BAKKEN OIL BUSINESS JOURNAL

BakkenJournal_Aug-Sept16

The BAKKEN OIL BUSINESS JOURNAL is a high-gloss, full-color magazine with a targeted distribution that gets our Advertisers in front of the RIGHT EYES in this industry. Direct mailed to Companies in the Bakken with bonus distribution at Energy Shows.

Issue link: http://bakkenjournal.uberflip.com/i/709374

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 10 of 35

Read online @ B A K K E N O I L B I Z . C O M / d i g i t a l - j o u r n a l 11 ➤ continued, pg 12 Contact: Steven M. Sottung, LEED ® AP Vice President, Director of Business Development STV Energy Services, Inc. (610) 385-8262 / steven.sottung@stvinc.com www.stvinc.com STV Energy Services, Inc. provides engineering, design, procurement, project management and construction management services to the natural gas, liquid petroleum, and pipeline transportation markets for projects from concept to completion. Strategically located in Denver and Bismarck, we deliver innovative solutions to meet our clients' needs. • Oil, gas and water processing and treatment facilities • Pipelines and gathering systems • Construction management • Commissioning/start-up • Storage and loading facilities • Control system programming & integration • Permitting – construction, air, natural resources • UL 508A-listed electrical and control panel fabrication shop • Metering/measurement services Efficiency Through Engineering & Design At that point, the journalists and self- appointed analysts became conspiracy theorists. The Exxon Truthers, got a big boost from what should have been an unlikely source: the once venerable journalistic venue of Scientific American. The previously formidable magazine, long known for publishing scholarly articles that revealed the seemingly endless brilliance of American scientists, the kind of brilliance that put Neil Armstrong on the moon, had shifted gears. It downshifted into a different stratum of journalism. To boost its popularity, it became the science-oriented version of National Geographic mixed with a dash of the National Enquirer. In this vein, the October 2015 issue carried a story that recounted the purported revelations brought forth by an eight- month investigation of Exxon conducted by another journal, InsideClimate News. The climate journal interviewed former Exxon employees and studied hundreds of pages of internal Exxon documents. Its investigation led to a 1977 paper written by James Black, identified as the Science Advisor to Exxon's Product Research Division. To the journalists, it was the smoking gun. Their idea of a signed confession that a prosecutor would love. What was stated? Here's what Scientific American and InsideClimate News claimed James Black had writtern. "In the first place, there is general scientific agreement that the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels." That's what the journalists claimed Black told the senior management of Exxon. Black did make that point. But he had more to say. In fact, Black wrote this: "First, current scientific opinion overwhelmingly favors attributing atmospheric carbon dioxide increase to fossil fuel combustion. However, most scientists feel that more research is needed to support an unqualified conclusion. Finally, some scientists, particularly the biologists, claim that part or all of the CO2 increase arises from the destruction of forests and other land biota." Clearly the journalists are guilty of the sin of omission. Scientific American included the following: "A year later he warned Exxon that doubling CO2 gases in the atmosphere would increase average global temperatures by two or three degrees—a number that is consistent with the scientific consensus today." Not quite. Black wrote: "Mathematical models for predicting the climatic effect of a CO2 increase have not progressed to the point at which all the feedback interactions which can be important to the outcome can be included. What is considered the best presently available climate model for treating the Greenhouse Effect predicts that a doubling of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere would produce a mean temperature increase of about 2°C to 3°C over most of the earth." Again, more omissions. Black also wrote: "Models which predict the climatic effects of a CO2 increase are in a primitive stage of development.

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of BAKKEN OIL BUSINESS JOURNAL - BakkenJournal_Aug-Sept16