This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The fossilfuel industry has long been the main driver of climate change, but Big Oil’s CEOs and profiteers would like you to believe that it is a part of the solution. One of the people peddling this idea is the man behind Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) – Murray Edwards, the FossilFuel Fanatic.
This could be met from a variety of sources—including pollution fees on fossilfuel companies, the elimination of fossilfuel subsidies, and wealth taxes on the richest people. Despite important gains in renewable energy, there is still more progress needed and fossilfuels continue to expand at odds with this agreement.
A target of 45 to 50 per cent reductions from 2005 levels by 2035 represents no meaningful increase in ambition from Canadas current 2030 target. These will only keep increasing unless Canada seriously commits to replacing fossilfuels with renewable energy. Targets matter. Canadians are calling for governments to do just that.
Since the summer of 2021, five Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed bills banning their state governments from doing business with financial institutions that they allege have divested from fossilfuel companies as a result of ESG investment policies. Another six statehouses are considering similar bills.
First and foremost, despite some fossilfuel interests swinging for the fossilfuel-favored fences, the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. What the Supreme Court decided in West Virginia v. What this decision means for the climate. That’s for two reasons.
Minnesotans are facing concurrent crises of climate change, high energy prices and inflation, and the inequitable public health impacts of fossilfuel air pollution. Minnesota’s current goal is to reduce statewide carbon emissions 30 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels and 80 percent by 2050.
It turns out that most of them are 50-60% reliant on fossilfuels, with a lot of the remainder coming from nuclear and hydro. This table shows how much power is generated from fossilfuels by the top ten utilities (ranked by market value). There was more fuel oil in use in some places than I expected. Carbon Goal.
3) ExxonMobil predicted the possibility of linking rising temperatures to fossilfuels ExxonMobil researchers accurately predicted when it would become possible to attribute changes in climate to human activity. Such a constraint would clearly place a limit on the amount of fossilfuels ExxonMobil could extract, produce and market.
But the scientific and technological advances that made these technologies competitive with fossilfuels are much more recent. So in a sense, these are old technologies — about the same age as the very first internal combustion engines. California wind will reach over 2.2 GW — over half of world wind capacity. Wind reaches 10% of U.S.
North Carolina today gets over half of its power from fossilfuels, about 25% from coal and 33% from natural gas. Nevertheless, the bill passed the state senate by a 42 to 7 vote and the state house by 90 to 20, before being signed by the Democratic governor. Solar is at 5% and wind is under 1l%.
The majority 6–3 decision sharply curtails the EPA’s authority to set standards based on a broad range of flexible options to cut carbon emissions from the power sector—options such as replacing polluting fossilfuels with cheap and widely available wind and solar power coupled with battery storage.
Despite adding six million more passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs to the roads over the last 10 years, California’s gasoline consumption has dropped over two billion gallons from its peak in 2005. Switching from fossilfuels like gasoline to increasingly clean electricity sources is vital for hitting climate and air pollution goals.
However, as we replace fossilfuels with clean electricity for heating and transportation to meet our climate goals, these peak demands will increasingly shift to the winter in many parts of the country. Decarbonizing the power sector also plays a critical long-term role by replacing fossilfuels in other sectors.
This is in total opposition to the US commitment under the Paris Agreement to achieve a 50-52 percent emissions reduction below 2005 levels by 2030, and net-zero by 2050. These projections show that without additional policies or incentives, the US is very much in danger of not meeting our climate goals.
Over the past year, precisely as our ability to identify the specific magnitude of action required to hit 2030 climate targets of 50-52 percent below 2005 levels has resolved into ever clearer view, the range of viable pathways for meeting those targets has consistently and considerably narrowed. No pivoting, just pivotal.
The sources of these increases are dominated by the burning of fossilfuels, landfills, mining, oil and gas operations, agriculture (especially livestock for methane), and industry. New greenhouse gas compounds such as halocarbons (CFCs, HFCs) did not exist in the pre-industrial atmosphere. Sherwood, M.J. Annan, K.C. Armour, P.M.
However, great opportunities for more new clean energy supplies to replace fossilfuel energy need supporting grid investments. While the majority of states have clean energy portfolio laws, there are fewer that have taken on the task of expanding the grid to enable the clean energy transition and retirement of fossilfuel powerplants.
I dug into this complexity with my energy colleagues in the context of their recent analysis of pathways for how the US can meet its goals to cut heat-trapping emissions 50%-52% below 2005 levels by 2030, and achieve net zero emissions no later than 2050. That analysis assumed the U.S.
By expanding renewable power, phasing out fossilfuels, electrifying as much of the economy as possible, and deploying other technologies, the U.S. The average Seattle resident drove just 6,150 miles a year in 2018, 17% fewer than in 2005. can achieve its climate goals by 2050—and a new report from UCS shows how.
Last November, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released an interdisciplinary study exploring the various pathways to meeting US goals to cut heat-trapping emissions economywide 50 to 52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions no later than 2050. The good news?
The new information shows that in 2021 GHG emissions were over eight per cent lower than in 2005. However, to reach the federal government’s 2030 climate targets – a 40-45 per cent reduction from 2005 levels – significantly more reductions are needed. This is thanks to fuel economy regulations and more electric vehicles on the roads.
Since then, the Conservative government has made a series of U-turns on its own net zero policies, attacked Labour’s green spending plans, and doubled down on its support for new fossilfuel projects, approving more than 100 new North Sea oil and gas licences. This comes as DeSmog and Democracy for Sale reveal that £6.8 percent (£1.8
Ebel, the CEO of Enbridge, to our list of infamous Climate Villains – powerful people with fossilfuel interests holding Canada back from effective climate action. The executives behind the fossilfuel industry often avoid public scrutiny, which is why we’re shining the spotlight on their activities.
Despite publicly claiming support for climate action, the oil and gas companies along with CAPP have consistently pushed for the expansion of the fossilfuel industry, in direct opposition to the International Energy Agency’s call for a rapid phase out of fossilfuels.
o C in 2100, relative to pre-industrial times, is still avoidable, but whether or not we are able to stay within these limits and avert catastrophic climate change depends on achieving our climate goals of emissions reductions at least 50 percent below 2005 levels in 2030, on the way to net-zero emissions in 2050.
In the 1960s climate change was not really a significant concern, not even amongst environmentalists – this was despite the fact that the Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius in 1896 was the first to claim that emissions from fossilfuels might eventually result in enhanced global warming. This has since changed many times.
Smaller, decentralized growth in electric heat pumps for buildings, and electric transportation replacing fossilfuels also require more access to electricity and a modern grid. Texas went first in 2005, with a law called SB 20.
Now the Prime Minister needs to chart the pathway to reduce the industry’s emissions – which account for 26% of Canada’s domestic emissions and increased by nearly 20 per cent from 2005 to 2019 – all of this while most other sectors have reduced theirs. The 2030 goal for the emissions cap needs to be a 60% reduction from 2005 levels.
Among those contradictions is the need to wean society off fossilfuels versus the desire for short-term economic gain. That draft called on “Parties to accelerate the phasing-out of coal and subsidies for fossilfuels.” It is significant, however, that “fossilfuels” and “coal” finally survived in a COP text.
Back in 2021 , the Government of Canada set a target for 2030: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 – 45 per cent below 2005 levels. We also know that reducing our dependence on fossilfuels is the best way to address the affordability crisis , which is also hurting us all. What are Canada’s climate targets?
Climate catastrophes are happening throughout our planet, and are only projected to get more intense and more frequent, unless we get a handle on addressing the leading cause of this crisis: FossilFuels. Emissions from the sector are rising; they have increased by nearly 20 per cent from 2005 levels. degrees Celsius.
Ontario does have a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. For example, the province could phase-out the use of gas plants (which utilize fossilfuels) to generate electricity for the province. Especially Ontario, which is the second most polluting province in Canada.
ExxonMobil knew about – and denied – the links between fossilfuels and climate change for decades and continues to gaslight people who challenge climate denial. NOVA was fined $550,000 more than two years after a 2005 spill of cancer-causing benzene from one of its plants near Sarnia, Ontario. Majority owner is U.S.-based
Pennsylvania won the International Envirothon competition in 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1994, 1997, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2009 and 2017 and frequently places in the top 10 finishers. Now more than 15,000 high school students across the state compete in 67 county Envirothons.
For the target to ensure oil and gas companies are doing their part, it must increase to at least align with Canada’s national emissions reduction target, which is a 40–45 per cent reduction from 2005 levels by 2030. The federal government must stand firm in the face of the unreasonable opposition it will inevitably receive.
Yeti Crab The hairy yeti crab ( Kiwa hirsuta ) is a crustacean that was just discovered in 2005. Take action with us today and help Ocean Conservancy in our work to fight for policies that strengthen climate resilience , prioritize clean energy and fight against fossilfuel dependence.
Fossilfuel-caused climate change was a driving force in these storms, and despite the nearly perfect forecasts, we are still not ready for the effects of climate change. Why are the oceans so warm and fueling this rapid intensification? Why are the oceans so warm and fueling this rapid intensification?
Were spotlighting Micheal Binnion, the Mastermind of Petro Populism, who has worked for decades to embed support for fossilfuels in the highest levels of the Canadian government. This series of satirical CVs for climate villains has helped reveal the names and faces of the corporate elite championing the fossilfuel industry.
Will your party commit to reducing the province’s greenhouse gas emissions by 60% from 2005 levels by 2030? Ontario New Democratic Party: Our commitment is to reduce emissions from 2005 levels by at least 50% by 2030 , and to achieve net-zero by 2050 or earlier. . Progressive Conservative (PC) Party of Ontario: .
I also wrote a post on this topic in 2005 ( Naturally trendy? ), and even if it is a blog, it could provide some clues for Dagsvik and Moen. Although there was no clarification on that at the time, we can say that the discussion is characterised by tunnel vision that does not take into account all our knowledge and how physics plays a role.
It’s the interaction of the California LCFS with federal policy, particularly the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), that has led to California’s renewable diesel boom. In its early years, between 2005 and 2010, the RFS helped launch the massive scaleup of corn ethanol that established 10 percent ethanol as the de facto standard for US gasoline.
In fact, the current target for oil and gas emissions doesn’t even stack up to Canada’s own national target, which is 40-45 per cent emissions reduction from 2005 levels by 2030. It is a scientific fact that greenhouse gas emissions from fossilfuels are causing climate change. No free rides for the industry!
ExxonMobil knew about — and denied — the links between fossilfuels and climate change for decades and gaslights people who challenge climate denial. NOVA was fined $550,000 more than two years after a 2005 spill of cancer-causing benzene from one of its plants near Sarnia, Ontario. Majority owner is U.S.-based
Since 2005, wind turbines have been producing renewable power for the grid and a reliable cash crop for the ranch. I strongly believe we have to wean ourselves off fossilfuels, and I felt that this was an excellent statement on how we might do that. Ferrell: The park was completed in 2005. It is industrial.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content