<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
	<channel>
<title>My RSS Feed</title><link>http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/home.html</link><description>Hot News&#x21;</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><language>en</language><dc:date>2021-08-09T15:36:47+02:00</dc:date><admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.realmacsoftware.com/" />
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<sy:updateBase>2000-01-01T12:00+00:00</sy:updateBase>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2022 17:22:59 +0100</lastBuildDate><item><title>Covid effect on energy consumption and CO2 emissions</title><dc:subject>Blog</dc:subject><dc:date>2021-08-09T15:36:47+02:00</dc:date><link>http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/9af6bd21e43704c6bb5fa6716fde4d1d-2.html#unique-entry-id-2</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/9af6bd21e43704c6bb5fa6716fde4d1d-2.html#unique-entry-id-2</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[So, how did the covid pandemic affect the world's energy consumption and CO2 emissions? The plots below show the 2019-2020 percentage growth in primary energy consumption (top) and CO2 emissions (bottom) of countries in the <a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html">BP statistical review of world energy</a> database. The countries are coloured according to regions. Red is Africa, yellow is Asia Pacific, purple is CIS countries, blue is Europe, orange is Middle East, light green is North America, and dark green is Central and South America.<br /><br />Although covid contributed to a dramatic reduction of energy consumption and CO2 emissions, it is interesting to see that this reduction was not the same everywhere. Countries with population > 100 million had reductions of less than 15% (with the exception of Mexico). China had a 2% increase in energy consumption and 0.6% increase in CO2 emissions, while India and USA had significant reductions of both energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Hong Kong and Venezuela which experienced a tough 2020 show reductions of 25-30%. Norway (nor) is interesting because although CO2 emissions decreased about 6%, primary energy consumption increased about 8%. Perhaps Norway lowered its CO2 footprint by exporting less hydrocarbons, but it consumed more energy because people stayed and worked from home? <br /><br /><img class="imageStyle" alt="2019-2020PrEnConsGrowth" src="http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/2019-2020prenconsgrowth.png" width="680" height="400" /><br /><br /><img class="imageStyle" alt="2019-2020CO2Growth" src="http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/2019-2020co2growth.png" width="680" height="400" />]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>IEA net zero by 2050 report</title><dc:subject>Blog</dc:subject><dc:date>2021-05-31T14:22:06+02:00</dc:date><link>http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/8c0f44a43288fa122cbbb8c4915900c8-1.html#unique-entry-id-1</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/8c0f44a43288fa122cbbb8c4915900c8-1.html#unique-entry-id-1</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[A comparison of today's energy mix (top) and the IEA net zero by 2050 mix (bottom). I used <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050">the IEA report</a> and <a href="https://energy.glex.no/calculator">the Glex energy calculator</a> to make this figure. The red arrows show some challenges: 76 times CO2 sequestration, 8 times critical metals, and 3 times use of land area by 2050. Notice that the IEA 2050 scenario meets the demands of a slightly smaller population than today's at the current energy consumption per capita. Obviously, we expect a larger population in 2050 (though population growth rate is decreasing), but IEA is also including in their scenario behavioural changes that will lead to less energy consumption per capita. Let's hope this is the case!<br /><br /><br /> <img class="imageStyle" alt="2019vsIEANetZero2050" src="http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/2019vsieanetzero2050.jpg" width="668" height="765" />]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Applicants to geology and petroleum programs</title><dc:subject>Blog</dc:subject><dc:date>2016-05-16T12:35:32+02:00</dc:date><link>http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/0cf28266044e43f3e70af9e9704e0fac-0.html#unique-entry-id-0</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/0cf28266044e43f3e70af9e9704e0fac-0.html#unique-entry-id-0</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[The plots below show the number of first-option applicants versus the oil (Brent) price (USD) for undergraduate programs in Norway in geology (top) and petroleum (bottom). Notice that from 2020, it has been difficult to track applicants since most programs changed their name from "petroleum" to "energy", and some closed or merged with other programs. Oil and gas prices have skyrocketed, yet applicants to petroleum programs remain low.<br /><br /><img class="imageStyle" alt="geoPSEng" src="http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/geopseng.png" width="667" height="500" /><br /><br /><img class="imageStyle" alt="petPSEng" src="http://www.ux.uis.no/~nestor/blog_files/petpseng.png" width="667" height="500" />]]></content:encoded></item></channel>
</rss>