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
Yet, driven by vested interests in the fossilfuel industry , misleading narratives aim to distort and hinder meaningful climate commitments. Fossilfuels are the problem It’s pretty simple: the burning of fossilfuels is the main driver of climate change. What’s lacking is political will.
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.
Earlier this year, The Guardian ran a powerful article exposing the ties of Elsevier, one of the world’s largest academic publishing companies, to the fossilfuel industry. The article caught my attention because I’d never considered the ways in which an academic publisher might be perpetuating and enabling a fossilfuel economy.
On November 8, the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, is slated to consider approving amendments to California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. For more than 50 years, we have pioneered new policies and ushered in new technologies to clean our air and protect our climate. The Board should adopt these proposals. But it’s never easy.
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.
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.
By examining possible trajectories for global economic development, technology adoption, and policy actions, the driving forces behind emissions, these scenarios help us assess a range of potential climate futures. levels of cooperation or competition among countries, technology adoption, and inequality) in terms of radiative forcing.
Union of Concerned Scientists’ (UCS) research shows that top fossilfuel producers’ emissions are responsible for as much as half of global surface temperature increase. The best solution: Replace fossilfuels with renewable energy. A small number of big corporations are responsible for the climate crisis.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In an unforeseen turn of events, a pivotal climate litigation case unfolded in Montana , where 16 young environmental advocates challenged the state’s fossilfuel policies. Nearly half of the climate litigation cases filed by local and state governments in the United States against the fossilfuel industry mention wildfire.
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 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.
Two-thirds of the G20’s public finance for energy went to fossilfuels in 2019–2020. The G20 group of nations provided nearly US$200 billion in support of fossilfuels in 2021, despite the worsening impacts of the climate crisis and their pledge in 2009 to phase out “inefficient” subsidies. By Catherine Early.
I don’t mean to imply that technological progress will automatically fix things. 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.
If honored, this commitment will likely unseat Canada as the worst-ranking in the G20 for international public financing to the fossilfuel sector. . After a wave of commitments to end international coal finance this year, this is the first international political commitment that also addresses public finance for oil and gas.
A big shift to renewables could leave stranded assets — existing fossilfuel plants that the utility will no longer get paid for using. That doesn’t seem to be politically feasible at the national level, at present. Another possibility would be to provide less favorable tax treatment for fossilfuel plants.
Some states, like California, Louisiana, or Alaska may be feeling the impacts more acutely earlier on, but it does not feel like things have become bad enough for political will to be marshalled. But it beats a structure in which political paralysis is so severe that nothing, whether adaptation or mitigation, can be done.
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.,
While there is enormous potential for UN climate negotiations to transform climate action, meaningful progress has been delayed in part by the fossilfuel industry’s deceptive tactics. Last year’s COP was notable as the first to explicitly mention “fossilfuels” in the final decision document.
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
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.
Renewable energy generation increases faster than any other technology. Generation from renewable technologies more than covers the increase in electricity demand, also making up for coal and nuclear plant retirements. Source: US Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2022 (AEO2022).
If society continues to burn fossilfuels and clear forests, those dry cycles are expected to intensify and spread across wetter areas like the Caribbean and Amazon, potentially affecting hundreds of millions of people a year. The distinction between a climate migrant and a migrant is often quite blurry.
C temperature target, and one that more than 130 countries have adopted, albeit mostly as squishy political declarations, not yet legally binding or implemented. Fossil enterprises and political leaders in major fossil producers ranged from politely dismissive to openly contemptuous. Not this time.
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.
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?
Taylor, a professor at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. Mine Cleanup Law Weakened by Coal’s Decline — Reclamation is a flashpoint for the partisan divide over fossilfuels. Social and political circumstances in Syria may have aided the outbreak. Brett Walton, Interim Stream Editor.
It highlights the most active fossilfuel companies and industry associations, as well as the Members of Parliament, ministries and ministers targeted for lobbying. The report compiles data from the Federal Registry of Lobbyists. That means Big Oil lobbied Parliament nearly five times per working day.
Fossilfuels such as coal , oil and natural gas are the source of just over 80% of the world’s energy. To avert catastrophic warming, the global community must rapidly reduce how much of these fuels it extracts and burns. Fossilfuels still provide most of the world’s energy. Fossilfuel rationing.
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?
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.
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.
The IRA gave us effective tools for cleaning up the power sector through dedicated support for the rapid and widescale deployment of renewable resources and the technologies that support them. Which means the consequences of these polluters unabashedly continuing to pollute aren’t just severe—they’re compounding.
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. Measure Z never took effect.
By Phil McKenna With a pair of fossil-fuel friendly senators at his side, former U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, came as an investigation by Democrats in Congress exposed efforts by the oil and gas industry to downplay the climate impact of natural gas. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz on Tuesday released a favorable report on U.S.
Last month’s report on solar geoengineering research from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) consolidated a shift in the discourse on this controversial technology. But to security experts, and students of political science, geoengineering appears as a hybrid, dual-use security technology.
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 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?
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?
These firms recognized that they could not assume the risks of exacerbating climate damage from continued burning of fossilfuels. Wind, solar and battery storage are the fastest growing electric energy sources and should be the first choice for a modern economy adapting new data technologies.
However, political shifts and implementation challenges have slowed that momentum. Longstanding investments in existing supply chains can become obsolete as political winds shift. Rivalries between major powers have disrupted long-established supply chains, introducing unpredictability.
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