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
They’re called Scope 3 emissions, and they are key to understanding the big picture of a company’s impact on the environment. First, let me explain the three “scopes” of carbonemissions. Scope 1 emissions come from power plants, oil rigs and other sources directly owned or controlled by a company.
Previous IPCC reports have concluded that human activities such as burning fossilfuels are the primary cause of climate change: about 70 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions come from burning fossilfuels for electricity, transportation, and industry.
By comparing these two data sets, scientists can determine the probability that human activities are responsible for observed changes in temperature, precipitation patterns, sealevel rise, and other climate change indicators. Climate source attribution studies can inform strategies to reduce carbonemissions.
GOM communities, not fossilfuel interests, should determine policies that affect GOM people. He was on to something And the lobsterman was correct: we can blame carbonemissions for ocean acidification and warming in the Gulf of Maine. Sealevels are rising.
That’s understandable in terms of India’s current carbonemissions, which are now only a quarter of China’s. But given the growth of the economy, carbonemissions were projected to continuing growing steadily through 2030. Mumbai is on a peninsula and faces severe risks from sealevel rise.
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.
But the science is clear : human-caused global warming is definitely and significantly increasing the odds of severe and once-rare extreme events , alongside driving slow-onset disasters—like sealevel rise and the loss of major ice sheets and glaciers —and raising the risk of major tipping points. It’s an emergency !’ (You
Flooding/SeaLevel Rise/Storm Surge: Water can physically damage and corrode infrastructure, particularly distribution poles and substations. Modernizing our power grid by shifting from fossilfuels to renewables makes sense for many reasons. What is next? Increasing resilience is another important (and often related!)
There, we can tackle shipping emissions, which are projected to generate 18% of all global emissions by 2050. We can decrease production of virgin plastic that comes from fossilfuels and pollutes our ocean as well. We need bold plans and execution at all levels of government to combat climate change. In the U.S.,
If there is one thing the fossilfuel industry, the government, and climate change activists might agree on it is this: in the end it all comes down to money. Oil, gas and coal companies, and their investors, are terrified of leaving fossilfuels in the ground. Without fossilfuels, most modern industry would not exist.
Carbon pollution from fossilfuel use and land development have heated the atmosphere and ocean, leading to sealevel rise, stronger storms, fisheries’ moving poleward, and widespread loss of sea ice and glaciers. We’ve heard so much about the effects of climate change on our ocean.
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. The limits of adaptation.
percent of total emissions. They found that 48 percent of the increase in the region’s fire-friendly conditions since 1901—specifically drier land and vegetation—can be traced to the 88 companies’ carbonemissions. Ekwurzel was joined by Heede, then-UCS climate scientist Peter Frumhoff , and four other scientists.
Acidification : Reducing the pH rating of a substance making it more acidic in nature, for example, increased carbonemissions lead to the oceans absorbing more of it, increasing acidification and damaging ecology such as coral bleaching. We are already seeing the depletion of the ice caps and rising sealevels.
JDB: State and municipal governments need to do their part to curb carbonemissions, but they also need to make a commitment to help their residents adapt to hotter conditions, which would persist for a long time even if we were able to stop burning fossilfuels today. Some cities and counties are doing that.
One party challenging the Master Program—Citizen’s Alliance for Property Rights Jefferson County (CAPR)—had argued that a provision in the Master Program goals section addressing climate change and sea-level rise was unconstitutionally vague.
And even a slight rise in sealevel makes the threat of a storm surge that more terrifying. Regrettably, in the absence of a threat that is immediate and palpable, like a hurricane, the concept in practice has often been an oxymoron, with states litigating to undermine or reject national programs to reduce carbonemissions.
A polluting fossil-fueled energy agenda Unsurprisingly, Project 2025 also pushes for more fossilfuels, with statements like ‘ Affirm an “all of the above” energy policy…’ and ‘Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).’
Over the last few years I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossilfuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossilfuel interests.
Individuals and families are increasingly empowered to make environmentally smart decisions to cut emissions and reduce our reliance on fossilfuels. Leaders from communities across Pennsylvania directly impacted by fossilfuel extraction and climate change also urged the legislature to act. Joining Reps.
Here, Ill describe the data currently available to quantify these emissions, what they tell us about the drivers of climate change, and how we can achieve accountability for its harms moving forward. Who are the Carbon Majors? The Carbon Majors are the largest fossilfuel producers and cement manufacturers, and a group to which 67.5%
Kasprak falsely claims that “Allowing developing nations access to some form of fossilfuel-based energy as a bridge, at least in the scientific community, is not as controversial as Shellenberger suggests.” Kasprak falsely suggests I am unconcerned about rising carbonemissions and climate change. The IPCC agrees.
Million In Solar For All Funding From Self-Imposed Freeze [PaEN] -- The Allegheny Front/WPSU: Solar Power Supporters In PA Say Outlook Is Positive, Even As Policies Could Change Under President -- City Of Reading Begins Energy Efficiency, Solar Energy Project To Save $13.3
Without major reductions in the carbonemissionsfueling global warming, the impacts on the parks would be endless. Even under a scenario of drastic emissions reductions, Gonzalez’s 2018 study found that more than half of national park area would exceed the 3.6-degree
In my retelling of the show, I quickly pointed out that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had by then concluded that “most” of the increase in average global temperatures since 1950 was “very likely” due to the increase in human-made carbonemissions. His reply ? ExxonMobil is still funding those folks, big time.”
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. Check Out C-SAW -- Trout Unlimited, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers New R.I.S.E
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. Here’s a roundup of what these AGs have been doing to make a bad situation worse.
The plaintiffs alleged among other things that the defendants the two projects’ cumulative impacts on carbonemissions. 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 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. Challenge to Settlement in Utility Rate-Setting Case in New Mexico Cited Failure to Quantify Coal Plant’s CarbonEmission Risks.
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.
The DEP estimates that by joining RGGI in 2022, Pennsylvania would have been able to cut carbonemissions by at least 25.5% And considering Pennsylvania accounts for nearly 1% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, that reduction could have global significance. You cannot have cleaner green energy projects without fossilfuel.
Circuit’s January opinion vacating EPA’s repeal and replacement of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan regulations for controlling carbonemissions from existing power plants. Maryland County Filed Climate Change Lawsuit Against FossilFuel Companies and Trade Group. Supreme Court seeking review of the D.C.
That would still allow some important actions that would help reduce carbonemissions. 43 USC 1341) If climate change is a national emergency caused by fossilfuels, then suspension seems like a logical response. Conceivably, these powers could be deployed against companies or countries trafficking in fossilfuels.
The SCC is a metric that seeks to capture all of the costs that emitting a ton of carbon dioxide (or equivalent amounts of other greenhouse gases such as methane) imposes on society by contributing to climate change over the hundreds of years it remains in the atmosphere. The SCC then monetizes those impacts over time.
The news: The White House Council on Environmental Quality proposed reversing Trump administration changes to the National Environmental Policy Act regulation, which carries implications for environmental reviews on everything from highway projects and fossilfuel lease sales to pipelines and electric transmission lines.
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