Japan's Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide poses for a portrait on September 14, 2020 in Tokyo, Japan, after being elected Liberal Democratic Party President. Nicolas Datiche / Pool / Getty Images
Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga announced that Japan will become country carbon neutral by 2050, Bloomberg reported.
<p>As the world's third-largest economy, this will require a "fundamental shift" away from coal, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/japan-climate-emissions/2020/10/26/b6ea2b5a-1752-11eb-8bda-814ca56e138b_story.html" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p><p>Suga replaced former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last month, after he resigned due to health issues. This was Suga's first parliament policy speech since taking office. </p><p>He announced, "The Suga administration will seek to make a virtuous cycle between the economy and the environment," Bloomberg reported. "We will put all possible efforts into creating a green society."</p>
<p>Additionally, "Responding to climate change is no longer a constraint on economic growth," <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/japan-climate-emissions/2020/10/26/b6ea2b5a-1752-11eb-8bda-814ca56e138b_story.html" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported from Suga's speech. "We need to change our thinking to the view that taking assertive measures against climate change will lead to changes in industrial structure and the economy that will bring about great growth."</p><p>However, Suga did not offer any details about how carbon neutrality will be achieved, although he referenced carbon recycling and next generation solar cells. The Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Hiroshi Kajiyama told reporters that more details will be presented in a report later this year, according to Bloomberg, including wind energy, hydrogen and improved battery storage.<br></p><p>The move follows commitments from other major economies responsible for an outsized share of greenhouse gas emissions, including the world's largest emitter, China.<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/china-climate-action-2060-2648140974.html?rebelltitem=5" target="_self"> China has set a 2060 target </a>for carbon neutrality. Japan is the world's fifth-largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/business/japans-carbon-neutrality.html" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>.</p>
<p>Japanese policy experts believe a number of factors drove the announcement, including mounting pressure from inside Japan to tackle the climate crisis, plus international competition. It would be "somewhat embarrassing for Japan to have a net zero emissions timeline later than China," Takeshi Kuramochi, a climate policy researcher at the NewClimate Institute told The New York Times.</p><p>Sam Annesley, executive director of Greenpeace Japan, added that sustainability should also include a move away from nuclear power. "Nearly 10 years on from Fukushima we are still facing the disastrous consequences of nuclear power, and this radioactive legacy has made clear that nuclear energy has no place in a green, sustainable future," <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/26/japan-will-become-carbon-neutral-by-2050-pm-pledges" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Student Climate Protesters Urge Universities to Go Carbon Neutral ... ›
- This Country Is Already Carbon Neutral and Now Plans to Go 100 ... ›
- Climate Action Must Go Deeper Than 'Carbon Neutral' - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
The 1.4-gigawatt coal-fired Kingston Steam Plant, just outside Kingston, Tennessee on the shore of Watts Bar Lake on March 31, 2019. In 2008, a coal ash pond at the plant collapsed, leading to the largest industrial spill in modern U.S. history and subsequent industry regulations in 2015. Paul Harris / Getty Images
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a rule change on Friday that will allow some coal power plants to ignore a court order to clean up coal ash ponds, which leech toxic materials into soil and groundwater. The rule change will allow some coal ash ponds to stay open for years while others that have no barrier to protect surrounding areas are allowed to stay open indefinitely, according to the AP.
<p>The arsenic-laced sludge that fills coal ash ponds is likely to leak when just a plastic barrier protects it. It is far more likely to pollute nearby soil and water when the pits have a clay barrier, according to researchers, as <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/521409-epa-may-violate-courts-with-new-rule-extending-life-of-unlined-coal" target="_blank">The Hill</a> reported.</p><p>A 2018 order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit had forced the EPA to close coal ash ponds that did not have plastic lining and were likely to leak toxic chemicals, making Friday's rule change seem like a blatant move to undermine the court's authority, according to environmental groups who promised to sue to stop the rule change, as The Hill reported.</p>
<p>Environmentalists argue that the rule change is a favor to the coal industry, for which EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler served as a lobbyist prior to joining the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration. The move allows the industry to dump its byproducts inexpensively and irresponsibly.</p><p>"The reason the utilities are arguing to keep the ponds is because they have put in these unlined pits out the back door of the power plant that act as a catchall for their toxic waste," said Lisa Evans, an attorney for the environmental group Earthjustice, as the AP reported. "They don't want to get rid of them because they are cheap."</p>
<p>Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project commissioned a study on coal ash ponds and found that 91 percent of them were leaking toxic chemicals beyond what was permitted by EPA regulations, as The Hill reported. Their study found that heavy metals from the waste was polluting nearby drinking wells and groundwater.</p><p>Coal ash is produced when coal is burned to produce power. It is full of arsenic, mercury, lead and several other hazardous heavy metals. In the U.S., coal plants create nearly 100 million tons annually of ash and other waste, according to the AP.</p><p>"When ponds without lining leak, it's often more aggressive, faster and harder to control," said Evans, as The Hill reported. "Utilities are asking for favors and exemptions and EPA is willing to give them and is willing to rush to provide these exemptions."</p>
<p>The 2018 court decision found that clay lined coal ash ponds, or unlined ponds, are simply dangerous, as the AP reported.</p><p>Evans noted that the Obama-era Resource Conservation and Recovery Act required power plants to close unlined coal-ash ponds by April 2019, but the EPA keeps extending the deadline, as the AP reported.</p><p>By rewriting the rule, coal plants are able to get around the mandates of the 2015 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act by simply showing that their coal ash ponds pose no threat to human health.</p><p>"The Trump EPA is flouting the court's decision," said Evans, as the AP reported. "I've never seen anything like this before."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- 10 Ways Andrew Wheeler Has Decimated EPA Protections in Just ... ›
- What a Real Coal Ash Cleanup Looks Like - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A resident of Springdale, Pennsylvania looks out her front window at the smoke stack of the Cheswick coal-fired power plant on Oct. 27, 2017. Robert Nickelsberg / Getty Images
A three judge panel in the Court of Appeals in Washington, DC listened to arguments Thursday on a Trump administration rollback of regulations that limit the emissions that power plants are allowed to spew into the atmosphere, as The New York Times reported.
<p>Health and environmental activists sued the government, arguing that the new regulations inadequately address the threat of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-crisis" target="_self">climate crisis</a>. The American Lung Association and the American Public Health Association first filed the suit. Then dozens of other groups signed on and more than 170 amicus briefs were filed in the case revolving around the Trump administration's move to scrap the Clean Power Plan, as <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/health-environment-groups-clash-with-feds-over-clean-power/" target="_blank">Courthouse News</a> reported.</p><p>The new Trump rule, touted as the Affordable Clean Energy rule, "will result in some <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuel</a> plants running more often and delaying their retirement, which would mean increased emissions of dangerous pollution as compared to the Clean Power Plan," according to the American Lung Association, as Courthouse News reported.</p>
<p>In arguments held virtually that went all day, the panel of judges — two Obama appointees and one Trump appointee — fired questions at the lawyers on a range of topics from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" target="_self">EPA</a>) jurisdiction to how coal turns into electricity, as <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/d-c-circuit-goes-into-overtime-exploring-epas-climate-rules" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Bloomberg Law</a> reported.</p><p>The plaintiffs contend that the administration's Affordable Clean Energy rule will not only allow power plants to make no effort to reduce carbon emissions, but will also allow them to increase other toxic pollutants emitted into the atmosphere. That consequence betrays the EPA's mandate and legal obligations, they argue, as The New York Times reported.</p>
<p>New York Deputy Solicitor General Steven C. Wu said the Affordable Clean Energy plan is unjustified and inadequate to make any significant impact in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.</p><p>The case may have far-reaching implications as the Trump administration is arguing that the EPA has an extremely limited amount of authority in the Clean Air Act. That limited scope, the administration argues, means the federal government has neither the authority to set national limits on greenhouse gas emissions, nor the jurisdiction to mandate that states move away from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal">coal</a> power, according to The New York Times.</p>
<p>The plaintiffs in the case argued that the Trump administration's rollbacks were irresponsible.</p><p>"It's like choosing a squirt gun to put out a five alarm fire. EPA provides no reasoned explanation of how such a paltry remedy is appropriate given a record showing such an urgent problem," said Sean Donahue, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, in his argument for the health and environmental petitioners, as Courthouse News reported.</p><p>If the Trump administration is successful in the case, it will limit the scope that any future administration has to curtail the emissions from power plants, which are the nation's second largest source of greenhouse gases after transportation. If the administration loses the case, it's expected to appeal to the Supreme Court, making the potential appointment of Amy Coney Barrett high-stakes for environmental policy, according to The New York Times.</p><p>"The Trump administration has really taken a go-for-broke approach," said Joseph Goffman, executive director of Harvard University Law School's Environmental & Energy Law Program and a former EPA official under Obama, to The New York Times. He added that if the Trump administration wins, "Then they've really advanced a broader project that the Trump administration has been pursuing to not only repeal individual rules, but to narrow the foundation of the federal government in doing any kind of regulation."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trump's Latest EPA Rollback Lets Polluters Spew More Lead ... ›
- Blowing the Cover off the 'Cleanest Air' Illusion of the Trump ... ›
- Trump's EPA Signs 'Deadly' Clean Power Plan Replacement ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Support Ecowatch
Beijing's Forbidden City is seen here covered by smog. Yinan Chen / Wikimedia Commons / CC0
By Hao Tan, Elizabeth Thurbon, John Mathews, Sung-Young Kim
China's President Xi Jinping surprised the global community recently by committing his country to net-zero emissions by 2060. Prior to this announcement, the prospect of becoming "carbon neutral" barely rated a mention in China's national policies.
<p>China currently accounts for about <a href="https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2020-co2-emissions.pdf" target="_blank">28% of global carbon emissions</a> – double the U.S. contribution and three times the European Union's. Meeting the pledge will demand a deep transition of not just China's energy system, but its entire economy.</p><p>Importantly, China's use of coal, oil and gas must be slashed, and its industrial production stripped of emissions. This will affect demand for Australia's exports in coming decades.</p><p>It remains to be seen whether China's climate promise is genuine, or simply a ploy to win international favor. But it puts pressure on many other nations – not least Australia – to follow.</p>
Goodbye, Fossil Fuels
<p>Coal is currently used to generate <a href="https://ieefa.org/coals-share-of-china-electricity-generation-dropped-below-60-in-2018/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">about 60%</a> of China's electricity. Coal must be phased out for China to meet its climate target, unless technologies such as carbon-capture and storage become commercially viable.</p><p>Natural gas is <a href="https://chineseclimatepolicy.energypolicy.columbia.edu/en/natural-gas" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">increasingly used</a> in China for heating and transport, as an alternative to coal and petrol. To achieve carbon neutrality, China must dramatically reduce its gas use.</p><p>Electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles must also come to dominate road transport - currently they account for <a href="http://www.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2020-01/08/c_1125433202.htm" target="_blank">less than 2%</a> of the total fleet.</p><p>China must also slash the production of carbon-intensive steel, cement and chemicals, unless they can be powered by renewable electricity or zero-emissions hydrogen. One <a href="https://www.energy-transitions.org/publications/china-2050-a-fully-developed-rich-zero-carbon-economy/" target="_blank">report</a> suggests meeting the target will mean most of China's steel is produced using recycled steel, in a process powered by renewable electricity.</p><p><a href="https://www.energy-transitions.org/publications/china-2050-a-fully-developed-rich-zero-carbon-economy/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Modeling</a> in that report suggests China's use of iron ore – and the coking coal required to process it into steel – will decrease by 75%. The implications for Australia's mining industry would be huge; around <a href="https://minerals.org.au/minerals/ironore" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">80%</a> of our iron ore is exported to China.</p><p>It is critically important for Australian industries and policymakers to assess the seriousness of China's pledge and the likelihood it will be delivered. Investment plans for large mining projects should then be reconsidered accordingly.</p><p><span></span>Conversely, China's path towards a carbon neutral economy may open up new export opportunities for Australia, such as "green" hydrogen.</p>A Renewables Revolution
<p>Solar and wind currently account for <a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html" target="_blank">10% of China's total power generation</a>. For China to meet the net-zero goal, renewable energy generation would have to ramp up dramatically. This is needed for two reasons: to replace the lost coal-fired power capacity, and to provide the larger electricity needs of transport and heavy industry.</p><p>Two factors are likely to reduce energy demand in China in coming years. First, energy efficiency in the building, transport and manufacturing sectors is likely to improve. Second, the economy is moving <a href="https://apjjf.org/2018/10/Tan.html" target="_blank">away</a> from energy- and pollution-intensive production, towards an economy based on services and digital technologies.</p><p>It's in China's interests to take greater action on climate change. Developing renewable energy helps China build new "green" export industries, secure its energy supplies and improve air and water quality.</p>The Global Picture
<p>It's worth considering what factors may have motivated China's announcement, beyond the desire to do good for the climate.</p><p>In recent years, China has been viewed with increasing hostility on the world stage, especially by Western nations. Some <a href="https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/09/23/asia-pacific/china-carbon-neutral-2060/" target="_blank">commentators</a> have suggested China's climate pledge is a bid to improve its global image.</p><p>The pledge also gives China the high ground over a major antagonist, the US, which under President Donald Trump has walked away from its international obligations on climate action. China's pledge follows similar ones by the European Union, New Zealand, California and others. It sets an example for other developing nations to follow, and puts pressure on Australia to do the same.</p><p>The European Union has also been <a href="https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/europe-urges-china-to-match-its-climate-ambitions/" target="_blank">urging China</a> to take stronger climate action. The fact Xi made the net-zero pledge at a United Nations meeting suggests it was largely targeted at an international, rather than Chinese, audience.</p><p>However, the international community will judge China's pledge on how quickly it can implement specific, measurable short- and mid-term targets for net-zero emissions, and whether it has the policies in place to ensure the goal is delivered by 2060.</p><p>Much is resting on China's next <a href="https://chinadialogue.net/en/climate/11434-the-14th-five-year-plan-what-ideas-are-on-the-table/" target="_blank">Five Year Plan</a> – a policy blueprint created every five years to steer the economy towards various priorities. The latest plan, covering 2021–25, is being developed. It will be examined closely for measures such as phasing out coal and more ambitious targets for renewables.</p><p>Also key is whether the recent <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-chinas-co2-emissions-grew-4-during-first-half-of-2019" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">rebound</a> of China's carbon emissions – following a fall from 2013 to 2016 – can be reversed.</p>Wriggle Room
<p>The 2060 commitment is bold, but China may look to leave itself wriggle room in several ways.</p><p>First, Xi declared in his speech that China will "aim to" achieve carbon neutrality, leaving open the option his nation may not meet the target.</p><p>Second, the Paris Agreement states that developed nations should provide financial <a href="https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf" target="_blank">resources and technological support</a> to help developing countries reduce their emissions. China may make its delivery of the pledge conditional on this support.</p><p>Third, China may seek to game the way carbon neutrality is measured – for example, by insisting it excludes carbon emissions "embodied" in imports and exports. This move is quite likely, given exports account for a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988316302432" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">significant share</a> of China's total greenhouse gas emissions.</p><p>So for the time being, the world is holding its applause for China's commitment to carbon neutrality. Like every nation, China will be judged not on its climate promises, but on its delivery.</p>From Your Site Articles
- China and California Sign Renewables Deal, Bypassing Trump's ... ›
- U.S. and China Strike Historic Climate Change Deal - EcoWatch ›
- Climate Change Damage in China Could Harm U.S. Economy ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
President Donald Trump hands coal miners the pen he used to sign a bill eliminating environmental regulations on the mining industry at the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 16, 2017. Nicholas Kamm / AFP / Getty Images
By Oliver Milman
Art Sullivan is considered something of a political heretic by other coal miners in south-western Pennsylvania, where a wave of support for Donald Trump based upon his flamboyant promises of a resurgence in coal helped propel the Republican to the U.S. presidency.
"Many of my coal miner friends voted for him," said Sullivan, who has spent 54 years as a coal miner and, more latterly, consultant to a struggling industry. "They were deceived. Trump had no plan, no concept of how to resurrect the coal industry. My friends were lied to."
<p>Sullivan's friends may disagree with this assessment but the coal comeback promised by Trump in the 2016 election campaign has failed to materialize, with his first term studded with bankruptcies and closures of mines and coal-fired power plants.</p><p>There are now about 5,000 fewer miners than when Trump strode into the White House. The coronavirus pandemic has turbo-charged the decline – so far this year U.S. coal production has <a href="https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/weekly/?src=email" target="_blank">collapsed</a> by more than 25% compared with the same period in 2019.</p><p>It has been a bruising few years rather than the glorious new dawn promised when Trump donned a miner's helmet, mimed digging coal and excoriated Barack Obama's "war on coal" on the campaign trail four years ago. One of Trump's <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-signing-executive-order-create-energy-independence/" target="_blank">first executive orders</a> removed a ban on coal mining on federal land and dumped Obama's plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. "Come on, fellas," said Trump at the order's signing, where he was surrounded by beaming miners. "Basically, you know what this is? You know what it says, right? You're going back to work."</p><p>Such assurances were eagerly accepted by coal mining communities in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/west-virginia" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">West Virginia</a>, Pennsylvania and Kentucky who backed Trump and prepared for salvation. "When he came into office, it was like someone pulled their finger out of the dyke," said Thomas McLoughlin, a former mine inspector who trains new miners. "I was flooded with new mining students. It was overwhelming." McLoughlin said he would vote for the president again because Trump was the only candidate prepared to stand up for coal workers. "My business won't go under if he's re-elected," he added.</p>
<p>The Trump administration has set about weakening or scrapping a slew of environmental rules that bound the industry, such as requirements that new coal-fired power plants capture their carbon emissions and that coal firms do not release <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/aug/31/trump-toxic-water-pollution-wastewater" target="_blank">wastewater laced with dangerous pollutants</a>, such as lead, selenium and arsenic, into rivers and streams.</p><p>Bob Murray, a major Trump donor and founder of the largest private coal company in the U.S., has <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/a-coal-executives-action-plan-for-trump-is-made-public/" target="_blank">boasted</a> of an "action plan" he gave the administration to undo what he called "eight years of pure hell" under Obama. Much of Murray's three-and-a-half-page wishlist has been ticked off, including the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement. A particular prize was <a href="https://e360.yale.edu/digest/trump-administration-to-weaken-limits-on-mercury-and-other-toxic-pollutants" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a weakening of Obama-era standards</a> to reduce mercury pollution from coal plants, a rollback undertaken after Andrew Wheeler, a former lobbyist for Murray Energy, became administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.</p><p>"We are still feeling the effects of the damage from the Obama administration," said Jason Bostic, vice-president of the West Virginia Coal Association. "The social devastation in mining communities has been breathtaking. The support for <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Donald Trump</a> is as strong if not stronger than in 2016. West Virginia is a Democratic state that has been dyed deep red because of the last administration."</p><p>But while Appalachia will largely stick with Trump in 2020, more coal capacity <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1063430425" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">has been retired</a> under Trump than during Obama's second term. "Coal's not back," as Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America, glumly conceded last year. "Nobody saved the coal industry."</p>
<p>Coal production fell so sharply last year that renewable energy such as solar and wind <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/03/renewables-surpass-coal-us-energy-generation-130-years" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">overtook it in electricity generation for the first time since at least 1885</a>, the year Mark Twain published The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, America's first skyscraper was erected in Chicago and people were burning more wood than coal. Last year also saw Murray Energy <a href="https://www.waterwaysjournal.net/2019/11/08/murray-energy-files-for-chapter-11-protection/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">file for bankruptcy</a>, one of half a dozen coal companies to do so that year.</p><p>Cheap, abundant gas, retrieved via fracking, and the advance of renewables have been greater causes of coal's demise than any green regulation, <a href="https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/proceedingsreports/Whither-the-Regulatory-War-on-Coal.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">experts say</a>, rendering Trump's rollbacks simply environmentally destructive.</p><p>"The fall of coal is first and foremost a market story," said Daniel Kaffine, a University of Colorado economist who has <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20150321" target="_blank">researched the issue</a>. "The days of coal supplying the majority of U.S. electricity production are not coming back." While metallurgical coal – needed for the making of steel – will hang on, the practice of burning thermal coal for energy is in "a death spiral," Kaffine said.</p><p><span></span>There are about 45,000 coal miners <a href="https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES1021210001" target="_blank">left in the U.S</a>., half the number employed during Obama's first term. Plenty of political rhetoric surrounds a workforce that is actually quite small – there are double the number of flight attendants in the U.S. than coal miners, for example, and roughly the same number of chiropractors.</p>
<p>Whole communities sprang up around mining, however, meaning several dependent jobs are lost for each miner put out of work. The long decline of well-paying mining jobs, through machinery automation and now creeping obsolescence, has left deep scars in Appalachian towns now blighted by unemployment and opioid addiction.</p><p>"People drank Trump's Kool-Aid and he hasn't done it for them," said Blair Zimmerman, a former coal miner who is now commissioner of Greene county, Pennsylvania. "I'm very worried about the future because without mining, our tax base would go and we couldn't survive. People are leaving the area, it's tough. We should have looked at other options a long time ago."</p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/joebiden" target="_blank">Joe Biden</a>, the Democratic presidential nominee, has outlined a $2tn plan to generate millions of jobs in renewable energy, potentially providing a new path for threatened coal workers. But coal mining has deep roots in communities that many are unwilling to relinquish. "It's a damned joke," said Bostic, of the West Virginia Coal Association. "It's an affront to a coal miner to say: 'We will take your job away for one that pays less well, and by the way, you have to pack your family up and move.'"</p><p>According to Sullivan, coal miners feel they have little choice. "The coal miner had no friends and was desperate," he said. "No one was speaking for us and then Trump was, so people backed him. Miners see him as their guy."</p>
<p>The externalities of coal reach far beyond mining communities, however. As the most carbon-intensive of fuels, coal is a key driver of the climate crisis, indirectly spurring the sorts of huge wildfires that have ravaged the U.S. west coast this year, as well as the continuing deterioration of the polar ice sheets that imperil coastal cities through sea level rise and storms.</p><p>Direct air pollution from the soot and chemicals given off by burned coal is also a major health burden. Not far from Sullivan and his friends, the Cheswick power plant, close to the banks of the Allegheny River, is close enough to people's homes that nearby residents have to <a href="https://earthjustice.org/features/photos-life-under-the-stacks" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wipe the coal soot from their houses</a>. Five miles downstream towards Pittsburgh, in the suburb of Verona, Laura Jacko suspects emissions from the power plant could be behind her husband's asthma and the breathing problems suffered by her son, who was born prematurely.</p><p>"There is nothing more horrifying than holding down your small baby to shove a breathing machine into them," Jacko said. "It affects me personally and I get pretty angry about it."</p><p>Environmental groups have long pushed for the closure of Cheswick, which has previously <a href="https://gasp-pgh.org/2020/08/17/cheswick-generating-station-assessed-32k-civil-penalty-for-emissions-issues/" target="_blank">been handed a civil penalty</a> for breaching pollution limits. In Jacko's view, the era of coal needs to come to a managed but swift end. "My uncle was a coal worker and had black lung," a disease that develops from inhaling coal dust, she said. "I don't want their jobs to kill them. I want them to transition. These jobs are going away, it's just a matter of when. Pushing ahead with coal does everyone a disservice."</p>
<p><em>This story originally appeared in</em> <em><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/" target="_blank">The Guardian</a></em> <em>and is republished here as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Judge Rebukes Trump's Attack on Public Lands, Rules Coal Mining ... ›
- Trump Promises to Bring Back Coal as Two More Coal Plants Set to ... ›
- Largest US Private Coal Company Files Bankruptcy Despite Trump's ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A new study finds only 10% of global energy utility companies are expanding their renewable energy capacity at a faster rate than their gas or coal-fired capacity. jwvein / Needpix
By Jo Harper
Only 10% of global energy utility companies are expanding their renewable energy capacity at a faster rate than their gas or coal-fired capacity. That is the main finding of a study by Galina Alova from the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford.
<p>The study, published in research journal <em>Nature Energy</em>, found that of the 3,000 utilities studied most remain predominantly invested in fossil fuels. And of those prioritizing renewable energy growth, 60% had not halted expansion of their fossil fuel portfolios.</p><p>The companies with the slowest transition tended to be larger and from outside Europe, Alova told DW. "The renewables-prioritizing cohort of utilities that I identified comprises companies that are overall larger and own a larger market share in the countries where they operate, compared to the other companies," she said. "The key issue is that the majority of these companies continue in parallel to expand their fossil fuel-based capacity, although they do so at a slower rate."</p><p>Her research highlights a gap between what is needed to tackle the climate crisis and "the actions being taken by the utility sector," she added. These companies face the risk of carbon lock-in, given that a third of their fossil fuel capacity has been added in the last 10 years, so is here to stay for decades. "Unless it is retired early, it will render significant shares of their portfolios stranded," Alova said.</p><p>"Although there have been a few high-profile examples of individual electric utilities investing in renewables, this study shows that overall, the sector is making the transition to clean energy slowly or not at all," she said.</p><p>Alova believes inertia in the electricity industry is one key reason for the slow transition.</p>
The Matter of Gas
<p>The report found that 10% of utilities favored growth in gas-fired power plants, dominated by the US utilities exploiting the country's shale gas reserves, followed by Russia and Germany.</p><p>"Renewables and natural gas often go hand in hand," Alova said, adding that companies often choose both in parallel. "So, it might be just in media reports we are getting this image of investing in renewables, but less coverage on continued investment in gas." </p><p>It might also be the case that gas is viewed as a transition fuel, relatively less carbon emitting and providing load-balancing services to intermittent renewables generation, Alova said.</p><p>Dave Jones, senior electricity analyst for independent climate think tank Ember, agrees with Alova that utilities have hindered the transition by "misunderstanding the future of gas." Utilities have a mindset to build big centralized power plants, replacing a coal power plant with a gas power plant, he said. "Fortunately, most of the gas hype across the world is now dying down, as wind and <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/cheap-solar-energy-prices-explained/a-53590607" target="_blank">solar now provide cheaper options</a> for generating electricity," Jones said.</p>Green Movement Taking Place
<p>Over a fifth of Europe's energy was generated by solar panels and wind turbines in the first half of 2020, according to a report by Ember. Denmark came out on top, generating 64% of its energy from these renewable sources, followed by Ireland (49%) and <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/renewables-make-up-over-half-of-germanys-power-mix/a-52986924" target="_blank">Germany</a> (42%).</p><p>In Ember's half-year review released in July, renewables exceeded fossil fuel generation for the first time ever, producing 40% of the EU's power, with fossil fuels contributing 34%. However, globally only a tenth of all energy was generated by these sources during the first half of 2020. </p><p>Last year saw the use of coal to generate electricity around the world fall by a record 3%. In part due to COVID-19, coal generation in the first half of 2020 again broke records with a drop of 8.3%. In the EU, the drop was higher, as coal energy generation fell by nearly a third.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzgzODcwOS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwOTM5NTQ2Mn0.uKpwljXeUk2jEe8I6p2UqRx9U9kR6tAtXPvcD3KTW1U/img.png?width=980" id="ddf6f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7430067a3d895332e32bf4f45ff8ddc6" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" /><p>With many projects delayed by the pandemic, the global capacity to produce electricity from renewable sources is predicted to drop by up to 13% overall this year according to the International Energy Agency.</p>
Slowly Getting There?
<p>Utilities have been slow to understand how quickly wind and solar would drop in price, and also how quickly governments would want to move away from coal. "Many utilities have been caught off guard by the speed of the transition, and have suffered financially ever since," said Jones.</p><p>The world this year has generated one-tenth of its electricity from wind and solar, double from the 5% in 2015, and that increase has led to a fall in market share of coal generation, Jones added. </p><p>Valentina Kretzschmar from consultancy Wood Mackenzie says BP's recently announced strategy has created a new industry benchmark. BP plans to increase investment in its low-emission businesses, including renewable energy, by tenfold in the next decade to $5 billion (€4.5 billion) a year, while cutting back oil and gas production by 40%.</p><p>In July, Royal Dutch Shell won a deal to build a wind farm off the coast of the Netherlands, while France's Total has agreed to make several large investments in solar power in Spain and a wind farm off Scotland. Total also bought an electric and natural gas utility in Spain. Shell has said it will <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/mexico-sells-rights-to-19-offshore-oil-fields-for-over-500-million/a-42393559" target="_blank">delay offshore oil fields in the Gulf of Mexico</a> and in the North Sea.</p><p>US giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron, however, have been slower than their European counterparts to commit to climate goals.</p><p>"I have seen a substantial shift between companies in the fossil fuel clusters toward renewables," Alova said. "This signals that the companies that have been growing fossil fuel portfolios in the earlier time periods might be switching to renewables more recently."</p>
Read More
Show Less
Trump looks on as EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler speaks during an event to unveil changes to the National Environmental Policy Act on Jan. 9, 2020 in Washington, DC. Drew Angerer / Getty Images
The Trump administration announced that it would roll back a rule from 2015 that was put in place to limit the amount of toxic chemicals that are in the wastewater of coal plants, according to The Washington Post.
<p>The rule insisted that coal plants invest in newer technologies to treat their wastewater so toxic heavy metals like <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/lead">lead</a>, selenium and arsenic are not leached into nearby <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/rivers">rivers</a> and streams where they can damage fragile ecosystems and also seep into <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drinking-water">drinking water</a>, as The Washington Post reported.</p><p>The new <a href="https://www.epa.gov/eg/2020-steam-electric-reconsideration-rule" target="_blank">regulations</a> put forth by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa">EPA</a>), which is run by Andrew Wheeler, a former lobbyist for the coal industry, allows coal plants to dial back their investment in new technologies; the regulations delay the date that plants needed to be in compliance, and they exempt some coal-fired plants from taking any corrective or pollution-limiting action, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/climate/trump-coal-plants.html" target="_blank">The New York Times.</a></p>
<p>The compliance date is pushed back to 2025 for some plants. The ones exempted from the rule are done so with the expectation that they will be retired by 2028.</p><p>The "effluent limitations" regulations that the EPA rolled out Monday will save the coal industry $140 million, according to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-epa-coal/u-s-epa-rolls-back-limits-on-waste-water-from-coal-plants-idUSKBN25R2QK" target="_blank">Reuters</a>.</p><p>"Newer, more affordable pollution control technologies and flexibility on the regulation's phase-in will reduce pollution and save jobs at the same time," said Wheeler, as Reuters reports.</p><p>The Obama administration had said that the 2015 rule would limit 1.4 billion pounds of toxic pollutants from entering U.S. waterways each year. Coal plants use scrubbers to capture mercury, sulfur dioxide and heavy metals that would be emitted through smoke stacks. That rule has been in place since the 1980s, but what to do with those trapped pollutants is a thorny issue. Coal plants had been allowed to dump them into nearby waterways until the 2015 rule took effect, according to The New York Times.</p>
<p>And yet, without evidence, the current EPA said it expects the same or even greater pollution reductions because coal plants will supposedly adopt the newer technologies voluntarily. The EPA's math is based on the assumption that 30 percent of coal plants will implement technologies that are beyond the regulations required by the EPA, according to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/aug/31/trump-toxic-water-pollution-wastewater" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>.</p><p>"It's clear from this rule that a relatively inexpensive treatment technology is available – the one that they made voluntary – that would eliminate the toxic contamination of drinking water supplies and is very affordable. And yet they did not require it," said Betsy Southerland, an Obama EPA water official, to The Guardian. "People should be very concerned."</p>
<p>Environmental activists quickly criticized the rule as a gift to the coal industry and a shortsighted measure that ignored the health of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> and people that live near coal plants, according to The Washington Post.</p><p>Thomas Cmar, an attorney with Earthjustice, told The New York Times that the EPA's actions will allow older, dirtier coal plants to stay alive longer since they do not have to invest in upgrades.</p><p>"There are dozens of water bodies around the country where the local water is significantly impacted by this type of direct dumping of toxic metals from power plants," said Cmar to The Times.</p><p>Cmar said Earthjustice will attempt to stop the rollback in court.</p><p>"Giving coal companies a free pass to dump more toxic heavy metals like mercury and arsenic into our waters is a travesty," Brett Hartl, government affairs director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said in an email, to The Washington Post. "This shameless handout will allow greater amounts of these dangerous pollutants to be spewed directly into our waterways, threatening public health and pushing hundreds of aquatic endangered species, including salmon, sturgeon and hellbender salamanders, closer to extinction."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trump's Toxic Wake: 10 Ways the EPA Has Made Life More ... ›
- EPA Moves to Overhaul Obama-Era Coal Ash Disposal Rule ... ›
- EPA Delays Toxic Waste Rule for Coal-Fired Power Plants - EcoWatch ›
- Trump's EPA Weakens Justification for Life-Saving Mercury Pollution ... ›
- EPA Chief Previews a Second Trump Term: More Deregulation, Fewer Environmental Protections - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Adani Coal Company Attempted to Search Home of Activist Who Opposes Its Australian Mine
27 August
Business
Protestors demonstrate against the Adani coal company outside Australia Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg's Camberwell office on Oct. 3, 2017. John Englart / Flickr
Coal company Adani sought to raid the home of an environmental activist who opposed its controversial mine in Queensland, Australia's Galilee Basin, court documents have shown.
<p>The company tried twice to request a search order known as an Anton Piller order to enter the home of activist Benjamin Pennings, maintaining that he had access to confidential documents that only company higher ups should possess, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-27/queensland-adani-secretly-applied-to-raid-ben-pennings-home/12602472?fbclid=IwAR0-8rbCykcC834iCVlLaHC97h6VmMdg4e7yaH_Pd5gybUIDLtqze9fLPWc" target="_blank">Australia's ABC News reported Wednesday</a>.</p><p>"My wife and I have three school-aged children living at home, one with a disability," Pennings said in a statement reported by ABC News. "Adani has failed in two recent Supreme Court applications to raid our family home for corporate secrets they believe I possess. They want to silence dissent about their destructive thermal coal project that a majority of Australians oppose."</p>
<div id="1085f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5cba4ecad661b760f22037d71734405c"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1298832350004953088" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The next step in their leaked ‘Trained Attack Dog’ legal strategy 👇🏼 is approx. 1500 pages of legal documents serve… https://t.co/fixsKbEJE3</div> — Ben Pennings (@Ben Pennings)<a href="https://twitter.com/BenPennings/statuses/1298832350004953088">1598500738.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Pennings handles media and strategy for <a href="https://galileeblockade.net/" target="_blank">Galilee Blockade</a>, an activist group that uses non-violent direct action like boycotts and blockades to prevent <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuel</a> extraction in the Galilee Basin.</p><p>Adani's mine is controversial in part because it would open up the area, a currently untapped coal reserve, for eight other mines, according to another activist group <a href="https://www.stopadani.com/why_stop_adani" target="_blank">Stop Adani</a>. Adani's mine alone would add 4.6 billion tonnes (approximately 5 billion U.S. tons) of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere at a time when Australia is already suffering from <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/australia-wildfires-climate-models-2645279035.html" target="_self">bushfires</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/about-500-000-cattle-feared-dead-after-historic-queensland-floods-2628662464.html" target="_self">flooding</a> made worse by the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a>.</p><p>Adani's attempts to search Pennings' home were intended to bolster a civil case the company served against the activist on Wednesday, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/27/adani-fails-to-win-court-order-to-conduct-surprise-search-of-environmental-activists-home" target="_blank">The Guardian reported</a>.</p>
<p>Adani is suing Pennings for financial losses, intimidation, conspiracy and court costs. They claim activist pressure prompted contractors Downer EDI, AECOM and Greyhound Australia to drop their support of the mine.</p><p>Adani also wants Pennings to stop promoting the "<a href="https://galileeblockade.net/dob_in/" target="_blank">Dob in Adani</a>" campaign, which solicits information on Adani's contractors and their activities, ABC News reported.</p><p>Ahead of the suit, the company and its Carmichael Rail Network applied for the Anton Piller order to prove Pennings had "confidential information on a computer at his home" that only company executives should have had access to. Anton Piller orders are used to secure evidence from defendants for legal proceedings.</p><p>Adani and Charmichael first applied for the order in June and then appealed the court's initial rejection in July.</p>
<p>In rejecting the appeal, the court ruled that the company did not have enough evidence to justify a search that could cause undue harm to Pennings and his family.</p><p>"Surely, to permit a search of a defendant's house, with the humiliation and family distress which that might involve, lies at the outer boundary of the discretion," the Court of Appeal judges ruled last week, as ABC News reported. "This is because, for reasons that anyone can understand, the 'shock, anger, confusion' and the 'sense of violation and powerlessness' will be much greater in such a case and may be suffered not only by someone who is proved in due course to be a wrongdoer, but by entirely innocent parties as well."</p>
<p>Adani maintained that, in pursuing legal action against Pennings, it was not seeking to restrict free speech.</p><p>"We really believe that everyone has the right to express their own opinion, we support that. It's a core part of democracy," Adani in Australia communications lead Kate Campbell told ABC News. "But we think it's important that people express their opinions in a way that's legal, that's safe and that does not prevent others from going about their legal and legitimate business. Mr. Pennings is preventing us from going about our business because of the campaign of intimidation and harassment."</p><p>However, Australia's former Greens leader Bob Brown disagreed.</p><p>He said Adani's legal action would "send a shudder through every Australian who values democracy, free speech and the right to peaceful protest," The Guardian reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Australia, Your Country Is Burning — Dangerous Climate Change Is ... ›
- Indigenous Australians Take Fight Against Giant Coal Mine to the ... ›
- Australia's Controversial Adani Coal Mine Now One Approval Away ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The Huntley coal plant in Tonawanda, New York, contributed to the local economy — and pollution levels. youtu.be
The Huntley coal plant in Tonawanda, New York, was once the area's biggest polluter. But it was also the town's biggest taxpayer.
<iframe style="border: none" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/15116651/height/45/theme/standard/thumbnail/yes/direction/backward/" height="45" width="100%" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>
<p>So when the plant was slated to close, the town was concerned about job losses – not just for company employees, but public sector workers like teachers and paramedics.</p><p>"Those tax dollars that company pays … goes to the folks picking up garbage, and goes to people fixing the roads, and helps fund special ed," says Rebecca Newberry, executive director of the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.cacwny.org/">Clean Air Coalition of Western New York</a>.</p><p>To ease the transition, her group partnered with the town, local businesses, unions, residents, and community groups.</p>
<p>Together they created <a target="_blank" href="http://tonawandatomorrow.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2017/08/TonawandaTomorrowPlanJune15SinglePages.pdf">an economic development plan</a> to help the town make up lost revenue over time. It's designed to grow local businesses and create new jobs, especially in manufacturing and technology.</p><p>The group also helped convince the state to provide funds that fill the more immediate gap in revenue.</p><p>The plant closed in 2016, and Newberry says that since that time, "not one public sector employee, to our knowledge, has lost their job because of the closing of this plant."</p><p>So Tonawanda has moved away from a coal-powered economy while helping protect the community.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/07/how-tonawanda-ny-protected-its-economy-after-its-coal-plant-closed/" target="_blank">Yale Climate Connections</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Major Coal-Fired Power Plant in Washington to Go Solar - EcoWatch ›
- All Coal-Fired Power Plants in Texas Found Leaking Toxins Into ... ›
- Bloomberg Donates $64 Million to Shut Down Coal Power Plants ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Activists of Greenpeace and Fridays For Future demonstrate on a canal in front of the cooling tower of the coal-fired power plant Datteln 4 of power supplier Uniper in Datteln, western Germany, on May 20. INA FASSBENDER / AFP / Getty Images
The Bundestag and Bundesrat — Germany's lower and upper houses of parliament — passed legislation on Friday that would phase out coal use in the country in less than two decades as part of a road map to reduce carbon emissions.
<p>"The fossil age in Germany comes to an irrevocable end with this decision," said Economy Minister Peter Altmaier. Environment Minister Svenja Schulze called it a "great political success for all those who care about the climate-friendly future of our children and grandchildren."</p><p>The legislative package has two main features. The first establishes a legal avenue for the gradual reduction in emissions by 2038 at the latest, while the second targets regional economies that would be impacted by the phaseout.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/germany-approves-coal-phaseout-by-2038/a-54040605" target="_blank">Deutsche Welle</a>.<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/r/entryeditor/2646343538#/" target="_self"></a></em><em></em></p>
Preparing for the Future
<p>Coal-producing regions in the German states of North Rhine-Westphalia, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Brandenburg will have access to €40 billion ($45 billion) to help absorb the impact. Those funds are also expected to go towards restructuring regional economies, re-skilling workers and expanding local infrastructure.</p><p>Financial compensation is also be available to coal plant operators who face losses as a result of the early phaseout. However, compensation is contingent on operators announcing plans by 2026 to shutter plants and cease other emissions-intensive activity.</p><p>Michael Vassiliadis, who heads the IG BCE trade union, called the measures a "historic landmark." He said the package has provided a safety net for workers affected by the phase out and would provide them with the necessary support to transition to future sectors.</p>'Historic Error'
<p>However, not everyone agrees that the measures are enough to mitigate climate change.</p><p>Environmentalist activists say the legislation falls short of its ultimate aim, with Greenpeace managing director Martin Kaiser describing it as a "historic error."</p><p>German Green party chief Annalena Baerbock said the legislation was "oblivious to the future" and instead called on the government to complete Germany's coal phase out by 2030 the latest.</p><p>Earlier this year, <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/germans-most-worried-about-refugees-climate-change/a-51947417" target="_blank">a DeutschlandTrend survey</a> found that 27 percent of Germans believe climate change is the most pressing issue facing the country, just slightly behind refugees and immigration policy.</p><p>Germany is seeking to establish a carbon-neutral economy by 2050. The European Commission has also pushed forward with similar plans for the EU.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Germany Converts Coal Mine Into Giant Battery Storage for Surplus ... ›
- Germany Plans to Quit Coal by 2038 'But There's a Problem ... ›
- Climate Activists Protest Germany's New Datteln 4 Coal Power Plant ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Smoke rises from a cement factory in Castleton in the High Peak district of Derbyshire, England. john finney photography / Moment / Getty Images
Human activity has pushed atmospheric carbon dioxide to higher levels today than they have been at any other point in the last 23-million-years, potentially posing unprecedented disruptions in ecosystems across the planet, new research suggests.
<p>Understanding atmospheric concentrations of CO2 is "vital for understanding Earth's climate system" because it "imparts a controlling effect on global temperatures," said scientists in a study published in <a href="https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/doi/10.1130/G47681.1/586769/A-23-m-y-record-of-low-atmospheric-CO2" target="_blank"><em>Geology</em></a>.</p><p>Climate change is largely driven by a disproportionate increase of CO2 in the atmosphere largely resulting from the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas as well as cutting down or burning forests that serve as carbon stores, according to the <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/why-does-co2-get-more-attention-other-gases" target="_blank">Union of Concerned Scientists</a>. A 2013 study published by the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/" target="_blank">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> found that climate change from CO2 and greenhouse gas emission is not only caused by humans but has had "widespread impacts on human and natural systems."</p>
<p>Previous measurements have turned to ice cores to determine CO2 levels present in the atmosphere throughout Earth's history, but have only pieced together the last 800,000 years. To expand upon this record, researchers at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette used fossilized remains of ancient plant tissue to produce a record of atmospheric CO2 dating back 31 million years of "uninterrupted Earth history."</p><p>As plants grow, the amount of two stable carbon isotopes, carbon-12 and carbon-13, change in response to CO2 levels in the atmosphere. With this in mind, the research team measured the relative amount of these carbon isotopes in fossil plant materials from 700 measurements, published in 12 studies, characterizing ancient plants and their lipids in order to calculate concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere during the timeframe that the plants grew.</p>
<p>This atmospheric "timeline" did not show fluctuations in CO2 that are comparable to increases seen in the last century. In fact, the highest concentrations of CO2 were found during the Miocene, between 5 and 23 million years ago, but were still determined to have been below present-day levels.</p><p>"These data suggest present-day CO2 exceeds the highest levels that Earth experienced at least since the Miocene, further highlighting the present-day disruption of long-established CO2 trends within Earth's atmosphere," write the study authors in <em>Geology</em>.</p>
<p>The abrupt increase of greenhouse gas distribution today is unprecedented in Earth's 23-million-year history, indicating that ecosystems and global temperatures may be more sensitive to smaller changes in CO2 levels than previously thought. Though CO2 levels have varied widely throughout Earth's history, researchers believe that they have never fluctuated nor been as high as in recent years.</p><p>"One of the most pressing messages that climate scientists attempt to convey to the public is that current CO2 is elevated compared to the geological past," write the study authors, adding that the results also indirectly imply that major changes in plant and early humans were not driven by large changes in CO2 but rather "relatively small-amplitude changes."</p>
<p>Humans have increased atmospheric CO2 concentration by more than one-third since the Industrial Revolution began, according to <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/" target="_blank">NASA</a>. Though the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51281986" target="_blank">BBC</a> reports "worst-case scenario" for emissions of CO2 in the 21st century is considered unlikely by researchers, scientists still expect a rise of around 3 degrees Celsius by 2100, according to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/15/worst-case-scenario-2050-climate-crisis-future-we-choose-christiana-figueres-tom-rivett-carnac" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> — 1.5 degrees Celsius above goals set forth by the <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/paris_en" target="_blank">Paris agreement</a>. A report published by the <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide" target="_blank">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</a> earlier this year corroborates the findings, confirming that CO2 levels in 2018 were higher than at any other point in the past 800,000 years. The last time amounts were this high was more than 3 million years ago, when global temperatures were between 3.6 and 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit higher than during the pre-industrial era, and sea level was 50 to 80 feet higher than today.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- CO2 Levels Top 415 PPM for First Time in Human History - EcoWatch ›
- 415 PPM: We Are All Part of Exxon's Unchartered Climate ... ›
- Sea Ice Still Hasn't Formed off of Siberia and Scientists Are Worried - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Clean Water Act Rollback: Trump's EPA Limits States’ and Tribes’ Rights to Block Pipelines
02 June
Politics
Workers clean up a crude oil leak from a pipeline in Minnesota in 2002. JOEY MCLEISTER / Star Tribune via Getty Images
The Trump administration has finalized a rule making it harder for states and tribal communities to block pipelines and other infrastructure projects that threaten waterways.
<p>The change concerns Section 401 of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/clean-water-act" target="_self">Clean Water Act</a>, which essentially gives states and tribes veto power over projects that would hurt their water quality, <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/500480-trump-rule-limits-states-from-blocking" target="_blank">The Hill explained</a>. The changes, announced by the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" target="_self">Environmental Protection Agency</a> (EPA) Monday, give states and tribes a one-year deadline for reviewing projects and narrow the scope of what they can consider to only water issues, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/climate/trump-clean-water-pipelines.html" target="_blank">The New York Times reported</a>. They may no longer block projects because they would contribute to the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a>.</p><p>"This is a dangerous mistake," director of federal water policy at the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/" target="_blank">Natural Resources Defense Council</a> (NRDC) Jon Devine said in a <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/nrdc/epa-curbs-state-and-tribal-authority-block-projects-harm-waterways?utm_source=tw&utm_medium=tweet&utm_campaign=EJ" target="_blank">statement</a>. "It makes a mockery of this EPA's claimed respect for 'cooperative federalism.'"</p>
<p>In recent years, states have used Section 401 to block a number of high profile <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuels</a> projects, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/06/01/epa-limits-states-tribes-ability-protest-pipelines-other-energy-projects/" target="_blank">The Washington Post reported</a>. Last month, New York and New Jersey <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/new-york-rejects-williams-pipeline-2646023924.html" target="_self">blocked permits</a> for the Northeast Supply Enhancement Pipeline, which would have carried fracked <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/natural-gas" target="_self">natural gas</a> from Pennsylvania through both states. New York also blocked the Constitution pipeline that would have also moved gas from Pennsylvania. And Washington state blocked a $680 million <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal" target="_self">coal</a> export facility in 2017.</p><p>Climate activists have seen Section 401 as a useful tool for keeping fossil fuels in the ground, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/06/01/867224980/trump-administration-limits-states-power-to-stop-oil-and-gas-pipelines" target="_blank">NPR explained</a>. But industry groups and the Trump administration have accused states of abusing their veto powers, and President <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/donald-trump" target="_self">Donald Trump</a> issued an executive order in April 2019 mandating federal agencies ease the completion of energy infrastructure projects, according to The Washington Post.</p><p>"Today, we are following through on President Trump's Executive Order to curb abuses of the Clean Water Act that have held our nation's energy infrastructure projects hostage, and to put in place clear guidelines that finally give these projects a path forward," EPA Administrator and former coal lobbyist <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/andrew-wheeler" target="_self">Andrew Wheeler</a> said in a statement reported by The Hill.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">EPA announced a final rule that will streamline the construction of modern infrastructure projects across the United States, while ensuring our nation’s waterways are protected. <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realdonaldtrump</a> is delivering on another promise! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/PromisesMadePromisesKept?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#PromisesMadePromisesKept</a> <a href="https://t.co/hFGqKzraO0">https://t.co/hFGqKzraO0</a> <a href="https://t.co/LcrGsm4si8">pic.twitter.com/LcrGsm4si8</a></p>— EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler (@EPAAWheeler) <a href="https://twitter.com/EPAAWheeler/status/1267525012489146370?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>Fossil Fuel groups welcomed the change.</p><p>"We hope that EPA's action today will help end the abuse of the section 401 permitting process, which has been used to obstruct projects for reasons that had nothing to do with protecting water quality," National Mining Association President and CEO Rich Nolan told NPR.</p><p>Lawyer, former EPA employee and Clean Water Act expert Mark Ryan told The Hill that the changes were a major departure that would put states at a disadvantage.</p><p>"This changes the balance of power that has existed over the last 40 years from the states to the applicants," he said.</p><p>He explained that applicants would be incentivized to run down the clock on states by withholding information. However, he also thought it was unlikely the changes would hold up in court.</p><p>"The new rule will be very vulnerable to a legal challenge; the EPA will have a very hard time convincing the Supreme Court that its current interpretation of the Clean Water Act is correct," he said in a statement emailed to EcoWatch.</p>
<p>And a legal challenge looks likely.</p><p>"We won't stand idly by as they rip away our authority under the law to preserve water quality," California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, whose state has sued the Trump administration <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-fuel-efficiency-rollback-lawsuit-2646114003.html" target="_self">82 times</a>, said in a statement reported by The Washington Post.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trump's Budget Plan: A Push for Even Greater Environmental ... ›
- Trump Pushed for Mining Project That Could Destroy Alaska Salmon ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
During a protest action on May 30 in North Rhine-Westphalia, Datteln in front of the site of the Datteln 4 coal-fired power plant, Greenpeace activists projected the lettering: "Climate crisis - Made in Germany" onto the cooling tower. Guido Kirchner / picture alliance / Getty Images
Around 500 climate activists on Saturday gathered outside the new Datteln 4 coal power plant in Germany's Ruhr region, to protest against its opening.
<p>Fridays for Future, Greenpeace, as well as German groups Ende Gelände and the German Federation for Environment and Nature Conservation (BUND) were represented at the protests.</p><p>During the night into Saturday, climate activists graffitied the slogan "Climate crisis, made in Germany" on the side of the tower.</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/climate-activists-protest-germanys-new-datteln-4-coal-power-plant/a-53632887" target="_blank">Deutsche Welle</a>.<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/r/entryeditor/2646137253#/" target="_self"></a></em><em></em></p>
<p>The plant, owned by Dusseldorf-based energy company Uniper, began running on Saturday, after a nearly 10-year delay to its initial start date. It fired up just months after Germany unveiled a plan to phase out coal by 2038.</p>
<p>The protests were reported to be largely peaceful, despite several actions during the day-long event. One action included members of Ende Gelände swimming and using canoes in a canal used for cooling, while holding a floating banner with the slogan: "Shut it down."</p>
<div id="9e242" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="38e575ed16e09279dfea210cafaa44f0"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1263057783290724353" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Klimaprotest in Zeiten von #Corona ist nicht leicht. Aber wir machen es möglich, denn notwendig ist es offensichtli… https://t.co/oKazEWwaGv</div> — Luisa Neubauer (@Luisa Neubauer)<a href="https://twitter.com/Luisamneubauer/statuses/1263057783290724353">1589971416.0</a></blockquote></div>
Climate Activists Speak Out
<p>Speaking at the protest, German Fridays for Futures climate activist Luisa Neubauer said: "It's a post-factual power plant. The facts speak for themselves." She said it was a "provocation," to mark the planned coal phaseout with a new coal power plant.</p><p>"We're going to stop this power plant, we're going to bring it to a standstill, we will win this conflict," Neubauer added.</p><p>Former miners also attended the protest. "We condemn the fact that coal mining in Germany was halted and jobs were lost, only for coal now to be imported from other countries to power Datteln 4," said Sebastian Suszka, a former workers' council member.</p><p>Greta Thunberg, founder of climate activist movement Fridays for Futures tweeted that Saturday was "a shameful day for Europe.</p><div id="e0ee4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c4980f9c8b3d58f5d4075f5174690372"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1266646886896881664" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Today is a shameful day for Europe, as we open up a brand new coal power plant. We have signed up to lead the way t… https://t.co/BFX5PcGejv</div> — Greta Thunberg (@Greta Thunberg)<a href="https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/statuses/1266646886896881664">1590827125.0</a></blockquote></div>
Germany's Coal Phaseout
<p>Earlier this year, Germany announced a roadmap to see coal phased out, at the latest by 2038. It laid out plans for eight coal-fired power plants to be taken off the grid in 2020.</p><p>It was an important step for the largest contributor of carbon emissions in the EU — accounting for more than 22 percent of the bloc's CO2 emissions. Over a third of the electricity generated in Germany comes from burning coal.</p><p>Germany's coal commission has recommended that solutions be found for coal plants that are already built but not-yet-in-use to keep them from operating.<br></p><p>The state of North-Rhine Westphalia insisted that the additional carbon dioxide emissions from the new plant would be compensated by the closure of four other power plants.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Germany to Phase out Coal by 2038 - EcoWatch ›
- Germany's New Climate Charter: What Will It Change? - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less