Share this page!

Glen Peters Profile picture
Twitter logo
21 Sep, 7 tweets, 5 min read
"Have you ever published a paper that *never* would have happened without twitter?" @dsquintana

Hmmm, certainly yes, & most of my papers are in some way influenced by Twitter, & five minutes on Twitter can generate lots of new paper ideas...

1/
Perhaps the most (in)famous climate paper in recent times only came about because @MLiebreich provoked 90% of #ClimateTwitter with #RCP85isBollox, laying the foundation for this paper with @hausfath & myself
nature.com/articles/d4158…
2/
I met @Oliver_Geden on Twitter, & we have written several papers together (& have many ideas that are waiting some time & resources).

I suspect the trouble paper with @KevinClimate was heavily influenced by debates on Twitter science.org/doi/abs/10.112…

3/
I think my involvement in @ParisReinforce came about from Twitter, though I would have to fact check that one! Several papers from this project.

Many @gcarbonproject papers learn from Twitter debates, & helps shape our graphical material. globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/i…

4/
I get lots of ideas on Twitter, I have reams of paper (notes in Word docs, of ideas to follow up, I mean 10s & 10s of them). I just do not have the time to follow them up. Twitter allows rapid discussions on specific issues from experts that would rarely meet in person.
5/
Twitter is a great spot to get feedback. I tweet a figure, people comment on it, often this leads to adjustments. I see other peoples figures, get ideas. (noting nearly all my figures heavily depend on @robbie_andrew)
6/
For all its problems, Twitter is actually a great medium for science & scientists. It does, however, take a lot of time...

👋 to a fellow Aussie working across the road in Oslo @dsquintana

7/7

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Glen Peters

Glen Peters Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Peters_Glen

Glen Peters Profile picture
22 Sep
#ClimateTwitter Direct Air Capture (DAC)

In 2011, Rob Socolow estimated that 1MtCO₂/yr DAC would require a contact structure with height 10m & length of 5km.

Is that still the case?

1/
aps.org/policy/reports…
If I look at these pictures of Climeworks Orca via @EdgarHertwich

The height is ~3m, the length ~10m, & 4 units
Area: 120m² for 4000tCO₂/yr
Or: 30,000m² for 1MtCO₂/yr (120/4*1000)

If 10m high (Socolow), then contact structure ~3km long.



2/
This is rather crude, but is quite similar to the original Socolow estimate. If true, this is fascinating…

If contact structure is 10m high, then 1MtCO₂/yr requires 3-5km structure

1GtCO₂/yr requires 3-5000km
5GtCO₂/yr requires 15-25,000km

3/
Read 5 tweets
Glen Peters Profile picture
16 Sep
Estimating CO₂ emissions from forests is difficult, not least because of different definitions.

CO₂ emissions come from conversion (cutting down or growing a tree).

There is also a 'sink', soaking up CO₂ we previously emitted.

What should be reported as CO₂ emissions?

1/
It is really rather complex. The reason the 'sink' is included in emission accounting, is that it is difficult to determine what is 'anthropogenic'.

It was decided to use self-defined 'managed land' & include 'indirect' (climate) effects.

carbonbrief.org/guest-post-cre…

2/
Scientific studies (eg IPCC Assessment Reports) generally consider CO₂ emissions from 'Net Conversions' as the emissions, while government reporting to the UNFCCC combines the conversions & sink (black line).

The 'sink' is not the total sink, only a part of the forest sink.

3/
Read 6 tweets
Glen Peters Profile picture
14 Sep
Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) in Canada.

There are two facilities (capturing in 2019), but very different stories:
* Boundary Dam: Operates ~60% capacity, used for EOR
* Quest: Operates ~90% capacity, permanent storage, but the generated H₂ is used to upgrade oilsands

1/
Boundary Dam is CCS on coal power, with the goal of capturing CO₂ for Enhanced Oil Recovery.

In short, it has not lived up to expectations. How much CO₂ gets stored is unknown, & in any case, the CO₂ is used for EOR (more CO₂).

2/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_…
Quest produces H₂ in a steam methane reformer, the concentrated CO₂ stream is captured & permanently stored.

Though, the H₂ is used to make heavy oil marketable, & in a sense, it is a type of EOR: the CO₂ is indirectly used to generate more CO₂.

3/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_Car…
Read 4 tweets
Glen Peters Profile picture
13 Sep
Norway is known for its Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) & is best in class.

Even the best in class does not run at capacity. Currently ~80% of capacity is used, but Sleipner has dropped to ~65%.

But, Norwegian CCS is the easy type, removing CO₂ from extracted gas.

1/
The extracted gas at Sleipner Vest contains ~9% CO₂, but has to be reduced to ~2.5% to meet sales specifications.

The extracted gas in the Snøhvit field contains ~5-7.5% CO₂, and this has to be removed to avoid it freezing out in the downstream liquefaction process.

2/
The CO₂ has to be removed for market or technical reasons. You would therefore expect the facilities to run at a high capacity, as they have to!

The CO₂ is captured & stored, presumably to avoid paying the Norwegian CO₂ tax. This is great, but a different issue.

3/
Read 8 tweets
Glen Peters Profile picture
9 Sep
“[W]e scientists carry a big responsibility in not spreading the wrong messages” @jrockstrom

3/4 answered “yes” to this question, but Rockström said “no” in an interview with @MLiebreich

The question is ambiguous, so let’s unpack it a bit.

cleaningup.live/ep49-johan-roc…

1/
“[Y]ou're absolutely right, that nobody is suggesting that there is a planetary tipping point out there that causes runaway climate change” @jrockstrom

[I used this to make the question in the Twitter poll]

2/
That statement seems clear, but there are ambiguities:
* “a” or many?
* “planetary” or smaller scale?
* “runaway” or a new state?

These issues were common in yesterday’s discussion

3/
Read 17 tweets
Glen Peters Profile picture
8 Sep
"I accept that thanks to human activity... atmospheric CO₂ has increased from ~300ppm [to] ~400ppm, & without appropriate action, it will probably go up to 500ppm in 30-40 years, maybe sooner... I accept that that could have consequences that we would much prefer to avoid."
1/
"I absolutely accept that". For added emphasis.

"[I]t's very hard to disagree with facts, & in the end a fact is a fact is a fact. And we cannot ignore facts just because in the short term, they don't see their argument."

2/
It would seem that Tony Abbott (former Prime Minister of Australia) is quite keen on facts. And climate change is a fact, according to his own words, & action is therefore needed.

Oh, but it is China: "by far the largest source of additional emissions right now" (a fact)

3/
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @Peters_Glen has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @Peters_Glen!

Read all threads by @Peters_Glen

:(