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
Production and combustion of fossilfuels imposes enormous costs on society, which the industry doesn’t pay for. One option, a tax on carbon dioxide emissions, gets the most attention but seems politically impossible. A more promising alternative might be a clean-up tax on the fossilfuel industry.
The destruction caused by climate change is directly linked to human activity, primarily burning fossilfuels. There are multiple realistic, tangible solutions that would rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, yet policy addressing anthropogenic climate change remains slow and insufficient.
The majority 6–3 decision sharply curtails the EPA’s authority to set standards based on a broad range of flexible options to cut carbonemissions from the power sector—options such as replacing polluting fossilfuels with cheap and widely available wind and solar power coupled with battery storage.
Climate change wasn’t a central issue in the campaign, but resistance to climate action no longer provided a political advantage. Polling showed broad public support for more aggressive cuts in carbonemissions. Labor’s climate policy calls for a 43% reduction in carbonemissions by 2030.
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 carbonemissions 30 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels and 80 percent by 2050.
New California legislation will require corporations to disclose their carbonemissions. Cheaper renewable energy attracts private investment and makes limits on fossilfuels more feasible. The resulting economic growth also helps create a stronger political base for aggressive expansion of clean energy.
Burning fossilfuels, cutting down forests, raising livestock, making cement, and using synthetic fertilizers are among the actions that have increased the amount of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere to the point that the planet’s basic functions are coming undone. The same factors apply to adaptation, especially to water.
Some events last week sent a strong signal that the tide is turning against fossilfuels. To paraphrase Churchill, this may not be beginning of the end for fossilfuels, but at least it is the end of the beginning of the campaign against them. Each of the events standing alone would have been noteworthy.
Fossilfuels are the root cause of climate change, of long-standing environmental injustices, and are also frequently connected to geopolitical strife and violent conflicts. Other countries are dependent upon these fossilfuels, they don’t make themselves free of them. This is a fossilfuel war.
A simple statement that masks just how complicated the issues are: mixing politics, economics, livelihoods, fisheries and endangered species in the ocean body that is the Gulf of Maine. GOM communities, not fossilfuel interests, should determine policies that affect GOM people. They should be held accountable for their actions.”
Through the Clean Air Act , and as affirmed—and reaffirmed—through multiple legal sagas, EPA is statutorily obligated to address carbon pollution from fossilfuel-fired power plants. Indeed, EPA still retains the ability to set strong standards that curtail carbon pollution at the scale, speed, and rigor required.
However, the bill’s definition of what constitutes clean energy includes nuclear power (which doesn’t emit carbon but isn’t “clean”) and fossil gas power plants that capture and store at least 90 percent of their carbonemissions. What Still Needs to be Done?
CO 2 emissions remain mostly level through 2050—nowhere close to meeting US climate goals. Carbonemissions remain high. Here are five key takeaways from this year’s AEO, focused primarily on the electricity sector: 1. Source: US Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2022 (AEO2022).
Emissions trading systems are often launched with relatively lenient design features, typically justified as giving the system a chance to “learn-by-doing” and to gain political buy-in for approval of a program. Yet it can be difficult to make emission trading systems more environmentally ambitious after program launch.
All political parties can and should adopt strong policies to reduce our province’s greenhouse gas emissions, while building a robust green energy sector that supports Albertans and their communities.
As political parties prepare their election platforms and publish their climate priorities, it can be difficult to determine which parties are releasing strong climate plans that put us on a pathway to zero emissions – and what policies are actually dangerous distractions from real solutions.
But with the recent influx of government incentives for hydrogen production, new and improving production and storage technologies, and greater political will than ever before, H 2 ’s reputation is gaining favor. Because of this, a 30% hydrogen mix by volume delivers only a 10% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.
Exxon , the cities and towns allege that the fossilfuel companies were liable because they knowingly produced and marketed products that have caused climate change harms, while concealing and misrepresenting the associated dangers. have filed more than twenty cases seeking damages from fossilfuel companies for climate harms.
These firms recognized that they could not assume the risks of exacerbating climate damage from continued burning of fossilfuels. Thus the progress so far with large-scale solar in reducing carbonemissions is offset by the present levels of energy use by data centers. We just need to bring the political will.
According to official analysis from CARB and EPA, soybean oil-based diesel has lower lifecycle carbonemissions than fossil diesel, but this finding is quite uncertain. A non-binding RFS is not a stable long-term situation, for both economic and political reasons.
WEDNESDAY 9:30: House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee meets to consider House Bill 1215 (Vitali-D- Delaware) the state Act 108 tax credit for hydrogen production would be limited to hydrogen produced for hard-to-electrify sectors, expanded to include a larger incentive to companies using hydrogen produced from renewable energy sources (..)
Keeping with the topic of climate change, one part of the inequality is evident and it’s the discussion about carbon debt. There’s one estimate that says that 80% of the carbonemissions between 1850 and 2011 (more than one and a half centuries) were caused by rich countries who made up 14% of the global population.
It’s hard to argue with ‘human freedom’ as a worthy goal, but one of the most successful routes to that has been the way that fossilfuels have provided an escape from nature. “In We see the huge benefits of urbanism, industrial chemistry, growing political freedoms, and global trade.
As climate change has become a more pervasive and urgent political issue, governments around the world have started to look to soil as a potential part of the solution. As someone who thinks a lot about soil carbon, the issue I see as rather under-discussed is what carbon economists call, “leakage.”
And this change comes in part from increasing diffusion of fossilfuels. Another quote from JC; "But reducing carbon is thus, logically, just one item on the list of answers to "What can we do to raise GDP in 2100?," John is optimistic about our future; "The share of the world population in extreme poverty is plummeting.
The alarm bells are deafening,” he warned, “and the evidence is irrefutable: greenhouse-gas emissions from fossil-fuel burning and deforestation are choking our planet and putting billions of people at immediate risk.”. Let’s hope our political leaders in Glasgow can make that a reality.”. Global goals.
Therefore…. Independence Day fireworks, which nationally introduce 42 percent more pollutants into the air than are found on a normal day. Independence Day fireworks, which nationally introduce 42 percent more pollutants into the air than are found on a normal day. For the times they are [must be] a-changin’ ” before it’s too late.
These two deals have the potential to improve conditions on Earth much more than anything in the rest of the NYT combined, but I had to dig to find it, because of other political events. Will countries agree to make serious new cuts in their carbonemissions from fossilfuel burning? Hopefully not.
It also churns out around 1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide—equal to Germany’s emissions—and other toxic pollutants into the atmosphere every year. If nothing is done to clean up shipping, its carbonemissions are projected to jump by almost 130% by 2050.
The demand statement focuses on upholding Indigenous rights and respecting Indigenous knowledge, bold and ambitious climate action (including phasing out fossilfuels and guaranteeing a just transition to a sustainable clean energy economy), protecting and restoring nature and establishing environmental rights in Canada.
In turn, this means that greater emission cuts are economically feasible and pass cost-benefit analysis. For instance, since IRA increases the tax credit for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), EPA has a stronger argument for requiring fossilfuel plants to use CCS. Federal subsidies impact state policies.
to reducing their carbonemissions. which will implement national standards to govern carbon pollution from power plants. Furthermore, the specific effects of carbonemissions on global climate change are also. would suggest increasing the price of carbon. jointly committed. Clean Power Plan.
Quickly and sharply tapering down the use of fossilfuels, which are the main driver of human-caused climate change, is just as crucial if we are to have any chance of keeping climate extremes from spiraling further out of control. They are literally putting their political interests and profits over our collective well-being.
During the past 30 years of extensive political debate around global climate change, participants have largely ignored the role that curbing population growth could play in dealing with it. Figure SPM.3 3 from IPCC, Fifth Assessment Report, Mitigation Report, Summary for Policymakers (2014).
The environmental impacts of coal power – from local air and water pollution to carbonemissions – have made the project controversial. “We Pakistan’s energy sector is dominated by fossilfuels. He also stated that the country would increase support for low-carbon energy in developing countries.
Here’s the bottom line: Because of decades of politically motivated inaction from policymakers, especially in richer countries, and the greed of fossilfuel companies bent on extracting every last bit of profit, scientific projections show that we are currently on a trajectory to exceed 1.5˚C Even at about 1.1˚C
Few people realize that Germany has actually increased its fossilfuel combustion capacity over the 20 years of its landmark renewable energy program from 2001 to the present. We can see the same impact of variable energies in Germany. We need to respect our grid authorities. link] [19] Michael Greenstone et al.,
The release of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by the burning of fossilfuels is, conceiveably, the most important environmental issue in the world today. — "Costs and benefits of carbon dioxide," Nature , May 3, 1979. And along with the economic costs will come social and political side effects.
Texas and a number of other states have passed laws banning what they call “boycotts of fossilfuel companies.” ” More precisely, they ban state investment or contracting with firms that “boycott” fossilfuel companies. Is this as opposed to a political purpose on the part of the managers? “.
Image Image Products Oil / gas exploration and production, natural gas and LNG trading and transportation, oil refining, chemicals, solar and biomass development Protesting Total's role in Burma - Photo Credit TotalOutNow Summary Total is a fossilfuel exploration company. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
Image Image Products Oil / gas exploration and production, natural gas and LNG trading and transportation, oil refining, chemicals, solar and biomass development Protesting Total's role in Burma - Photo Credit TotalOutNow Summary Total is a fossilfuel exploration company. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
Image Image Products Oil / gas exploration and production, natural gas and LNG trading and transportation, oil refining, chemicals, solar and biomass development Protesting Total's role in Burma - Photo Credit TotalOutNow Summary Total is a fossilfuel exploration company. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
Image Image Products Oil / gas exploration and production, natural gas and LNG trading and transportation, oil refining, chemicals, solar and biomass development Protesting Total's role in Burma - Photo Credit TotalOutNow Summary Total is a fossilfuel exploration company. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
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