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
That 2013 headline resulted from the first effort to quantify emissions from the ‘carbon majors’ —fossilfuel companies and cement manufacturers whose businesses have contributed an outsized amount of heat-trapping gases to the atmosphere. Nearly two-thirds of industrial heat-trapping emissions can be traced to just 90 entities.
Prior to Glasgow, the NRDC had concluded that India was on track to meet its previous commitment to have 40% non-fossilfuel power generation by 2030. Mumbai is on a peninsula and faces severe risks from sealevel rise. Mumbai, with a population of 21 million, now has a roadmap for reaching net-zero emissions by 2050.
Now the same district court has gone further, again in favor of environmental groups but now against Royal Dutch Shell (“Shell”) , the world’s largest non-state-owned fossilfuel company. In fact, Shell has the most ambitious emissions abatement plan of all fossilfuel companies , for whatever that is worth.)
We’re witnessing an increase in costly damages thanks to fossil-fueled climate change , which has increased the intensity and frequency of some extreme events , and also thanks to more buildings and people in risky areas. inches during that same period (1981-2010). Families were rescued from rooftops and some “lost everything”.
We know that burning fossilfuels is the main cause of anthropogenic climate change, and that climate change is the source of adverse impacts on communities and even regional and national economies. by Justin Gundlach. These points are largely undisputed. Peter Frumhoff led off, presenting two key points.
C, we stand to lose ocean and coastal ecosystems we depend on to sealevel rise, warming temperatures, ocean acidification and other climate impacts. There was also no formal commitment to phaseouts of all fossilfuels, and even some countries supporting phaseouts are planning to expand fossilfuel production.
According to the report , average net annual human-caused GHG emissions were at their highest levels in human history between 2010 and 2019, with urban areas responsible for an increasing proportion of the emissions. The rate of emissions growth year on year slowed between 2010-2019 in comparison to the previous decade.
Fossilfuels alone – coal, oil and gas – account for over 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions. degrees, but data suggests emissions have instead increased instead by 16% since 2010. Anything short of that is rich countries exploiting the situation even further.
Titled The FossilFuels Behind Forest Fires , it provides a concise overview of the peer-reviewed study and makes policy recommendations for the Biden administration and Congress. CP: Major fossilfuel companies and their trade groups knew that burning fossilfuels would dramatically reshape our climate since at least the 1960s.
Lest one thinks this disconnect is a failure of the global climate architecture, the failure lies much closer to home—in the domestic politics in the US and many other countries that continue to favor the interests of the rich and powerful , and fossilfuel companies, at the expense of the health and safety of everyone else and the planet.
uncertain costs and losses resulting from damage to property or assets, such as a mortgage portfolio, caused by weather events, sea-level rise, increasing temperatures, etc.) This should include both (a) physical risks (i.e., and (b) transition risks (i.e.,
Scientists estimate that emissions must be reduced by 45% by 2030, compared with 2010levels, and from there to net zero emissions by 2050, if the world is to have a good chance of remaining within the 1.5C Fossilfuel use must also end. Since the industrial revolution, the modern world has run on fossilfuels.
There is, in fact, substantial scientific evidence that there’s a strong link between global warming and heat waves and coastal flooding from sea-level rise,” I said. Maybe if we took the subsidy off and it was challenged and had to perform, people would take it to a new level.” His reply ?
If all of Greenlands ice melted, sealevel would rise about 24 feet. Engineers assert that fossilfuel pipelines can be thoroughly cleaned and made available for shipping freshwater to almost any location in America. And melting is fast increasing. If all this sounds preposterous, its not.
The project will also contribute to “ carbon lock-in ” – the process by which expanding oil and gas infrastructure causes continued dependence on fossilfuels. Less sea ice also means that bears must swim longer distances, which poses a drowning risk to young cubs. See, e.g., IPCC AR6 WGI Ch.3 3 ; Laidre et al.
Energy choices are key to climate resilience—but there’s resistance within state government Science tells us the extent and degree of future flooding depends on how fast we can reduce heat trapping emissions from the burning of fossilfuels. It cannot be a plan that reflects the opinions and interests of the powerful.
In 2022, Texas, along with several other states and industry groups representing fuel manufacturers (together, Petitioners), challenged EPA’s new emissions standards in court. These standards required each automobile manufacturer to reduce the average emissions from its vehicle fleet by approximately 5% per year between 2012 and 2025.
Casey, Colleagues: Introduce Bill To Empower FossilFuel Workers To Train, Find Jobs In Changing Energy Industry [PaEN] -- Patch.com: Chester County Commissioners Adopt New Climate Action Plan -- ReadingE: Muhlenberg Twp. Wolf, AG Shapiro To Support A Total Ban On Road Dumping Of Oil & Gas Drilling Wastewater; 240.4
Requirements for insurers to disclose their climate-related risks and fossilfuel investments (and a first-of-its-kind climate scenario analysis of insurer portfolios).
Attorneys general (AGs) in the five states most vulnerable to climate change, however, are doing the exact opposite: Instead of defending their constituents, they are defending the fossilfuel industry. Moody also jumped in head-first to protect the fossilfuel industry.
A climate change-related argument rejected by the trial court—that sealevel rise projections in the Plan were too high and not based on best available science—did not appear to have been before the appellate court. The fossilfuel companies asked the court to grant only a 30-day extension.
The plaintiffs alleged that Peabody (and a number of other fossilfuel companies) caused greenhouse gas emissions that resulted in sealevel rise and damage to their property. Peabody, a coal company, filed for bankruptcy in April 2016 and emerged from bankruptcy under a plan that became effective on April 3, 2017.
Ninth Circuit Heard Oral Argument in California Local Government Cases; FossilFuel Companies Said Juliana Decision Supported Their Position. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on February 5, 2020 in the appeals in California local governments’ climate change cases against fossilfuel companies.
Most big environmental groups United States who take money directly from people that made their money in fossilfuels have budgets around 100 million a year, my budget is less than a million. Michael: Well, I mean, what — do you think we're helpless to sealevel rise? And they have a huge sea wall that floats up.
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