean up the inevitable mess, dont let them turn Old Erin into a Toxic cesspit, Shell is like a Giant Slug you can see where its been. Their profits wil be Banked Offshore in places like the Caymans,the Mauritias, the Channel Islands,there they will hand out Political Funds to the Politicians who do their bidding, supported by their thugs, and of course Sandline, Mark Thatcher,and old Etonians, who have been in the game too long. they wont stop untill the seas are all poisoned,or the fish are dead,or the Earth is a Dessert , and the Politics are all finally corrupted,then it will be too late!. Whoever was responsible should be IMPEACHED! under Maritime Law, Irish Constitutional Law, or even under European Law, and if that doesnt work try International Law, the Hague has just slapped their wrists,Shell only have to call up the Gnomes of Zurich and the fine is paid.Its time that the Judges , The Army. The Navy. The Garda, The Ecconomists, realized its their Constitution Too,and do something about it before the people do, one thing for certain is that its on the cards. Flynn O Flynn
What paranoid drivel.
Our fishermen have vacuumed our coastal and offshore waters to the extent that the only thing preserving several species of pelagic and coastal saelife is the zoning imposed by Brussels and the draconian laws necessary to enforce fish conservation laws against one of the least environmentally observant sectors of our economy.
On the other hand, Shell is owned, not by robber-barons, but by the pension funds ordinary people depend upon for security in their old age.
Not even 1% of Shell is owned by private trusts or individuals.
The current agitation against the pipeline is a grim and regressive coalition of private land-owners and the trots and other usual suspects who protest against everything.
The victim of this reactionary coalition is the wider community interest and the pensioners who own Shell.
Go out and get a real job.
Not even 1% of Shell is owned by private trusts or individuals.
Bzzzt - Wrong
In fact the largest single shareholder is the Dutch Royal family. It is not clear how much of the company they currently own but in the past it has been as high as 25%.
God created the prehistoric microscopic sea animals and the forests and jungles whose fossilised remains became oil and coal and allowed human beings evolve so that they had huge brains and no fur which drove them to go look for fuel to burn and keep themselves warm in the first place.
I think we should tax the Catholic Church.
So, let me get this straight:
if anyone says anything against shell they are hurting old age pensioners.
That has to be the best one yet!!
.
Thought I'd add a couple of things as explanation:
Any gas or oil installation in Europe will come under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, since they generate power and/or emissions of CO2 or other greenhouse gases throuigh combustion.
So this new Erris platform, once it's built, will come under the same law.
Under the EU scheme, each installation has calculated its total emissions of greenhouse gases, and is given a certain proportion of that total (its "cap") in the form of EU Allowances. 1 EUA = 1 mt of CO2 equivalent.
At the end of the year, each installation must surrender as many EUAs as it has emitted tonnes of CO2e.
Most power stations, for example, have been given a lot fewer EUAs than they actually emit in tonnes of CO2 each year.
So those installations have a choice: they can either work/invest to reduce their overall emissions in order to reach their "cap", or they can buy however many EUAs from other installations in Europe to cover their actual emissions.
You can actually download the verified data for every one of 11,500 installations in Europe that have been participating in this scheme since 2005 from the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ets/registrySearch.do
though it's not very user-friendly unless you know what you're looking for.
You can find what the emissions "caps" are for comparable UK oil and gas platforms by looking up the UK's allocation of allowances here: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/tradi...d.htm.
A point about costs to the taxpayer: The EU emissions trading scheme costs some money to administer across 25 (and soon 27) member states. The allowances are handed out for free at the moment to the installations, but it's hoped that one day there'll be auctions each year and every installation will have to pay up front to get their allowances. That cost will end up coming through to us consumers in the form of higher gas and electricity bills; in many cases, it already is.
About methane: yes, methane is 23 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2. And yes, methane emissions (as opposed to CO2 ones) are taken into account and multiplied appropriately into CO2 terms.
Kyoto refers to Greenhouse Gases, all of which are measured and espressed in terms of their CO2 equivalent. There are 6 major greenhouse gases that come under Kyoto: CO2, methane, nitrous oxide (296 times worse than co2) hydrofluorocarbons (anywhere from 500-3000 times worse than co2), perfluorocarbons (up to 11,000 times worse) and sulphur hexafluoride (23,500 times!!!!).
Methane is also generated at rubbish tips and landfills, on pretty much every farm, and in coal mines.
Ireland actually has a pretty tough limit on greenhouse gas emissions. Under the Kyoto agreement, Irish emissions can go UP by no more than 13% from their levels in 1990, which is the base year for the whole treaty. (But think of the economic development that's gone on since 1990 and you'll understand why Irish CO2 emissions are already way over that cap!)
The UK has a target of a 12.5% cut from 1990 levels, and it's at around 10-11% under at the moment.
About methane "leakage", which you also mention: methane leakage from pipelines and other infrastructure does offer the opportunity to make savings in emissions (Russia could save million of tonnes of CO2 equivalent by patching up its pipelines, for example). But methane leakage from undersea structures does not count in Kyoto. In fact, Kyoto is considering adopting Carbon capture and storage technology as a way to reduce emissions: by gathering and storing CO2 in oil deposits underland or water, you prevent it from being vented into the atmosphere....
Apologies for the long-winded reply.
Dear Joe,
Shell used to be called Royal Dutch Shell - about a million years ago....
However, it was not called that because of some supposed ownership by royalty - anymore than the Imperial Tobacco Co. was ever owned by Liz Windsor and her disfunctional family!
The Dutch Royal Family havn't held a shareholding in the company for at least fifty years. Probably never.
Yup. The fact is that Shell and most of the 'evil' multinationals who oppress the poor workers by employing millions worldwide are nowdays owned primarily by huge pension-funds.
Sorry about your misconceptions.
Wealth produced by Shell doesn't just go to pay its employees. Taxes on that wealth, and on the income accruing to Shell workers, helps pay for the dole which supports the fringe protestors who have have the luxury of being able to spend their days protesting their exploitation by Shell instead of having to get a job.
Mr Plain man! - Queen Beatrix of Holland is still a majour share holder in Shell - Please check your facts before you start telling lies on behalf of Shell's evil empire.
As for you pig ignorant comments about protestors and tax's don't make me laugh, This governemnt has allowed Shell to rob the country of its natural resources to the tune of billions of euros. The income tax form the Shell PR team is very small beer indeed!!.
PS - For Mr Plain and other slow learners, the majority of protestors disperse between 9 and 10am to go to their places of employment, the people that are left are mainly the self employed, shift workers (like myself), farmers, housewives and others who happen to have some free time to help out their under-siege community.!!
Not only Shell is to blame for our Kyoto targets not being met - the era of 'cheap air travel' is proving very detrimental to the planet. Chief among the culprits is Michael O'Leary and Ryanair with their dirt cheap air fares - highly subsidised of course.
Air travel is 'taking off' as it were - year on year more people travel.
Difficult as it may be for all us with itchy feet, we should all travel less....
see: http://hummingbird.typepad.com/hummingbird/2006/09/fryi....html