Omnipotent oil...

---

Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

Oil production and oil usage is increasing [*] Click to enlarge or better still go HERE for the original or for an even bigger version go HERE. Points to note are that 87% of global energy sources are still fossil fuels and that "renewable sources contribute just 2.7%". Things aren't changing much and remembering the overblown outlook may even seem to be in reverse although based on the compound annual growth rates shown in the graphic [*] "it does seem that we are making progress in tapering the growth of production. Human population and the economy are growing at rates higher than 1.13%, so that means oil is giving up ground to other energy sources."

I would like to point out that the figures are debatable because I thought Venezuela now had the highest proven reserves (and you'd think OPEC would know about their own members) and that worldwide Canada were 3rd. See HERE and HERE; the second (Wiki) link provides the probable reason: "Different sources... ...give different figures, and there are different types of oil, ranging from cheap and easy to recover oils to shale oil or oil sands, which are more expensive and difficult to recover."

Omnipotent oil...

---

Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

Oil production and oil usage is increasing [*] Click to enlarge or better still go HERE for the original or for an even bigger version go HERE. Points to note are that 87% of global energy sources are still fossil fuels and that "renewable sources contribute just 2.7%". Things aren't changing much and remembering the overblown outlook may even seem to be in reverse although based on the compound annual growth rates shown in the graphic [*] "it does seem that we are making progress in tapering the growth of production. Human population and the economy are growing at rates higher than 1.13%, so that means oil is giving up ground to other energy sources."

I would like to point out that the figures are debatable because I thought Venezuela now had the highest proven reserves (and you'd think OPEC would know about their own members) and that worldwide Canada were 3rd. See HERE and HERE; the second (Wiki) link provides the probable reason: "Different sources... ...give different figures, and there are different types of oil, ranging from cheap and easy to recover oils to shale oil or oil sands, which are more expensive and difficult to recover."

Overblown outlook...

---

Earlier this month Matt Ridley posted a withering article about "The beginning of the end of wind"; he writes - not for the first time - about the various negative points of wind energy and the turbine mania that has seized many governments. He highlights the fact that to "the nearest whole number, the percentage of the world’s energy that comes from wind turbines today is: zero"; in fact the energy from wind, solar and bio-fuels combined comes in at 1% (click on image to enlarge). In The Spectator, with the same article, he leads with the headline that the "government has finally seen through the wind-farm scam – but why did it take them so long?".



Anyway, thinking about that while I read more bad news: yesterday the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) sent out a press release: "Act now or face costly consequences". In their report they state that urban air pollution - 'premature deaths from ground-level ozone' - will be the top environmental cause of mortality worldwide by 2050 (more even than dirty water and lack of sanitation). perhaps we have the solution: Matt Ridley says that It would be a shame for the 3,500 or so wind turbines in Britain (with hundreds more under construction) to be dismantled of the and suggests the biggest one should remain  "for future generations to marvel at" as a  "monument to the folly of mankind." I have a better idea, thinking ahead to worsening air pollution, leave all the wind farms up but switch them to blow!

Overblown outlook...

---

Earlier this month Matt Ridley posted a withering article about "The beginning of the end of wind"; he writes - not for the first time - about the various negative points of wind energy and the turbine mania that has seized many governments. He highlights the fact that to "the nearest whole number, the percentage of the world’s energy that comes from wind turbines today is: zero"; in fact the energy from wind, solar and bio-fuels combined comes in at 1% (click on image to enlarge). In The Spectator, with the same article, he leads with the headline that the "government has finally seen through the wind-farm scam – but why did it take them so long?".

Anyway, thinking about that while I read more bad news: yesterday the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) sent out a press release: "Act now or face costly consequences". In their report they state that urban air pollution - 'premature deaths from ground-level ozone' - will be the top environmental cause of mortality worldwide by 2050 (more even than dirty water and lack of sanitation). perhaps we have the solution: Matt Ridley says that It would be a shame for the 3,500 or so wind turbines in Britain (with hundreds more under construction) to be dismantled of the and suggests the biggest one should remain  "for future generations to marvel at" as a  "monument to the folly of mankind." I have a better idea, thinking ahead to worsening air pollution, leave all the wind farms up but switch them to blow!