ReportWire

Tag: greenhouse gases

  • Study Directly Links Emissions from Fossil Fuel Producers to Devastating Heatwaves

    [ad_1]

    A new study directly links hundreds of major heatwaves since 2000 to the emissions from fossil fuel and cement producers. Among its fundings, the researchers conclude that as many as a quarter of all heatwaves since the start of this century would have been “virtually impossible” without emissions from any of the world’s 14 largest fossil fuel and cement producers.

    The study, published Wednesday in the journal Nature, shows that greenhouse gas emissions from 180 of the world’s biggest cement, oil, and gas producers have significantly contributed to climate change over the last two decades.

    They linked the emissions to 213 heatwaves, finding the pollution made the extreme heat more likely and intense. Of those 213 events, 53 were made 10,000 times more likely as a result of the emissions, according to the researchers.

    The fight for climate accountability

    The findings could bolster legal efforts to hold the world’s biggest polluters responsible for the consequences of their emissions, experts said. In July, the International Court of Justice ruled that states that fail to prevent climate harm may have to pay compensation, and in May, a German high court ruled that major emitters can be held liable for climate impacts. And some U.S. states have passed similar laws.

    Still, despite dozens of lawsuits filed since 2004, no court has penalized emitters for causing climate change, researchers wrote in an accompanying viewpoint.

    “I cannot as a scientist assign legal responsibilities for these events,” lead author Yann Quilcaille, a climate researcher at the Federal Institute of Technology in Switzerland, told Nature. “What I can say is that each one of these carbon majors is contributing to heatwaves, making them more intense and also making them more likely.”

    Trying to attribute human-caused climate change

    This study is an example of attribution science, which specifically aims to quantify how human-caused global warming shapes specific extreme weather events, including heatwaves. Evidence suggests that climate change will increase both the frequency and intensity of future heatwaves, but attribution science aims to tell scientists whether climate change worsened a particular heatwave that has already occurred.

    Backed by decades of research and endorsed by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), attribution science a powerful methodology, but it comes with clear limitations. Attribution science can’t tell us whether climate change “caused” an extreme weather event, but it can indicate how much more likely or severe it was in a world with climate change compared to a world without.

    180 ‘carbon majors’ produce half of all global emissions

    Quilcaille and his colleagues assessed the historical greenhouse gas emissions from 180 “carbon majors,” a group that includes fossil fuel companies, state-owned entities, and fossil fuel and cement emissions produced by nation states.

    In all, these sources were responsible for nearly 57% of historical global emissions between 1850 and 2023, the analysis revealed.

    The researchers then used climate models to compare global temperature trends in a world with greenhouse gas emissions to temperatures in a world without those emissions. Then, they estimated the impact of human-driven global warming on 213 heatwaves recorded between 2000 and 2023, finding direct links to top emitters and these extreme weather events.

    “For a while, it was argued that any individual contributor to climate change was making too small or too diffuse a contribution to ever be linked to any particular impact. And this emerging science, both this paper and others, is showing that that’s not true,” Chris Callahan, a climate scientist at Indiana University who was not involved in the study, told The Associated Press.

    [ad_2]

    Ellyn Lapointe

    Source link

  • Al Gore Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    Al Gore Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Here is a look at the life of Al Gore, 45th vice president of the United States and environmental activist.

    Birth date: March 31, 1948

    Birth place: Washington, DC

    Birth name: Albert Arnold Gore Jr.

    Father: Albert Gore Sr., former US senator from Tennessee

    Mother: Pauline (La Fon) Gore

    Marriage: Mary Elizabeth “Tipper” (Aitcheson) Gore (May 19, 1970-present, separated June 2010)

    Children: Albert III, Sarah, Kristin, Karenna

    Education: Harvard University, B.A., 1969; Vanderbilt University, Graduate School of Religion 1971-1972; Vanderbilt University, J.D., 1976

    Military service: US Army, 1969-1971, served in Vietnam as a reporter with the 20th Engineering Battalion.

    Religion: Baptist

    Wrote his 1969 Harvard thesis on how television would impact the conduct of the American presidency.

    In 2009, former President Bill Clinton flew to North Korea to negotiate the release of two journalists working for Gore’s Current TV.

    1971-1976 – Is an investigative reporter and editorial writer for the Nashville Tennessean.

    1977-1985 – US Representative in the 95th-98th Congresses, representing first the 4th and then the 6th District of Tennessee. Elected to the House in 1976, 1978, 1980 and 1982.

    1985-1992 – US Senator from Tennessee.

    1988 – Runs for the Democratic Party nomination for president in the 1988 election. Later drops out of the race.

    July 9, 1992 – Bill Clinton chooses Gore to be his running mate in the 1992 presidential election.

    1992 – Publishes “Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit.”

    January 20, 1993 – Inaugurated as vice president.

    January 20, 1997 – Second term as vice president begins.

    March 9, 1999 – Gore states in an interview on CNN with Wolf Blitzer, “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.” This quote creates a large amount of rhetoric with his opponents.

    June 16, 1999 – Announces his intention to run for president in the 2000 election.

    August 16, 2000 – Wins the Democratic Party nomination.

    November 7, 2000 – Election Day.

    November 8, 2000 – Concedes in the early morning to George W. Bush but later retracts his concession. Florida is too close to call for either Bush or Gore.

    November 9, 2000 – Requests a recount in Florida.

    December 13, 2000 – Concedes the election to Bush after the US Supreme Court rules that another recount in Florida would be unconstitutional, 36 days after the election.

    2002 – “Joined at the Heart: The Transformation of the American Family,” co-written with Tipper Gore, is published.

    March 19, 2003 – Joins the board of directors for Apple Computers Inc.

    May 4, 2004 – Announces intention to purchase Newsworld International from Vivendi Universal SA for an undisclosed price and plans to transform it into a network aimed at viewers ages 18-35.

    August 1, 2005 – Gore’s cable television channel, Current TV, debuts.

    2006 – His crusade against global warming is featured in the book “An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do about It “ and documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”

    May 2007 – His book, “The Assault on Reason,” is published.

    February 9, 2007 – Joins Sir Richard Branson at a press conference announcing the $25 million Virgin Earth Challenge, a prize for a design to safely remove man-made greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Gore and Branson are among the judges.

    February 15, 2007 – Announces a series of concerts called Live Earth to be held on all seven continents on July 7, 2007. The 24-hour music event is the kickoff of a campaign to “Save Our Selves (SOS).”

    February 25, 2007 – “An Inconvenient Truth” wins an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

    March 21, 2007 – Testifies at separate House and Senate events, urging legislation to curb climate change.

    October 12, 2007 – Is co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for work on global warming. The prize is shared with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    October 26, 2007 – Receives the Prince of Asturias Award for International Cooperation.

    November 12, 2007 – Announces he is joining the venture capital firm of Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield and Byers. He will help the company invest in start-up “green” companies. Gore will also donate his salary to the Alliance for Climate Protection.

    November 2007 – Receives the International Emmy Founders Award at the 35th International Emmy Awards.

    December 10, 2007 – Accepts the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Norway.

    February 12, 2009 – Receives the NAACP Chairman’s Award during the annual Image Award ceremony. The honor is given in recognition of special achievement and distinguished public service. This year’s award is shared with Dr. Wangari Muta Maathai.

    June 1, 2010 – Gore and wife Tipper, announce they are to separate after 40 years of marriage.

    January 2, 2013 – Qatar-based broadcaster Al Jazeera purchases Current TV for a reported $500 million, personally netting Gore an estimated $70 million.

    December 5, 2016 – Meets with President-elect Donald Trump to speak about climate change issues.

    January 19, 2017 – “An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power,” premieres at the Sundance Film Festival. Paramount Pictures releases the film worldwide in July.

    2017 – Publishes “The Assault on Reason: 2017 Edition” with a new preface and conclusion: “Post-Truth: On Donald Trump and the 2016 Election.”

    November 4, 2019 – Releases a statement expressing his disappointment over failing to persuade Trump to keep the US in the Paris climate agreement. “I thought that he would come to his senses on it, but he didn’t,” Gore said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • American Families Have a Massive Food-Waste Problem

    American Families Have a Massive Food-Waste Problem

    [ad_1]

    If you have children, you probably already understand them to be very adorable food-waste machines. If you do not have children, I have five, so let me paint you a picture. On a recent Tuesday night, the post-dinner wreckage in my house was devastating. Peas were welded to the floor; my 5-year-old had decided that he was allergic to chicken and left a pile of it untouched on his plate. After working all day, making the meal in the first place, and then spending dinnertime convincing five irrational, tiny people to try their vegetables, I didn’t even have the energy to convince them to take their plates into the kitchen, let alone box up their leftovers for tomorrow. So I did exactly what I’m not supposed to do, according to the planet’s future: I threw it all out, washed the dishes, and flopped into bed, exhausted.

    Tens of millions of tons of food that leaves farms in the United States is wasted. Much of that waste happens at the industrial level, during harvesting, handling, storage, and processing, but a staggering amount of food gets wasted at home, scraped into the garbage can at the end of a meal or tossed after too long in the crisper drawer. According to a 2020 Penn State University study, almost a third of the food that American households buy is wasted.

    On the individual level, all of this waste is expensive, annoying, and gross. In the aggregate, it’s unfortunate, given that about a fifth of American families reported not having enough to eat last year. But it’s also bad for the planet. Every step of the modern food-production process generates greenhouse gases. Before they ended up in the trash, all of those slimy vegetables and uneaten hunks of chicken were grown using water and farmland and pesticides and fertilizer. They were most likely packed in plastic and paper, and then stored and transported using fossil fuels and electricity. Throwing away food means throwing away all of the resources it requires, but the problems don’t end there: As food rots in landfills and open dumps, it emits methane, a greenhouse gas much more potent than carbon dioxide. According to the United Nations, food loss and waste accounts for about 8 to 10 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions.

    Read: Your diet is cooking the planet

    Some amount of food waste is probably inevitable, especially with young kids. “The very youngest children … are still kind of understanding what they like, with novel foods and healthy foods. We want to give them that opportunity,” Brian Roe, a farm-management professor and the director of the Food Waste Collaborative at Ohio State University, told me. “You need to waste a little bit of food while they develop palates.”

    More saliently, Roe’s research indicates that food waste is often inversely proportional to spare time: We get busy, we eat out, and our well-intended groceries head to the trash. His data show a 280 percent increase in food waste from February 2021 to February 2022, right as pandemic restrictions were loosening and people with the income to do so started eating out more. In other words, as soon as people had the option to eat without cooking, they did. “When you’ve got more kids and more craziness and a time crunch, all of a sudden, what you thought was going to be 40 minutes to prep dinners is out the window,” he told me. Thus, “those ingredients are more likely to go to waste.”

    Wasting less food starts at the grocery store: Most financially secure families simply need less food than they buy. The sustainability consultant Ashlee Piper told me that she likes to take a picture of her fridge and pantry before heading to the store, in order to avoid buying duplicates. She also recommends shopping not for your “aspirational life” but for the one you are actually living: If, realistically, you’re never going to make your own pasta or pack gourmet lunches for your kids, don’t shop for those meals. “There’s no lunchbox sheriff,” she told me. (Comforting!)

    Once you unpack the groceries, experts say to be strategic about making perishable foods highly visible, accessible, and appetizing. Julia Rockwell, a San Francisco mom and sustainability expert, recommends an “Eat Me” station, whether it’s a basket, a bowl, a tray, or a section of the refrigerator, which she says is especially helpful for teenagers, inclined as they are to “go full claws into the fridge.” A designated place for high-urgency snacks reminds them, “Here’s a yogurt that you missed, or here’s a half of a banana, or here’s the things let’s go to first,” she told me. Leftovers and soon-to-spoil foods also make great dinners or lunches for younger kids, who will be happy to snack on items that don’t necessarily go together in a traditional meal.

    If you’re cleaning out your fridge and pantry strictly according to expiration dates, stop: If a food is past its expiration date but looks and smells fine, it probably is; most of the time, expiration dates are an indicator of quality, not safety. (Deli meats and unpasteurized cheeses are notable exceptions.) Brush up on the language of food packaging—“best by” is just a suggestion, while “expiration” is the date the manufacturer has decided when quality will begin to decline. Frozen food is pretty much always safe, and packaged foods and canned goods without swelling, dents, or rust can last for years, though they may not taste as good. (You can conceal your less-than-fresh nonperishables in another meal, such as adding older ground beef from the freezer to a chili. When in doubt about, say, an older vegetable, Roe says, “coat it in panko and fry it up.”)

    Read: Expiration dates are meaningless

    And whatever you’re feeding your kids, experts repeatedly told me, you should probably be feeding them less. How many blueberries does your pickiest kid really eat at the breakfast table? And how many do you put on their plate that you wish they’d eat? The difference in this pint-size math equation is an essential factor in food-waste management for families. Jennifer Anderson, a mom and registered dietician, discourages “wishful portions.” “You know the amount you want your child to eat, so you put that much on their plate … Take that amount, cut it in half, then cut it in half again,” she told me. “A practical portion is a quarter of what you wish they would eat.”

    Since talking to Anderson, I’ve kept her advice in mind. I still spend more time than I’d like trying to convince my kids to eat yellow peppers when they’ve decided the red ones are the only acceptable type. But the math is simple: Smaller portions on their plate means fewer leftovers in the trash later, and I’ve noticed a real difference.

    And I still find myself dumping plates of picked-over food into the trash or compost. But I move on to the next meal with more grace and less guilt for having helped my kids become little stewards of a healthier planet. I want them to understand that our food comes from somewhere, and that not eating it has consequences. That doesn’t mean guilting them for not liking dragon fruit, or demanding that they clean their plate at every meal, or scaring them about climate change. It’s more like bringing them along, helping them participate in a family project with planetary implications. Wish me luck with the peppers.

    This story is part of the Atlantic Planet series supported by HHMI’s Science and Educational Media Group.

    [ad_2]

    Alexandra Frost

    Source link

  • Diet Choice Could Help Solve the Climate Crisis, Major New Study Finds

    Diet Choice Could Help Solve the Climate Crisis, Major New Study Finds

    [ad_1]


    WINCHESTER, England, October 16, 2023 (Newswire.com)
    –
    In a major new study, prominent scientists from around the world have developed a new strategy for addressing climate change. The study “Proposed solutions to anthropogenic climate change: a systematic literature review and a new way forward,” published in leading scientific journal Heliyon, demonstrates that climate change solutions must include a shift to a more fundamentally plant-based diet and a global phaseout of industrialized animal farming. The authors also recommend the adoption of an “All Life” approach that recognizes the profound interconnectedness of all life on Earth and a global standardization of climate change metrics. 

    Our planet is in a state of emergency and we only have a short window of time (7-8 years) to enact meaningful change to prevent an eventual global climate crisis that will impact each and every one of the Earth’s inhabitants. To achieve this monumental task in such a short space of time, human activities cannot continue on a “business-as-usual” basis. And the data clearly indicate that we will not succeed without changes in the way that we eat and produce food.

    “We must recognize that by solely focusing on reducing greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming, we are treating the symptom of the cause, and the cause is major global unsustainability. To achieve long-lasting transformative change, which will benefit current and future generations (and save our planet), we need to change our mindset and behavior as individuals, communities, businesses, governments, and global citizens,” says lead author Svetlana V. Feigin, Ph.D.

    “Animal agriculture is not necessary (nor sustainable) to feed the growing global population,” the authors contend. Regarding the phaseout of industrialized animal farming, the authors propose “ending government subsidies for animal-based meat, dairy and eggs, and initiating taxes on such products to account for the wide-ranging externalized costs that are currently passed on to taxpayers, governments, societies and future generations.” Other actions include “more stringent legislation on animal welfare standards and divestment in industrialized animal agriculture.”

    Also in the study, the authors introduce and discuss the concept of an “All Life” approach. An “All Life” approach emphasizes the protection of the “oneness of life” (humans, animals, plants, the entire planet), and emphasizes that our health, and the health of our planet, are intimately intertwined with the health and wellbeing of all living beings. It emphasizes the interdependence and protection of all life forms and shifts away from a human-centric paradigm to an Earth-centric paradigm.

    We are running out of time to alter our current trajectory, and thus to enact meaningful change that will have a profound impact upon the future wellbeing of the planet and all of its inhabitants. Failure to act will ultimately result in a scenario of irreversible climate change, with widespread famine and disease, global devastation, climate refugees, and warfare following resource scarcity.

    Source: Prof. Andrew Knight

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Could Vegan Pet Food Help Save the Planet?

    Could Vegan Pet Food Help Save the Planet?

    [ad_1]


    WINCHESTER, England, October 4, 2023 (Newswire.com)
    –
    Studies show plant-based diets lower greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), and use less land and water. Food energy savings mean more people can be fed. This has triggered calls for vegan diets – but not for our pets. Yet a new major study published in leading scientific journal PLOS ONE has demonstrated very large environmental benefits associated with nutritionally-sound vegan diets – for dogs and cats, as well as people.

    After analysing pet food ingredients in detail, Veterinary Professor Andrew Knight calculated that the world’s dogs and cats consume seven billion land animals annually, as well as billions of fish. If all the world’s dogs went vegan, it would save more GHGs than those emitted by the UK, land larger than Mexico, and could feed 450 million additional people – more than the entire EU. If all the world’s cats went vegan, it could feed 70 million additional people – more than the entire UK. And if all the world’s people went vegan, it would save more GHGs than all those emitted by the entire EU, land larger than Russia – the world’s largest country, combined with India, and would feed around 5.3 billion additional people – two thirds of the Earth’s current population.

    Until recently, vegan diets were not seriously considered for dogs and cats – who are biologically omnivores and carnivores respectively. In the last two years however, many new vegan pet foods have been developed by companies using plant-based ingredients supplemented with vitamins, amino acids and minerals, to ensure all necessary nutrients are included. New studies have shown good health and behavioural outcomes for dogs and cats using such diets. There are now 9 such studies in dogs, and 3 in cats. The most recent very large-scale study showed positive health outcomes in vegan cats, following a similar canine study in 2022. These have driven rapid growth with the vegan dog food market valued at USD 14 billion by 2023, and expected to reach USD 26 billion by 2033.

    Said Professor Knight, “This is game-changing. We’ve long known that plant-based diets are better for the planet, but have not seriously considered pet food. However, pet food clearly has profound environmental impacts. Conversely, very large environmental benefits can be achieved by nutritionally-sound vegan pet food. Large-scale studies have also shown that health outcomes for both dogs and cats are as good or better. And studies of feeding behaviour have demonstrated that average dogs and cats enjoy vegan pet foods as much as those made from meat.”

    He concluded: “Pet owners who care about the environment or their animals’ health should consider nutritionally-sound vegan pet food. However, to safeguard health, it is important that people feed only commercial diets labelled as nutritionally complete, produced by reputable companies with good standards.”

    Source: Prof. Andrew Knight

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • It’s the summer of changed climate. Get used to it | CNN Politics

    It’s the summer of changed climate. Get used to it | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appeared in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a hot take on the summer of 2023: The climate you grew up in is gone, replaced by something new and changing, but also inalterably different – where the Atlantic Ocean can reach hot-tub temperature, heat is a recurring public health concern and people will have to adapt their way of living.

    In this year of epic heat, it’s time to start thinking about how the climate changed rather than the fact of its changing.

    From a historical standpoint, we are in uncharted territory. This is not just the hottest month in human history. It may be the hottest month in 120,000 years, according to scientists in Europe.

    Nearly half the US is under a heat advisory this week, and the country’s largest power grid was on alert.

    The warnings that more fires, floods and storms would occur as the atmosphere heated up are here.

    A large portion of the country has seen smoke come and go from those Canadian wildfires. Tourists in Greece were forced to flee in the country’s largest-ever evacuation.

    Towns unused to flooding were under water this year in Vermont. Torrential rain flooded Boston’s Fenway park.

    The West Coast of the US, for instance, has gotten a respite so far from wildfires thanks to epic rainfall earlier in the year.

    But we can expect more heat more often. Asked by CNN’s Zain Asher about a heat index in Iran that approached 150 degrees Fahrenheit, Marina Romanello, executive director of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change, said to prepare for more.

    “What we know is the heat will become much more intense, much more frequent, and that if we don’t act urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, then the outlook will be very serious with, as you said, temperatures that are beyond the limits of physiological survival.”

    Are we acting urgently? Asher pointed out California is phasing out gas-powered car sales. Romanello said the basic move would be to commit to phase out fossil fuels. But countries are not yet on that path or anywhere close to it.

    Take a look at Arizona, where Phoenix has endured nearly a full straight month of 110-plus-degree days.

    Cacti can’t stand the heat and are dying. Hospitals have been taxed. Doctors are treating people burned just by falling on the ground, according to one CNN report.

    The Phoenix area medical examiner has brought in extra refrigerated containers for bodies, like it did during spikes of Covid-19, to deal with potential overflow. Maricopa County has 25 heat-related deaths so far, but another 249 are under investigation.

    The urban density that creates economic opportunity also makes cities hotter than their surrounding areas. There can be variation up to 8 degrees between portions of a city with trees and green space and those that are mostly pavement.

    “These giant swings in temperature over short distances in cities, known as the urban heat island effect, make heat waves even worse,” writes CNN’s Rachel Ramirez of a new report by the nonprofit research group Climate Central. “Areas blanketed with asphalt, buildings, industry and freeways tend to absorb the sun’s energy then radiate more heat, while areas with abundant green space – parks, rivers, and tree-lined streets – radiate less heat and provide shade.”

    Ramirez notes that cities are looking for new ways to adapt, like painting roads white in Los Angeles, painting roofs in New York and more.

    Coral reefs off the Florida Keys, unable to stand the 100-plus-degree temperatures charted in some areas, are suffering a mass bleaching event, according to CNN’s Eric Zerkel, who writes experts were stunned at the two-week escalation that could kill some reefs off.

    That’s a very real and grim consequence. More theoretical is the possibility that the series of currents that circulates water around the oceans simply collapses.

    A study published in the journal Nature this week suggested the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current, which includes the Gulf Stream, could collapse as early as 2025. Melting ice could dilute ocean water and alter the currents, which would affect everyone on the planet.

    The reason gas prices have spiked in recent days? On top of OPEC holding back supply, excessive heat is affecting productivity at oil refineries.

    In the US, while President Joe Biden has made pledges to make the US carbon neutral in the coming decades, he is not completely opposed to new oil projects. It was seen as a political win for him and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, that the Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for a new pipeline running through West Virginia.

    That news came the same day the White House announced new relief measures for people suffering from the record heat, including the creation of a new “heat hazard alert” system to clarify precautions for workers.

    “I don’t think anybody can deny the impact of climate change anymore,” Biden said, announcing the measures.

    A majority of Americans – 52% – said in Gallup survey in March, before this heat wave, that protecting the environment should be prioritized even if it hurts the economy. That’s compared with 43% who said the government should prioritize economic growth even if it hurts the environment.

    However.

    The numbers may fluctuate depending on how people feel about the health of the economy. But the share who prioritize economic growth over the environment has on the whole risen in Gallup’s polling over the long term. Between 1985 and 2002, that number never topped 40%. The partisan divide over climate change is also the largest it has ever been.

    The geophysicist Bill McGuire, a professor at University College London and author of “Hothouse Earth: An Inhabitant’s Guide,” writes for CNN Opinion this week that people’s vacations as we know them are over.

    He points to tourists who had to flee the island of Rhodes in Greece to get away from wildfires.

    “It would be a big mistake to regard these as freak events and to continue holidaying as usual in the years ahead,” McGuire writes. “On the contrary, the extreme weather conditions across southern Europe this summer are a wake-up call – a reminder that not even our vacations are insulated from the growing consequences of global heating.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Xi says China will follow its own carbon reduction path as US climate envoy Kerry meets top officials in Beijing | CNN

    Xi says China will follow its own carbon reduction path as US climate envoy Kerry meets top officials in Beijing | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    China will follow its own path to cut carbon emissions, leader Xi Jinping vowed Tuesday, as US climate envoy John Kerry called for faster action to confront the climate crisis in a high-profile visit to Beijing.

    Xi told a national conference on environmental protection that China’s commitment to its duel carbon goals – reaching a carbon peak by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060 – is “unwavering,” according to state news agency Xinhua.

    “But the path, method, pace and intensity to achieve this goal should and must be determined by ourselves, and will never be influenced by others,” he said.

    The comments came as Kerry met China’s Premier Li Qiang and top diplomat Wang Yi Tuesday, with Washington and Beijing – the world’s two largest polluters – resuming their long-stalled climate talks amid scorching heat waves across much of the globe.

    In the meeting with Li, Kerry stressed the “need for China to decarbonize the power sector, cut methane emissions, and reduce deforestation,” a spokesperson for the US State Department said in a statement.

    He also urged China to “take additional steps to enhance its climate ambition in order to avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis.”

    China has invested heavily in clean energy in recent years. Its solar capacity is now greater than the rest of the world combined, and the country is also leading the world in wind capacity and electric vehicles.

    On the other hand, it has accelerated the approval of new coal plants due to a renewed focus on “energy security,” sparking concerns from environmentalists that these new projects will make the shift away from coal slower and more difficult.

    But Xi’s remarks at the conference suggest that China has no desire to be pushed, or be seen to cave to pressure – especially from the United States.

    China and the US are the world’s two biggest greenhouse gas emitters, so any attempt to address the climate crisis will need to involve deep emissions cuts from these two powerhouse nations.

    China’s emissions are more than double those of the US, but historically, the US has emitted more than any other country in the world.

    China and other fast developing nations have long argued that the world’s richest countries, especially those in the West, were able to become wealthy while churning out huge carbon emissions for decades.

    Relations between the US and China are at their worst in years with the world’s two largest economies feuding over a host of issues, from geopolitics to trade and technology.

    The US has said climate cooperation with China should be a standalone issue, separate from their disputes.

    But Beijing views it differently. Last year, it cut off climate talks with the US in protest at then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan – in the middle of the worst heat wave China had seen in six decades.

    It also halted cooperation on other common causes issues, including communications between military and law enforcement.

    That difference in views has been on full display in Beijing, even as the two sides return to the table to restart talks.

    When meeting Wang, China’s top diplomat, on Tuesday, Kerry stressed the two countries “cannot let bilateral differences stand in the way of making concrete progress” on climate cooperation.

    But Wang insisted this cooperation “cannot be separated from the overall environment of Sino-US relations.” He urged the US to pursue a “rational, pragmatic and positive policy toward China” and “properly handle the Taiwan issue,” referring to the democratic self-ruled island that Beijing claims sovereignty over.

    On Wednesday, Kerry reiterated his message to Chinese Vice-President Han Zheng that climate should be handled separately from broader diplomatic issues, Reuters reported.

    Acknowledging the diplomatic difficulties between the two sides in recent years, Kerry said climate should be treated as a “free-standing” challenge that requires the collective efforts of the world’s largest economies to resolve, according to Reuters.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Climate change is making our oceans change color, new research finds | CNN

    Climate change is making our oceans change color, new research finds | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The color of the ocean has changed significantly over the last 20 years and human-caused climate change is likely responsible, according to a new study.

    More than 56% of the world’s oceans have changed color to an extent that cannot be explained by natural variability, said a team of researchers, led by scientists from the National Oceanography Center in the UK and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the US, in a statement.

    Tropical oceans close to the equator in particular have become greener in the past two decades, reflecting changes in their ecosystems, according to the study published Wednesday in the journal Nature.

    The color of the ocean is derived from the materials found in its upper layers. For example, a deep blue sea will have very little life in it, whereas a green color means there are ecosystems there, based on phytoplankton, plant-like microbes which contain chlorophyll. The phytoplankton form the basis of a food web which supports larger organisms such as krill, fish, seabirds and marine mammals.

    It’s not clear exactly how these ecosystems are changing, said study co-author Stephanie Dutkiewicz, senior research scientist in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and the Center for Global Change Science. While some areas are likely to have less phytoplankton, others will have more – and it’s likely all parts of the ocean will see changes in the types of phytoplankton present.

    Ocean ecosystems are finely balanced and any change in the phytoplankton will send ripples across the food chain. “All changes are causing an imbalance in the natural organization of ecosystems. Such imbalance will only get worse over time if our oceans keep heating,” she told CNN.

    It will also affect the ocean’s ability to act as a store of carbon, Dutkiewicz said, as different plankton absorb different amounts of carbon.

    While the researchers are still working to unpick exactly what the changes mean, what is clear, they said, is that the changes are being driven by human-induced climate change.

    The researchers monitored changes in ocean color from space by tracking how much green or blue light is reflected from the surface of the sea.

    They used data from the Aqua satellite which has been monitoring ocean color changes for more than two decades and is able to pick out differences that are not visible to the human eye.

    They analyzed color variation data from 2002 to 2022 and then used climate change models to simulate what would happen to the oceans both with additional planet-heating pollution and without.

    The color changes matched almost exactly what Dutkiewicz predicted would happen if greenhouse gases were added to the atmosphere – that around 50% of our oceans would change color.

    Dutkiewicz, who has been running simulations that showed the oceans were going to change color for years, said she is not surprised at this finding.

    “But still I found the results very sobering; yet another wake-up call that human induced climate change [has] significantly impacted the earth system,” she told CNN via email.

    Dutkiewicz told CNN it was difficult to say whether color changes could become visible to humans if the process continues.

    “If a big tipping point was reached in some places: maybe. Though you’d have to study the colors for a while to be able to pick up on the changes,” said Dutkiewicz.

    Next up, Dutkiewicz will try to better understand the color changes in different ocean regions, as well as looking into what might be causing them, she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The ‘climate kids’ want a court to force Montana’s state government to go green | CNN

    The ‘climate kids’ want a court to force Montana’s state government to go green | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Helena, Montana
    CNN
     — 

    It’s a Big Sky story fit for a big screen.

    On one side: 16 kids from ranches, reservations and tourist boomtowns across Montana – a group of wannabe climate avengers ranging in age from 5 to 22 and assembled to fight for a livable planet.

    On the other side: Montana’s governor, attorney general and the Republican supermajorities of both houses, who may have lost a three-year fight to kill the nation’s first constitutional climate case before it hit court, but are still determined to let oil, gas and coal keep flowing for generations.

    The setting is a small courtroom in Helena and the whole plot pivots around the Montana constitution, widely considered the greenest in the nation.

    “The state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations,” reads Article 9, and those pivotal words “clean and healthful environment” are also guaranteed separately in the state’s bill of rights.

    “This case is about the equal rights of children,” attorney Roger Sullivan began in his opening argument in Held vs. Montana this week, “and their need now for extraordinary protection from the extraordinary dangers of fossil fuel pollution and climate crisis that their state government is exposing them to.”

    In the half-century since the environmental promises were added to the constitution, the Treasure State has never rejected a fossil fuel project for potential harm to air or water. And this spring, after a county judge cited the constitution in pulling the permit of a new gas-fired power plant, state leaders quickly crafted House Bill 971 to make it illegal for any state agency to analyze climate impacts when assessing large projects, like power plants, that need environmental review.

    In a region full of ranchers and farmers who depend on stable weather and the kind of National Park beauty that draws millions of outdoor enthusiasts a year, the bill created the most buzz by far in the May legislative session, drawing more than 1,000 comments.

    But while 95% of the comments were opposed, according to a legislature count, the bill passed.

    “Skinny cows and dead cattle,” Rikki Held said, when asked how drought changed her family’s Broadus ranch.

    Since she was the only plaintiff of legal age when the suit was filed, the historic case bears her name. Now finally on the stand, she described with emotion what it was like to work through smoke and ash on 110°F days. “We have the technology and knowledge,” said Held, now an environmental science major at Colorado College. “We just need empathy and willingness to do the right thing.”

    One after another, her fellow plaintiffs have testified how the effects of a warming planet are already causing them physical, emotional and financial pain. “You know, it’s really scary seeing what you care for disappear right in front of your eyes,” said Sariel, a member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, after describing how the loss of consistent snow affects everything from native plants to tribal traditions.

    “Do you believe the state of Montana has a responsibility to protect this land for you?” a lawyer asked Sariel, who, like the other children who were under 18 when the case was filed, is being referred to only by her first name. “Yes, I do,” she replied in a soft voice. “It’s not only written in our constitution, an inherent right to a healthy land and environment, but it’s also just about being a decent person.”

    “During the course of this trial, the court will hear lots of emotions,” Montana Assistant Attorney General Michael Russell said in his opening argument. “Lots of assumptions, accusations, speculation, prognostication … including sweeping, dramatic assertions of doom that awaits us all.” But this case is “far more boring,” Russell argued, and is little more than a show trial over statutes “devoid of any regulatory authority.”

    Montana’s population of 1.1 million is “simply too minuscule to make any difference in climate change,” Russell told the court, “which is a global issue that effectively relegates Montana’s role to that of a spectator.”

    Attorneys for the plaintiffs have tried to poke holes in this argument, pointing out Montana’s outsized energy footprint.

    On Thursday, Peter Erickson, a greenhouse gas emissions expert and witness for the plaintiffs, pointed out Montana has the sixth largest per-capita energy-related CO2 emissions in the nation – behind other big energy-producing states like Wyoming, West Virginia and Louisiana.

    “It’s significant. It’s disproportionately large, given Montana’s population,” Erickson said.

    While attorneys for the state objected when Rikki Held tried to connect her mental health to the climate crisis, they have largely saved cross-examination for the experts as the plaintiffs lay out their case.

    “If the judge ordered that we stop using fossil fuels in Montana would it get us to the point where these plaintiffs are no longer being harmed in your opinion?” Mark Stermitz, an attorney for the state, asked Steven Running, professor emeritus of ecosystem and conservation sciences at the University of Montana.

    “We can’t tell in advance,” said Running, who shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 as one of the scientists on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. “Because what has been shown in history over and over and over again is when a significant social movement is needed, it often is started by one or two or three people.”

    Montana's state capitol building rises above Helena, even as it is dwarfed by mountains.

    The trial is set to conclude on June 23 and is being heard before Judge Kathy Seeley, with no jury. While Seeley has no power to shut down fossil fuel use or order the end of new extraction permits, a ruling against Montana could help kill the new law outlawing climate impact analysis and set a powerful precedent for similar cases winding their ways through the courts.

    “I think we’re really at a tipping point right now,” Our Children’s Trust attorney Nate Bellinger told CNN. The Oregon-based legal nonprofit has filed similar actions in all 50 states and will go to trial in September with a group of young Hawaiians suing their state’s transportation department, claiming it is allowing rampant tailpipe pollution. The group also supports the 21 young plaintiffs in Juliana vs. United States, who will get their day in federal court after amending their complaint that actions by the federal government have caused climate change and violated their constitutional rights.

    When the Ninth Circuit put the Juliana case back on track, 18 Republican-led states – including Montana – tried to intervene as defendants and take on the so-called Climate Kids but were rejected.

    It is likely the case will reach the US Supreme Court.

    Back in the Wild West days of 1889, Montana’s original constitution was written under the guidance of a copper baron named William Clark, who claimed that arsenic pollution from mining gave the women of Butte “a beautiful complexion.”

    But less than a century later, mining and logging had done obvious harm to the rivers, skies and mountainsides of “the last best place,” just as the movements for social change and environmental protection were sweeping the nation.

    This was the backdrop when in 1972, 100 Montanans from all walks of life gathered in the town of Last Chance Gulch to hammer out a new constitution with not a single active politician among them. Mae Nan Ellingson was the youngest delegate back then, and as the plaintiffs set out to establish the intent behind “a clean and healthful environment for present and future generations,” she became the first witness in Held vs. Montana.

    “It was important, I think, for this constitution to make it clear that citizens could enforce their right to a clean environment and not wait until the pollution or the damage had been done,” she testified.

    The Montana Supreme Court agreed with her in a 1999 ruling and the majority wrote, “Our constitution does not require that dead fish float on the surface of our state’s rivers and streams before its farsighted environmental protections can be invoked.”

    Claire Vlases, one of the young plaintiffs, is hopeful the court will check the power of the legislature.

    Regardless of the verdict, it is likely that Held vs. Montana will end up in Montana’s Supreme Court, but for plaintiffs like Claire Vlases who are too young to vote, that will be just fine.

    “I just recently graduated high school, but I think that’s something everyone knows is that we have three branches of government for a reason,” she said, sitting by the river that runs through her Bozeman yard. “The judicial branch is there to keep a check on the other two branches. And that’s what we’re doing here.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • EPA proposes new tailpipe rules that could push EVs to make up two-thirds of new car sales in US by 2032 | CNN Politics

    EPA proposes new tailpipe rules that could push EVs to make up two-thirds of new car sales in US by 2032 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed ambitious new car pollution rules that could require electric vehicles to account for up to two-thirds of new cars sold in the US by 2032, in what would be one of the Biden administration’s most aggressive climate-change policies yet.

    The tailpipe standards would also have the effect of cutting planet-warming pollution from cars in half. Transportation accounts for nearly 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions in the US, according to the EPA.

    EPA Administrator Michael Regan called the regulations “the strongest-ever federal pollution standards for cars and trucks.”

    Regan touted the proposed rules on “CNN News Central” on Wednesday, claiming they would bring down costs for consumers and slash planet-warming pollution.

    “This is a future for everyone, and we’re starting to see all of the auto industry move in this direction,” Regan told CNN’s Sara Sidner, saying strong auto emissions rules have been part of President Joe Biden’s “vision from day one.”

    EPA officials said that they are considering several different emissions proposals, which could result in anywhere from a 64% to 69% electric vehicle adoption rate by early next decade. If approved, the emissions standards would start model year 2027 vehicles.

    The agency anticipates the new rules would mean EVs could also make up nearly half of all new medium-duty vehicles, like delivery trucks, by model year 2032. Officials are also proposing stronger standards for heavy-duty vehicles, including dump trucks, public utility trucks, and transit and school buses.

    One expert told CNN the Biden administration’s proposal is a pivotal moment for the US auto industry and consumers.

    “It’s a pretty big deal,” said Thomas Boylan, a former Environmental Protection Agency official and the regulatory director for the EV trade group Zero Emission Transportation Association. “This is really going to set the tone for the rest of the decade and into the 2030s in terms of what this administration is looking for the auto industry to do when it comes to decarbonizing and ultimately electrifying.”

    Regan and White House National Climate Adviser Ali Zaidi hailed the proposed regulations as a major climate win that would also save American consumers money in the coming years.

    Zaidi said that in the Biden administration’s first few years, the number of EVs on US roads had already tripled, while the number of public charging stations had doubled. And Zaidi vowed more to come, with funding from Biden’s infrastructure law for a network of EV charging stations combined with consumer tax credits.

    “Whether you measure today’s announcements by the dollars saved, the gallons reduced, or the pollution that will no longer be pumped into the air, this is a win for the American people,” Zaidi said.

    Yet even as the administration is writing aggressive regulations to push the market toward EVs, a Gallup poll released Wednesday suggests that Americans are not yet sold on the idea. Gallup polled more than 1,000 adults in the US last month and found that 41% said they would not buy an electric vehicle.

    Not only are EVs still more expensive than gas-powered cars, but consumers also haven’t yet grasped the climate benefits of transitioning to zero-emissions vehicles, the poll found. Six in 10 respondents said they believe EVs help the environment “only a little” or “not at all,” Gallup reported.

    Transportation is the biggest source of planet-warming pollution in the US, and light duty vehicles – the average cars Americans drive – account for 58% of those emissions. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported last year that aggressive, pollution-slashing changes in the global transportation sector – including the transition to EVs – could reduce the sector’s emissions by more than 80%.

    Speaking on CNN, Regan also emphasized that switching to an EV would save consumers money in the long run.

    “Folks who purchase electric vehicles will see a cost savings over the lifespan of the vehicle, because they’re not having to buy gas, having to pay for maintenance,” Regan said. “So this is a huge opportunity for everyone in this country.”

    Other countries, including the EU and China, are moving faster toward adopting EVs. In the US, California has already proposed that zero-emissions vehicles make up 70% of new car sales by 2030, and 17 other states plan to follow California’s lead.

    That means much of the US car industry will already be transitioning ahead of the proposed federal rules.

    “I believe it’s pretty doable,” Margo Oge, chair of the International Council on Clean Transportation and a former Obama EPA official, said of the aggressive transition to EVs. “The industry is there. Europe is ahead of the US, China is ahead of Europe – and these companies are global companies.”

    New federal tax credits are coming next week that aim to help American consumers save up to $7,500 on an EV. But they have incredibly complex requirements for the auto industry – including that the cars’ batteries and components come from the US or countries it has a free-trade agreement with.

    Still, Boylan said the regulations are designed to gradually work over the next decade, by which time consumers should have far more electric vehicle options to choose from.

    “You’ve got the tax credits as the carrot,” Boylan said. The proposed tailpipe regulation “provides the stick to backstop these incentives and push the industry forward.”

    Regan told CNN the rules would be phased in gradually, giving auto makers and consumers years before they fully go into effect. During that time, the administration is focused on installing more EV charging stations and expanding access to $7,500 federal EV tax credits.

    “What we’re looking at is a ramp-up period,” Regan said on CNN. “We’re going to see a massive buildup over the next couple years, and we’re starting to see those electric vehicle sales numbers grow already.”

    The EPA will take public comment on the proposal before finalizing the rules in the coming months.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • IFC to invest ₹600 crore in Mahindra unit at valuation of up to ₹6,020 crore

    IFC to invest ₹600 crore in Mahindra unit at valuation of up to ₹6,020 crore

    [ad_1]

    Mahindra & Mahindra, on Wednesday, said World Bank Group arm, IFC, will invest ₹600 crore in a new unit of the company, which is being incorporated to scale up the last-mile electric mobility business.

    IFC is investing ₹600 crore in a new last-mile mobility (LMM) company — a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mahindra & Mahindra — that will be newly incorporated (NewCo), the Mumbai-based automajor said in a statement.

    IFC’s first investment in an EV manufacturer in the country and the first in electric three-wheelers globally will be in the form of compulsory convertible instruments at a valuation of up to ₹6,020 crore.

    The ₹600 crore investment will result in an ownership of between 9.97 per cent to 13.64 per cent for IFC in NewCo.

    Also read: Mahindra Electric Mobility merges with M&M

    The NewCo will house the last-mile mobility division, including three-wheelers (Alfa, Treo, Zor) and four-wheeler SCV (Jeeto), Mahindra & Mahindra said.

    IFC’s financing will help scale up electric mobility in last-mile connectivity while enabling the development and manufacturing of new generation products in this space, it added.

    “Decarbonising the transport sector is crucial to achieving the climate goals that India has set for herself. IFC, with its focus on sustainability and boosting prosperity, is an ideal partner for us,” Mahindra & Mahindra MD and CEO Anish Shah said.

    IFC’s Regional Director for South Asia Hector Gomez Ang said India is the largest three-wheeler market globally, and this investment marks a significant step towards scaled domestic production of electric vehicles catering to this segment as well as small commercial vehicles.

    Also read: If India does well in attracting investment, this could be India’s time: World Bank Chief Economist

    “By supporting a leading market player, IFC hopes to encourage other large automotive manufacturers to follow suit, driving EV adoption across India and helping the government deliver on its climate targets,” he added.

    Decarbonising the transport sector, which contributes about 13 per cent of the country’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, can help substantially reduce the impacts related to GHG emissions and other air pollutants.

    This is vital given that India has committed to reducing its emissions profile by 45 per cent by 2030.

    Mahindra & Mahindra Executive Director and CEO (Auto & Farm Sector) Rajesh Jejurikar noted that the last-mile mobility business presents a tremendous opportunity, both in terms of electrification and growth.

    “Being the market leaders in this segment, we have an opportunity to drive higher EV penetration in this segment and provide a more sustainable as well as profitable option to microentrepreneurs,” he added.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden administration restores Obama-era mercury rules for power plants, eyes more regulations in coming months | CNN Politics

    Biden administration restores Obama-era mercury rules for power plants, eyes more regulations in coming months | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Biden administration on Friday finalized a decision to reestablish Obama-era rules that require coal and oil-fired power plants to reduce toxic pollutants, including mercury and acid gas, that come out of their smokestacks.

    Mercury is a neurotoxin with several health impacts, including harmful effects on children’s brain development. And while the updated rule significantly benefits public health for communities around these kinds of power plants, it also has the effect of requiring plants to cut down on planet-warming pollution that comes from burning coal to generate electricity.

    President Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency announced early last year that it intended to undo a Trump-era rollback of the 2012 mercury pollution rules, one of many Trump-era environmental decisions it has reversed.

    “This is a really good day for public health in this country,” EPA Deputy Administrator Janet McCabe told CNN. “We’re talking about mercury, arsenic, acid gases; these are dangerous pollutants that impact people’s health.”

    The EPA estimates the 2012 rule brought down mercury emissions from power plants by 86% by 2017, while acid gas emissions were reduced by 96%.

    McCabe said the EPA is currently working on its own, stronger mercury standard that it expects to propose “not too long from now” and finalize before the end of Biden’s first term.

    The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rules are part of a larger tranche of regulations the agency is expected to roll out this spring that would cut down on coal-fired power plant pollution, including rules on proper disposal of coal ash.

    It also plans to release a much-anticipated rule that would regulate planet-warming pollution like carbon dioxide and methane. That rule is expected to be more limited than climate advocates desire, after the US Supreme Court limited the EPA’s ability to broadly regulate carbon pollution in a ruling last year.

    “We’re very mindful of the Supreme Court precedent,” McCabe told CNN. “We’ve been working very, very carefully to craft a rule that will be in the four corners of the direction that the Supreme Court has laid down.”

    McCabe said the agency will propose that rule “in the relatively near future,” but did not share specifics about what the rule would do to limit pollution.

    Many of the nation’s coal-fired power plants are aging and new ones are not being built – especially as it’s getting more expensive operate existing plans. If the EPA implements stronger federal regulations on mercury, coal ash and greenhouse gas emissions, it could have the impact of more utilities shuttering coal-fired plants, as many are already doing.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden administration takes another step toward advancing a controversial oil drilling project in Alaska | CNN Politics

    Biden administration takes another step toward advancing a controversial oil drilling project in Alaska | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management on Wednesday advanced the controversial Willow oil drilling project on Alaska’s North Slope, releasing the final environmental impact statement before the project can be approved.

    The ConocoPhillips proposed Willow drilling plan is a massive and decadeslong project that the state’s bipartisan Congressional delegation says will create much-needed jobs for Alaskans and boost domestic energy production in the US.

    But environmental groups fear the impact of the planet-warming carbon pollution from the hundreds of millions of barrels of oil it would produce – and say it will deal a significant blow to President Joe Biden’s ambitious climate agenda.

    The final environmental report from the Bureau of Land Management recommends a slightly smaller version of what ConocoPhillips originally proposed, putting the number of drilling sites at three instead of five. The Department of Interior is also recommending other measures to try to lower the pollution of the project, and recommending a smaller footprint of gravel roads and pipelines.

    In a statement, the Interior Department said it “has substantial concerns about the Willow project and the preferred alternative as presented in the final SEIS, including direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions and impacts to wildlife and Alaska Native subsistence.”

    The Biden administration now has 30 days to issue a final decision on the project, after which drilling could begin. In its statement, Interior said it could select a different alternative on the project, including taking no action or further reducing the number of drill sites.

    ConocoPhillips and members of the Alaska Congressional delegation have been pushing the administration to finalize the project by the end of February to take advantage of cold and icy conditions needed to drill in the Arctic. If the company misses that window, it could push the project’s start date to next year.

    Erec Isaacson, president of ConocoPhillips Alaska, said in a statement that nearly five years of regulatory review should conclude “without delay.” Isaacson added the project is “ready to begin construction immediately” after Interior’s final decision is issued.

    According to the Interior Department’s own estimation, the project would produce 629 million barrels of oil over the course of 30 years and would release around 278 million metric tons of planet-warming carbon emissions. Climate groups say that’s equivalent to what 76 coal-fired power plants produce every year.

    “The world and the country can’t afford to develop that oil,” said Jeremy Lieb, a senior attorney for environmental law firm Earthjustice. Lieb and other advocates are concerned that Willow may be the start of a future drilling boom in the area.

    “Willow is just the start based on what industry has planned,” Lieb said. “The total estimate for the amount of oil that could be accessible in the region around Willow is 7 or 8 billion barrels.”

    For the Willow project, ConocoPhillips is proposing five drilling sites on federal land in Alaska’s North Slope, and the project would include a processing facility, pipelines to transport oil, gravel roads, at least one airstrip and a gravel mine site.

    The project – and the public comment process leading up to it – has also received heavy criticism from the nearby Alaska Native village of Nuiqsut, which some villagers evacuated last year during a gas leak in a ConocoPhillips project in the area. Nuiqsut officials recently released a letter calling the Bureau of Land Management’s public input process “disappointing and inadequate,” criticizing both the Trump and Biden administration’s timeline.

    The bureau’s “engagement with us is consistently focused on how to allow projects to go forward; how to permit the continuous expansion and concentration of oil and gas activity on our traditional lands,” Nuiqsut officials wrote in their letter.

    Alaska’s entire Congressional delegation – including newly elected Rep. Mary Peltola, a Democrat – have urged the White House and Interior to approve the project, saying it would be a huge boost to state’s economy.

    Sen. Lisa Murkowski, in particular, has been urging the White House and Biden personally to greenlight Willow, she told CNN.

    “I’ve been pretty persistent on this,” she told CNN in an interview this summer. “Let’s just say, any conversation I’ve ever had with the White House, anyone close to the White House, I’ve brought up the subject of Willow.”

    As gas prices spiked last summer, Murkowski, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a Democrat, and other Senate Republicans tightened the pressure on Biden to approve a major domestic oil drilling project. Environmental advocates, meanwhile, argued the project will not bring US gas prices down any time soon, as the infrastructure will take years to build.

    “When you think about those things that should be teed up and ready to go, this is one where in my view there’s really no excuse for why we should see further delay,” Murkowski said. “This is something that’s been in the works that’s gone through so much process, across multiple administrations.”

    This story has been updated with more information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The rich should pay higher fares to clean up aviation, says Heathrow boss | CNN Business

    The rich should pay higher fares to clean up aviation, says Heathrow boss | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    Rich travelers will have to pay more to fly if the aviation industry is to transition to greener fuels, the boss of one of the world’s biggest airports said Tuesday.

    Speaking on a panel at the World Economic Forum in Davos hosted by CNN’s Richard Quest, Heathrow CEO John Holland-Kaye said that wealthy individuals and companies should pay extra to fly with sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) in order to bring the costs down for everyone else, particularly people in developing countries.

    He said that financiers and energy suppliers should invest in SAF production, including in emerging markets.

    “But as individuals and companies we need to be paying the premium for sustainable aviation fuels so that we can get the cost of it down so that the mass market and developing countries don’t have to pay for the energy transition. The wealthy people in this room and wealthy nations should be funding the energy transition in aviation to help support developing countries,” he added.

    Holland-Kaye said the solution to sustainable aviation was not to fly less, which was not necessarily an option outside Northern Europe, but to use cleaner sources of energy to travel.

    SAF is viewed as critical to reducing aviation’s carbon emissions but its green credentials come at a hefty price. Some airlines allow passengers to offset their CO2 emissions by paying more for their tickets to cover the extra cost of using SAF, but very few travelers currently make use of this option.

    Holland-Kaye said that companies can play a major role accelerating the adoption of SAF because business travel accounts for about 30% of fuel used in aviation. He cited the example of Microsoft

    (MSFT)    , which has an internal carbon tax for travel that requires each business unit to pay a fee based on its carbon emissions.

    Produced mainly from recycled food and agricultural waste, such as used cooking oil, SAF is a type of biofuel that cuts greenhouse gas emissions by 80% compared to conventional jet fuel.

    It also costs between two and eight times more than its fossil-fuel based alternative, which is why in 2019 it accounted for just 0.1% of jet fuel used in commercial aviation, according to a report by the World Economic Forum and McKinsey.

    In 2021, the industry pledged to replaced 10% of global jet fuel supply with SAF by 2030. This year, Virgin Atlantic plans to fly a Boeing 787 from London to New York powered solely by SAF in what has been billed as the world’s first net-zero transatlantic flight.

    Clean energy investments need a major boost if the world is to meet its climate goals, according to Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has prompted a surge in investment in renewables as countries race to secure alternative energy supplies, but much more needs to be done, he said.

    Speaking on another Davos panel hosted by CNN’s Julia Chatterley earlier on Tuesday, Birol said that for every dollar invested in fossil fuels, the world is now investing $1.50 in clean energy. That needs to increase to $9 to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, he added.

    — Anna Cooban contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: Miami is one step closer to the implosion of its crypto dreams | CNN

    Opinion: Miami is one step closer to the implosion of its crypto dreams | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Jake Cline is a writer and editor in Miami whose work has appeared in The Washington Post, The Atlantic and other national outlets. He was a member of the team that won the 2019 Pulitzer Prize in Public Service for the South Florida Sun Sentinel’s coverage of the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. The opinions expressed here are his own. Read more opinion on CNN.



    CNN
     — 

    Thanks in large part to bitcoin evangelism by top officials in Miami, the city has spent the past couple of years in full-blown cryptomania.

    In the vision of Mayor Francis Suarez – the city’s chief cheerleader for digital currency – Miami will one day become the national capital for cryptocurrency.

    Two years ago, Miami published its “Bitcoin White Paper” – a blueprint for its transformation into a 21st century city. Around the same time, prominent crypto figures began relocating to the city, and Miami began hawking its own digital currency, MiamiCoin.

    As the fever quickened, cryptocurrency exchanges began advertising on Miami billboards. Bitcoin ATMs were installed at neighborhood gas stations and convenience stores.

    And perhaps the most visible symbol allowing Miami to flex its crypto bragging rights was the announcement in March of 2021 by Miami-Dade County that it had sold naming rights for its main sports arena – home of the beloved Miami Heat NBA franchise – to FTX, the now bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange founded by disgraced crypto entrepreneur Sam Bankman-Fried.

    That partnership, which is not even two years old, came to an unhappy end last week. On Wednesday, the beleaguered company and Miami’s local government finalized an agreement to terminate the deal and remove the now tarnished FTX logo from the sports venue.

    Over the past few months, as the scale of Bankman-Fried’s alleged fraud became clear, some city elders and the business community scrambled to unwind what many of us had suspected from the start was a simply terrible business deal. Bankman-Fried, who has maintained his innocence, pleaded not guilty to federal fraud charges during a court appearance in New York earlier this month.

    We now know just what a fiasco Miami’s love affair with crypto has been. The financial costs of last year’s crypto crash have been enormous for the many thousands of investors who invested – and then lost funds they could ill afford to forgo.

    But my own reservations were not rooted in certain knowledge that crypto would crumble, although its collapse was far swifter and more spectacular than even most skeptics anticipated.

    My opposition to crypto is based on its deleterious effects on the environment. The fact that Miami, considered “the most vulnerable major coastal city in the world,” would go all in for a currency created by a climate-wrecking technology always seemed to me to be a particular kind of madness.

    Many people don’t understand how a currency that exists largely in the digital space can have real-life destructive impacts on our environment. Bitcoin mining uses vast amounts of resources. As the New Yorker’s Elizabeth Kolbert wrote in an April 2021 article, “bitcoin-mining operations worldwide now use … about the annual electricity consumption of the entire nation of Sweden.”

    Citing data scientist Alex de Vries’ Digiconomist website, Kolbert reported that “a single bitcoin transaction uses the same amount of power that the average American household consumes in a month.” Similar reporting could be found at The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN.

    Bitcoin mining hardware has ramped up as the cryptocurrency’s popularity has increased. Between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2018, the mining operations for four major cryptocurrencies released an estimated three to 15 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, according to a study in the research journal Nature Sustainability.

    Even China, the world’s largest polluter, banned bitcoin mining in 2021, citing its high carbon emissions. Now we are in what has been called “crypto winter” after enthusiasm has plummeted for cryptocurrencies worldwide. Nevertheless, the carbon footprint of bitcoin, still the world’s most valuable digital currency, continues to be enormous.

    This past September, a report from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy found that crypto mining in the United States emits as much greenhouse gas as the nation’s railroads and cautioned that “depending on the energy intensity of the technology used, crypto-assets could hinder broader efforts to achieve net-zero carbon pollution consistent with U.S. climate commitments and goals.”

    But despite all that data, Suarez remains convinced that it’s possible to produce bitcoin in an environmentally friendly way.

    “I’d love to sort of dispel some of the, I think, myths — I call them myths — of [crypto] mining as a not-environmentally-friendly activity,” the mayor said during his Crypto Conference, a live-streamed event held in June 2021.

    And because there are renewable-energy sources in South Florida, his argument goes, crypto miners could eventually be incentivized to stop contributing to the destruction of our planet. He has argued, in effect, that because renewable energy sources exist, miners might just in the future opt to use them. It’s an extraordinarily weak argument. It would be a wonderful outcome, if only we could interest bitcoin miners in abandoning their pursuit of cheap and dirty energy sources.

    But he’s not wrong – it is entirely possible to mine bitcoin responsibly, as bitcoin’s leading competitor, ethereum, proved last year. A decentralized global network used for verifying billions of dollars of cryptocurrency transactions, ethereum in September completed a system-wide transformation known as the Merge.

    Essentially, ethereum moved to a mining process, known as proof of stake, that requires significantly less computing power than bitcoiners’ preferred process, proof of work. In doing so, ethereum appears to have reduced its worldwide energy consumption by more than 99%.

    While some bitcoin miners say they want their industry to go green, the majority resist calls to adopt the proof of stake system over fears it would eat into their profits. Meanwhile, residents of Miami seem torn on environmental matters. According to a survey conducted by Yale University, as well as George Mason University, they believe that local officials, and state officials, including the governor “should do more to address global warming.”

    But Miami voters helped to propel a “red wave” that installed Republican supermajorities in both chambers of the Florida legislature — a body that under GOP control allows fossil-fuel companies to write its bills.

    Residents of Miami-Dade County this past November also voted to reelect Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has said that while he doesn’t consider himself a “climate change denier” he hopes never to be mistaken for a “climate change believer.”

    And despite everything that has happened with the digital currency’s plummeting value, Suarez, who is also president of the United States Conference of Mayors, remains a bitcoin believer.

    Miami-Dade County will once again play host later this year to Bitcoin 2023, the next installment of the annual conference. And Suarez told a Miami TV station that he continues to receive his government salary in bitcoin, as he has since November 2021.

    Some dreams, it would seem, die hard.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First on CNN: Biden administration moves to phase out compact fluorescent light bulbs and push market toward LEDs | CNN Politics

    First on CNN: Biden administration moves to phase out compact fluorescent light bulbs and push market toward LEDs | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Biden administration is unveiling a new proposed rule that, if enacted, would effectively phase out compact fluorescent light bulbs and move the US light bulb markets decisively to more energy-efficient LEDs.

    The Department of Energy is proposing the rule on Monday with the aim to finalize it by the end of President Joe Biden’s first term. The rule would more than double the current minimum light bulb efficiency level, from its current standard of 45 lumens per watt to over 120 lumens per watt for the most common bulbs. The details of the proposed rule were shared first with CNN.

    This change will accelerate what White House National Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi said is an “increasing shift in the marketplace toward LED lighting” over the last decade. Zaidi said moving away from compact fluorescents and even less efficient incandescent bulbs will ultimately lead to savings for consumers.

    “The mandate to the Department of Energy from Congress is to find ways to save money for American consumers,” Zaidi told CNN in an interview. “LEDs are now an order of magnitude cheaper than just a decade ago.”

    The proposed rule comes on top of the Biden administration’s move to get inefficient incandescent bulbs off the shelves by the summer of 2023. The Department of Energy finalized a rule to phase out the old-fashioned bulbs in the spring, capping off a decades-long bipartisan effort started in the Bush administration to get them off the shelves.

    That was complicated by former President Donald Trump in 2019, whose administration undid a previous Obama-era light bulb rule. Trump once famously complained about the quality of the light coming from LED bulbs, telling House Republicans “I always look orange” in the energy-efficient lighting.

    Zaidi said that LED lighting technology has improved tremendously since the early days of LEDs, providing better light for a fraction of the cost.

    LED bulbs can last three to five times longer than a compact fluorescent bulb, and up to 30 times longer than an incandescent bulb, according to the Department of Energy. Unlike both incandescent and compact fluorescent bulbs, LEDs release very little heat, and thus waste less energy.

    “If a particular light fixture was costing someone $10 in a year, then it’s going to be costing much, much less,” Zaidi said.

    Even before the latest proposed rule, LED use in the US has grown significantly in recent years. Nearly 50% of US households said they used LED bulbs for most or all their indoor lighting, according to the 2020 Residential Energy Consumption Survey. It was a huge increase from the 2015 survey, where just 4% of households reported using LEDs for most or all indoor light use.

    That same survey showed just 12% of US households said they used compact fluorescents as their predominant source of lighting, down from 32% in 2015.

    DOE also estimates the proposed changes will help put a dent in planet-warming emissions, cutting 131 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and 903 thousand tons of methane over the next 30 years – roughly equal to the electricity that 29 million homes use in one year.

    Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in a statement the changes would “help lower energy costs and keep money in the pockets of American families while reducing our nation’s carbon footprint.”

    The rulemaking is also part of an administration goal to take 100 actions in the past year to make energy efficiency standards stronger. The White House announced Monday it had surpassed its goal with stronger standards on gas furnaces, air conditioners and clothes dryers.

    Zaidi told CNN it is part of a broader effort by the Biden administration to move Americans’ appliances to more energy efficient and cost-effective ones that also release far less heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions into the air. For instance, Zaidi said DOE is also at work on a rule to make residential cooking products like stoves and ovens more efficient.

    Zaidi added the administration is trying to use a combination of federal standards and incentives to push consumers toward energy-efficient and cleaner products for their homes, whether it be a light bulb, an HVAC unit or a stove.

    “We’re laying the foundation for people in every year of this administration being able to lock in more ways to save money on energy bills,” Zaidi said. “One of the things we’ve heard loud and clear is how focused consumers are on not only recognizing that energy costs are front of mind now, but that there are these products that help them avoid impacts to their bottom line as energy costs fluctuate in the future.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California regulators approve plan to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 | CNN

    California regulators approve plan to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    California’s air regulators approved an aggressive plan Thursday for the state to reach carbon neutrality by 2045 – in line with legislation signed by Governor Gavin Newsom earlier this year.

    The plan, approved by the California Air Resources Board, looks to move one of the largest economies in the world to renewable energy and away from fossil fuels.

    Known as the Scoping Plan, the actions and policies aim to slash fossil fuel usage to less than a tenth of current consumption by decreasing demand for liquid petroleum by 94% by 2045, mainly driven by a move away from gas-powered vehicles.

    The board also says the plan will cut air pollution by 71% and gas emissions by 85% to below 1990 levels. Both goals are consistent with targets laid out in Governor Gavin Newsom’s $54.1 billion climate commitment intended to protect residents from wildfires, extreme heat and drought while moving away from big oil.

    The plan will create four million jobs and save Californians some $200 billion in health costs for pollution-related illnesses by 2045, the board said, providing a path for California to meet its climate targets.

    “California is leading the world’s most significant economic transformation since the Industrial Revolution – we’re cutting pollution, turning the page on fossil fuels and creating millions of new jobs,” said Newsom in a press release after the plan was approved.

    After a public comment session, board members acknowledged that this plan is a roadmap to cutting greenhouse gases, and that not all of what is laid out may come to fruition.

    One focus of the plan is a move to zero-emission transportation, including both personal vehicles and mass transit. While fossil fuels used in homes are also targeted, the state said gas-powered vehicles and other transportation are currently the largest source of carbon emissions.

    In August, the board approved a rule requiring all passenger vehicles sold in the state to be zero-emission by 2035.

    Beginning in 2026, all new residential buildings will be required to install electric appliances and in 2029, the requirements will begin extending to commercial buildings, according to the plan. For existing residential buildings, all appliance sales are required to be electric by 2035. Ten years later, all commercial buildings in the state will have to follow suit, the plan said.

    While the board called the plan “achievable” some critics say the plan relies too much on what some of the board members acknowledged is an unproven method of carbon capture and sequestration instead of relying on natural and working lands to also house some of that carbon.

    “This plan is failing the people of California and our planet – first by endorsing carbon capture, a faulty climate scheme promoted by the fossil fuel industry,” said Chirag Bhakta, the California state director for Food & Water Watch, in a statement to CNN.

    “Carbon capture is a completely unproven and unworkable technology that only serves to provide cover for oil and gas drillers to continue business as usual,” Bhakta said.

    The scoping plan also targets wildfires which are not only responsible for the destruction of forests, buildings and property, but also emit copious amounts of carbon dioxide.

    In recent years, human-driven climate change has spurred massive blazes. The board pointing out that of the 20 largest wildfires in California, nine happened in 2020 and 2021.

    The plan sets a goal of treating one million acres a year by 2025 through actions like prescribed burns and increased forest management. Currently, about 100,000 acres are treated a year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A trash heap 62 meters high shows the scale of India’s climate challenge | CNN

    A trash heap 62 meters high shows the scale of India’s climate challenge | CNN

    [ad_1]


    New Delhi
    CNN
     — 

    At the Bhalswa landfill in northwest Delhi, a steady flow of jeeps zigzag up the trash heap to dump more garbage on a pile now over 62 meters (203 feet) high.

    Fires caused by heat and methane gas sporadically break out – the Delhi Fire Service Department has responded to 14 fires so far this year – and some deep beneath the pile can smolder for weeks or months, while men, women and children work nearby, sifting through the rubbish to find items to sell.

    Some of the 200,000 residents who live in Bhalswa say the area is uninhabitable, but they can’t afford to move and have no choice but to breathe the toxic air and bathe in its contaminated water.

    Bhalswa is not Delhi’s largest landfill. It’s about three meters lower than the biggest, Ghazipur, and both contribute to the country’s total output of methane gas.

    Methane is the second most abundant greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide, but a more potent contributor to the climate crisis because methane traps more heat. India creates more methane from landfill sites than any other country, according to GHGSat, which monitors methane via satellites.

    And India comes second only to China for total methane emissions, according to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Global Methane Tracker.

    As part of his “Clean India” initiative, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said efforts are being made to remove these mountains of garbage and convert them into green zones. That goal, if achieved, could relieve some of the suffering of those residents living in the shadows of these dump sites – and help the world lower its greenhouse gas emissions.

    India wants to lower its methane output, but it hasn’t joined the 130 countries who have signed up to the Global Methane Pledge, a pact to collectively cut global methane emissions by at least 30% from 2020 levels by 2030. Scientists estimate the reduction could cut global temperature rise by 0.2% – and help the world reach its target of keeping global warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius.

    India says it won’t join because most of its methane emissions come from farming – some 74% from farm animals and paddy fields versus less than 15% from landfill.

    In a statement last year, Minister of State for Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate change Ashwini Choubey said pledging to reduce India’s total methane output could threaten the livelihood of farmers and affect India’s trade and economic prospects.

    But it’s also facing challenges in reducing methane from its steaming mounds of trash.

    A young boy in the narrow lanes of slums in Bhalswa Dairy Village.

    When Narayan Choudhary, 72, moved to Bhalswa in 1982, he said it was a “beautiful place,” but that all changed 12 years later when the first rubbish began arriving at the local landfill.

    In the years since, the Bhalswa dump has grown nearly as tall as the historic Taj Mahal, becoming a landmark in its own right and an eyesore that towers over surrounding homes, affecting the health of people who live there.

    Choudhary suffers from chronic asthma. He said he nearly died when a large fire broke out at Bhalswa in April that burned for days. “I was in terrible shape. My face and nose were swollen. I was on my death bed,” he said.

    “Two years ago we protested … a lot of residents from this area protested (to get rid of the waste),” Choudhary said. “But the municipality didn’t cooperate with us. They assured us that things will get better in two years but here we are, with no relief.”

    The dump site exhausted its capacity in 2002, according to a 2020 report on India’s landfills from the Center for Science and Environment (CSE), a nonprofit research agency in New Delhi, but without government standardization in recycling systems and greater industry efforts to reduce plastic consumption and production, tonnes of garbage continue to arrive at the site daily.

    Narrow lanes of the slum in Bhalswa Dairy Village.

    Bhalswa isn’t the only dump causing distress to residents nearby – it is one of three landfills in Delhi, overflowing with decaying waste and emitting toxic gases into the air.

    Across the country, there are more than 3,100 landfills. Ghazipur is the biggest in Delhi, standing at 65 meters (213 feet), and like Bhalswa, it surpassed its waste capacity in 2002 and currently produces huge amounts of methane.

    According to GHGSat, on a single day in March, more than two metric tons of methane gas leaked from the site every hour.

    “If sustained for a year, the methane leak from this landfill would have the same climate impact as annual emissions from 350,000 US cars,” said GHGSat CEO Stephane Germain.

    Methane emissions aren’t the only hazard that stem from landfills like Bhalswa and Ghazipur. Over decades, dangerous toxins have seeped into the ground, polluting the water supply for thousands of residents living nearby.

    In May, CNN commissioned two accredited labs to test the ground water around the Bhalswa landfill. And according to the results, ground water within at least a 500-meter (1,600-foot) radius around the waste site is contaminated.

    A ground water sample from the Bhalswa landfill in northwest Delhi.

    In the first lab report, levels of ammonia and sulphate were significantly higher than acceptable limits mandated by the Indian government.

    Results from the second lab report showed levels of total dissolved solids (TDS) – the amount of inorganic salts and organic matter dissolved in the water – detected in one of the samples was almost 19 times the acceptable limit, making it unsafe for human drinking.

    The Bureau of Indian Standards sets the acceptable limit of TDS at 500 milligrams/liter, a figure roughly seen as “good” by the World Health Organization (WHO). Anything over 900 mg/l is considered “poor” by the WHO, and over 1,200 mg/l is “unacceptable.”

    According to Richa Singh from the Center for Science and Environment (CSE), the TDS of water taken near the Bhalswa site was between 3,000 and 4,000 mg/l. “This water is not only unfit for drinking but also unfit for skin contact,” she said. “So it can’t be used for purposes like bathing or cleaning of the utensils or cleaning of the clothes.”

    Dr. Nitesh Rohatgi, the senior director of medical oncology at Fortis Memorial Research Institute, Gurugram, urged the government to study the health of the local population and compare it to other areas of the city, “so that in 15 to 20 years’ time, we are not looking back and regretting that we had a higher cancer incidence, higher health hazards, higher health issues and we didn’t look back and correct them in time.”

    Most people in Bhalswa rely on bottled water for drinking, but they use local water for other purposes – many say they have no choice.

    “The water we get is contaminated, but we have to helplessly store it and use it for washing utensils, bathing and at times drinking too,” said resident Sonia Bibi, whose legs are covered in a thick, red rash.

    Jwala Prashad, 87, who lives in a small hut in an alleyway near the landfill, said the pile of putrid trash had made his life “a living hell.”

    “The water we use is pale red in color. My skin burns after bathing,” he said, as he tried to soothe red gashes on his face and neck.

    “But I can’t afford to ever leave this place,” he added.

    Jwala Prashad, 87, at the handpump in front of his house in Bhalswa Dairy Village.

    More than 2,300 tonnes of Municipal Solid Waste arrive at Delhi’s largest dump in Ghazipur every day, according to a report released in July by a joint committee formed to find a way to reduce the number of fires at the site.

    That’s the bulk of the waste from the surrounding area – only 300 tonnes is processed and disposed of by other means, the report said. And less than 7% of legacy waste had been bio-mined, which involves excavating, treating and potentially reusing old rubbish.

    The Municipal Corporation of Delhi deploys drones every three months to monitor the size of the trash heap and is experimenting with ways to extract methane from the trash mountain, the report said.

    But too much rubbish is arriving every day to keep up. The committee said bio-mining had been “slow and tardy” and it was “highly unlikely” the East Delhi Municipal Corporation (which has now merged with North and South Delhi Municipal Corporations) would achieve its target of “flattening the garbage mountain” by 2024.

    “No effective plans to reduce the height of the garbage mountain have been made,” the report said. Furthermore, “it should have proposed a long time ago that future dumping of garbage in them would pollute the groundwater systems,” the report added.

    CNN sent a series of questions along with the data from the water testing questionnaire to India’s Environment and Health Ministries. There has been no response from the ministries.

    In a 2019 report, the Indian government recommended ways to improve the country’s solid waste management, including formalizing the recycling sector and installing more compost plants in the country.

    While some improvements have been made, such as better door-to-door garbage collection and processing of waste, Delhi’s landfills continue to accumulate waste.

    In October, the National Green Tribunal fined the state government more than $100 million for failing to dispose of more than 30 million metric tonnes of waste across its three landfill sites.

    “The problem is Delhi doesn’t have a concrete solid waste action plan in place,” said Singh from the CSE. “So we are talking here about dump site remediation and the treatment of legacy waste, but imagine the fresh waste which is generated on a regular basis. All of that is getting dumped everyday into these landfills.”

    “(So) let’s say you are treating 1,000 tons of legacy (waste) and then you are dumping 2,000 tons of fresh waste every day it will become a vicious cycle. It will be a never ending process,” Singh said.

    “Management of legacy waste, of course, is mandated by the government and is very, very important. But you just can’t start the process without having an alternative facility of fresh waste. So that’s the biggest challenge.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Big Oil has engaged in a long-running climate disinformation campaign while raking in record profits, lawmakers find | CNN Politics

    Big Oil has engaged in a long-running climate disinformation campaign while raking in record profits, lawmakers find | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Big Oil companies have engaged in a “long-running greenwashing campaign” while raking in “record profits at the expense of American consumers,” the Democratic-led House Oversight Committee has found after a year-long investigation into climate disinformation from the fossil fuel industry.

    The committee found the fossil fuel industry is “posturing on climate issues while avoiding real commitments” to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Lawmakers said it has sought to portray itself as part of the climate solution, even as internal industry documents reveal how companies have avoided making real commitments.

    “Today’s documents reveal that the industry has no real plans to clean up its act and is barreling ahead with plans to pump more dirty fuels for decades to come,” House Oversight Committee Chair Carolyn Maloney told CNN in a statement.

    For example, lawmakers reported, BP has stated it strives to “be a net zero company by 2050 or sooner,” but the committee found internal BP documents that show the company’s recent plans do not align with the company’s public comments.

    In a July 2017 email between several of the company’s high-level officials about whether to invest in curbing emissions from one of its gas projects off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago, BP’s vice president of engineering stated that BP had “no obligation to minimize GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions” and that the company should only “minimize GHG emissions where it makes commercial sense,” as required by code or if it fits into a regional strategy.

    The committee said documents uncovered also showed the fossil fuel industry has presented natural gas as a so-called “bridge fuel” to transition to cleaner sources of energy, all while doubling down on its long-term reliance on fossil fuels with no clear plan of action to full transition to clean energy.

    A strategy slide presented to the Chevron Board of Directors from CEO Mike Wirth and obtained by the committee states that while Chevron sees “traditional energy business competitors retreating” from oil and gas, “Chevron’s strategy” is to “continue to invest” in fossil fuels to take advantage of consolidation in the industry.

    In a 2016 email from a BP executive to John Mingé, then-Chairman and President of BP America, and others, about climate and emissions, an employee assessed that the company often adopted an obstructionist strategy with regulators, noting, “we wait for the rules to come out, we don’t like what we see, and then try to resist and block.”

    “The fossil fuel industry has of late been involved in extensive “greenwashing”—misleading claims in advertisements, particularly on social media, claiming or suggesting that they are “Paris aligned,” and that they are committed to meaningful solutions,” Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard professor who has studied the fossil fuel industry’s rebuke of climate science, told CNN. “Numerous analyses shows that these claims are untrue.”

    BP, Chevron, Exxon, Shell, the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce were the focus of Democratic lawmakers’ investigation. The companies have denied engaging in a disinformation campaign surrounding climate change and the role the industry has played in fueling it for decades. CNN has reached out to the companies and organizations for comment on the committee’s findings.

    Todd Spitler, a spokesperson for Exxon, said in a statement the committee took internal company communications out of context.

    “The House Oversight Committee report has sought to misrepresent ExxonMobil’s position on climate science, and its support for effective policy solutions, by recasting well intended, internal policy debates as an attempted company disinformation campaign,” Spitler said. “If specific members of the committee are so certain they’re right, why did they have to take so many things out of context to prove their point?”

    Democratic lawmakers had hoped the committee’s hearings would be the fossil fuel industry’s “Big Tobacco” moment — a nod to the famous 1994 hearings when tobacco CEOs insisted that cigarettes were not addictive, triggering accusations of perjury and federal investigations.

    The impact of House Oversight’s investigation into Big Oil will not be as immediate, but Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democrat and the chair of Oversight’s environmental subcommittee, said the findings have added to the historical record for the industry and its role in global warming.

    “These hearings and reports have been historic because we succeeded in bringing in the heads of Exxon, Chevron, Shell, BP, API, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to testify under oath for the first time ever about efforts to mislead the public on climate and forced them to provide explosive internal documents” Khanna told CNN in a statement. “I have no doubt that this work will be analyzed for years to come and help deepen our understanding about the entire industry’s role in funding and facilitating climate disinformation.”

    Democratic lawmakers said the oil and gas industry obstructed their investigation throughout the more than year-long process. Many of their requests for internal documents were heavily redacted by the companies, which did not specify reasons for withholding the information.

    In other cases, documents were heavily redacted because companies like Exxon said the information was “proprietary and confidential,” though the lawmakers noted that is not a valid reason to withhold information in a committee subpoena.

    “These companies know their climate pledges are inadequate but are prioritizing Big Oil’s record profits over the human costs of climate change,” Maloney said. “It’s time for the fossil fuel industry to stop lying to the American people and finally take serious steps to reduce emissions and address the global climate crisis they helped create.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UK government greenlights first new coal mine in three decades | CNN

    UK government greenlights first new coal mine in three decades | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The UK has greenlit a controversial plan to open the country’s first new coal mine in three decades, a little more than a year after the nation tried to convince the world to ditch coal at the COP26 climate talks in Glasgow.

    Michael Gove, the UK housing and communities secretary, on Wednesday approved the plan to open the Whitehaven coal mine in Cumbria, a county in northwestern England that is home to the World Heritage-listed Lake District.

    The controversial mine is expected to create more than 500 jobs. But the environmental trade-off is steep: The UK Climate Change Committee (CCC), an independent group that advises the government, has estimated the mine and the coal it will produce will emit around 9 million tons of planet-warming emissions every year.

    Supporters of the mine argue the project will create jobs and secure the fossil fuel for British steelmaking; however, 85% of the coal mined is due to be exported.

    The CCC has criticized the decision. Committee chairman Lord Deben said in a statement: “Phasing out coal use is the clearest requirement of the global effort towards Net Zero. We condemn, therefore, the Secretary of State’s decision to consent to a new deep coal mine in Cumbria, contrary to our previous advice. This decision grows global emissions and undermines UK efforts to achieve Net Zero.”

    The mine’s approval was also met with fierce criticism from scientists and environmentalists.

    “A new coal mine in Cumbria makes no sense environmentally or economically,” said Paul Ekins, Professor of Resources and Environmental Policy at the UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, in a statement. “It will add to global CO2 emissions, as the new supply will not replace other coal but divert it elsewhere, and it will become stranded in the 2030s as the steel industry globally moves away from coal.”

    Ekins also said that the mine’s approval “trashes the UK’s reputation as a global leader on climate action and opens it up to well justified charges of hypocrisy – telling other countries to ditch coal while not doing so itself.”

    The government initially approved the project, but then put it on hold after a wave of protests, including a 10-day hunger strike by two teenage activists.

    It came under intense pressure to reject the plan in 2021, the year it hosted the COP26 talks in Glasgow.

    Alok Sharma, the COP26 President and a lawmaker for the governing Conservative Party, campaigned against the mine.

    “Opening a new coal mine will not only be a backward step for UK climate action but also damage the UK’s hard-won international reputation, through our COP26 Presidency, as a leader in the global fight against climate change,” he said ahead of the announcement on Wednesday.

    The decision comes a little more than a year after the conference, and after lengthy discussions between the UK government, local authorities and the public.

    The Cumbria County Council had also approved the plan three times, but it backtracked its decision last February and called for a planning inquiry, effectively shifting the decision to the national government.

    The Whitehaven mine, also known as the Woodhouse Colliery, is scheduled to operate until 2049, which is just a year before the UK’s self-imposed deadline to slash greenhouse gas emissions to net zero (emitting as little greenhouse gas as possible, and offsetting any emissions that cannot be avoided).

    According to the International Energy Agency, investment into new fossil fuels infrastructure must stop immediately if the world wants any chance of achieving net zero by 2050. The latest climate science shows that achieving net zero by mid-century is necessary to keep temperatures from rising well above 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared with pre-industrial times. Beyond that threshold, the world will face climate crisis impacts that could take millennia to correct, or could be irreversible altogether.

    Climate activists have protested against the project, while West Cumbria Mining, which is developing the mine, said the project would bring hundreds of new jobs into a struggling region. Its opponents argue these jobs may not be secure, given the huge momentum in Europe to phase out coal.

    “Opening a coal mine in Cumbria is investing in 1850s technology and does not look forward to the 2030s low carbon local energy future,” Stuart Haszeldine, a professor at the School of GeoSciences at the University of Edinburgh, said in a statement.

    [ad_2]

    Source link