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
To adjust the focus of this picture a little closer, just our passenger cars and light trucks contribute to a whopping 58 percent of total transportation emissions, placing our car-centric society in the fossilfuel spotlight. Petroleum has accounted for more than 90 percent of transportation energy in the last 50 years.
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.
On November 8, the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, is slated to consider approving amendments to California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard is one of California’s most innovative policy successes. Over its short lifetime, the program has already transformed many segments of the fuels market.
Through political shifts and economic tides, the organization has stayed the course. Protecting our blue planet isn’t just a matter of politics; it is our duty—to ourselves, to future generations and to the planet we call home. No matter who is in power, we will continue this work with unrelenting determination.
This wasn’t the first of these summits – but it was the first one that focused on the concrete actions governments are taking to phase out fossilfuels. We heard world leader after world leader say what has been only an elephant in the room until now – that we must phase out fossilfuels. It’s not complicated.
That means we’ll need to quickly add additional clean energy policies and policies to phase out fossilfuels just to meet our 2030 goals. c) of the Paris Agreement calls for “ Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.” Article 2.1(c)
Earlier this month at COP28 countries committed to transitioning off of fossilfuels and massively scaling up renewable energy instead. So you’re excused if, like me, you’re baffled by Minister Freeland’s first move in the wake of COP28: a giant new fossilfuel subsidy, via the new Canada Growth Fund.
The article surveys a range of criticisms of the use of carbon taxes as a tool to address greenhouse gas emissions, and criticisms of the focus of many economists on carbon taxes as the primary tool to address climate change. I think these political constraints are a key reason economists focused so long – too long – on carbon pricing.
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? “.
Working Group 3: Mitigation of Climate Change Evaluates pathways for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, sustainable development strategies, and the role of finance, technology, and policy in achieving net-zero emissions. Fossilfuels, which are central to mitigation discussions but were largely avoided, reflecting ongoing political tensions.
CARB’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) seeks to incentivize the production and sale of alternative, lower emissions transportation fuels in order to displace conventional fossilfuels. To identify which fuels should be promoted, CARB calculates the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels.
Working Group 3: Mitigation of Climate Change Evaluates pathways for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, sustainable development strategies, and the role of finance, technology, and policy in achieving net-zero emissions. Fossilfuels, which are central to mitigation discussions but were largely avoided, reflecting ongoing political tensions.
For the past two decades, explicit state policy has been to transition as quickly as possible from reliance on fossilfuels to renewable energy sources–motivated primarily by climate change concerns and the critical need to reduce the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.
In the study, we found that political power dynamics shape international negotiations, that the Paris Agreement temperature goal doesn’t fully account for the dangers of sea level rise, and that climate justice requires fully considering diverse views and experiences of climate change.
The bench trial took place last month in the state capitol, Helena, where 16 youth plaintiffs ages 5 to 22 made the case that Montana’s unwavering promotion of fossilfuels violates the state constitution’s guarantee to a “clean and healthful environment.” The admission says a lot about political will.
There is still much we can do to bend that emissions curve sharply within this decade—but only if world leaders, especially leaders of richer countries and major emitting nations, take responsibility to act together quickly and fossilfuel companies are held accountable for their decades of obstruction and deception.
They called expert witnesses to calculate the total greenhouse gas emissions caused by activity in Montana, a major gas and coal producing state, and connected that to tangible impacts on ecosystems and humans in the state. ” Prioritizing fossilfuels over renewable energy in 2023 for insubstantial reasons does not pass strict scrutiny.
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. We’re Making Them Worse.
They include, but are not limited to, altering rainfall and monsoon patterns, damaging the ozone layer, increasing global conflicts, and – most unacceptable of all – giving political cover for fossilfuel industries to continue polluting rather than cut greenhouse gas emissions. If we overshoot the 1.5
As of 2021, 30 emissions trading systems were in force globally, covering 16 – 17 % of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 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.
FossilFuel Companies are to Blame It’s clear that global warming is bringing hotter and drier weather. Greenhouse gas emissions are causing the climate crisis. And over 75 per cent of greenhouse gas pollution comes from producing and burning fossilfuels. What’s missing is political leadership.
Management approved her shift in emphasis, hoping that she would prove that aerosols in the atmosphere (including those from auto exhaust) would completely offset the greenhouse gas effect. In the early 1960s, he wrote again about fossilfuels as causes of global warming. He talked her into studying climate change.
A friend asked me if a discussion paper published on Statistics Norway’s website, ‘ To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions? ’, was purposely timed for the next climate summit ( COP28 ). All this can be explained by physical processes and an enhanced greenhouse effect.
By Bob Berwyn Amidst a summer of fires, floods and heat waves, scientists on Monday delivered yet another reminder that burning more fossilfuels in the decades ahead will rapidly intensify the impacts of global warming.
It’s also an essential consideration as countries plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with the Paris agreement. Unless fossilfuel use declines steeply and swiftly, it will be necessary to pursue options such as removing carbon from the air or growing crops as a fuel stock. There are other hurdles as well.
The high-minded language of the constitution takes precedence over a legislative effort to block state officials from considering the impact of new fossilfuel projects on global warming. It also puts the inter-generational equity issue squarely on the political agenda.
As you may recall, the Commission’s informal (but serious) job description was to speak of elephants in the room and unclothed emperors: to say things that are true and important about climate risks and responses that other, more political constrained bodies cannot. Wait a second, you might say, what’s so radical about that?
State of Montana, a Montana trial court ruled that the state Constitution’s guarantee of a healthy and clean environment prevails over Montana’s longstanding fossil-fuel-based state energy system. The first legal challenge mounted by Our Children’s Trust was Juliana v. United States.
CCS is an example of how oil and gas companies are pretending to care about the climate crisis, and are pushing dangerous distractions that they claim can help address greenhouse gas emissions – while allowing them to keep extracting and burning dirty fossilfuels. Why push these false solutions? Because they don’t care.
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.
In August, the oil and gas industry had 64 lobby meetings with the federal government, with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) being the most active fossilfuel lobbyist once again. CAPP is the largest oil and gas industry association and lobby group in Canada. Will you join us?
By Dave Jenkins, Conservatives For Responsible Stewardshi p The following goest essay first appeared in the Erie Times on March 27, 2023 -- We are at an inflection point on energy: 2022 was the first year when global investment in carbon-free sources of energy matched investment in fossilfuels. Energy is energy.
For decades the fossilfuel lobby has masterfully weakened, derailed, and outright blocked government climate policy. The fossilfuel lobby meddles with Canadian politics and inserts itself into international climate change politics and diplomacy. CAPP is trying to buy and build the social license (ie.
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. Instead, it has been to stem and confuse the flow of information about climate change to the public and political leaders.
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.
However, it’s a disappointment to the initiative’s proponents and to a larger group of environmental advocates who seek to promote California’s quick transition from reliance on heavily-polluting and climate-damaging fossilfuels to renewable energy resources.
We must reduce greenhouse gas emissions now, as Dr. Sarah Cooley , Ocean Conservancy’s director of climate science, emphasized when addressing a COP27 session. There was also no formal commitment to phaseouts of all fossilfuels, and even some countries supporting phaseouts are planning to expand fossilfuel production.
This blog is co-authored with Alienor Rougeot, Climate and Energy Program Manager Two prominent figures of Canada’s oil and gas industry were recently on Global TV’s politics show, The West Block with Mercedes Stephenson, where they spread a bunch of misinformation and half truths.
If the effects of burning fossilfuels have been very well documented on both global (climate change) and local (air pollution and its 8 million deaths annually) scales, up until now healthcare professionals and organizations had not been represented at the United Nations’ annual climate conference.
United States case, plaintiffs sought an order directing the federal government to slash the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. The plaintiffs had asked the court to issue a “remedial plan” that would require Montana to take many steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fossilfuel production in the state.
Last week world leaders gathered in New York for the UN Climate Ambition Summit where countries shared concrete action they’ve taken to phase out fossilfuels. There, the conversation was grounded in science, with leaders such as California’s Governor Newsom saying “The climate crisis is a fossilfuel crisis.
With most energy investments still in fossilfuels, significant reform is needed to modernise the sector and meet Kazakhstan’s pledge to become net-zero by 2060. Social unrest related to fossilfuels is not a new phenomenon in Kazakhstan. Chinese investments fuel Kazakhstan’s energy economy. By Kate Watters.
There’s a direct line of culpability between fossilfuel corporations and climate change – it’s why so many oil and gas CEOs have topped our list of Climate Villains. But they aren’t the only powerful players who shoulder responsibility for keeping us hooked on fossilfuels, the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.
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. of annual emissions from fossilfuels.
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