<< CASTRO QUITS ~ MAIN ~ LISTEN TO THE AAAS >>

ROASTING AHOY

As required by law, mining company Rio Tinto estimates the carbon and warmening impact of planned coal mining expansion in the Hunter Valley:

Rio Tinto subsidiary Coal & Allied says that if the project is approved, an additional 155MT CO2e [carbon dioxide equivalent] will be emitted over the life of the mine (taking account of direct mining-related emissions and emissions from coal transport and combustion).

“It was determined that over the life of the mine, the emissions resulting from the project as distinct from currently approved mining at Hunter Valley Operations, will raise the global surface temperature by 0.000078°C.”

“It is considered a reasonable assumption that if the coal was not produced at Hunter Valley Operations, an alternative mine would increase production to meet demand, therefore equivalent emissions would occur.”

Reported in Carbon + Environment Daily; subscription required. Via Pete S.

Posted by Tim B. on 02/19/2008 at 09:42 AM
  1. Yeah….but…but…but if they open only 100,000 more of those mines then the temperature will go up 7.8°C. You won’t be laughing then, Blair!

    /of course, I keed

    Posted by Villeurbanne on 2008 02 19 at 09:49 AM • permalink

  2. This is completely unacceptable. They need to mine far more coal so that we can actually measure their impact.

    Posted by Burbank on 2008 02 19 at 09:59 AM • permalink

  3. REALLY O/T:

    Just checked Damien Lataan’s blog from curiosity. sure enough, all comments except those of valiant MentalFloss have been deleted.

    Now he’s annoyed that Howard isn’t as dead as Saddam Hussein...

    Posted by carpefraise on 2008 02 19 at 10:02 AM • permalink

  4. Please disregard my comment above as I was wrong, except about MentalFloss’s valiant nature.

    NB*Must not post late at night*.

    Posted by carpefraise on 2008 02 19 at 10:11 AM • permalink

  5. Villeurbanne - your figures are correct, but there are other things to consider and I’m sure bald Pete will be chewing over them as I type.

    As a very conservative estimate the new mine might have a lifetime of ten years, therefore over the next 10,000 years it “might” raise the global surface temperature by 0.78°C. This is considerably more than the 0.6°C rise of the last century and is quite frankly too much.

    The project should be stopped immediately. If not, I look forward to images of bare-breasted greenhoes pressing themselves up against Rio Tinto’s security fence when excavation begins.

    Posted by Whale Spinor on 2008 02 19 at 10:17 AM • permalink

  6. Sorry - maths bad; make that 1,000 years

    Posted by Whale Spinor on 2008 02 19 at 10:28 AM • permalink

  7. Perhaps people who are worried about this possible rise in temperature should consider ecotherapy.

    Posted by paco on 2008 02 19 at 10:37 AM • permalink

  8. “It is considered a reasonable assumption that if the coal was not produced at Hunter Valley Operations, an alternative mine would increase production to meet demand, therefore equivalent emissions would occur.”

    Talk about settled science!

    Posted by Mystery Meat on 2008 02 19 at 11:11 AM • permalink

  9. 0.000078, and no doubt if the bothered to pubish the standard devaiation of their estimate or statistical confidnece level it would be in the order or +/- 0.001% - esentially meaning they have no f-ing idea.

    Posted by Baron on 2008 02 19 at 12:31 PM • permalink

  10. #8 - I like it.  Basically saying “progress is inevitable, so it might as well take place in our own back yard”.

    Also, I suddenly had a thought…  the Fire Brigade puts out carbon-releasing fires.  Particularly the CFA which is always cash-strapped.  Surely they can sell the carbon credits that they generate by their intervention to prevent all that carbon released?

    Posted by Baron on 2008 02 19 at 12:33 PM • permalink

  11. Ya probably need ten more of those mines to balance the probable cooling trend we have been in for a few years.  Start digging.

    Posted by yojimbo on 2008 02 19 at 12:38 PM • permalink

  12. I submit there is no device, outside research laboratories, that can register a 0.000078°C change. Hell, if you can find one INSIDE a research lab, I’ll be shocked.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2008 02 19 at 01:03 PM • permalink

  13. GOOD. Open the darn mine already; there’s three inches of ice on the walkways outside, and I can’t feel my legs.

    Posted by Tungsten Monk on 2008 02 19 at 02:42 PM • permalink

  14. C’mon, don’t tell me Phatty’s 10,000 acre Hunter Valley cattle pharm produces more CO2?

    Did his jet-setting-pharmer missus discuss bovine flatulence on her last jaunt to Beijing?

    Posted by egg_ on 2008 02 19 at 05:13 PM • permalink

  15. #14
    CO2 equivalence, Phatts ...

    Posted by egg_ on 2008 02 19 at 05:18 PM • permalink

  16. #12
    Gotta be derived from a formula, in the fashion of all of this GW shite [witnessed uV-sensitive thermocouples finer than human hair but thermal mass and insulation are critical to screen out ‘noisy’ influences].

    Posted by egg_ on 2008 02 19 at 05:26 PM • permalink

  17. Wow. 0.000078°C. Someone break out the marshmallows.

    Posted by Skip on 2008 02 19 at 05:55 PM • permalink

  18. Nah; they’ve forgot CO2 saturation; oh, and the imminent weak Schwabe cycle; I’d say that temp increase is going to be a temp drop.

    Posted by cohenite on 2008 02 19 at 07:29 PM • permalink

  19. WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!!


    ...eventually.

    Posted by John A on 2008 02 20 at 06:09 AM • permalink

  20. This increase in temperature is not only unmeasureable, but totally beyond the order of accuracy of any compututation.

    It is, in effect, total bullshit.

    Posted by Louis on 2008 02 20 at 07:18 AM • permalink

  21. 0.000078°C???

    Let’s wait for our challenged Fairfax friends - am sure it will be reported in a measured, unbiased way!!

    “Look Margo, that evil coal is going to warmen the planet again”

    SFX: Electric Espresso machine in background

    “Oh no Traceeee, how much warmer-er will it be”

    “Hard to tell - there’s lots of zeros but I learnt at school that zero means nothing - so we can just ignore those”

    “Oh no - that means it will be 78 degrees hotter.”

    “Not quite Margo - you never were good at maths - it means 7800 degrees hotter”

    “shit Traceeee, we better tell our readers!”

    Posted by Vincent Gerome on 2008 02 20 at 06:46 PM • permalink

  22. Carbon + Environment Daily?  That commie MSM rag?

    To get the REAL story, you’ve got to check out alternative media, like the Ozona Stockman.  (At least if you’re looking for a hunting lease…)

    Posted by Tex Lovera on 2008 02 21 at 08:24 AM • permalink

  23. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.