Dear mhaze,

You really do struggle with this stuff don't you.

Fracking is the reason that US total emissions have dropped.

“From 2005 to 2017, coal-related CO2 emissions declined by 835 million metric tons (39%), and petroleum-related CO2 emissions declined by 289 million metric tons (11%). Natural gas emissions, however, increased by 285 million metric tons (24%) over that period. The underlying energy consumption trends that resulted in these changes—mainly because more electricity has been generated from natural gas than from other fossil fuels—have helped to lower the U.S. emissions level since 2005 because natural gas is a less carbon-intensive fuel than either coal or petroleum.”
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34872

Yup that is right, the US moved away from coal and into natural gas which produces notably less CO2 per BTU.

Plus they have a virtual ban on energy exports.

Here we send a huge proportion of our gas overseas while a bunch of throwbacks want to kick start a coal resurgence.

No one answered when I asked this question;
Temperatures rise BEFORE CO2 rises !
Why ?

SR,

"You really do struggle with this stuff don't you.

Fracking is the reason that US total emissions have dropped."

Well I don't know why you'd think I struggle with this stuff when I didn't actually comment on why the US emissions were falling.

On the other hand, here's what I wrote on these very pages some 18 months ago...

"The nation most successful in reducing emissions over the past decade is the USA - yes the great satan. Over the past decade the US has reduced total CO2e emissions by 10% and per capita emissions by 16%.

There are several factors leading to that decline but the major reason (according to the US EPA et al) is the replacement of coal with natural gas which has become cheap and ubiquitous due to fracking revolution. Yep, fracking leads to emission reductions."

I wrote that so long ago that your knowledge of this is probably based on what I previously passed on.

Dear oh dear SR you really are a berk.

Bazz,

"Temperatures rise BEFORE CO2 rises !"

Well I'm not entirely sure that's been fully established. It seems that the ice cores show it to be true but I don't really think that we can be sure about that since the accuracy of the core data is questionable. Additionally the alarmists argue that even if temperatures started to rise before CO2 rose, the increasing CO2 caused even more temperature increases.

Hasbeen,
The surface ocean temperature determines frequency of emmitted IR - very measurable by satellite. Plus, upwards of 4000 Argo buoys in worlds oceans. Each one captures temp and other data, repeating every two days - descending 1000 meters, then rising to surface to send data to satellite. So, ample data on temp profile in northern Atlantic.

Mhaze, ice ages and inter glacials determined by Milancovch cycles, where each cycle takes thousands of years. Suns strength varies with the stage of a cycle. The earths path around the sun is elliptical. And earths rotation axis moves, also imposes a multi thousand year cycle. Northern hemisphere temp drives beginning and ending of ice ages. Ice age starts when summer in Northern Hemispere is furthest from the sun. As warming starts, as northern hemisphere temp rises, biological activity increases. And more CO2 generated. And the thermal blanket created by the CO2 provides exponential increase in warming.

Our earth should today be slowly heading towards an ice age. But CC overriding Milancovich.

All most Australians are interested is the fact that we have the highest elrctricity prices in the world, and we have them because our dimwitted politicians believed the rent-seekers rubbish about CO2. All this shonky NEG talk is about EMISSIONS ONLY: you cannot persist with cutting emissions AND expect to lower prices. Everything that comes from the mouth of the minister, Josh Friedegg, is a blatant lie. But there is nothing new about Australian politicians and lying.

ttbn,
Yes, we have very high electricity cost. Reason: free market at its rampant worst. Various costs due to excessive infrastructure costs, and gaming the system by not turning gas generators on until price sky high. And, very complex billing algorithms preventing easy price comparisons. Nothing to do with renewables. If new large generator required, solar and wind much cheaper than coal. And with well designed network, cloud and or no wind in one location, electricity available from other sunny and or windy locations.