ReportWire

Tag: Emissions

  • Colorado mountains’ reduced snowpack — a sign of things to come or temporary? (Letters)

    [ad_1]

    Reduced snowpack — a sign of things to come, or a temporary problem?

    Re: “Endangered snowpack,” Denver Post three-part series on climate and ski industry, Feb. 15-17

    The Post seems to be heavily focused on climate change and any weather that supports its philosophy. Over the last few days, there were a number of articles on Colorado’s recent warm/low snow weather and climate change.

    However, this partial analysis doesn’t provide a full picture, including:

    1) For at least the last five years, there have been typical snows and temperatures here.

    2) It ignores the record cold/snow in the eastern United States this year that killed more than 100 people.

    3) Huge lakes froze over this year (such as Erie and Champlain) that rarely freeze. It begs the question — is weather variability being confused with climate change by The Post?

    In examining the complex climate, a complete analysis is needed to provide a comprehensive view– not cherry-picking events that meet a predetermined agenda. I wonder if The Post has a significant “confirmation bias” on this issue, where anything that doesn’t agree gets buried and things that confirm it get endlessly pushed.

    William Turner, Denver

    With the “Endangered Snowpack” article, there’s a color timeline graph of the number of days that individual Colorado ski resorts were open in 2025, plus dismal projections for 2050 and 2090, based upon the assertion that the “damage already done by anthropogenic climate change to the U.S. ski industry is evident”. That may be the case, but such climate change, reputedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions, could not have occurred overnight.

    In other words, why are there no graphs for 2015, 2000, 1995, etc.? (If the number of ski days in past decades is not easily obtainable, then the recorded snowfall would probably have made a better metric for this analysis.) Regardless, any valid attempt to predict future snowfall is meaningless if it fails to include statistics on snowfall from previous years.

    John Contino, Golden

    Don’t let politicians get involved in water compact negotiations

    Re: “States fail to meet another deadline for water deal,” Feb. 17 news story

    The Post has been carrying a series on the current drought-caused water shortages and their impact on the ski resorts. These stories are of “above the fold, front-page importance.”  Tucked away in the upper corner of Page 2 on Tuesday is an article about states missing the deadline for an agreement on distribution of the shrinking water flows in the Colorado River and the threat of the Bureau of Reclamation stepping in and setting the distribution. Extended litigation is forecast.

    The dispute between the states boils down to the split between the Upper Basin states and the Lower Basin states, and whether the Upper Basin states should reduce their allotments during low-flow years, which they oppose.

    The Colorado ski industry uses a tremendous amount of Colorado River water to make snow. The Front Range cities divert tremendous amounts of Colorado River water for urban domestic use. Both have purchased sufficient senior water rights to sustain current standards, but these are Colorado state water rights, which could have dubious value in the negotiations over the interstate distribution of available river flows.

    In the current political climate, Colorado, being a so-called “blue state,” may have trouble retaining these rights. The president is throwing out all kinds of threats of retaliation for perceived slights, and he controls the Bureau of Reclamation. In particular, Denver, a “sanctuary city,” could be very vulnerable to having its current diversion severely curtailed.

    I hope the Denver Water Board, as well as city and state officials, and our Congressional representatives, act expeditiously to mitigate any adverse impacts.

    Richard (Dick) Emerson, Denver

    Move beyond false choices in energy policy

    Re: “Global energy demand is rising as Colorado is still restricting operations,” Feb. 15 commentary

    In her opinion column on global energy demand, Lynn Granger creates a false dichotomy when she states, “Colorado politics has framed energy policy as a moral choice rather than a systems challenge.” Energy policy is both a moral choice and a systems challenge.

    Given the scientific consensus that fossil fuels are the root cause of the climate crisis, and given the impacts we’ve seen here in Colorado — including the fires, floods, beetle-kill, meager snowpacks, and the dire condition of the Colorado River — doing anything other than constraining the burning of fossil fuels can be considered a crime against the people of Colorado.

    And, given that the whole planet shares the same atmosphere, any steps that would perpetuate or increase the burning of fossil fuels in Colorado could readily be considered crimes against humanity. Energy policy is indeed a moral choice.

    And energy policy is also a systems challenge. Our challenge is to transition our energy systems from huge, established, and entrenched extractive and polluting industries to systems more reliant on clean energy and more resilient to disruptions by climate-change-driven weather events.

    Fortunately, many of the technologies we need are already available. And they are being implemented right here in Colorado. In 2024, Colorado overtook California as the EV capital of the United States with 25.3% in new EV sales. The electricity delivered by Holy Cross Energy was 85% clean last year.

    We can get to a cleaner, safer, healthier future, but Ms. Granger’s false choice doesn’t help us.

    Chris Hoffman, Boulder

    Lynn Granger’s guest opinion is basically “drill, baby, drill” obfuscated in a word salad. Instead of “drill, baby, drill” she talks about “maximizing existing assets” and “preserving affordability.” She helpfully points out that burning hydrocarbons is an easy and relatively cheap way to provide additional energy, because demand is increasing.

    Granger chastises Colorado leaders for prioritizing the “tired” and “outdated” framing of renewable energy. Her opinion is nothing more than the classic Baby-Boomer approach to everything — “let’s consume it, burn it, use it up, borrow and spend it” and then pass all the problems down to our children and grandchildren.

    When you boil down her opinion, it turns out to be — take the easy way out.

    Roy W. Penny Jr., Denver

    When the world asks us too much, dogs provide comfort

    Re: “Are we asking too much of our dogs?” Feb. 15 commentary

    Clara Bow, the “It Girl,” is reported to have said, “The more I see of men, the more I like dogs.”

    Are we asking too much of our dogs? Absolutely not. Their potential as replacements for human interactions has been underestimated for years. Once, a family’s dog was just a dog. That is not longer true.

    Harry, my third and final dachshund, was invaluable to me during the pandemic, and he is even more invaluable to me now during this wretched presidency. (Does anyone not know by now how psychologically depleting last year and this year have been?)

    The importance of dogs — and other pets — during the pandemic became the theme of an art exhibition at the Lone Tree Arts Center. Harry was featured.

    I’m elderly. Final glide pattern. Mark Twain said, “The dog is a gentleman; I hope to go to his heaven, not man’s.”

    Craig Marshall Smith, Highlands Ranch

    [ad_2]

    DP Opinion

    Source link

  • Xcel Energy seeks $355.5M revenue hike, increasing residential bills nearly 10% on average

    [ad_1]

    Xcel Energy, Colorado’s largest electric utility, has asked state regulators for an increase of $355.5 million to its rate base, which would boost the average residential electric bill by nearly 10% per month.

    Xcel filed the proposal Friday with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, which will take testimony from the company and various intervening parties and hold a public hearing. If approved, the increase would take effect in September 2026.

    Xcel Energy-Colorado President Robert Kenney said the utility’s last increase to the rate base was in 2022. The average residential bill rose by 3.2%, according to an Xcel statement after an agreement was reached with all the parties

    The rate base is a utility’s investments to provide services and on which it’s allowed to earn a regulated rate of return.

    “This rate case is to recover costs associated with investments that we’ve made over the last three years,” Kenney said.

    The Utility Consumer Advocate, or UCA, which represents the public before state regulators, said the proposed increase is “too big of an increase.”

    “It’s an especially large increase given the context of the economic times,” said Joseph Pereira, UCA deputy director.

    The increase is largely related to Xcel’s expanded capital spending on distribution, transmission and generation, Pereira said.

    “It’s unclear to parties in the UCA that the company is prioritizing investments that are the biggest bang for the buck, that increase reliability and that adopt an intelligent approach to how they’re using the grid,” Pereira said. “It still appears that the company is using a crude blanket approach to replacing and investing in new infrastructure.”

    Kenney said Xcel has invested in safety, reliability, making the system more resilient, electrifying transportation and buildings, meeting increased demands from growth and taking steps to significantly reduce carbon emissions.

    Xcel has said it has reduced carbon emissions by 57%. The state’s target is to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% from 2005 levels by 2030.

    Xcel is upgrading its electric grid with a $1.7 billion transmission project. The Colorado Power Pathway includes transmission lines, power substations and other equipment stretching over 12 counties, mostly in eastern Colorado.

    “We’ve added a tremendous amount of renewable energy over the last several years,” Kenney said. “And we’ve done all of this while keeping bills as low as possible.”

    Xcel has faced criticism from the Office of the Utility Consumer Advocate, or UCA, which represents the public before state regulators, and customers over the past few years for what the UCA has called “a pancaking of rate increases.”

    The criticism of Xcel and other regulated utilities heated up in 2023 after a cold winter and high natural gas prices sent costs soaring statewide. A legislative committee held hearings and approved a bill intended to protect customers against future price shocks and level what some see as a playing field tilted in the utilities’ favor.

    [ad_2]

    Judith Kohler

    Source link

  • Halloween pumpkin waste is a methane problem, but chefs and farmers have solutions

    [ad_1]

    Don’t let your Halloween pumpkin haunt the landfill this November.More than 1 billion pounds (454 million kilograms) of pumpkins rot in U.S. landfills each year after Halloween, according to the Department of Energy.Video above: Halloween festivities in full swing in Salem, MassachusettsYours doesn’t have to go to waste. Experts told us your pumpkins can be eaten, composted or even fed to animals. Here’s how. If you’re carving a jack-o’-lantern, don’t throw away the skin or innards — every part is edible.After carving, you can cube the excess flesh — the thick part between the outer skin and the inner pulp that holds the seeds — for soups and stews, says Carleigh Bodrug, a chef known for cooking with common food scraps. You can also puree it and add a tablespoon to your dog’s dinner for extra nutrients. And pumpkin chunks can be frozen for future use.”The seeds are a nutritional gold mine,” Bodrug said. They’re packed with protein, magnesium, zinc and healthy fats, according to a 2022 study in the journal Plants.One of Bodrug’s recipes involves removing the seeds, rinsing and roasting them with cinnamon for a crunchy snack or salad topper. Then you can use the stringy guts to make a pumpkin puree for muffins. This version differs from canned purees in grocery stores — which typically use a different type of pumpkin or squash — because carving pumpkins have stringier innards and a milder flavor. A carving pumpkin’s guts can still be used for baking — you’ll just have to amp up the seasoning to boost the flavor.If you don’t want to eat your pumpkins, you can donate them to a local farm, which might use them to feed pigs, chickens and other animals. Edible parts should be collected while you’re carving and before they’re painted, decorated or left on your porch for weeks. Paint and wax aren’t food-safe, and bacteria and mold can grow on the skin in outdoor climates.Once you’ve cooked what you can and donated what’s safe to feed, composting the rest is the easiest way to keep it out of the landfill.”That way, even though they’re not safe to eat, they can still give back to the earth,” Bodrug said. Composting pumpkins keeps them out of methane-emitting landfills and turns them into nutrient-rich soil instead. You can do this at home or drop them off at a local farm, compost collection bin or drop-off site.”A large percentage of what ends up going to the landfill is stuff that could have been composted,” said Dante Sclafani, compost coordinator at Queens County Farm in New York. “So even just cutting down something like pumpkins could really help curb how many garbage bags you’re putting out every week.”Before composting, remove any candles, plastic, glitter, or other decorations — they can contaminate the compost. A little glitter or paint won’t ruin the pile, but it’s best to get it as clean as possible before tossing it in. Then, chop up the pumpkin into 1-inch (2.5-centimeter) pieces so it can break down more easily.”Pumpkins are full of water, so it’s important to maintain a good balance of dried leaves, wood chips, sawdust, shredded newspaper, cardboard, straw — anything that’s a dry organic material — in your compost bin,” Sclafani said. If you don’t maintain this balance, your compost might start to stink.According to the Environmental Protection Agency, a healthy compost pile should include a mix of “greens” — like pumpkin scraps and food waste — and “browns” like dry leaves, straw or cardboard, in roughly a 3-to-1 ratio. That balance helps the pile break down faster and prevents odors.And if your pumpkin’s been sitting on the porch all month? That’s actually ideal. “It’s never too far gone for compost,” Sclafani said. “Even if it’s mushy or moldy, that actually helps, because the fungus speeds up decomposition.””Composting anything organic is better than throwing it out because you’re not creating more refuse in landfills, you’re not creating methane gas,” said Laura Graney, the farm’s education director.Graney said autumn on the farm is the perfect opportunity to teach kids about composting since it gives them a sense of power in the face of big environmental challenges. “Even though they’re little, composting helps them feel like they can make a difference,” Graney said. “They take that message home to their families, and that’s how we spread the word.”

    Don’t let your Halloween pumpkin haunt the landfill this November.

    More than 1 billion pounds (454 million kilograms) of pumpkins rot in U.S. landfills each year after Halloween, according to the Department of Energy.

    Video above: Halloween festivities in full swing in Salem, Massachusetts

    Yours doesn’t have to go to waste. Experts told us your pumpkins can be eaten, composted or even fed to animals. Here’s how.

    If you’re carving a jack-o’-lantern, don’t throw away the skin or innards — every part is edible.

    After carving, you can cube the excess flesh — the thick part between the outer skin and the inner pulp that holds the seeds — for soups and stews, says Carleigh Bodrug, a chef known for cooking with common food scraps. You can also puree it and add a tablespoon to your dog’s dinner for extra nutrients. And pumpkin chunks can be frozen for future use.

    “The seeds are a nutritional gold mine,” Bodrug said. They’re packed with protein, magnesium, zinc and healthy fats, according to a 2022 study in the journal Plants.

    One of Bodrug’s recipes involves removing the seeds, rinsing and roasting them with cinnamon for a crunchy snack or salad topper. Then you can use the stringy guts to make a pumpkin puree for muffins. This version differs from canned purees in grocery stores — which typically use a different type of pumpkin or squash — because carving pumpkins have stringier innards and a milder flavor. A carving pumpkin’s guts can still be used for baking — you’ll just have to amp up the seasoning to boost the flavor.

    If you don’t want to eat your pumpkins, you can donate them to a local farm, which might use them to feed pigs, chickens and other animals.

    Edible parts should be collected while you’re carving and before they’re painted, decorated or left on your porch for weeks. Paint and wax aren’t food-safe, and bacteria and mold can grow on the skin in outdoor climates.

    Once you’ve cooked what you can and donated what’s safe to feed, composting the rest is the easiest way to keep it out of the landfill.

    “That way, even though they’re not safe to eat, they can still give back to the earth,” Bodrug said.

    Composting pumpkins keeps them out of methane-emitting landfills and turns them into nutrient-rich soil instead. You can do this at home or drop them off at a local farm, compost collection bin or drop-off site.

    “A large percentage of what ends up going to the landfill is stuff that could have been composted,” said Dante Sclafani, compost coordinator at Queens County Farm in New York. “So even just cutting down something like pumpkins could really help curb how many garbage bags you’re putting out every week.”

    Before composting, remove any candles, plastic, glitter, or other decorations — they can contaminate the compost. A little glitter or paint won’t ruin the pile, but it’s best to get it as clean as possible before tossing it in. Then, chop up the pumpkin into 1-inch (2.5-centimeter) pieces so it can break down more easily.

    “Pumpkins are full of water, so it’s important to maintain a good balance of dried leaves, wood chips, sawdust, shredded newspaper, cardboard, straw — anything that’s a dry organic material — in your compost bin,” Sclafani said. If you don’t maintain this balance, your compost might start to stink.

    According to the Environmental Protection Agency, a healthy compost pile should include a mix of “greens” — like pumpkin scraps and food waste — and “browns” like dry leaves, straw or cardboard, in roughly a 3-to-1 ratio. That balance helps the pile break down faster and prevents odors.

    And if your pumpkin’s been sitting on the porch all month? That’s actually ideal. “It’s never too far gone for compost,” Sclafani said. “Even if it’s mushy or moldy, that actually helps, because the fungus speeds up decomposition.”

    “Composting anything organic is better than throwing it out because you’re not creating more refuse in landfills, you’re not creating methane gas,” said Laura Graney, the farm’s education director.

    Graney said autumn on the farm is the perfect opportunity to teach kids about composting since it gives them a sense of power in the face of big environmental challenges.

    “Even though they’re little, composting helps them feel like they can make a difference,” Graney said. “They take that message home to their families, and that’s how we spread the word.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New Report Finds Efforts to Slow Climate Change Are Working—Just Not Fast Enough

    [ad_1]

    In the 10 years since the signing of the Paris Agreement, the backbone of international climate action, humanity has made impressive progress. Renewable energy is increasingly cheap and reliable, while electric vehicles are becoming better every year.

    By virtually every key metric used to measure progress, though, we are still lagging behind where we would need to be to avert the worst effects of climate change, according to a report released Wednesday by a coalition of climate groups—and we’re running out of time to right the ship.

    “All systems are flashing red,” Clea Shumer, a researcher at the World Resources Institute, one of the organizations involved in the report, said last week on a call with reporters. “There’s no doubt we are largely doing the right things—we are just not moving fast enough.”

    The Paris Agreement aims to keep the world from warming more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels by the end of this century. To measure progress toward this goal, the report looks at emissions from 45 different sectors of the global economy and environment, measuring everything from building electrification to use of coal in the power sector to global meat consumption.

    Grimly, none of the indicators the report measures are where they need to be to keep the world on track to meet the goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees. Six of the 45 indicators are “off track”—progress is being made, but not fast enough—while almost 30 are “well off track,” meaning progress is much too slow. Five, meanwhile, are headed in the “wrong direction,” meaning the situation is getting worse, not better, and needs an urgent U-turn. (There’s not enough data, the report says, to measure the remaining five indicators, which include peatland degradation and restoration, food waste, and the share of new buildings that are zero-carbon.)

    One of the most consistently off-track markers, experts said, was the global effort to phase out coal, one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. While coal’s share in global electricity generation did go down slightly in 2024, total coal use actually hit a record high last year thanks to growing electricity demand, especially from China and India. A dirty power grid, Shumer said, has “huge knock-on effects” for other progress indicators like decarbonizing buildings and transportation.

    To get on track, the world needs to increase its pace of coal phaseout tenfold, Shumer said. That, she continued, would entail shutting down more than 360 medium-sized coal plants each year and canceling every coal-fired power plant currently in the global development pipeline.

    “We simply will not limit warming to 1.5 degrees if coal use keeps breaking records,” Shumer said.’

    [ad_2]

    Molly Taft

    Source link

  • Is nuclear power becoming cool in Colorado? Discussion of a role for it is growing

    [ad_1]

    Colorado has a new law declaring nuclear power a source of clean energy. The Denver airport might explore building a small nuclear reactor to meet the rising demand for electricity. Local business, civic and labor leaders see nuclear  energy as the fuel of choice when Xcel Energy stops burning coal at its power plants in Pueblo County,

    Is nuclear power becoming cool in Colorado?

    The state has had only one nuclear power plant, Fort St. Vrain near Platteville. And it was converted to natural gas in 1989 after 10 years of technical problems. The former Rocky Flats weapons plant, which produced plutonium triggers for nuclear bombs, drew thousands of protesters for years to the site north of Denver, including such prominent activists as Daniel Ellsberg and Beat poet Allen Ginsberg.

    In 2004, Colorado voters were the first in the country to approve a renewable energy mandate for utilities. How has nuclear power, with its baggage of radioactive waste and the Three Mile Island partial meltdown, become a seriously considered option in today’s fuel mix?

    Worry about the demand for electricity outstripping capacity and concerns about progress on cutting greenhouse gas emissions led state Rep. Alex Valdez, a Denver Democrat, to back legislation this year that defines nuclear power as “clean.” He sponsored House Bill 25-1040, which added nuclear to the energy sources that utilities can use to meet state clean energy targets.

    “As a kid, I grew up in the ’80s when a lot of talk about nuclear was in relation to the weaponry that was pointed at each other between the Soviet Union and the United States,” Valdez said. “I think I just kind of lumped nuclear into the same conversations as most people do: around its negative uses, less desirable uses.”

    Valdez got a different perspective when he was appointed to the nuclear working group at the National Conference of State Legislatures. The group visited France, which gets about 70% of its electricity from nuclear power. Roughly 19% of electricity in the U.S. comes from nuclear energy.

    With some forecasts showing electricity demand rising dramatically, Valdez said the U.S. will have to add “a tremendous amount of energy” to the grid if it’s going to compete in quantum computing and other advanced technology.

    A boom in data center construction driven by increasing the use of artificial intelligence is expected to escalate the need for more electricity generation.

    Valdez, who spent most of his career in the renewable energy field, said the legislation he sponsored recognizes that the power generated by nuclear energy is carbon-free. “As we move toward our path to zero-carbon (energy), it can be included in the mix to get us there.”

    Not ready for prime time

    A lot of the current interest in nuclear power revolves around a new technology: small modular nuclear reactors, about one-tenth to one quarter the size of a conventional reactor. They’re billed as potentially less expensive, safer, easier to build and adaptable because modules can be added as more power is needed.

    The technology is also still in the development and demonstration stage. Just a few are operating in China and Russia. No small modular reactors –SMRs– are in commercial use in the U.S.

    “SMRs aren’t ready for prime time,” said Dennis Wamsted, an analyst at  the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. “You will hear from developers and others about the advantages. The advantages right now are all on paper.”

    The institute focuses on research into the economics of expanding the use of renewable energy.

    “We are not fans of nuclear power because it costs too much and that cost has been consistently high over the years. We see no track record of it declining,” Wamsted said. “We certainly don’t see that happening with a new class of  reactor that nobody’s built before and nobody’s run before.”

    Noah Rott, a spokesman for the western region of the Sierra Club, said the environmental group feels that discussion around nuclear energy “is largely a distraction as utilities work to address electric load growth in the next decade.”

    “Cleaner sources like wind, solar, demand response, energy efficiency and storage are the answer here,” Rott said in an email.

    However, the concept of an energy source that can run 24/7 and emit no heat-trapping greenhouse gases when generating power is compelling. Denver International Airport CEO Phil Washington and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston said in August that the airport, the country’s third-busiest, planned to commission a study to explore the feasibility of building a small, modular nuclear reactor on its campus to meet the growing demand for electricity in the area and cut the use of carbon-emitting power.

    The airport put the study on hold after complaints that city officials hadn’t talked to area residents first. The airport determined that a broader scope will best serve its interests and needs and will issue a request for information later this fall on multiple clean energy solutions, including reactors, after first receiving ideas and input from the community, spokeswoman Courtney Law said in an email Wednesday.

    Nuclear power generation is the top choice of a local advisory committee for replacing coal at Xcel Energy’s Comanche power plants near Pueblo. Xcel has proposed tapping renewable energy, battery storage and natural gas when it stops burning coal by 2031.

    But the Pueblo Innovative Energy Solutions Advisory Committee, established by Xcel and community members, said renewable energy facilities wouldn’t provide the same number of jobs and tax revenue for local governments that nuclear or gas facilities would. The committee is promoting installing SMRs.

    Xcel Energy operates nuclear facilities in Minnesota and has said they’re not off the table for Colorado, but the new type of reactors likely won’t be commercially available when the utility has to replace its coal plants.

    The Western Governors Association, WGA, held workshops in September at the Idaho National Laboratory, which focuses largely on nuclear energy.

    The workshops were part of an initiative by Utah Gov. Spencer Cox called “Energy Superabundance: Unlocking Prosperity in the West.” Cox, the WGA’s chairman this year, said the country is looking to the West for ways to meet the surge in need for more electricity.

    Andy Cross, The Denver Post

    Some community leaders want to see nuclear power replace coal-fired power when Xcel Energy quits burning coal at the Comanche power plant in Pueblo County. (Photo by Andy Cross/The Denver Post)

    Idaho Gov. Brad Little said during a workshop that the U.S. won’t meet its energy needs “with our legacy energy.”

    “We’re going to have to have scalable, safe nuclear energy,” Little said.

    While it could be five to 10 years before small reactors are up and running in the U.S., Mark Jensen, a chemistry professor at the Colorado School of Mines, said the federal government is more involved in promoting nuclear energy than in the recent past. He noted that the Department of Energy has opened federal sites to allow companies to test prototypes and that could help streamline development.

    [ad_2]

    Judith Kohler

    Source link

  • How China Plans to Cut 10 Percent of its Emissions by 2035

    [ad_1]

    UNITED NATIONS (AP) — With China leading the way by announcing its first emission cuts, world leaders said Wednesday they are getting more serious about fighting climate change and the deadly extreme weather that comes with it.

    At the United Nations’ high-level climate summit, Chinese president Xi Jinping announced the world’s largest carbon-polluting country would aim to cut emissions by 7% to 10% by 2035. China produces more than 31% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, and they have long been soaring.

    The announcement came as more than 100 world leaders gathered to talk of increased urgency and the need for stronger efforts to curb the spewing of heat-trapping gases.

    With major international climate negotiations in Brazil 6½ weeks away, the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres convened a special leaders summit Wednesday during the General Assembly to focus on specific plans to curb emissions from coal, oil and natural gas.

    After more than six hours of speeches, promises and announcements, about 100 nations — responsible for about two-thirds of the world’s emissions — gave plans or some kind of commitments to further curb fossil fuel emissions and fight climate change, Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed said.
    In a video address, Xi pledged that China would increase its wind and solar power sixfold from 2020 levels, make pollution-free vehicles mainstream and “basically establish a climate adaptive society.”

    Europe then followed with a less detailed and not quite official new climate change fighting plan. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said last week, member states agreed that their emissions cutting targets would range between 66% and 72%. The EU will formally submit its plan before the November negotiations.

    While the new promises are in the right direction and show stronger commitment to fighter climate change, “these targets will not be enough to keep us safe from climate destruction,” said Jake Schmidt, senior strategic director for international climate at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

    Xi and Brazil’s leader also made statements on Wednesday afternoon that may have referred to U.S. President Donald Trump’s attacks a day earlier on renewable energy and the concept of climate change. “While some countries are acting against it, the international community should stay focused on the right direction,” Xi said.

    Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who is hosting the upcoming climate conference, said, “no one is safe from the effect of climate change. Walls at borders will not stop droughts or storms,” Lula said. “Nature does not bow down to bombs or warships. No country stands above another.”

    Said Guterres: “The science demands action. The law commands it. The economics compel it. And people are calling for it.”

    Time to ‘wake up’ amid catastrophes

    Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine said she was there to issue “a demand for us all to wake up from a community whose hospitals and schools are being destroyed” by rising tides. She said she has regularly been awakened by floods and drought emergencies in her small island nation and that it will soon be others’ turn.

    “If we fail to wake up now and end our dependence on fossil fuels the leaders of every country in this room will be woken up by calls about catastrophes of wildfires, of storms, of heatwaves, and of starvation and drought,” she said.
    Pakistani Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif said his country knows this all too well, with recent floods that have affected 5 million people across over 4,000 villages, killing over 1,000.

    “As I speak to you, my country is reeling from intense monsoon rains, flash floods, mudslides and devastating urban flooding,” he said. “We are facing this calamity at a time when the scars of the 2022 floods that inflicted losses exceeding $30 billion and displaced millions are still visible across our land.”
    Anthony Albanese, prime minister of Australia, called this a decisive decade for climate action and said Australians know the toll of more frequent and extreme weather events like cyclones, floods, bush fires and droughts. “Australia knows we are not alone,” he said.

    ‘Here we must admit failure’

    “Warming appears to be accelerating,” climate scientist Johan Rockstrom said in a science briefing that started the summit. “Here we must admit failure. Failure to protect peoples and nations from unmanageable impacts of human-induced climate change.”

    “We’re dangerously close to triggering fundamental and irreversible change,” Rockstrom said.

    Texas Tech climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe told leaders that every tenth of a degree of warming is connected to worsening floods, wildfires, heat waves, storms and many more deaths: “What’s at stake is nothing less than everything and everyone we love.”

    In a news conference, Lula said he invited both Trump and Xi to the November climate negotiations, saying it’s important that leaders listen to scientists.
    Under the 2015 Paris climate accord, 195 nations are supposed to submit new more stringent five-year plans on how to curb carbon emissions from the burning of coal, oil and natural gas.

    U.N. officials said countries really need to get their plans in by the end of the month so the U.N. can calculate how much more warming Earth is on track for if nations do what they promise. Former U.S. President Joe Biden submitted America’s plan late last year before leaving office and the Trump administration has distanced itself from the plan.

    Before 2015, the world was on path for 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming since pre-industrial times, but now has trimmed that to 2.6 degrees Celsius (4.7 degrees Fahrenheit), Guterres said.

    However, the Paris accord set a goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) since the mid 19th century and the world has already warmed about 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit) since.

    Simon Stiell, UN’s climate chief, said the Chinese plan “is a clear signal that the future global economy will run on clean energy. And that for every country, stronger and faster climate action means more economic growth, jobs, affordable and secure energy, cleaner air, and better health, for all of us, everywhere.”

    Lula also praised China’s announcement, but some advocates were underwhelmed, but they said China has reputation for under-promising and over-delivering on climate action.

    “China’s latest climate target is too timid given the country’s extraordinary record on clean energy,” said former Colombia President Juan Manuel Santos, chair of the group The Elders. “China must go further and faster”

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    Copyright 2025. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Big Tech Dreams of Putting Data Centers in Space

    [ad_1]

    For one thing, the systems he imagines process data relatively slowly compared to those on terra firma. They’d be constantly bombarded by radiation, and “obsolescence would be a problem” because making repairs or upgrades would be confoundingly difficult. Hajimiri believes that data centers in space could, someday, be a viable solution but hesitates to say when that day might come. “Definitely it would be doable in a few years,” he said. “The question is how effective they would be, and how cost-effective they would become.”

    The idea of simply putting data centers in orbit is not limited to the offhand musings of techies or the deeper thought of academics. Even some elected officials in cities where companies like Amazon hope to build data centers are raising the point. Tucson, Arizona, councilmember Nikki Lee waxed poetic about their potential during an August hearing, in which the council unanimously voted down a proposed data center in their city.

    “A lot of people are saying data centers don’t belong in the desert,” Lee said. But “if this is truly a national priority,” then the focus must be on “putting federal research and development dollars into looking at data centers that will exist in space. And that may sound wild to you all and a little science fiction, but it’s actually happening.”

    That’s true, but it’s happening on an experimental scale, not an industrial one. A startup called Starcloud hoped to launch a refrigerator-sized satellite housing a few Nvidia chips in August, but the launch date was pushed back. Lonestar Data Systems landed a miniature data center, carrying precious information like an Imagine Dragons song, on the moon a few months ago, though the lander tipped over and died in the attempt. More such launches are planned for the coming months. But it’s “very hard to predict how quickly this idea will become economically feasible,” said Matthew Weinzierl, a Harvard University economist who studies market forces in space. “Space-based data centers may well have some niche uses, such as for processing space-based data and providing national security capabilities,” he said. “To be a meaningful rival to terrestrial centers, however, they will need to compete on cost and service quality like anything else.”

    For now, it’s much more expensive to put a data center in space than it is to put one in, say, Virginia’s Data Center Valley, where power demand could double in the next decade if left unregulated. And as long as staying on Earth remains cheaper, profit-motivated companies will favor terrestrial data-center expansion.

    Still, there is one factor that might encourage OpenAI and others to look toward the heavens: There isn’t much regulation up there. Building data centers on Earth requires obtaining municipal permits, and companies can be stymied by local governments whose residents worry that data center development might siphon their water, raise their electricity bills, or overheat their planet. In space, there aren’t any neighbors to complain, said Michelle Hanlon, a political scientist and lawyer who leads the Center for Air and Space Law at the University of Mississippi. “If you are a US company seeking to put data centers in space, then the sooner the better, before Congress is like, ‘Oh, we need to regulate that.’”

    [ad_2]

    Sophie Hurwitz

    Source link

  • Big Businesses Are Doing Carbon Dioxide Removal All Wrong

    [ad_1]

    Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and H&M are currently investing in durable CDR. A spokesperson for H&M described the fast-fashion company’s purchase of 10,000 metric tons of durable CDR from the Swiss company Climeworks, one of the largest purchases to date, and said H&M plans to use them to neutralize residual emissions. The tech companies affirmed their commitment to reduce emissions first and then use carbon removal to offset residual emissions, though none of them addressed NewClimate Institute’s concerns that they would use large amounts of durable and nondurable CDR to claim progress toward net-zero.

    A statement provided to Grist from TotalEnergies did not address CDR. It instead described the company’s support for carbon capture and storage and “nature-based solutions.” The latter refers to short-lived offsets, such as tree-planting, that the NewClimate Institute does not believe are appropriate for offsetting fossil fuel emissions.

    Apple, Duke Energy, and Shein declined to comment after seeing the report. The remaining 24 companies did not respond to inquiries from Grist.

    Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan and the dean of its School for Environment and Sustainability, said the NewClimate Institute report is timely. “Right now the whole idea of CDR … is kind of a Wild West scene, with lots of actors promising to do things that may or may not be possible,” he said. He added that companies appear to be using CDR as an alternative to mitigating their climate pollution.

    “The priority has to be on reducing emissions, not on durable CDR at this point,” he told Grist.

    In the near term, durable CDR is doing virtually nothing to offset emissions. As of 2023, only 0.0023 gigatons of CO2 were removed from the atmosphere each year using these methods. That’s about 15,000 times less than the annual amount of climate pollution from fossil fuels and cement manufacturing.

    According to the NewClimate Institute, voluntary initiatives are no substitute for government-mandated emissions reduction targets and investments in durable CDR. To the extent that these initiatives exist, however, the organization says they should provide a clearer definition of what constitutes “durable” carbon removal; determine companies’ responsibility for scaling up durable CDR based on their ongoing and historical emissions, or—perhaps more realistically—on their ability to pay; and require companies to set separate targets for emissions reductions and support for durable CDR. The last recommendation is intended to reinforce a climate action hierarchy that puts mitigation before offsetting. Companies should not “hide inaction on decarbonization behind investments in removals,” as the report puts it.

    Mooldijk said voluntary initiatives can incentivize investments in durable CDR by recognizing “climate contributions.” These might manifest as simple statements about companies’ monetary contributions to durable CDR, instead of claims about the amount of CO2 that they have theoretically neutralized.

    Some of these recommendations were submitted earlier this year to the Science-Based Targets initiative, the world’s most respected verifier of private sector climate targets. The organization is getting ready to update its corporate net-zero standard with new guidance on the use of CDR. Another standard-setter, the International Organization for Standardization, is similarly preparing to release new standards on net-zero, which could curtail some of the most questionable corporate climate claims while also drumming up support for durable CDR.

    John Reilly, a senior lecturer emeritus at the MIT Sloan School of Management, said that ultimately, proper regulation of corporate climate commitments—including of durable CDR—will fall on governments. Companies “are happy to throw a little money into these things,” he said, “but I don’t think voluntary guidelines are ever going to get you there.”

    [ad_2]

    Joseph Winters

    Source link

  • New style of recycling leaves Sonoma County community concerned about pollution

    [ad_1]

    Sonoma County start-up Resynergi says it has developed a new way to recycle most plastics that would normally end up in a landfill. They say they will use a method called pyrolysis, which uses a microwave to heat the plastics to separate their molecules from contaminants. That turns the plastic into an oil that will be reused to make more plastics. “Instead of drilling out of the ground, which causes a lot of greenhouse gases, we take the plastic, chip it, process that plastic,” said Resynergi CEO Brian Bauer. Their warehouse in Rohnert Park is full of various plastics waiting to be recycled while the company waits for the green light from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. However, some in the community claim Resynergi isn’t paying attention to its potential emissions. They say pyrolysis is just another form of incineration. “The lack of regard for the potential health impacts,” said Molly Rubardt, a Rohnert Park resident. “The lack of regard for the potential real fire and explosion risk, we live in a fire-risky area.”The company claims its methods will not involve burning plastics. “Incineration requires oxygen, you’re burning plastic,” said Sasha Kosek, Resynergi’s lead chemist. “Pyrolysis, you have removed all the oxygen and the molecules literally cannot burn.”The other concern is about the plant’s close proximity to Credo High School. Residents fear the emissions will create a health risk for the students. “You can’t have a petro-chemical plant that produces thousands of gallons of oil next to schools and communities next to homes,” said Mike Puccetti, another Rohnert Park resident. Many of the concerned residents protested in front of city hall, asking their council to revoke Resynergi’s permit to operate. They are also gathering a petition to send to the BAAQMD to ask them not to offer Resynergi a permit to start their machines. “Rohnert Park doesn’t allow incinerators within city limits,” Rubardt said. “If it is not an incinerator and it is what they say it is, they need to go back and get reclassified.”However, the company continues to insist emissions will be low. “The emissions coming from here are the equivalent of a semi truck driving down the road,” Bauer said. The BAAQMD sent out three notices of violations in August, claiming Resynergi built equipment without proper permits. They also told the San Francisco Chronicle that its experts evaluated the added risk of cancer from the plant’s estimated emissions would be minimal.Some in the city think this technology could be beneficial for recycling plastics, but they don’t want it this embedded in their community. “Why not build it near Recology or near a highway?” Puccetti said. “I don’t think anybody is thinking it is a bad idea, but why is it in a subcommunity? Why is it right next to a high school?”See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    ROHNERT PARK, Calif. —

    Sonoma County start-up Resynergi says it has developed a new way to recycle most plastics that would normally end up in a landfill.

    They say they will use a method called pyrolysis, which uses a microwave to heat the plastics to separate their molecules from contaminants. That turns the plastic into an oil that will be reused to make more plastics.

    “Instead of drilling out of the ground, which causes a lot of greenhouse gases, we take the plastic, chip it, process that plastic,” said Resynergi CEO Brian Bauer.

    Their warehouse in Rohnert Park is full of various plastics waiting to be recycled while the company waits for the green light from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. However, some in the community claim Resynergi isn’t paying attention to its potential emissions. They say pyrolysis is just another form of incineration.

    “The lack of regard for the potential health impacts,” said Molly Rubardt, a Rohnert Park resident. “The lack of regard for the potential real fire and explosion risk, we live in a fire-risky area.”

    The company claims its methods will not involve burning plastics.

    “Incineration requires oxygen, you’re burning plastic,” said Sasha Kosek, Resynergi’s lead chemist. “Pyrolysis, you have removed all the oxygen and the molecules literally cannot burn.”

    The other concern is about the plant’s close proximity to Credo High School. Residents fear the emissions will create a health risk for the students.

    “You can’t have a petro-chemical plant that produces thousands of gallons of oil next to schools and communities next to homes,” said Mike Puccetti, another Rohnert Park resident.

    Many of the concerned residents protested in front of city hall, asking their council to revoke Resynergi’s permit to operate. They are also gathering a petition to send to the BAAQMD to ask them not to offer Resynergi a permit to start their machines.

    “Rohnert Park doesn’t allow incinerators within city limits,” Rubardt said. “If it is not an incinerator and it is what they say it is, they need to go back and get reclassified.”

    However, the company continues to insist emissions will be low.

    “The emissions coming from here are the equivalent of a semi truck driving down the road,” Bauer said.

    The BAAQMD sent out three notices of violations in August, claiming Resynergi built equipment without proper permits. They also told the San Francisco Chronicle that its experts evaluated the added risk of cancer from the plant’s estimated emissions would be minimal.

    Some in the city think this technology could be beneficial for recycling plastics, but they don’t want it this embedded in their community.

    “Why not build it near Recology or near a highway?” Puccetti said. “I don’t think anybody is thinking it is a bad idea, but why is it in a subcommunity? Why is it right next to a high school?”

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • GHGSat Unveils Carbon Dioxide Plume Images From Vanguard, the World’s First Commercial Satellite That Pinpoints CO2 to Individual Facilities

    [ad_1]

    The carbon dioxide plume, the first shared by GHGSat, was detected from a power-generating station, with an estimated rate of 12Mt of CO2 per year.


    BAKU, Azerbaijan, November 14, 2024 (Newswire.com)
    –
    GHGSat, the global leader in satellite emissions monitoring, shared high-resolution images from Vanguard, the world’s first commercial satellite designed to trace carbon dioxide to individual industrial facilities, for the first time at COP29.

    The carbon dioxide plume was detected from a power-generating station, with an estimated rate of 12 Mt of CO2 per year.

    Released just as the international climate community convenes in Baku for the annual UN climate conference, the data marks a transformation in the way carbon dioxide emissions are monitored, reported, mitigated, and traded. 

    Recent research has shown that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are now 8% higher than 2015 levels, when the Paris Agreement that set landmark reductions targets for 2030 was first negotiated. Data like the observations from Vanguard, which zooms in to identify where exactly leaks originate, will be instrumental in pinpointing the sources and rates of those emissions, so that they can be effectively quantified and addressed. 

    “This detection is a critical first step toward a new era in monitoring emissions from space,” said Stephane Germain, Founder and CEO of GHGSat. “Ultimately, the insights generated by Vanguard will empower industry operators and government regulators with precise data required to address carbon dioxide emissions, guiding the way to the ambitious emissions reductions needed to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.” 

    GHGSat C-10, known as Vanguard, was launched in 2023, joining GHGSat’s constellation of 11 methane-sensing satellites as the first of a new carbon-detecting fleet that GHGSat will put into orbit over the coming years. Data from the satellite will enable the standardized measurement of greenhouse gas emissions at sites from carbon-intensive industries, such as steel mills, cement plants, and oil & gas facilities, anywhere in the world. High-resolution CO2 data will also improve the accuracy of country-level emissions inventories and the Global Stocktake, and build confidence in the global carbon trading market, estimated to be approximately $1 trillion as it continues to develop.

    GHGSat pioneered industrial greenhouse gas emissions monitoring from space in 2016, building a fleet of high-resolution satellites capable of tracing greenhouse gas emissions down to 25m—the area of an Olympic-sized swimming pool—and capturing methane emissions as small as 100 kg/hour at unmatched near-daily frequency. 

    Today, GHGSat serves as a trusted partner to the United Nations, NASA, the European Space Agency, and the governments of the United States, Canada and Great Britain, as well as multinational companies in carbon-intensive industries. In 2023 alone, GHGSat’s constellation made over 3 million measurements across 85 countries. Since the beginning of GHGSat’s journey, data from its satellite constellation has enabled mitigation of methane emissions equivalent to the annual emissions of nearly 3.5 million gasoline-powered cars on U.S. roads.

    Source: GHGSat

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: Here’s why pursuing net-zero buildings — even in Aspen — isn’t practical or necessary

    Opinion: Here’s why pursuing net-zero buildings — even in Aspen — isn’t practical or necessary

    [ad_1]

    The company I work for recently built a new ticket office at the base of Buttermilk Mountain in Aspen, Colorado. Environmentally, we killed it: argon-gas-filled windows, super-thick insulation and comprehensive air sealing, 100% electrification using heat pumps instead of gas boilers. All within budget.

    Yet one of the first comments we received was from a famous energy guru: “Nice building. But why do you have a heating system at all?” Or more simply put: “Why didn’t you build a perfect building, instead of just a really good one?”

    Solving climate change could depend on how we answer that question. My answer: Society needs the Prius of buildings, not the Tesla X.

    The green building movement didn’t originate only from a desire to protect the environment. It often had elements of the bizarre ego gratification that trumped practicality.

    Recall “Earthships” that used old tires and aluminum cans in the walls. Geodesic domes were interesting looking but produced inordinate waste to build. They also leaked. Rudolf Steiner’s weirdly wonderful Goetheanum was an all-concrete structure designed to unite “what is spiritual in the human being to what is spiritual in the universe.”

    Early practitioners such as Steiner, Buckminster Fuller, and Bill McDonough, among others, were often building monuments, whose ultimate goal became the concept of “net zero.” Net zero was a building that released no carbon dioxide emissions at all.

    Designers achieved that goal by constructing well-sealed, heavily insulated, properly oriented, and controlled buildings–but then they did something wasteful. They added solar panels to make up for carbon dioxide emissions from heating with natural gas. The approach zeroed out emissions, but at extraordinary cost that came in the form of added labor, expense and lost opportunity.

    While net zero wasn’t a good idea even when most buildings were heated with natural gas, the rapid decarbonization of utility grids — happening almost everywhere — and advances in electrification make the idea downright pointless.

    Instead, all you need to build an eventual net zero building is to go all-electric. It won’t be net zero today, but it will be net zero when the grid reaches 100% carbon-free power. So, all that really matters is that building codes require 100% electrification.

    Yet many communities remain focused on that sexy goal of net zero, and therefore include requirements for solar panels, or “solar ready” wiring. Even apart from the issue of cost, many utilities don’t need rooftop solar because they increasingly have access to huge solar arrays, giving them more electricity than they need in peak times.

    What utilities really need is energy storage and smart management.

    That means home batteries and grid integration that allows utilities to “talk” to buildings and turn off appliances during peak times. The problem is that environmentalists haven’t evolved: Just like we can’t retire our tie-dyes, we think “green” means rooftop solar panels.

    My company’s Buttermilk building passes the only test that matters: “If everyone built this kind of structure, would it solve the built environment’s portion of the climate problem?” The answer for our building is “yes.”

    Still, aspirational monuments matter. We need the Lincoln Memorial, the Empire State Building. But if we’re going to solve climate change in buildings, which is about a third of the total problem, new structures will have to reconceive what we consider efficient and beautiful. And it doesn’t have to break the bank.

    Electrification, for example, is getting cheaper every year. Years ago, I served on an environmental board for the town of Carbondale in western Colorado. The overwhelming interest there was ending dandelion spraying in the town park. But at one point, we worked on a building.

    After a long conversation about the technical tricks and feats we could pull off, a Rudolf Steiner disciple named Farmer Jack Reed said: “We should also plant bulbs in the fall so colorful flowers blossom in the spring.” “Why?” I asked, stuck in my own technocratic hole. He said: “Because flowers are beautiful and they make people happy.”

    So, too, are realistic solutions as we adapt to climate change.

    Auden Schendler is a contributor to Writers on the Range, writersontherange.org, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is senior vice president of sustainability at Aspen One. His book, Terrible Beauty: Reckoning with Climate Complicity and Rediscovering our Soul, comes out in November.

    Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

    To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

    Originally Published:

    [ad_2]

    Auden Schendler

    Source link

  • Clock is ticking to clean the Front Range’s dirty air by 2027. The region’s off to a bad start this summer.

    Clock is ticking to clean the Front Range’s dirty air by 2027. The region’s off to a bad start this summer.

    [ad_1]

    Colorado has three years to lower ground-level ozone pollution to meet federal standards, and this summer’s hazy skies — caused by oil and gas drilling, heavy vehicle traffic and wildfire smoke — are putting the state in a hole as it’s already logged more dirty air days than in all of 2023.

    “Our state has taken a lot of steps to improve air quality, but you can see it in the skies, you can see it in the air, that we still have work to do,” said Kirsten Schatz, clean air advocate for the Colorado Public Interest Research Group.

    Two months into the 2024 summer ozone season, the Front Range already has recorded more high ozone days than the entire summer of 2023. As of Monday, which is the most recent data available, ozone levels had exceeded federal air quality standards on 28 days. At the same point in 2023, there had been 27 high-ozone days.

    The summer ozone season runs from June 1 to Aug. 31. However, the region encompassing metro Denver and the northern Front Range this year recorded its first high ozone day in May, and in some years ozone pollution exceeds federal standards into mid-September.

    The region is failing to meet two air quality standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency.

    The first benchmark is to lower average ozone pollution to a 2008 standard of 75 parts per billion. The northern Front Range is in what’s called “severe non-attainment” for that number, meaning motorists must use a more expensive blend of gasoline during the summer and more businesses must apply for federal permits that regulate how much pollution they spill into the air.

    The second benchmark requires the region to lower its average ozone pollution to a 2015 standard of 70 parts per billion, considered the most acceptable level of air pollution for human health. In July, the EPA downgraded the northern Front Range to be in serious violation of that standard as the region’s ozone level now sits at 81 parts per billion. The state must now submit to the EPA a new plan for lowering emissions.

    Colorado needs to meet both EPA benchmarks by 2027, or it will be downgraded again and face more federal regulation.

    Of the 28 days the state has recorded high ozone pollution levels, 17 exceeded the 2008 standard of 70 parts per billion, according to data compiled by the Regional Air Quality Council, an organization that advises the state on how to reduce air pollution.

    That’s bad news for the region after state air regulators predicted Colorado would be able to meet that standard by the 2027 deadline. The EPA calculates average ozone pollution levels on a three-year average, so this summer’s bad numbers will drag down the final grade.

    “It’s not a good first year to have,” said Mike Silverstein, the air quality council’s executive director.

    Smoke from wildfires near and far

    Ground-level ozone pollution forms on hot summer days when volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides react in the sunlight. Those compounds and gases are released by oil and gas wells and refineries, automobiles on the road, fumes from paint and other industrial chemicals, and gas-powered lawn and garden equipment.

    It forms a smog that can cause the skies to become brown or hazy, and it is harmful to people, especially those with lung and heart disease, the elderly and children. Ground-level ozone is different than the ozone in the atmosphere that protects Earth from the sun’s powerful rays.

    Wildfire smoke blowing from Canada and the Pacific Northwest did not help Colorado’s pollution levels in July, and then multiple fires erupted along the Front Range over the past week, creating homegrown pollution from fine particulate matter such as smoke, soot and ash. Ultimately, though, the heavy smoke days could be wiped from the calculations from 2024, but that decision will be made at a later date.

    Still, June also saw multiple high ozone days, and air quality experts say much of the pollution originates at home in Colorado and cannot be blamed on outside influences.

    The out-of-state wildfire smoke sent ozone levels skyrocketing the week of July 21 to 27, Silverstein said, but it’s not the reason the numbers are high. The week prior saw ozone levels above federal standards, too, and wildfire smoke had not drifted into the region.

    “Pull the wildfires out and we would probably still have had high ozone,” he said.

    Jeremy Nichols, senior advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, also warned that wildfires should not be used as an excuse for the region’s air pollution.

    “While the wildfires are out of our control, there is a whole bunch of air pollution we can control,” he said. “I don’t want to let that cover up the ugliness that existed here in the first place.”

    Nichols blames oil and gas drilling for the region’s smog. The state is not doing enough to regulate the industry, he said.

    “We actually need to recognize we are at a point where oil and gas needs to stop drilling on high ozone days,” Nichols said. “Just like we’re told to stay home on high ozone days, business as usual needs to stop. I don’t think we’ve clamped down on them and in many respects they are getting a free pass to pollute.”

    Legislation that would have prevented drilling on high ozone days failed during the 2024 session.

    However, the air quality council has approved two measures to reduce emissions in the oil fields and is preparing to send those to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for approval.

    One proposal would require drilling companies to eliminate emissions from pneumatic actuating devices, equipment driven by pressurized gas to open and close valves in pipelines, Silverstein said. Oil companies already are required to make 50% of those devices emission-free, and the federal government also is requiring them to be 100% emission-free by 2035. But Colorado’s proposal would accelerate the timeline, he said.

    The second proposal would tell companies to stop performing blowdowns, which is when workers vent fumes from pipelines before beginning maintenance to clear explosive gases, when an ozone alert is issued, Silverstein said.

    “There are thousands of these very small events, but these small events add up to significant activity,” he said.

    Gabby Richmond, a spokeswoman for the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, said the industry supports the new regulations. She said operators also were electrifying operations where possible and voluntarily delaying operational activities on high ozone days.

    “Our industry values clean air, and we are committed to pioneering innovative solutions that protect our environment and make Colorado a great place to live,” Richmond said in a statement. “As a part of this commitment, we have significantly reduced ozone-causing emissions by over 50% through technology, regulatory initiatives and voluntary measures — all in the spirit of being good neighbors in the communities where we live and work.”

    “Knock down emissions where we can”

    Meanwhile, people who live in metro Denver and the northern Front Range are asked to do their part, too.

    [ad_2]

    Noelle Phillips

    Source link

  • Austin-based company fined for flaring that led to 7.6 million pounds of excess gases known to cause respiratory issues

    Austin-based company fined for flaring that led to 7.6 million pounds of excess gases known to cause respiratory issues

    [ad_1]

    New Mexico has reached a record settlement with a Texas-based company over air pollution violations at natural gas gathering sites in the Permian Basin.

    The $24.5 million agreement with Ameredev announced Monday is the largest settlement the state Environment Department has ever reached for a civil oil and gas violation. It stems from the flaring of billions of cubic feet of natural gas that the company had extracted over an 18-month period but wasn’t able to transport to downstream processors.

    Environment Secretary James Kenney said in an interview that the flared gas would have been enough to have supplied nearly 17,000 homes for a year.

    “It’s completely the opposite of the way it’s supposed to work,” Kenney said. “Had they not wasted New Mexico’s resources, they could have put that gas to use.”

    The flaring, or burning off of the gas, resulted in more than 7.6 million pounds of excess emissions that included hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and other gases that state regulators said are known to cause respiratory issues and contribute to climate change.

    Ameredev in a statement issued Monday said it was pleased to have solved what is described as a “legacy issue” and that the state’s Air Quality Bureau was unaware of any ongoing compliance problems at the company’s facilities.

    “This is an issue we take very seriously,” the company stated. “Over the last four years, Ameredev has not experienced any flaring-related excess emissions events thanks to our significant — and ongoing — investments in various advanced technologies and operational enhancements.”

    While operators can vent or flare natural gas during emergencies or equipment failures, New Mexico in 2021 adopted rules to prohibit routine venting and flaring and set a 2026 deadline for the companies to capture 98% of their gas. The rules also require the regular tracking and reporting of emissions.

    Ameredev said it was capturing more than 98% of its gas when the new venting and flaring rules were adopted, and the annual capture rate has been above 98% ever since.

    A study published in March in the journal Nature calculated that American oil and natural gas wells, pipelines and compressors were spewing more greenhouse gases than the government thought, causing $9.3 billion in yearly climate damage. The authors said it is a fixable problem, as about half of the emissions come from just 1% of oil and gas sites.

    Under the settlement, Ameredev agreed to do an independent audit of its operations in New Mexico to ensure compliance with emission requirements. It must also submit monthly reports on actual emission rates and propose a plan for weekly inspections for a two-year period or install leak and repair monitoring equipment.

    Kenney said it was a citizen complaint that first alerted state regulators to Ameredev’s flaring.

    The Environment Department currently is investigating numerous other potential pollution violations around the basin, and Kenney said it was likely more penalties could result.

    “With a 50% average compliance rate with the air quality regulations by the oil and gas industry,” he said, “we have an obligation to continue to go and ensure compliance and hold polluters accountable.”

    [ad_2]

    Susan Montoya Bryan, The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Letters: Russell Wilson wasn’t the problem. Here’s who should have been sacked.

    Letters: Russell Wilson wasn’t the problem. Here’s who should have been sacked.

    [ad_1]

    Russell Wilson wasn’t the problem

    Re: “Broncos releasing QB Russell Wilson, team announces, making expected move official after disappointing two-year run,” March 4 news story

    From the sidelines – in sacking Russell Wilson — the Broncos and Denver lost not only a great QB, but very decent and genuine human beings, both he and his family. The fault lies not with Wilson but with Sean Payton and his inability to coach the talent he had at his disposal. And quality talent it was. They should have dumped Payton. The very best to Wilson and his family. Would it not be the height of irony if he lands with a team that knocks Denver out of Super Bowl competition?

    Steven Turner, Aurora

    Transition to renewables is more than fast enough

    Re: “Colorado’s renewable energy transition too slow,” March 2 letter to the editor

    I disagree with the letter writer’s opinion that Colorado’s clean energy transition is too slow.  I don’t believe the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s data support his argument.

    Yes, Iowa produces more wind power than Colorado. It also operates a fleet of coal plants. In November 2023, Iowa’s coal power consumption per capita equaled Colorado’s. In 2022, Iowa’s and Colorado’s power sectors produced roughly the same amount of CO2 emissions, but Colorado has twice the population.

    [ad_2]

    DP Opinion

    Source link

  • Biden administration may give automakers more time to shift to EVs

    Biden administration may give automakers more time to shift to EVs

    [ad_1]

    The Biden administration plans to loosen the limits on tailpipe emissions proposed last year by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), giving automakers more time before they’ll be required to sell significantly more electric vehicles than gas-powered cars, reported this weekend. Under the , EVs would have to account for 67 percent of new car and light-duty truck sales by 2032.

    Rather than forcing manufacturers to start ramping up EV sales right away, the changes would allow them to make the shift more gradually through the remainder of the 2020s, sources told the NYT. After 2030, though, EV sales would need to drastically increase. Automakers have argued that the current cost of electric vehicles and the lack of charging infrastructure stand in the way of hitting such extreme targets as those proposed by the EPA. Last year, just 7.6 percent of new cars sold in the US were EVs, per NYT.

    The revision is likely a move in part to appease labor unions, which represent a demographic seen as a key area of support for Biden and have expressed a need for more time to unionize new EV plants among other concerns, according to NYT. The rules are not yet finalized, but are expected to be published in the spring.

    [ad_2]

    Cheyenne MacDonald

    Source link

  • Greens push for EU climate neutrality by 2040 in election manifesto

    Greens push for EU climate neutrality by 2040 in election manifesto

    [ad_1]

    The earlier target represents a loss for the German Greens who, ahead of a three-day party congress in Lyon this weekend, had pushed for the climate neutrality target to be delayed to 2045, according to amendments seen by POLITICO.

    The election manifesto, which was adopted by a large majority of national delegations, warned that meeting these climate objectives “must not rely on false solutions such as geo-engineering.”

    The Greens are at risk of losing about a third of their seats in the European Parliament at the EU election in June, while a backlash against Brussels’ green agenda has been sweeping across the Continent in recent weeks. The party’s response has been to redouble the push on its core demands for higher climate ambition.

    The final manifesto, for example, calls for the EU energy system to rely on 100 percent renewable sources and to phase out all fossil fuels by 2040, “starting with coal by 2030.” It also calls on the EU to adopt a plan for phasing out “fossil gas and oil as early as 2035 and no later than 2040.”

    That point is another loss for the German Greens, who had pushed for deleting phaseout dates for fossil gas and oil from the manifesto.

    The Greens have also been fighting back against the conservatives’ and far right’s attacks blaming them for farmers’ current struggles and for forcing the green transition to quickly on the sector.

    Over the weekend, the Greens amended their manifesto to respond to farmers’ discontent, saying they will campaign for “a new agricultural model that reduces emissions, protect the environment, and foster social justice.”

    The text insists that “farmers should make a decent income of their work,” and that the Greens will push to “make sure farmers are not exposed to unfair competition from products not respecting the same standards, including those imported from third countries” — which have been key demands of farmers’ unions during the recent demonstrations.



    [ad_2]

    Louise Guillot

    Source link

  • ETHERO Truck + Energy Enters Partnership Agreement With Harbinger

    ETHERO Truck + Energy Enters Partnership Agreement With Harbinger

    [ad_1]


    WASHINGTON, January 23, 2024 (Newswire.com)
    –
    ETHERO Truck + Energy and Harbinger electrified the expo center floor for attendees of FedFleet during this year’s Washington D.C. Auto Show by debuting their new partnership while showcasing the Southern California-based automotive manufacturer’s innovative electric stripped chassis.

    ETHERO is poised to be one of the first to join the network of dealers that will offer the Harbinger EV platform. The scalable chassis, built to support the most popular medium-duty body types available today, was designed from the ground up to address the unique performance, durability, and lifespan expectations required of Class 4 to Class 6 vehicles. Unique in the medium-duty marketplace, Harbinger developed and manufactures the chassis, powertrain and battery packs of its EV platform in-house.

    “Adding a medium-duty option as flexible and sophisticated as Harbinger’s technology to our product offerings is something we’ve wanted to do since ETHERO’s inception,” said Dave Rogers, director of ETHERO’s electric truck division. “Something all fleet owners are looking for is versatility. Being able to offer this functional, adaptable chassis from Harbinger alongside our other zero-emissions trucks opens more doors for companies interested in EV technology at a level that fits their operational goals.”

    “ETHERO joining the dealer network for Harbinger is additional validation of the market responding to our clean-slate approach to the medium-duty commercial vehicle industry,” said John Harris, CEO and co-founder of Harbinger.

    To learn more details on inventory, energy services, and dealership locations, visit www.ethero.com.

    To learn more about Harbinger’s technology, visit www.harbingermotors.com. 

    Media Kit
     

    # # #
     

    About ETHERO Truck + Energy
    ETHERO is a multi-brand electric truck dealer and charging infrastructure solutions partner guiding customers through the transition to a zero-tailpipe emissions fleet. We provide industry-leading, proven energy generation and distribution, uniquely positioned to provide fleet customers with wrap-around personalized support. Our experienced team comprises decades of expertise in commercial truck sales and service, parts, distributed power solutions, and charging station infrastructures with a boots-on-the-ground approach to help drive your fleet to the sustainable future.

    About Harbinger
    Harbinger is an electric vehicle (EV) company on a mission to transform an industry starving for innovation. Harbinger’s best-in-class team of EV, battery, and drivetrain experts have pooled their deep experience to support the growing demand for medium-duty EVs. Leveraging a foundation of proprietary, in-house developed vehicle technologies designed specifically for commercial and specialty vehicle applications, Harbinger is bringing a first-of-its-kind EV platform to market, priced for zero acquisition premium. Harbinger: familiar form, revolutionary foundation.

    Source: ETHERO Truck + Energy

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The ‘dirty dozen’ of Davos

    The ‘dirty dozen’ of Davos

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    It’s that time of year again: Leaders, business titans, philanthropists and celebs descend on the Swiss ski town of Davos to discuss the fate of the world and do deals/shots with the global elite at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum.

    This year’s theme: “Rebuilding trust.” Prescient, given the dumpster fire the world seems to be turning into lately, both literally (climate change) and figuratively (where to even begin?).

    As always, the Davos great and good will be rubbing shoulders with some of the world’s absolute top-drawer dirtbags. While there’s been a distinct dearth of Russian oligarchs in attendance at the WEF since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and Donald Trump will be tied up with the Iowa caucus, there are still plenty of would-be autocrats, dictators, thugs, extortionists, misery merchants, spoilers and political pariahs on the Davos guest list.

    1. Argentine President Javier Milei

    Known as the Donald Trump of Argentina — and also as “The Madman” and “The Wig” — the chainsaw-wielding Javier Milei has it all: a fanatical supporter base, background as a TV shock jock, libertarian anarcho-capitalist policies (except when it comes to abortion), and a … memorable … hairdo.

    A long-time Davos devotee (he’s been attending the WEF for years), Milei’s libertarian policies have turned from kooky thought bubbles to concerning reality after he was elected president of South America’s second-largest economy, riding a wave of discontent with the political establishment (sound familiar?). The question now is how far Milei will go in delivering on his campaign promises to hack back public service and state spending, close the Argentine central bank and drop the peso.

    If you do get stuck talking to Milei in the congress center or on the slopes, here are some conversation starters …

    Milei’s likes: 1) American mobster Al Capone — “a hero.” 2) His cloned English Mastiff dogs — his advisers. 3) Spreading the gospel on tantric sex. 4) Selling human organs on the open market.

    Milei’s dislikes: 1) Pope Francis — “a filthy leftist” and “communist turd” — though the Milei administration has recently invited him back to Argentina to visit. 2) Taxes — insisting (incorrectly) Jesus didn’t pay ’em. 3) Sex education — a Marxist plot to destroy the family. 4) Fighting climate change — a hoax, naturally.

    2. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman

    Rumor has it that Mohammed bin Salman will make his first in-person WEF appearance at this year’s event, accompanied by a giant posse of top Saudi officials.

    It’s the ultimate redemption arc for the repressive authoritarian ruler of a country with an appalling human rights record — who, according to United States intelligence, personally ordered the brutal assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018. 

    Rumor has it that Mohammed bin Salman will make his first in-person WEF appearance at this year’s event | Leon Neal/Getty Images

    Perhaps MBS would still be a WEF pariah — consigned to rubbing shoulders with mere B-listers at his own Davos in the desert — if it were not for that other one-time Davos-darling-turned-persona-non-grata: Russian President Vladimir Putin. By launching his invasion of Ukraine, which killed thousands of civilians and hundreds of thousands of troops, Putin managed to push the West back into MBS’ embrace. Guess it’s all just oil under the bridge now.

    Here’s a piece of free advice: Try to avoid being caught getting a signature MBS fist-bump. Unless, of course, you’re the next person on our list …

    3. Jared Kushner, founder of Affinity Partners

    Jared Kushner is the closest anyone on the mountain is likely to come to Trump, the former — and possibly future — billionaire baron-cum-anti-elitist president of the United States of America. 

    On the one hand, a chat with The Donald’s son-in-law in the days just after the Iowa caucus would probably be quite a get for the Davos devotee. On other hand … it’s Jared Kushner.

    The 43-year-old, who is married to Ivanka Trump and served as a senior adviser to the former president during his time in office, leveraged his stint in the White House to build up a lucrative consulting career, focused mainly on the Middle East.

    Kushner’s private equity firm, Affinity Partners, is largely funded through Gulf countries. That includes a $2 billion investment from the Saudi Public Investment Fund, led by bin Salman — which was, coincidentally, pushed through despite objections by the crown prince’s own advisers. 

    Kushner struck up a friendship and alliance with MBS during his father-in-law’s term in office, raising major conflict-of-interest suspicions for the Trump administration — especially when the then-U.S. president refused to condemn the Saudi leader in Jamal Khashoggi’s murder, despite the CIA concluding he was directly involved.

    4. Ilham Aliyev, Azerbaijan’s president

    What does an autocrat do with a breakaway state within his country’s borders? Take advantage of Russia’s attention being elsewhere along with the EU’s thirst for his gas to launch a lightning-fast offensive, seize control, deport those pesky ancestral residents, lock up any rascally reporters — and then call a snap election to capitalize on the freshly whipped patriotic fervor, of course!

    Not that elections matter much for Ilham Aliyev — a little ballot stuffing here, a bit of double-voting there, add a sprinkle of violence and suppression — and hey presto, you’ve got a winning recipe, for two decades and counting.

    Running Azerbaijan is something of a family business for the Aliyevs — Ilham assumed power after the death of his father, Heydar Aliyev, an ex-Soviet KGB officer who ruled the country for decades. And the junior Aliyev changed Azerbaijan’s constitution to pave the path to power for the next generation of his family — and appointed his own wife as vice president to boot.

    5. Chinese Premier Li Qiang

    Li Qiang is Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ultra-loyal right-hand man, and will represent his boss and his country at the World Economic Forum this year.

    Li’s claim to infamy: imposing a brutal lockdown on the entirety of Shanghai for weeks during the coronavirus pandemic, which trapped its 25 million-plus inhabitants at home while many struggled to get food, tend to their animals or seek medical help — and tanking the city’s economy in the process.

    Li’s also the guy selling (and whitewashing) China’s Uyghur policy in the Islamic world. In case you need a refresher, China has detained Uyghurs, who are mostly Muslim, in internment camps in the northwest region of Xinjiang, where there have been allegations of torture, slavery, forced sterilization, sexual abuse and brainwashing. China’s actions have been branded genocide by the U.S. State Department, and as potential crimes against humanity by the United Nations.

    Li Qiang will represent his boss and his country at the World Economic Forum this year | Johannes Simon/Getty Images

    The Chinese government claims the camps carry out “reeducation” to combat terrorism — a story Li has brought forward during recent meetings with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Pakistan’s caretaker Prime Minister Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar. Guess we know whom Li will be lunching with.

    6. Rwandan President Paul Kagame

    Nicknamed “the Napoleon of Africa” in a nod to his campaign to seize power in 1994, Paul Kagame has ruled over the land of a thousand hills since. He’s often praised for overseeing what is probably the greatest development success story of modern Africa; he’s also a dictator.

    The former military officer changed the Rwandan constitution to scrap an inconvenient term limit and cement his firm grip on the levers of power, while clamping down on dissent. But despite being accused of overseeing the imprisonment, exile and torture of Rwandan dissidents and journalists, Kagame has managed to stay in the West’s good books — and on the Davos guest list. 

    7. Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico

    Slovakia just can’t seem to quit Robert Fico. 

    Forced from office in 2018 by mass protests following the murder of investigative journalist Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová, Fico rose from the political ashes to become Slovakian prime minister for the fourth time late last year. His Smer party ran a Putin-friendly campaign, pledging to end all military support for Ukraine.

    Slovakian courts are still working through multiple organized crime cases stemming from the last time Smer was in power, involving oligarchs alleged to have profited from state contracts; former top police brass and senior military intelligence officers; and parliamentarians from all three parties in Fico’s new coalition government.

    8. President of Hungary Katalin Novák

    Katalin Novák, elected Hungarian president in 2022, must’ve pulled the short straw: she’s been sent to Davos to fly the flag for the EU’s pariah state. Luckily, the 46-year-old is used to being the odd one out at a shindig: She’s both the first woman and the youngest-ever Hungarian president.

    You’d think Novák, given her background, would be a trail-blazing feminist seeking to inspire women to reach for the stars. But the arch social conservative is a hero of the international anti-abortion, anti-equality, anti-feminism movement.

    It’s her thoughts on the gender pay gap, though, that ought to get attention at the famously male-dominated World Economic Forum: In an infamous video posted back in late 2020, Novák told the sisterhood: “Do not believe that women have to constantly compete with men. Do not believe that every waking moment of our lives must be spent with comparing ourselves to men, and that we should work in at least the same position, for at least the same pay they do.” That’s us told.

    9. Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet

    You may be surprised to see Hun Manet on this list: The new, Western-educated Cambodian prime minister has been touted in some circles as a potential modernizer and reformer. 

    But Hun Manet is less a breath of fresh air and a lot more continuation of the same stale story. Having inherited his position from his father, the longtime autocrat Hun Sen, Hun Manet has shown no signs of wanting to reform or modernize Cambodia. While some say it’s too early to tell where he’ll land (given his dad’s still on the scene, along with his Communist loyalists), the fact is: Many hallmarks of autocracy are still present in Cambodia. Repression of the opposition? Check. Dodgy “elections”? Check. Widespread graft and clientelism? Check and check. 

    10. Qatar Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani

    How has a small kingdom of 2.6 million inhabitants in the Persian Gulf managed to play a starring role in so many explosive scandals?

    There were the influence-buying allegations that claimed the scalps of multiple European Union lawmakers. The claims of undisclosed lobbying by two Trump-aligned Republican operatives. The multiple controversies over attempts at sportswashing. Not to mention the questions raised about what officials in the emirate knew ahead of the October 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas — of which Qatar is the biggest financial backer.

    Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani is the prime minister of Qatar, a country that’s played a starring role in many explosive scandals | Chris J. Ratcliffe/AFP via Getty Images

    You’d think that sort of record would see Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani shunned by the world’s top brass. Nah! Just this month, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with the Qatari leader and told him the U.S. was “deeply grateful for your ongoing leadership in this effort, for the tireless work which you undertook and that continues, to try to free the remaining hostages.” 

    See you on the slopes, Mohammed!

    11. Polish President Andrzej Duda

    When you compare Polish President Andrzej Duda to some of the others on this list, he doesn’t seem to measure up. He’s not a dictator running a violent petro-state, hasn’t invaded any neighbors or even wielded a chainsaw on stage.

    But Duda is yesterday’s man. As the last one standing from Poland’s nationalist Law and Justice party that was swept out of office last year, Duda’s holding on for dear life to his own relevance, doing his best to act as a spoiler against the Donald Tusk-led government by wielding his veto powers and harboring convicted lawmakers. All of which is to say: When you catch up with President Duda at Davos, don’t assume he’s speaking for Poland.

    12. Amin Nasser, CEO of Aramco

    The Saudi Arabian state oil and gas company is Aramco — the world’s biggest energy firm — and Amin Nasser is its boss. If you read Aramco’s press releases, you’d be forgiven for assuming it is also the world’s biggest champion of the green energy transition. Spoiler alert: It’s far from it.

    Exhibit A: Aramco is reportedly a top corporate polluter, with environment nongovernmental organization ClientEarth reporting that it accounts for more than 4 percent of the globe’s greenhouse gas emissions since 1965. Exhibit B: Bloomberg reported in 2021 that it understated its carbon footprint by as much as 50 percent. 

    Nasser, meanwhile, has criticized the idea that climate action should mean countries “either shut down or slow down big time” their fossil fuel production. Say that to Al Gore’s face!

    This article has been updated to reflect the fact Shou Zi Chew is no longer going to attend the World Economic Forum.

    Dionisios Sturis, Peter Snowdon, Suzanne Lynch and Paul de Villepin contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Zoya Sheftalovich

    Source link