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
Achieving climate goals requires significant investments in clean energy, transportation, and other climate technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and remove carbon from the atmosphere. However, as we work toward an equitable climate transition, climate infrastructure investments need to be envisioned in a more expansive way.
A stream of data about methanea potent greenhouse gasis now constantly being beamed down from space. New methane satellites provide a powerful data capability for governments who want to demonstrate leadership in climate policy. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, over 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide in a 20-year timespan.
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.
As of 2021, 30 emissions trading systems were in force globally, covering 16 – 17 % of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. California’s system uses revenues from auctioning allowances to fund its Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and to limit cost increases to electricity users. Carbon markets are at a crossroads.
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.
By concentrating this much power in the hands of one office, the province’s energy planning will happen in backrooms, likely to the benefit of government insiders. The government’s choice to enshrine in law a prioritization of nuclear power is also troubling.
Last week, MIT’s “Technology Review” reported that a small startup firm is proposing to spray reflective aerosols in the stratosphere commercially as a climate corrective. Stratospheric Aerosol Injection or SAI.) The firm is small and new, operating with a claimed total of $750K of venture financing.
Hydrogen is being presented as a key climate change solution because when it is burned, it doesn’t create any greenhouse gas emissions. We have cost-effective, proven, and reliable solutions that are ready today—including solar, wind, and battery storage—which continue to be underfunded by all levels of government. And it leaks a lot.
Food production is responsible for more than a third of greenhouse gas emissions. To get everyone the food they need in a warming world, governments worldwide must invest in securing our food systems
Earlier this month, the US Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service hosted a public hearing on their recent proposed rules governing implementation of the Section 45Y Clean Electricity Production Credit and the Section 48E Clean Electricity Investment Credit. My testimony is copied below.
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.
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.
Statement from Keith Brooks, Program Director Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – New data released today by the Government of Canada shows that Canada is finally starting to bend the curve when it comes to climate pollution.
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 resulting government policies are forcing radical change on the energy system of a kind not seen in a century or more. Technological changes.
Yesterday, Massachusetts Climate Chief Melissa Hoffer issued a report detailing how “to implement the Healey-Driscoll Administration’s whole-of-government approach to addressing the climate crisis.” Publish an annual report card on the Commonwealth’s progress to achieve mandated greenhouse gas emission reductions.
The scoping process has been key to California’s success in cutting greenhouse gas emissions. The process requires the government to assess past progress, project future emissions, and come up with a strategy to meet its climate goals. b) The range of projected air pollution reductions that result from the measure. (c)
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. How will governments deal with private startups if they continue to perform unscientific, unregulated experiments? A weather balloon.
County of Monterey –a major case involving the authority of California local governments to limit oil and gas development within their borders. County of Monterey case raises important and difficult questions for both the justices and the Executive Branch of California state government.
Our transportation system is highly inequitable, reflecting decades of misguided and biased decisions at all levels of government. In other words, technological solutions are necessary but not sufficient. On the technology side, decarbonization is the key. How do we make this transformation happen?
But the nation’s farmers and farmland are also poised to be part of the solution, if only our government would invest meaningfully in it. My colleagues have argued forcefully about what’s at stake and how the Inflation Reduction Act would affect the cars we drive. Here I’ll expand a bit on the provisions of the bill aimed at agriculture. $20
Reynolds, who recently completed an Emmett Institute Geoengineering Governance Fellowship. 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.
ExxonMobil’s reduction pledges do not take Scope 3 emissions into account, and the company’s leadership takes issue with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol’s approach to measuring emissions, as described below. Studies show Scope 3 emissions account for roughly 85% of oil and gas emissions.
It would seem that the Grinch has once again made off with a ramshackle sleigh full of wind turbines and solar panels and they aren’t likely to return from their shop, not unless the heart of the ole ‘Grinchy-Claus’ (aka the Alberta Government) has an unexpected growth spurt. Stay tuned.
Statement from Julia Levin, Associate Director, National Climate Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – The Government of Alberta’s new Emissions Reduction and Energy Development Plan is not a credible climate strategy. It’s also missing key elements, such as a 2030 emissions target.
And so just by hearing it , members of the Supreme Court seemed to tip their hand, signaling a majority actively on the hunt for a chance to slash away at the government’s ability to advance vital environmental and public health safeguards. Unfortunately, those ominous signs were right on the mark. But that’s about where the good news ends.
The net effects will depend on how people and enterprise respond to these incentives, what technological improvements occur, how fast we learn to do better etc. How much global technological innovation will be spurred by these investments? Modeling the impacts of all this is hard. The biggest unknowns are the geopolitical implications.
The federal government is now supporting that role with federal funding for states. A key provision (IRA § 60114) appropriates $250 million to support emission reduction planning by state governments. It’s not just the direct funding for state governments that makes me think this. States have played a critical role in U.S.
And how can we provide job opportunities for the tremendously skilled workers in traditional energy domains while also training the workers we need to accelerate emerging technologies? New and emerging geothermal technologies allow us to tap into and extract the earths naturally occurring heat in ways that were not possible a decade ago.
National governments are the most important systemic actors in the governance of climate action, primarily because they are the only actors with the ability to adopt economy-wide decarbonization measures. Over 80 government framework cases have been filed around the world, using a wide variety of legal and factual arguments.
What makes me most optimistic are the recent technological innovations and falling costs for renewable energy generation, battery storage and alternative fuel vehicles. While these strategies are daunting and most governments are focused on mitigation and adaptation, I think that there is a lot of hope for innovation at the local level. [L]ocal
As we electrify everything, from our cars to our home heating systems, we need electricity to come from sources that dont emit greenhouse gases. To deliver on this goal, the federal government made important investments in renewable energy projects. So, do they do the job? Lets have a look.
They will be working alongside our faculty director (formerly faculty co-director) Ted Parson—an accomplished scholar of environmental governance—as well as me and my colleague Cara Horowitz, shaping the strategic direction of the Emmett Institute. Wang is a leading expert on environmental governance and the law and politics of China.
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. on routes between 250 and 450 miles.
government are investing billions of dollars in carbon capture technology to suck greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. Tech firms, oil companies and the U.S. Can it save the warming world?
While EVs already result in less greenhouse gas emissions than the gasoline alternative, using these recycled materials substantially lowers impacts associated with material sourcing. Government funding should continue to support research and development of battery repurposing, reuse, and recycling.
The sector—including personal transportation like passenger cars, as well as air, marine, and surface goods and people movement—is the largest source of greenhouse gasses in the U.S.: But, as our panelist Beth Osborne has argued , greenhouse-gas reductions will also depend on reducing the amount of driving we do in general.
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?
Importantly (and often misunderstood), he meant not that we are gods, but instead that technologies have given humanity powers that had previously been exclusive to the gods. I thus wrote the paper “ Earth System Interventions as Technologies of the Anthropocene ,” which was published (open access!)
Department of the Treasury is hosting a public hearing on the December 2023 proposed regulations governing implementation of the Section 45V Credit for Production of Clean Hydrogen. As Treasury moves to finalize regulations governing implementation of 45V, it must maintain a rigorous approach that is responsive to its statutory charge.
The oil and gas CEOs tried to deflect responsibility for their massive greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), but the writing is on the wall for these Climate Villains: you can’t make oil and gas “green”. Yet behind closed doors, these companies admit that this is ineffective technology. Corson and Shell’s Ms. These tactics are not new.
A new report released by Oil Change International reveals that governments worldwide have already wasted over $40 billion on carbon capture and hydrogen projects. Even worse, these governments are gearing up to waste billions more – over $300 billion more! Why is government spending on carbon capture & hydrogen a problem?
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.” The story generated headlines , the way any “first” tends to. Sure, that’s good news. She’s right.
On 15 October, the port in Shandong was certified as carbon-neutral by the China Classification Society Quality Certification Company, according to a government statement. Globally, the shipping industry accounts for 3% of greenhouse gas emissions, with ports being one of the key contributors along with ships running on heavy fuel oil.
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.
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