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
The fossilfuel industry has long been the main driver of climate change, but Big Oil’s CEOs and profiteers would like you to believe that it is a part of the solution. One of the people peddling this idea is the man behind Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) – Murray Edwards, the FossilFuel Fanatic.
This month, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for a ban on advertising by fossilfuel companies, invoking the ban on tobacco ads as a relevant precedent. So what can we learn from the ban on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship that may be relevant to tackling the fossilfuel industry-driven climate crisis?
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.
In an important win for climate accountability in the United States, the US Supreme Court decided that lawsuits filed in Colorado, Maryland, California, Hawai’i, and Rhode Island against fossilfuel companies including ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, Suncor, and others will remain in state courts.
All political leaders should be bolder on climate. At the top of the list of key climate regulations that need to be finalized before March 24th is the governments cap on pollution from the oil and gas industry. Liberal leader hopefuls and political parties should all be paying attention to what people in Canada want.
Also like a sine graph, Union of Concerned Scientists will keep moving forward no matter what (and backward technically, but I am political science major and way out of my depth here, so let’s pretend they only move forward, give me kudos for an awesome simile, and get to the recap!). Much like a sine graph , this year had highs and lows.
On November 8, the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, is slated to consider approving amendments to California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. We progress despite regular cries of impending doom from regulated industries and their enablers. But it’s never easy. It’s what CARB must do again now.
And fossilfuel power plants may not stick to their retirement schedules for a variety of reasons. The bottom line: There’s still a long way to go, and the clean energy transition must move quicker than it has been—despite the fossilfuel industry’s self-serving claims to the contrary. A bit more on those reasons later.
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.
How often does the fossilfuel industry try to influence the government’s climate policy decisions? It highlights the most active fossilfuel companies and industry associations, as well as the ministries and ministers most targeted for lobbying. The report compiles data from the Federal Registry of Lobbyists.
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.
Indiana regulates the underground storage of carbon dioxide. Navigator responds that it has complied with state regulations, which require the company to notify landowners in the pipeline’s path and consider citizen safety when routing the project. The company is seeking powers of eminent domain from state regulators.
A big shift to renewables could leave stranded assets — existing fossilfuel plants that the utility will no longer get paid for using. In much of the country, those wholesale transactions are under the control of regional transmission organizations established by federal power regulators, but that’s not true everywhere.
As if big, wealthy, powerful corporations weren’t big, wealthy, and powerful enough, they often join industry associations to concentrate their political leverage and lobby for their interests. If a company’s public positions clash with those associations, the conflict usually takes place behind the scenes.
Methane emissions come from two main sources : fossilfuels and agriculture—primarily animal-based agriculture. Despite the obvious dangers of fossilfuel production and the multi-decade climate disinformation campaigns fossilfuel producers have perpetrated, the industry still holds political sway.
Now the reports driven by these resolutions are beginning to roll in, and while they certainly provide some insight into the fossilfuel industry’s investment in political influence, a sleight of hand is preventing investors from seeing the companies’ full strategy. ExxonMobil Names Names. The organization received between $2.5
The majority 6–3 decision sharply curtails the EPA’s authority to set standards based on a broad range of flexible options to cut carbon emissions from the power sector—options such as replacing polluting fossilfuels with cheap and widely available wind and solar power coupled with battery storage.
Minnesotans are facing concurrent crises of climate change, high energy prices and inflation, and the inequitable public health impacts of fossilfuel air pollution. Renewable energy will help with all of that—but we need a grid that is designed for wind and solar instead of having to rely on expensive coal and gas plants.
The article quotes a range of economists and other climate policy experts to the effect that subsidies and regulations are superior to carbon pricing because they can address equity issues, and that they can move investment in decarbonization technology more quickly than carbon pricing. Politics is central in policy.
While municipalities may have some flexibility in how they zone or regulate oil and gas operations – provided they do not exceed limitations in state or federal law – doing so in an unreasonable manner which prevents future natural gas development should render the municipality ineligible for state collected and distributed impact fees.
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? “.
Fossilfuel companies are well established as founts of disinformation , agents of obstruction, and drivers of climate change. Taken together, the need for governments to meaningfully regulate these super polluters has never been clearer. What is an advisory opinion?
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.
Disinformation dulls urgency Climate change denial and skepticism is a key feature of the deep political divide in this nation, fueled by long-running and coordinated campaigns of disinformation , often funded by fossilfuel interests. This has got nothing to do with climate.This is not because of fossilfuels.”
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.
We need more electricity to transition our homes and cars off fossilfuels, but we can’t afford to let that electricity come from more gas power plants. The Environmental Protection Agency is currently updating multiple pollution standards for new and existing fossilfuel-fired power plants.
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. One critical tool for forcing that reckoning comes from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA decision, but it did not ground EPA.
California’s leadership on reducing truck pollution has been on full display the past few years, passing critical regulations requiring 90 percent reduction in smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NO X ) emissions from diesel trucks and requiring manufacturers sell an increasing share of electric trucks to move away from fossilfuels altogether.
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.
These trends and projections show a very sobering energy future from an emissions perspective; an economy very much wedded to fossilfuels that completely disregards climate risks and agreed-upon climate targets and timelines. This year’s projections are a bit grim.
Even so, it is concerning that legislators included fossil gas in the definition of clean energy given the risk of continuing our reliance on fossilfuels and the impact of emissions from gas production, transportation, and combustion. What Still Needs to be Done?
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. . – Continual reform to improve ambition, integrity, and buy-in. Most ETS have fallen on the prices-too-low side.
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.
It highlights the most active fossilfuel companies and industry associations, as well as the Members of Parliament, ministries and ministers targeted for lobbying. The outcome for climate policy in Canada is that regulations have been diluted with loopholes or have been moving at a snail’s pace to the finish line.
The Great Lakes State has the opportunity to join other leading states in the region, notably Minnesota and Illinois , by adopting comprehensive updates to phase out fossilfuel electricity plants and ensure that the benefits of a clean energy transition flow to all communities.
Smaller, decentralized growth in electric heat pumps for buildings, and electric transportation replacing fossilfuels also require more access to electricity and a modern grid. This insistence on power-sharing reflects the divided political opinions in government today, and may actually be the path forward.
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. We need governments to regulate industry.
FossilFuel Companies are to Blame It’s clear that global warming is bringing hotter and drier weather. And over 75 per cent of greenhouse gas pollution comes from producing and burning fossilfuels. Decades of obstruction by the fossilfuel industry have led us to the hotter and more extreme weather.
In order to steer investment toward environmentally sustainable activities, the European Union launched the Taxonomy Regulation framework to define activities deemed sustainable. Notably, in the same proposal, the Commission has also included screening criteria for gaseous fossilfuels.
The simple fact is that ditching fossilfuels for low-cost clean energy resources is good for the planet, good for the US economy, and good for public health. It’s a contentious issue fraught with political and social dynamics that have largely doomed previous attempts. The good news?
As the water in hydropower reservoirs drops, hydropower production is reduced, possibly increasing energy prices, or forcing some utilities to compensate for energy demands by using more fossilfuels for power generation. Higher water and energy prices disproportionately affect low-income families. Green infrastructure.
Gas prices: Without a cap, the flood of bio-based diesel into California will continue, requiring a rapid increase in stringency to stabilize LCFS credit markets, sending 2030 stringency from the 30 percent proposed in the regulation to 34.5 The lower stringency results in lower costs and reduced economic impact of the regulation.
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.
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