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
For more than 50 years, we have pioneered new policies and ushered in new technologies to clean our air and protect our climate. 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.
The ocean absorbs more than 90% of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gasses and generates 50% of the oxygen we breathe. Renewable energy technologies are rapidly advancing, becoming increasingly competitive and, in many cases, becoming cheaper in cost and more efficient than fossilfuels.
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. Delegates questioned when (or if) the IPCC should develop methodologies for technologies with unclear risks.
Because while this decision does still recognize EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, it simultaneously sharply curtails the agency’s ability to do so. First and foremost, despite some fossilfuel interests swinging for the fossilfuel-favored fences, the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v.
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 key word here is “ intensity :” Fossilfuel companies often focus on emissions intensity, meaning emissions per barrel of oil, rather than absolute emissions, which is a set number measured in metric tons. That means Exxon still plans to spend the vast majority of its funds on fossilfuel exploration and production.
For example, researchers at the Union of Concerned Scientists have directly linked fossilfuel producers’ Scope 1 and Scope 3 emissions to increases in ocean acidification , global temperature, sea level rise and North American wildfires. So how does the fossilfuel industry think it should measure emissions?
utilities have been slower to adopt the energy- and emissions-saving technologies than those in other parts of the world. Despite the economic advantages of these technologies and their potential environmental benefits, U.S. Despite the economic advantages of these technologies and their potential environmental benefits, U.S.
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. Delegates questioned when (or if) the IPCC should develop methodologies for technologies with unclear risks.
With a new federal budget in the works, Finance Canada is currently developing two new investment tax credits – one for clean technology and one for hydrogen. Hydrogen is all the rage because when it is burned, it doesn’t create any greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A new fossilfuel subsidy in 2023! The post What?
EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act (CAA) A. Investment and incentives for clean technologies under the Inflation Reduction Act. Rules relating to renewable and fossilfuel development on public lands and offshore. Litigation against carbon emitters and fossilfuel producers G.
In 2016 Monterey County voters passed Measure Z, a citizen initiative intended to bar the drilling of new oil and gas wells in the county and ban the use of fracking technology for existing wells in Monterey County. The oil and gas industry, led by Chevron U.S.A.,
methane released from fossilfuel systems) could entirely undermine the climate benefits of the hydrogen tax credit and, worse, drive vast amounts of public dollars to subsidize what are ultimately still heavily-polluting fossilfuel-based projects, now just greenwashed as “clean.” Baseline counterfactuals.
by Klaus Lackner, Arizona State University Two centuries of burning fossilfuels has put more carbon dioxide, a powerful greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere than nature can remove. As that CO2 builds up, it traps excess heat near Earth’s surface, causing global warming.
Utilities were famously set in their ways, using nineteenth century technologies to produce and deliver their products. Energy use accounts for the bulk of greenhouse gas emissions. The key to getting climate change under control is to rapidly decrease the user of fossilfuels. Technological changes.
But while greenhouse gas emissions may be reduced, a delivery fulfilled by a diesel-burning truck may lead to increases in emissions of smog-forming nitrogen oxides and lung-damaging particulate matter. While the latter part of this conclusion is obvious, the former part isn’t as much.
We’ve been hearing a lot lately about geoengineering – the various scientific theories and governance ideas that could eventually lead to technological interventions to help cool the planet. Have fossilfuel industries made any move to co-opt, or benefit from, geoengineering? If we overshoot the 1.5
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. That’s the question implicitly raised by this article in the New York Times from late August.
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.
Most prominently, because the approach is changing from rewarding specific technologies to rewarding anything that meets the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions threshold of “clean”—hence the “tech-neutral” label—exactly how the government goes about determining whether or not something is actually eligible will be enormously important.
Carbon capture has never worked as promised, the carbon is dangerous to transport, and the technology is extremely expensive, especially compared to the plummeting costs of renewable energy. This isn’t just a bad bet for the climate, it’s bad for Albertans.
What makes me most optimistic are the recent technological innovations and falling costs for renewable energy generation, battery storage and alternative fuel vehicles. Now, a framework of foreign diplomacy exists through which we can decide how to best utilize new technologies as they develop. –Tom Hanrahan, JD 2023.
I’ve written recently about why a Cap on Vegetable Oil-Based Fuels Will Stabilize and Strengthen California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard , which addresses the bio-based diesel credits. This approach holds fuel producers accountable for reducing fossilfuel use and other global warming pollution in their supply chains.
With an outsized credit for the lowest-carbon tier, the incentive’s aim is clear: Drive deployment of hydrogen production technologies that will be needed by, and aligned with , the nation’s overall clean energy transition. But instead of meeting that straightforward aim, a series of implementation loopholes threaten to fully undermine it.
An equitable and people-centered transition of this nature will require changes that go beyond the necessary technological shifts and must focus on overcoming significant social, institutional, and behavioral barriers. In other words, technological solutions are necessary but not sufficient. How do we make this transformation happen?
As we electrify everything, from our cars to our home heating systems, we need electricity to come from sources that dont emit greenhouse gases. Yet, reaching net zero also means phasing out polluting fossilfuel energy, so the government developed rules to impose a pollution limit on electricity producers.
Critically, Canada must quickly reduce its dependence on fossilfuels, given that producing and burning oil and gas accounts for over 80 per cent of Canada’s total emissions. The oil and gas industry has been unwilling to reduce its emissions voluntarily, instead banking on ineffective technology like carbon capture and storage (CCS).
Statement by Emilia Belliveau, Energy Transition Program Manager Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – At today’s Parliamentary Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development (ENVI), Members of Parliament grilled the fossilfuel industry about their climate pollution. Jun 6, 2024.
The Pathways Alliance spent millions of dollars misleading the public with ads about “greening” its fossilfuel production. That’s not all; when the federal government passed new anti-greenwashing rules in June, the Pathways Alliance and other fossilfuel companies removed their advertising and website content about climate action.
A case in point is the Kyoto Protocol, an early attempt within the UNFCCC to require industrialized nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a certain amount in a given time period. Another actor with immense political power and influence played a role in this shift: the fossilfuel industry.
Weifang Port’s “zero-carbon” certification was primarily achieved by transitioning away from fossilfuel use, according to China Electric Power News (CEPN). It has built a wind power system to provide green energy for its operations and deployed hydrogen-powered vehicles to replace fossil-fuel-powered trucks.
CCS is a multi-billion dollar boondoggle that doesn’t come close to the hype, has significant safety risks, and is a substantial distraction from real climate solutions, such as building more renewable energy, increasing electricity transmission infrastructure, and developing and using storage technology. Want proof?
The unnatural storms, fires, droughts and heatwaves across Canada this year will keep getting worse until we transition off of fossilfuels and the pollution they create. Fossilfuel companies are promoting hydrogen and carbon capture as dangerous distractions from real climate action. The climate crisis impacts us all.
Their mitigation recommendations include calls to adopt stronger national and international accountability mechanisms for emissions cuts; policy and financing innovations to promote faster deployment of zero-emissions technologies; and for countries to recognize each other’s climate policies and reflect them in trade measures.
The 49ers called it “ a meaningful part of our commitment to more sustainable practices” and praised United for its SAF program, which both companies said can reduce greenhouse gas emissions “by up to 85% on a lifecycle basis.” Indeed, NRG Energy operates several oil, coal, and fossil gas facilities from Delaware to California ( map here ).
Generating and storing clean energy is a lifeline for the planet’s future; burning coal, oil, and gas fossilfuels causes 75% of greenhouse gas emissions. A fossilfuel energy grid extracts and expends finite resources. Support development of new battery technologies for energy storage.
As the climate crisis grows more urgent, unconventional technological responses are getting increased attention and controversy. We’ve written previously on Legal Planet about these technologies and their promise and risks. Reynolds, who recently completed an Emmett Institute Geoengineering Governance Fellowship.
With the growing urgency to address climate change, governments and companies are developing “net-zero” strategies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Renewable technologies are also currently available and are proven to work. Does it phase out the use of fossilfuels? Does it avoid speculative technologies?
Canada’s oil and gas industry, responsible for the largest chunk of Canada’s polluting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, continues to drive climate change while trying to weaken or stop the actions we need to address the climate crisis. We already have the technology and the resources needed to reduce oil and gas pollution.
In his 1874 novel, The Mysterious Island , Jules Verne wrote that “water will one day be employed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen which constitute it, used singly or together, will furnish an inexhaustible source of heat and light, of an intensity of which coal is not capable.”
EPA : when it comes to prodding progress from coal- and gas-fired power plants, the nation’s second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, the agency is constrained, but it’s not out. And so it is with the immediate implications of West Virginia v.
This is great news, considering the outsized impacts of fossilfuels on driving climate change. In addition to scaling up clean energy investments, Canada has a responsibility to do its part in reducing its greenhouse gas emissions. We have the tools to support a fair phaseout of fossilfuels.
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.
By Anders Lorenzen In recent years, a series of large and small fossilfuel companies have publicly signalled net-zero commitments while continuing business-as-usual investments in fossilfuels. Around 75 out of 112 of the largest fossilfuel companies have committed themselves to reach net-zero.
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