Fossil fuel companies received $110 billion in direct and indirect financial assistance during the coronavirus pandemic, including up to $15.2 billion in direct federal relief. Andrew Hart /
By Bret Wilkins
In a year in which the United States has already suffered 16 climate-driven extreme weather events causing more than $1 billion in economic damages, and as millions of American workers face loss of essential unemployment benefits due to congressional inaction, a report published Monday reveals the Trump administration has given fossil fuel companies as much as $15.2 billion in direct relief — and tens of billions more indirectly — through federal COVID-19 recovery programs since March.
<p>The report by BailoutWatch, Public Citizen, and Friends of the Earth — titled <em><a href="https://www.citizen.org/article/bailed-out-and-propped-up/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=94926f68-3c0f-462d-87c9-ae6d05950810" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bailed Out and Propped Up</a> —</em>tracks taxpayer funds flowing to fossil fuel companies since pandemic-related bailouts began. It found a total of $110 billion in direct and indirect benefits went to 66 companies, including between $10.4 and $15.2 billion in direct disbursements to coal, oil, and gas companies that are largely responsible for the worsening climate emergency. </p>
<p>Here's a breakdown, according to the report:</p><ul><li>At least $5.5 billion went to 70 money-losing polluters via the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.</li><li>$582 million in direct, subsidized loans were approved for 37 mid-sized fossil fuel and related companies through the Federal Reserve's Main Street Lending Program.</li><li>$4.3 to $9.1 billion in forgivable loans went to at least 25,931 companies through the Small Business Administration's Paycheck Protection Program.</li><li>At least 229 oil and gas companies received waivers for fees normally paid to drill on public land — giveaways that cost the government a minimum of $4.5 million in lost revenue, and likely far more.</li></ul><p>The report found that five fossil fuel companies — Diamondback Energy, EOG Resources, Marathon Petroleum, Phillips 66, and Valero — received more than 10% of the $110 billion in direct benefits, including tax refunds, and indirect support through the issuance of bonds, even if they were losing money. Reassured by the Fed's actions, private investors purchased more fossil fuel bonds, generating some $100 billion in additional indirect benefits.</p>
<div id="dbef0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2841b587ecc5cf0041553e90425d4397"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1330888073228427264" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">BREAKING: The fossil fuel industry has received up to $15,000,000,000 in direct COVID relief since bailout programs… https://t.co/znbkDW2f0M</div> — Public Citizen (@Public Citizen)<a href="https://twitter.com/Public_Citizen/statuses/1330888073228427264">1606143418.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>"When the pandemic hit last spring, Trump's corporate cronies made sure the fossil fuel industry was able to squeeze whatever favors they could out of the resulting economic rescues," wrote Alan Zibel, research director of Public Citizen's Corporate Presidency Project and a co-author of the report. "The Biden administration and the next Congress will have a golden opportunity to ensure our efforts to rescue the economy no longer benefit the very companies most responsible for the devastation caused by climate change."</p><p>Christopher Kuveke, a BailoutWatch analyst and a co-author of the report, added that "the fossil fuel industry took advantage of the pandemic to put their hands out for help escaping a financial mess of their own making, and their allies in the federal government rode to the rescue."</p><p>"By artificially delaying the industry's inevitable decline at taxpayers' expense, the government has made it that much harder to make the necessary transition to clean energy sources," he added.</p>
<p>The report comes just after members of Congress <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/23/21575394/stimulus-covid-relief-bill-congress" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">headed home</a> on vacation without having passed a new coronavirus relief bill, and as millions of Americans <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/11/18/about-be-catapulted-cliff-study-shows-12-million-set-lose-jobless-benefits-after" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">face the grim prospect</a> of losing essential unemployment benefits as the CARES Act is set to expire at the end of the year.</p><p>Last week, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) <a href="https://the-beam.com/finance/how-to-finance-a-global-green-new-deal-and-stop-climate-change-at-1-5c/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">excoriated</a> Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on the floor of the House of Representatives, accusing him of "abandoning our people."</p><p>"While... thousands of people in Texas lined up for food lines... hospitals no longer have beds to house the sick... [and] 30 million Americans are on the brink of eviction, [McConnell] dismissed the Senate," said Ocasio-Cortez. "Every single day, when we go back to our communities, people are asking us, 'Where is there going to be help? Is there going to be a second stimulus check? Are we going to get the resources that we need?"</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d1d7e9aa2b3b10ad4d53e11ce35e240a"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nNBeI-G3eQQ?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<p>Climate activists and many economists argue that giving money to those most culpable for carbon emissions is the exact opposite of what governments should be doing. One economist says that instead of selling fossil fuel bonds, governments should be promoting "Green Climate Bonds."</p><p>"With a mere fraction of the Covid-19 recovery funds, central banks could support climate protection," <a href="https://the-beam.com/finance/how-to-finance-a-global-green-new-deal-and-stop-climate-change-at-1-5c/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wrote</a> World Future Council chief economist Matthias Kroll last week. He continued:</p><blockquote>The price for coping with the systemically relevant climate crisis... appears almost to be a bargain: with a fraction of the funds used to overcome the Covid-19 crisis (or the banking crisis of 2008), the central banks could trigger investments in climate protection of a magnitude that would make the 1.5°C target [under the Paris agreement] achievable. The central banks would not even need to create additional money for this. It would be sufficient to replace expiring assets from previous purchase programs with new types of "Green Climate Bonds."</blockquote><p>A May 2020 <a href="https://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/press-release-study-pandemic-crisis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">study</a> by the World Future Council estimated the cost of a global "climate bailout" at a relatively modest $175 million per year, resulting in a one-third reduction in worldwide carbon emissions by the end of the decade.</p><p>"We need to start thinking about how to practically finance a Green New Deal and a swift transition to 100% <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a>, and central banks should start playing a proactive role," wrote Kroll. "Let's treat the climate emergency as what it is, and let's bail out the climate, too!"</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/11/23/time-cut-dirty-energys-lifeline-report-details-how-fossil-fuel-industry-feasted" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- 'We Need People's Bailout, Not Polluters' Bailout': Climate Groups ... ›
- Corporate Polluters Have Received Tens of Millions in PPP Loans ... ›
- Trump Bails Out Oil Industry, Not U.S. Families, as Coronavirus ... ›
- Former Federal Reserve Governor Rebukes Fed for Fossil Fuel Bail ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Wind turbines are seen in Palm Springs, California. Mint Images / Getty Images
By Tara Lohan
How much of U.S. energy demand could be met by renewable sources?
According to a new report from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, the answer is an easy 100%.
<p>The report looked at <a href="https://cdn.ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/report-ESRS-2020-ilsr.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">how much renewable energy potential</a> each state had within its own borders and found that almost every state could deliver all its electricity needs from instate renewable sources.</p><p>And that's just a start: The report found that there's so much potential for renewable energy sourcing, some states could produce <em>10 times</em> the electricity they need. Cost remains an issue, as does connecting all of this capacity to the grid, but prices have dropped significantly, and efficiency continues to improve. Clean energy is not only affordable but could be a big boost to the economy. Locally sourced renewables create jobs, reduce pollution, and make communities more climate resilient.</p><p>So where are the opportunities? Rooftop solar, the study found, could supply six states with at least half of their electricity needs. But wind had the greatest potential. For 35 states, onshore wind alone could supply 100% of their energy demand, and offshore wind could do the same in 21 states. (The numbers overlap a bit.)</p><p>The study follows a similar report conducted a decade ago and shows that the clean energy field has made substantial progress in that time.</p><p><em>The Revelator </em>spoke with Maria McCoy, a research associate at the Institute and report co-author, about what's changed and how to turn all the potential into reality.</p>
<p><strong>What's changed in the 10 years since you last looked at the potential for instate renewable energy?</strong></p><p><strong></strong>There's definitely been technology improvements in all the energy sources, but especially solar. Obviously there's the same amount of sun, but the solar panels themselves have a higher percentage of solar photovoltaic efficiency. Most states, on average, had 16% more solar potential this time around than they did a decade ago.</p><p>And for the other technologies, it's a matter of either more space being available or the technologies themselves improving. Wind turbines now can generate a lot more energy with the same amount of wind.</p>
<p><strong></strong><strong>Where do you see the most potential?</strong></p><p>There's been a lot of development in offshore wind and I think it's on the cusp of really becoming a big player in the clean energy field. But regulations, including at the federal level, have blocked it from happening at scale in the United States. Whereas in Europe there's already some incredibly efficient offshore wind farms that are generating a lot of electricity. Those companies are just starting to move into the U.S. market.</p><p>But it's onshore wind that has the biggest potential. Our research found that some states could generate over 1,000% of their energy with onshore wind if they really took advantage of it.</p><p><strong>Your report didn't consider the potential of large-scale solar. Why?</strong></p><p>We looked at the potential of rooftop solar rather than large-scale solar because as an energy democracy organization, we're really focused on distributed and community-owned energy. But it's also because pretty much every state has enough capacity to completely be powered by large-scale solar. It just then becomes an issue of land-usage debates and other challenges.</p><p>Your research shows there's a ton of potential for renewables across the country. How do we realize that potential?</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDc5NzI5MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NjMxMDYzNX0._Oq06wG8cPRIgogtnKqr4_dSk8cok64mwEpOD3H8an0/img.jpg?width=980" id="8abab" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="823bf4e22e6cd5e07c739984750fbdd3" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Graphic: ILSR, Energy Self-Reliant States 2020
<p>Continued support for renewable energy is a big one. There are a lot of credits that are phasing out and without renewing those, it will make it a little bit tougher for the market.</p><p>We were looking at just the technical ability to produce the energy and not necessarily the cost effectiveness, but we did recognize in the report that the costs have come down. The cost of solar PV, for example, has dropped 70%. So this is not really a pie-in-the-sky goal. It's definitely gotten a lot more feasible and many cities are already doing it or planning to in the near future.</p><p>I think the will is there and people want renewable energy, it's just a matter of fighting the status quo. A lot of these utilities have been using the same business model for decades and they're not really keeping up with where things are going and where the community wants things to go.</p><p>They're holding on to their fossil fuel infrastructure and their business model that profits off building more fossil gas plants when solar plus storage is already a cheaper energy source for customers. And wind is very cheap. If utility regulators and state and national policy could hold these utilities accountable to serving the public, which is their job as regulated monopolies, we could finally get to see some of this potential becoming a reality.</p><p>Having the ability to generate energy locally and store it and use it locally will create jobs and provide a lot of resilience to the grid and communities. And with climate change, I think that's becoming more and more important.</p>
<p><strong>Was there anything that surprised you about your findings?</strong></p><p>We definitely expected things to be better but I don't know if we expected them to be this much better in 10 years. Seeing all this potential and these ridiculously high percentages — I mean, being able to generate greater than 1,000% of the electricity we need with renewables in some states is just a sign of how abundant clean energy is.</p><p>And it's kind of sad, I guess, that some states aren't even able to get to 25% or 50% clean energy goals in their renewable portfolio standards. I would hope that the train starts rolling a little faster.</p><p>And I hope our research can inspire others who think maybe their state doesn't have a lot of renewable energy capacity in their area to realize that they do, and it could provide for all that they need and more.</p>
<p><a href="https://therevelator.org/author/taralohan/" target="_blank"><em>Tara Lohan </em></a><em>is deputy editor of The Revelator and has worked for more than a decade as a digital editor and environmental journalist focused on the intersections of energy, water and climate. Her work has been published by The Nation, American Prospect, High Country News, Grist, Pacific Standard and others. She is the editor of two books on the global water crisis. </em><em><em></em></em></p><p><em><em><a href="http://twitter.com/TaraLohan" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"></a></em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://therevelator.org/instate-renewable-potential/" target="_blank">The Revelator</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Like many other plant-based foods and products, CBD oil is one dietary supplement where "organic" labels are very important to consumers. However, there are little to no regulations within the hemp industry when it comes to deeming a product as organic, which makes it increasingly difficult for shoppers to find the best CBD oil products available on the market.
<p>Here you can learn about the importance of organic hemp oil, why it's better for the environment, and which CBD companies actually make trustworthy products with sustainable farming processes. origins which weigh heavily on many consumers who want to buy a product that's produced in the best way possible for not only themselves to ingest, but for the environment as well through sustainable farming methods. </p><h2>What Is CBD Oil?</h2><p>First things first, CBD stands for cannabidiol, and it's a cannabinoid found within cannabis sativa plants. This plant compound is believed to have many potential benefits, and it is primarily derived from hemp plants via a CO2 extraction process. </p><p>Since CBD is extracted from industrial hemp, which contains only trace amounts of THC (the psychoactive component in cannabis plants), this means that CBD won't make you feel high like marijuana, which has much higher levels of THC that causes psychoactive effects. Instead, the effects of CBD are much more subtle and promote a general sense of calm and relaxation in most users.</p><h2>What Makes a CBD Oil Organic?</h2><p>In terms of organic labels, perhaps the most important (and prominent) certification comes from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This government organization has been labeling foods as "organic" for many years, but what exactly does this certification entail? Essentially, a label indicating that a product is "USDA Organic" or "Certified Organic" means that at least 95% of the ingredients are obtained from organic sources.</p><p>For a crop to be considered organic by the USDA, it must be grown without the use of industrial solvents, irradiation, genetic engineering (GMOs), synthetic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Instead, farmers rely on natural substances and <a href="https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical, physical, or biologically based farming</a> techniques to cultivate healthy and organic crops.</p><p>Before the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, no hemp-derived products could be dubbed as "certified organic" since the hemp plant and its extracts were still categorized as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. However, it's still difficult for CBD companies to obtain a USDA certified organic label for their products due to the legal grey area that still surrounds CBD extracts. </p><p>Because of these challenges, and due to the fact that industrial hemp has only recently become an agricultural crop, very few CBD oils are USDA certified organic. Rather, many CBD products contain hemp extracts from plants that were grown in organic conditions but may not be federally certified.</p><h2>What are the Best Organic CBD Oil Brands?</h2><p><em>Each product featured here has been independently selected. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.</em></p>
<h2>Why Organic Hemp Oil Matters</h2><p>Hemp is a unique plant, not only for its rich cannabinoid content, but also for its ability to absorb a wide variety of components in soil. But this trait poses great risks when it comes to the creation of CBD products derived from hemp.</p><p>Because hemp has a high capacity for compound uptake, this means that the plants can retain <a href="https://www.remedyreview.com/industry/lab-test-results/" target="_blank">harmful chemicals like pesticides</a>, heavy metals, and other residual solvents. This is especially true when it comes to synthetic chemicals that are more toxic to humans, and difficult to remove once they have been absorbed by the hemp plant.</p><p>Organic farming practices help reduce the risk of hemp crops absorbing harsh chemicals that may later end up in CBD oil after extraction. When you're taking CBD as a wellness supplement to help alleviate your symptoms or improve your overall well-being, the last thing you want is to ingest compounds that might negatively outweigh the benefits of CBD. This is an important reason to look for third party lab test results when shopping for CBD products since these certificates of analysis can show the full cannabinoid and terpene profile of a hemp extract, as well as test results that search for the presence of any residual solvents.</p><p>In addition to creating a better end product, organic farming practices are also better for the environment. Sustainable and organic farming methods may <a href="https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy</a>. The use of natural pest deterrents as opposed to chemical pesticides is also better for nearby animal populations and ecosystems.</p><h3>Organic vs. Natural</h3><p>While there are only a select few companies offering certified organic ingredients in their products, almost every brand in the CBD market creates "natural" products. The term "all-natural" or "plant-based" does not mean that a product is organic, and since hemp oil is a natural derivative of hemp plants, these products are often referred to as all-natural. However, there are some synthetic CBD oils that should be avoided because they are chemically constructed and may produce unwanted side effects that are not caused by naturally derived CBD extracts.</p><h2>What are the Benefits of Organic CBD Oil?</h2><p>There's a long list of potential CBD oil health benefits, and some of the most common wellness advantages include:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2503660/" target="_blank">Chronic pain relief</a></li><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604171/" target="_blank">Anti-anxiety effects</a></li><li>Better sleep</li><li><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inner-source/201901/cbd-oil-mental-health-should-you-take-it-too" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Improvements in mood</a></li><li>Internal balance and regulation</li></ul><p>When dealing with pain, inflammation, sleep issues, and mental health struggles, it can be hard to find sufficient treatment options. The use of certain prescriptions can cause unwanted side effects, yet they are often the only solution for patients with these medical conditions. In search of other therapies, people have started to flock towards CBD oil as an alternative remedy for a variety of conditions. However, it should be noted that CBD products are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and you should seek your doctor's advice before using CBD if you have a serious medical condition.</p><h2>Look at the Labels Before You Buy CBD Oil</h2><p>When you go online to buy CBD oil, you'll quickly realize there is an overwhelming number of brands that are saturating the market. It can be difficult to determine which products are truly as good as they make themselves out to be. Always look for up-to-date third-party lab tests so you know you are getting a great product, and don't hesitate to contact the brand if you have any additional questions. And if you're intent on purchasing 100% organic CBD oil, it's best to look for certified products or brands that are held to strict regulatory standards.</p><p><strong>Melena Gurganus </strong>is the Reviews Editor at EcoWatch. She is passionate health and wellness and her writing aims to help others find products they can trust. Her work has been featured in publications such as Health, Shape, Huffington Post, Cannabis Business Times, and Bustle.<br></p>
Spruce
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjI3OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTM2NzgzOX0.axY0HjeqRctJsR_KmDLctzDpUBLBN-oNIdqaXDb4caQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="774be" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8379f35b1ca8a86d0e61b7d4bfc8b46e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="spruce organic cbd oil" /><p>As one of the best brands in the business, Spruce CBD is well-known for its potent CBD oils that feature many additional beneficial phytocannabinoids. This brand works with two family-owned, sustainably focused farms in the USA (one located in Kentucky and one in North Carolina) to create its organic, small product batches. The max potency Spruce CBD oil contains 2400mg of full-spectrum CBD extract, but the brand also offers a lower strength tincture with 750mg of CBD in total.</p>
$89
CBDistillery
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjkzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTU4OTM4Nn0.ypRdeDSBcE87slYrFfVrRwtJ2qGIK6FD5jBB4pndTMo/img.jpg?width=980" id="b473b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9930b53c9d58cb49774640a61c3e3e75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="cbdistillery cbd oil" /><p>All of the products from CBDistillery are <a href="https://ushempauthority.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. Hemp Authority Certified</a>, and for good reason. The company only uses non-GMO and pesticide-free industrial hemp that's grown organically on Colorado farms. Its hemp oils are some of the most affordable CBD products on the market, yet they still maintain a high standard of quality. CBDistillery has a wide variety of CBD potencies across its product line (ranging from 500mg to 5000mg per bottle) and offers both full-spectrum and broad-spectrum CBD oils to give customers a completely thc-free option.</p>
$35
FAB CBD
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIyNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NDIwOTEyMn0.MlTjz096FJ0ev_-soK7_Z-FeQeJczWoeh9Qi9SSkHsY/img.jpg?width=980" id="04b26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="76aa4862f44603242e318982acea6646" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fab cbd oil" /><p>For an organic CBD oil that has it all, FAB CBD offers plenty of variety for any type of consumer. All of its products are made with zero pesticides and extracted from organically grown Colorado industrial hemp. FAB CBD oil comes in five all-natural flavors (mint, vanilla, berry, citrus, and natural) and is also available in four strengths (300, 600, 1200, and 2400mg per bottle).</p>
$39
NuLeaf Naturals
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzExNTgyMX0.D6qMGYllKTsVhEkQ-L_GzpDHVu60a-tJKcio7M1Ssmc/img.jpg?width=980" id="94e4a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3609a52479675730893a45a82a03c71d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="nuleaf naturals organic cbd oil" /><p>As an industry-leading brand, it comes as no surprise that NuLeaf Naturals sources its CBD extract from organic hemp plants grown on licensed farms in Colorado. The comany's CBD oils only contain two ingredients: USDA certified organic hemp seed oil and full spectrum hemp extract.</p><p>NuLeaf Naturals uses one proprietary CBD oil formula for all of its products, so you will get the same CBD potency in each tincture (60mg per mL), but can purchase different bottle sizes depending on how much you intend to use.</p>
$38.50
Charlotte's Web
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjk3NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzQ0NjM4N30.SaQ85SK10-MWjN3PwHo2RqpiUBdjhD0IRnHKTqKaU7Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="84700" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2174067dcc0c4094be25b3472ce08c8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="charlottes web cbd oil" /><p>Perhaps one of the most well-known brands in the CBD landscape, Charlotte's Web has been growing sustainable hemp plants for several years. The company is currently in the process of achieving official USDA Organic Certification, but it already practices organic and sustainable cultivation techniques to enhance the overall health of the soil and the hemp plants themselves, which creates some of the highest quality CBD extracts. Charlotte's Web offers CBD oils in a range of different concentration options, and some even come in a few flavor options such as chocolate mint, orange blossom, and lemon twist.</p>
$60
From Your Site Articles
- Best CBD Oils of 2020: Reviews & Buying Guide - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oil for Pain Management - Top 10 CBD Oil Review 2020 ... ›
- Best CBD for Dogs 2020 - Organic CBD Oil for Pets - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
IEA: Renewables on Track to Become Largest Source of Global Electricity in Five Years
11 November
Energy
A wind farm is seen on a mountaintop in China. zhongguo / Getty Images
By Andrea Germanos
The International Energy Agency on Tuesday laid out how clean energy is booming in the face of the coronavirus crisis, revealing that auctioned renewable capacity from January to October was a record-breaking 15% higher than the same period last year.
The Paris-based agency's Renewables 2020 report comes as the oil sector faces plummeting prices amid the Covid-19 pandemic.
<div id="6faff" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="72fbe413d6995d807af0d104335d452d"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1326166601297784833" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">In the next five years, renewables are set to become the largest source of electricity ⚡️ generation worldwide - en… https://t.co/qSlN8VmOwD</div> — IEA (@IEA)<a href="https://twitter.com/IEA/statuses/1326166601297784833">1605017731.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Net installed renewable capacity is forecast to grow by nearly 4% globally in 2020, and renewables will account for almost 90% of the increase in total power capacity worldwide, according to the IEA.</p><p>Looking further ahead, "total installed wind and solar PV capacity is on course to surpass natural gas in 2023 and coal in 2024," the report says.</p><p><em>Carbon Brief</em>, in <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/iea-wind-and-solar-capacity-will-overtake-both-gas-and-coal-globally-by-2024" target="_blank">its analysis</a> of the agency's report, noted that "wind and solar capacity will double over the next five years globally and exceed that of both gas and coal." The outlet added:</p><blockquote>Last year, <em><a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-renewables-could-match-coal-power-within-5-years-iea-reveals" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Carbon Brief</a></em> analysis of the IEA's data found that it only expected renewables to overtake coal output over the next five years under its more optimistic "accelerated case" scenario.<br><br>However, this year—even in its less ambitious "main case" scenario—wind, solar, hydro, and biomass are projected to take the lead within the next five years.<br></blockquote>
<p>"Renewable power is defying the difficulties caused by the pandemic, showing robust growth while others fuels struggle," IEA executive director Fatih Birol said in statement.</p><p>"The resilience and positive prospects of the sector are clearly reflected by continued strong appetite from investors—and the future looks even brighter with new capacity additions on course to set fresh records this year and next," Birol said.</p>
<div id="9dbbf" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="85cf7d7e43a53cc4e5ea4641eaf7dadc"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1326209281931276289" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">China 🇨🇳 & the United States 🇺🇸 are propelling 🌍 renewable power capacity to new heights in 2020. Even stronger gro… https://t.co/wmCDCyzD4l</div> — IEA (@IEA)<a href="https://twitter.com/IEA/statuses/1326209281931276289">1605027907.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Birol also pointed to the United States and the impact the incoming Biden administration will have on the direction of energy policy. The IEA chief said that "if the proposed clean electricity policies of the next U.S. administration are implemented, they could lead to a much more rapid deployment of solar PV and wind, contributing to a faster decarbonization of the power sector."</p><p>Despite the recent growth in renewables and the IEA's projections, policymakers worldwide don't appear to be prioritizing clean energy in Covid-19 relief measures, even when faced with persistent calls from climate campaigners for a just, green recovery.</p><p>As the <em>Guardian</em>'s environment editor Damian Carrington <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/10/renewable-energy-covid-19-record-growth-2020?CMP=share_btn_tw" target="_blank">noted</a> in his report on the agency's assessment:</p><blockquote><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/09/revealed-covid-recovery-plans-threaten-global-climate-hopes" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Analysis for the <em>Guardian</em></a>, published on Monday, showed that far more of the coronavirus recovery funds being spent by governments was going to fossil fuels sectors than green projects.<br><br>"The natural environment and climate change have not been a core part of the thinking in the bulk of recovery plans," said Jason Eis, the chief executive of Vivid Economics. "In the majority of countries we are not seeing a green recovery coming through at all."<br></blockquote>
<p>For some climate activists and experts, the IEA report underscored why governments should focus on funding renewables rather than fossil fuels.</p><p>Harvard professor Naomi Oreskes—a geologist, science historian, and author recognized globally as a leading voice on anthropogenic climate change—<a href="https://twitter.com/NaomiOreskes/status/1326158964871008264" target="_blank">welcomed</a> the IEA report in a tweet Tuesday.</p><p>"Today's good news: renewable energy continues to grow," Oreskes <a href="https://twitter.com/NaomiOreskes/status/1326158964871008264" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>. "Why? Because it's cheaper and better than fossil fuels. And when we eliminated subsidies to fossil fuels, renewables will do even better."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/11/10/iea-renewables-track-be-largest-source-global-electricity-five-years" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Renewable Sources Made up 72% of New Energy Added in 2019 ... ›
- 100% Renewable Energy Is Possible, Here's How - EcoWatch ›
- Cheers! Budweiser Switches All U.S. Brewing to Renewables ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The new battery will be double the size of the South Australian one that had been the largest in the world when it was built in 2017 (pictured). Tesla
The Australian state of Victoria will build the largest battery in the Southern Hemisphere to assist in its planned transition to renewable energy.
<p>Victoria has committed to sourcing 50 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2030, <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/victoria-to-build-one-of-the-world-s-biggest-batteries-near-geelong-20201105-p56brg.html?fbclid=IwAR0riiqA0xahw8--E5RXJXhn7nHmyiiBX-nO_T4aOs8CaAWuFxhTGM0KxMQ" target="_blank">The Age reported</a>. The new lithium-ion battery will have a capacity of 300 megawatts and provide 85 jobs.</p><p>"The big battery will help protect our network in summer, create jobs and drive down energy prices, as well as supporting our recovery from the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coronavirus" target="_self">coronavirus</a> pandemic," Energy Minister Lily D'Ambrosio said Thursday, The Age reported. "Victoria is embracing new technologies that will unlock more renewable energy projects than ever before."</p>
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="66e96cfe30fcf28f0f7e431798a2b9db"><div class="fb-post" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/greenpeaceaustraliapacific/posts/10159290307392971"></div></div>Like your style Victoria! 🎉💪😎
<p>The battery was first floated in April and originally set to be 600 megawatts and cost $300 million, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/05/victoria-plans-300mw-tesla-battery-to-help-stabilise-grid-as-renewables-increase" target="_blank">The Guardian reported</a>. Energy company Neoen has since won a contract to build a 300-megawatt version with Tesla equipment. It will be double the size of the South Australian battery that had been the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tesla-worlds-largest-battery-2512145319.html" target="_self">largest in the world</a> when it was built in 2017. However, projects planned in California and New York will be larger than both.</p><p>The battery will have the capacity to power half a million homes for one hour, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-05/new-tesla-battery-for-moorabool-victoria/12851698" target="_blank">Australia's ABC News reported</a>, but its main purpose will be to provide backup energy to the grid to prevent blackouts. It is therefore an example of technology designed both to combat the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a> and adapt to it.</p><p>"We know in the time of climate change, our summers are getting far hotter and much longer, so that means there is increased strain on our thermal generators," D'Ambrosio said.</p>
<p>Victoria has signed an $84 million contract with Neoen, while the company will pay for the installation itself. However, an independent analysis found that customers would see a return of $2 for every dollar invested in the project. It is expected to be completed by November 2021.</p><p><a href="https://environmentvictoria.org.au/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Environment Victoria</a> welcomed the news.</p><p>"This is a game-changer for Victoria's transition from old <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal" target="_self">coal</a>-burning power stations to clean energy," Environment Victoria CEO Jono La Nauze said in a <a href="https://environmentvictoria.org.au/2020/11/05/big-battery/?fbclid=IwAR1xj5Nhz-2-SzmsVjyRA7ua_XxH17-bsGbIFWRvU2u4J_dKY2TEOxmzoXo" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">press release</a>.</p><p>La Nauze said the project would help the state move toward shuttering the coal-fired Yallourn power station.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://greens.org.au/vic" target="_blank">Victorian Greens</a> also applauded the new battery, but said the state needed to do more.</p><p>"Now the government needs to go one step further and actually admit we need to get off coal in Victoria," acting party leader Ellen Sandell told The Guardian.</p><p>Australia is <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/ipcc-report-2018-australia-2611176911.html" target="_self">one of the leading exporters of coal</a>, despite the fact that it is especially vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis, as the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/australia-wildfires-climate-models-2645279035.html" target="_self">devastating wildfires</a> that burned from late 2019 to early 2020 attested.</p><p>However, a new analysis reported by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/05/renewables-cut-australias-emissions-more-than-covid-energy-analysis-finds" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> found that Australia's emissions from electricity, transport and gas fell by 4.6 percent for the 12 months ending in July 2020 when compared to the 12 months prior. What's more, the drop was driven less by the coronavirus pandemic than by the shift to renewable energy sources like <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wind" target="_self">wind</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/solar" target="_self">solar</a>.</p><p>"Renewables in Australia are now cheaper and more popular than <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuels</a>, and we expect a lot more renewables coming on line soon," Australia Institute climate and energy program director Richie Merzian told The Guardian.</p>
<p><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- 'History in the Making': Tesla Switches on World's Largest Battery ... ›
- Tesla's Giant Australian Battery Saved Consumers $35 Million in ... ›
- Tesla's Massive Australian Battery Responds to Coal Power ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
As U.S. Election Nears, Polling Shows 82 Percent of Voters Support 100 Percent Clean Energy Transition
28 October
Energy
The majority of voters support a transition to renewable energy, including wind and solar. paedwards / Needpix
By Jessica Corbett
With an estimated 66 million ballots already cast and only a week to go until Election Day, new polling released Tuesday shows the vast majority of U.S. voters believe the nation should be prioritizing a transition to 100% clean energy and support legislation to decarbonize the economy over the next few decades.
<p><br/></p>
<p>Climate Nexus, the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication <a href="https://climatenexus.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Public-Gas-Poll-Climate-Change.pdf" target="_blank">surveyed</a> over 2,000 registered voters online in late September and early October. The poll's margin of error is plus/minus 2.2% at the 95% confidence level.</p><p>Pollsters found that 82% of voters somewhat (33%) or strongly (49%) agree that "the primary goal of U.S. energy policy should be achieving 100% clean energy."</p><p>Respondents were also asked to weigh in on legislation introduced in Congress "that would set the goal of achieving a 100% clean economy (eliminating fossil fuel emissions from the transportation, electricity, buildings, industry, and agricultural sectors) in the United States by the year 2050."</p><p>Over seven in 10 said they somewhat (31%) or strongly (40%) support such legislation—the same total percentage who said they somewhat (32%) or strongly (39%) support "requiring electric utility companies in the United States to generate 100% of their electricity from renewable sources, like wind and solar, by the year 2035."</p><p>"The conventional wisdom has clearly changed," Anthony Leiserowitz, director of Yale's program, said in a statement about the survey results Tuesday. "Voters strongly support a national transition from dependence on coal, oil, and gas to renewable sources like solar and wind."</p><p>The poll shows majorities of voters believe that transitioning to a 100% clean energy economy would positively impact jobs and economic growth, energy bills, rural and farming communities in their state, and communities of color in their state.</p><p>A majority of respondents (62%) also said they would be more likely to or would only vote for a candidate who supports "providing a multi-trillion-dollar federal economic stimulus that prioritizes investments in clean energy infrastructure."</p>
<div id="5206f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="584d1641628f692ff103aee7ed74b45e"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1321080152328208384" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Biden should get "uncontrolled climate change would cost $486 trillion" tattooed on his forehead imo https://t.co/nTbVdHa9gD</div> — Emily Atkin (@Emily Atkin)<a href="https://twitter.com/emorwee/statuses/1321080152328208384">1603805027.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>While support for hydraulic fracturing to increase production of natural gas and oil in the U.S. was split, 61% said there needs to be more regulation of fracking and 80% somewhat or strongly support requiring energy companies to install technology to reduce leaks of the potent greenhouse gas methane.</p><p>When presented with two statements about natural gas, the majority of voters reiterated that they believe the U.S. should reduce the use of fossil fuels :</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDYyNDgxNy9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MjgyNTE5Nn0.IzDbXLrMILJe7QvUmc11Po392wuun8MJkbvuzQMuUwA/img.png?width=980" id="85ad7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4a76b08bea09fe2057707ebc45dbf566" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<p>"The natural gas industry has spent decades convincing people their product is clean energy, and voters have believed them," said Edward Maibach, director of George Mason's center. "But we now know alarming spikes of methane emissions—caused in part by gas production—are making global warming worse. The public is beginning to catch on to the threat."</p><p>Nearly three-quarters (74%) of the poll's respondents somewhat or strongly support creating a jobs program for currently unemployed fossil fuel workers to safely close down tens of thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells that cause water and methane pollution; the same total percentage believe dirty energy companies should be required to cover at least some of the costs.</p><p>The new survey echoes polling results released last week following the <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/22/watch-joe-biden-and-donald-trump-face-final-presidential-debate-election-day" target="_blank">final debate</a> between President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden. After Biden said that he would phase out the U.S. oil industry in a shift toward clean energy, a Morning Consult/Politico poll <a href="https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/10/23190208/2010136_crosstabs_POLITICO_RVs_v1.pdf" target="_blank">found</a> that 57% of voters support a "concerted oil-to-renewables transition," with even greater support among Democrats.</p>
<p>Referencing those findings on Tuesday, <em>Our Daily Planet</em> <a href="https://www.ourdailyplanet.com/story/post-debate-poll-finds-57-of-registered-voters-support-phasing-out-fossil-fuels/?utm_source=Our+Daily+Planet+Subscribers&utm_campaign=e1bd284529-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_10_27_02_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_15a39131a0-e1bd284529-62405541&mc_cid=e1bd284529&mc_eid=9b209ce257" target="_blank">detailed</a> "why this matters":</p><blockquote>As Election Day draws near, new polls by Pew Research found that <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/06/how-important-is-climate-change-to-voters-in-the-2020-election/" target="_blank">68% of registered voters</a> consider climate change to be a "very important" or "somewhat" important issue. Many experts (and even <a href="https://www.ourdailyplanet.com/story/trumps-losing-record-on-coal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">some coal workers)</a> agree that investing in renewable energy will <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/climate/green-new-deal-questions-answers.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">help create jobs and boost the economy</a>. Renewable energy is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/05/us/politics/trump-coal-industry.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">more economically viable than ever</a> and voters support it. Moderate Dems may have been nervous that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/23/energy-202-biden-draws-gop-attacks-with-call-transition-oil/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Republicans will try to skewer</a> Biden over this remark, but these polls suggest that might not work. The question will be whether it flips any voters in a crucial swing state. Only time will tell.<br></blockquote><p>In response to the fossil fuel discussion at last week's debate, 350 Action North America director Tamara Toles O'Laughlin <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2020/10/23/350-action-responds-final-presidential-debate" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a> in a statement that climate is a top issue for voters and "Biden demonstrated the capacity for leadership our country needs and deserves, including tackling the climate crisis at scale." </p><p>"While we may not always agree with his approach, we can see his willingness to listen, proven by a commitment to ending federal subsidies to the oil industry, and we look forward to finding solutions and common ground," she added. "On the other hand, we have Donald Trump, unhinged and desperate, flailing about, spewing a combination of lies and hateful rhetoric at every turn."</p><p>350 Action is among the climate advocacy groups that have <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/24/clarion-call-all-progressive-environmentalists-defeat-trumps-planetary-destruction" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">endorsed</a> Biden. The Democrat has also won the backing of various climate scientists as well as the first-ever endorsement from the editors at <em>Scientific American</em>, who <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/15/matter-life-and-death-after-175-years-scientific-american-backs-biden-magazines" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">warned</a> last month that "the 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/27/election-nears-polling-shows-82-voters-believe-100-clean-power-should-be-primary-us?cd-origin=rss" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Donald Trump and Joe Biden arrive onstage for the final presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee, on Oct. 22, 2020. JIM WATSON / AFP via Getty Images
Towards the end of the final presidential debate of the 2020 election season, the moderator asked both candidates how they would address both the climate crisis and job growth, leading to a nearly 12-minute discussion where Donald Trump did not acknowledge that the climate is changing and Joe Biden called the climate crisis an existential threat.
<p>In response to the question from moderator Kristen Welker, "How would you both combat climate change and support job growth?" Trump insisted that he loves the environment and wants clean air and water. He said that his administration has started to plant trees and there have been record drops in carbon emissions during his administration. </p><p>Trump then made a rambling remark about air pollution in India, China and Russia, before touting that he took the U.S. out of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a>, giving a false version of what the Paris agreement requires of the U.S. and insisting that it would have sacrificed "tens of millions of jobs."</p>
<p><br></p><p>By contrast, Biden noted that the climate crisis and a warming planet are "an existential threat to humanity."</p><p>"We have a moral obligation to deal with it and we're told by all the leading scientists in the world we don't have much time," he said and then pointed out that scientists say we have 8 to 10 years to tackle the crisis before we pass the point of no return, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/22/climate-change-biden-trump-debate/" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p><p>He then went on to list infrastructure investments in charging stations to promote the use of electric cars, and retrofitting older buildings so they do not leak their heating and cooling. Biden said those upgrades will save millions of barrels of oil, help clean the environment and create more than 18 million jobs.</p>
<p><br></p><p>Trump, in his response, insisted that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and three other female Democratic lawmakers "know nothing about the climate." Trump then claimed the plan would cost $100 trillion, even though Biden's website says his plan will cost $2 trillion.</p>
<p>Biden turned his attention to the support he has received from both environmental groups and labor unions.</p><p>The moderator then asked Trump why people of color, who are disproportionately affected by pollution since their communities are often up against oil refineries and chemical plants, should give him four more years in office.</p><p>"The families that we're talking about are employed heavily and they're making more money than they've ever made," Trump replied. He then went on to claim that he saved the oil industry.</p><p>Biden replied by talking about the effect of living next to a fence line and how important it is to keep people safe by imposing restrictions on pollution.</p><p>Trump then stopped Welker from asking her final question and asked Biden if he would close down the oil industry. Biden insisted he would stop federal subsidies of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuels</a> and usher in a transition to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a>.</p><p>"We have to move towards a net zero emissions," Biden said.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- As Biden Embraces More Ambitious Climate Plan, Fossil Fuel Execs ... ›
- Climate Crisis Gets 10 Minutes at VP Debate - EcoWatch ›
- Climate Crisis Gets Just 10 Minutes at End of Presidential Debate ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
What will happen to all these batteries once they wear out? Ronny Hartmann / AFP / Getty Images
By Zheng Chen and Darren H. S. Tan
As concern mounts over the impacts of climate change, many experts are calling for greater use of electricity as a substitute for fossil fuels. Powered by advancements in battery technology, the number of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on U.S. roads is increasing. And utilities are generating a growing share of their power from renewable fuels, supported by large-scale battery storage systems.
<p>These trends, coupled with a growing volume of battery-powered phones, watches, laptops, wearable devices and other consumer technologies, leave us wondering: What will happen to all these batteries once they wear out?</p><p>Despite overwhelming enthusiasm for cheaper, more powerful and energy-dense batteries, manufacturers have paid comparatively little attention to making these essential devices more sustainable. In the U.S. only about 5% of lithium-ion batteries – the technology of choice for electric vehicles and many high-tech products – <a href="https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/07/f64/112306-battery-recycling-brochure-June-2019%202-web150.pdf" target="_blank">are actually recycled</a>. As sales of electric vehicles and tech gadgets continue to grow, it is unclear who should handle hazardous battery waste or how to do it.</p><p>As engineers who work on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=pPgKUOEAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">designing advanced materials</a>, including <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=dD8UWYEAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">batteries</a>, we believe it is important to think about these issues now. Creating pathways for battery manufacturers to build sustainable production-to-recycling manufacturing processes that meet both consumer and environmental standards can reduce the likelihood of a battery waste crisis in the coming decade.</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="15499060d7b57be67100758264d9f877"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iFchfHH0qzg?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Hazardous Contents
<p>Batteries pose more complex recycling and disposal challenges than metals, plastics and paper products because they contain many chemical components that are both toxic and difficult to separate.</p><p>Some types of widely used batteries – notably, lead-acid batteries in gasoline-powered cars – have relatively simple chemistries and designs that make them straightforward to recycle. The common nonrechargeable alkaline or water-based batteries that power devices like flashlights and smoke alarms can be disposed directly in landfills.</p><p>However, today's lithium-ion batteries are highly sophisticated and not designed for recyclability. They contain hazardous chemicals, such as toxic lithium salts and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/transition-metal" target="_blank">transition metals</a>, that can damage the environment and leach into water sources. Used lithium batteries also contain embedded electrochemical energy – a small amount of charge left over after they can no longer power devices – which can cause fires or explosions, or <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/e/5/e5530917-434d-451c-8a6b-c5cdfad1b5ec/EED12407A6BF7DE6C86A4B39C25CF6A4.greenberger-testimony-07.17.2019.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">harm people that handle them</a>.</p><div id="007de" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="34d57a5a359e141bcf74c9b1f66eae5f"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1026491976722468865" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The dangers of disposing of lithium batteries improperly - Battery blamed for Guernsey recycling site blaze https://t.co/Xcs76DI520</div> — Daniel Kinsbursky (@Daniel Kinsbursky)<a href="https://twitter.com/kbirecycling/statuses/1026491976722468865">1533569733.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Moreover, manufacturers have little economic incentive to modify existing protocols to incorporate recycling-friendly designs. Today it <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/e/5/e5530917-434d-451c-8a6b-c5cdfad1b5ec/EED12407A6BF7DE6C86A4B39C25CF6A4.greenberger-testimony-07.17.2019.pdf" target="_blank">costs more to recycle</a> a lithium-ion battery than the recoverable materials inside it are worth.</p><p>As a result, responsibility for handling battery waste frequently falls to third-party recyclers – companies that make money from collecting and processing recyclables. Often it is cheaper for them to store batteries than to treat and recycle them.</p><p>Recycling technologies that can break down batteries, such as <a href="https://www.britannica.com/technology/pyrometallurgy" target="_blank">pyrometallurgy</a>, or burning, and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/technology/hydrometallurgy" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">hydrometallurgy</a>, or acid leaching, are becoming <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s41918-018-0012-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">more efficient and economical</a>. But the lack of proper battery recycling infrastructure creates roadblocks along the entire supply chain.</p><p>For example, transporting used batteries over long distances to recycling centers would typically be done by truck. Lithium batteries must be packaged and shipped according to the U.S. Department of Transportation's <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=83659c6aca8187cdb60b38763b2ffbb8&node=se49.2.173_1185&rgn=div8" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Class 9 hazardous material regulations</a>. Using a <a href="https://www.anl.gov/egs/everbatt" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">model developed by Argonne National Laboratory</a>, we estimate that this requirement increases transport costs to more than 50 times that of regular cargo.</p>
Safer and Simpler
<p>While it will be challenging to bake recyclability into the existing manufacturing of conventional lithium-ion batteries, it is vital to develop sustainable practices for solid-state batteries, which are a next-generation technology expected to enter the market within this decade.</p><p>A solid-state battery replaces the flammable organic liquid electrolyte in lithium-ion batteries with a nonflammable inorganic solid electrolyte. This allows the battery to operate over a much wider temperature range and dramatically reduces the risk of fires or explosions. Our <a href="http://zhengchen.eng.ucsd.edu/" target="_blank">team of nanoengineers</a> is working to incorporate ease of recyclability into next-generation solid-state battery development before these batteries enter the market.</p><p>Conceptually, recycling-friendly batteries must be safe to handle and transport, simple to dismantle, cost-effective to manufacture and minimally harmful to the environment. After analyzing the options, we've chosen a combination of specific chemistries in next-generation all-solid-state batteries that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1557/mre.2020.25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">meets these requirements</a>.</p><p>Our design strategy reduces the number of steps required to dismantle the battery, and avoids using combustion or harmful chemicals such as acids or toxic organic solvents. Instead, it employs only safe, low-cost materials such as alcohol and water-based recycling techniques. This approach is scalable and environmentally friendly. It dramatically simplifies conventional battery recycling processes and makes it safe to disassemble and handle the materials.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU2NjkxOC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NDM3MjcyOX0.wyUKJaMauaSnDy5y2wkBWaI26DowukyA4vAk9MOLrI4/img.png?width=980" id="d54f2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f8a929e3797557d44277a9a62e6d715f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
A proposed procedure for recycling solid-state battery packs directly and harvesting their materials for reuse. Tan et al., 2020, CC BY
<p>Compared to recycling lithium-ion batteries, recycling solid-state batteries is intrinsically safer since they're made entirely of nonflammable components. Moreover, in our proposed design the entire battery can be recycled directly without separating it into individual components. This feature dramatically reduces the complexity and cost of recycling them.</p><p>Our design is a proof-of-concept technology developed at the laboratory scale. It is ultimately up to private companies and public institutions, such as national laboratories or state-run waste facilities, to apply these recycling principles on an industrial scale.</p>
Rules for Battery Recycling
<p>Developing an easy-to-recycle battery is just one step. Many challenges associated with battery recycling stem from the complex logistics of handling them. Creating facilities, regulations and practices for collecting batteries is just as important as developing better recycling technologies. China, South Korea and the European Union are <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/d/c/dc43cdc9-ef56-4f8c-b442-d325aa8acf72/D775B276380B37ABF9A49BFD581DD1A5.sanders-testimony-07.17.2019.pdf" target="_blank">already developing battery recycling systems and mandates</a>.</p><p>One useful step would be for governments to require that batteries carry universal tags, similar to the internationally recognized standard labels used for plastics and metals recycling. These could help to educate consumers and waste collectors about how to handle different types of used batteries.</p><p>Markings could take the form of an electronic tag printed on battery labels with embedded information, such as chemistry type, age and manufacturer. Making this data readily available would facilitate automated sorting of large volumes of batteries at waste facilities.</p><p>It is also vital to improve international enforcement of recycling policies. Most battery waste is not generated where the batteries were originally produced, which makes it hard to hold manufacturers responsible for handling it.</p><p>Such an undertaking would require manufacturers and regulatory agencies to work together on newer recycling-friendly designs and better collection infrastructure. By confronting these challenges now, we believe it is possible to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of battery waste in the future.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
World's Largest Solar Farm in Australia Will Also Supply 20% of Singapore's Electricity
21 October
Renewable Energy
Sun Cable hopes to start construction of the world's largest solar farm in 2023. Sun Cable
A large expanse of Australia's deserted Outback will house the world's largest solar farm and generate enough energy to export power to Singapore, as The Guardian reported.
<p><br/></p>
<p>The massive solar farm, which will be visible from space after it's constructed, will lie halfway between Alice Springs and Darwin, two cities in Australia's Northern Territory. The solar farm will occupy more than 46 square miles and cost $20 billion to build, according to <a href="https://www.unilad.co.uk/technology/worlds-largest-solar-farm-to-power-singapore/" target="_blank">Unilad</a>.</p><p>The remote area of the Outback where the solar panels will work is currently a massive cattle ranch, but the owner of the project, Sun Cable, hopes to start construction in 2023 with the aim of exporting energy by 2027. According to Unilad, the solar farm is expected to generate so much energy that not only will it power all of the Northern Territory, but two-thirds of the electricity will be exported via underwater cables that run 2,800 miles to Singapore, a city-state on the tip of the Malay peninsula.</p>
<p>Sun Cable has initiated the project by evaluating its environmental impact and making sure its project complies with regulation from the Northern Territory's Environment Protection Authority, as the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2020-10-20/newcastle-waters-station-nt-set-for-worlds-biggest-solar-farm/12785256" target="_blank">Australian Broadcasting Corporation</a> (ABC) reported.</p><p>"We'll be using thousands of hectares of land, and we need to closely examine the impact on the ground at the solar farm end," Sun Cable CEO David Griffin said, as ABC reported. "There's a lot of black soil in that country, but that's a bit problematic for us, so we're [planning to build] on a substantial area of soil that's a bit different and a bit friendlier for us to construct on."</p><p>Despite those challenges, Griffin believes the massive cattle farm called Newcastle Waters is an ideal location for the solar farm because it meets several critical requirements.</p><p>"It's on the Adelaide to Darwin rail corridor, which is brilliant for our logistics given the enormous amount of material we'll have to transport to the site," he said to The Guardian. The location is also just 18 miles off the main highway that runs the length of the sparsely populated Northern Territory.</p>
<p>The weather also provides ideal conditions for producing energy.<br></p><p>"It's a bit of a balancing act too, because it's far south enough to get away from the main patch affected by the wet season, so it's a steady solar resource throughout the year," Griffin told The Guardian. "There's plenty of sun and not many clouds."</p><p>The massive project is expected to supply 10 gigawatts of electricity. The sustainable energy will help the remote areas of the Northern Territory, which usually have to use energy from diesel-powered generators. The exported energy will supply 20 percent of Singapore's energy needs, according to Unilad.</p><p>The solar farm, which is three times larger than the world's current largest solar farm in northern China, is also expected to provide thousands of jobs related to construction and hundreds of jobs once construction is done. Griffin told The Guardian that many of the jobs will go to local <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/indigenous-peoples">Indigenous</a> communities.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Singapore Will Plant One Million Trees by 2030 - EcoWatch ›
- Australia to Build the World's Largest Solar Farm to Power Singapore ›
- Giant Water Battery Cuts University's Energy Costs by $100 Million ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Construction on the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric station in 2015. Government of Newfoundland and Labrador / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
By Tara Lohan
In 1999 a cheering crowd watched as a backhoe breached a hydroelectric dam on Maine's Kennebec River. The effort to help restore native fish populations and the river's health was hailed as a success and ignited a nationwide movement that spurred 1,200 dam removals in two decades.
<p>The era of building large dams in the United States, which defined so much of the 20th century, is over. The prime spots for development were cemented decades ago, and the ensuing harm to fish and other wildlife has been well documented. Attention is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/climate/environmentalists-hydropower-dams.html" target="_blank">now focused</a> on removing obsolete dams and retrofitting existing hydroelectric dams to reduce ecological harm and increase energy efficiency.</p><p>Many other countries are in the same boat. Across Europe and North America "big dams stopped being built in developed nations because the best sites for dams were already developed, and environmental and social concerns made the costs unacceptable," found a <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/115/47/11891" target="_blank">2018 study</a> in the <em>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</em>.</p>
<p>Canada appears to be the exception to that.</p><p>Large dams are still being built across Canada, from Muskrat Falls in Labrador to the generically titled "Site C" in British Columbia, despite <a href="https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/inquiry-slams-nalcor-s-c-12-7b-muskrat-falls-hydro-project-as-misguided-57533638" target="_blank">cost overruns</a>, outcry from some <a href="https://thenarwhal.ca/i-dont-see-why-anything-should-be-secret-first-nation-rejected-28-million-in-site-c-dam-deal-court-docs-reveal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">First Nations</a> and even <a href="https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/03/13/UN-Calls-for-Site-C-Review/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">environmental concerns</a> from the United Nations.</p><p>Hydroelectric power already supplies 60% of the country's energy. But the dam building isn't just to feed Canada's power needs. It's also become a hot export commodity.</p><p>As U.S. states look to meet new clean energy targets, imported low-carbon hydropower from across the northern border has become a larger part of the conversation — and the grid. New England already gets 17% of its energy from Canadian hydropower, Midwest states around 12% and New York 5%.</p><p>That number is likely to jump.</p><p>A new transmission project to bring 250 megawatts of Canadian hydropower to the United States <a href="https://renewablesnow.com/news/minnesota-power-brings-online-250-mw-hydro-wind-transmission-line-702303/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">just came online in Minnesota</a>. Two more are in the works for Massachusetts and New York.</p>
<p>Proponents say we need large-scale hydro to grease the wheels of the clean energy transition. Others caution that it comes with a larger environmental cost compared to wind and solar and could open the floodgates for more dam building.</p><p>There's one shared bit of common ground, though: We need to act quickly and wisely to tackle the climate crisis.</p><p>"This is the decade for getting 50% of the way there on renewables, but also proving out the pathway to get to net-zero by mid-century, if not before," says Peter Rothstein, president of the <a href="https://www.necec.org/" target="_blank">Northeast Clean Energy Council</a>.</p><p>How hydro figures into that process is still a complicated issue.</p>
<h3>Clean Energy Demand Surges</h3><p>The Northeast is one place where the energy transition is off and running.</p><p>All six New England states have pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions 80% over 1990 levels by 2050, and some are aiming higher.</p><p>Neighboring New York is also keeping pace. Last year the Empire State committed to achieving an 85% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and 70% renewable electricity by 2030.</p><p>How will those goals be achieved?</p><p>For some, imported Canadian hydropower looks poised to play a big role, and two new projects appear close to breaking ground.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MjYxMi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2OTU5NjkzNH0.ymkCcVXd-Ev9_AiedeJwov85g1tmCSI0ZarO06LveKI/img.jpg?width=980" id="addd0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c79b6e5712b1b6f73a4d875536a2a4e3" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Transmission lines from the Churchill Falls generating station in Labrador. Douglas Spott / CC BY-NC 2.0
<p><a href="https://chpexpress.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Champlain Hudson Power Express</a>, a 330-mile-long transmission line, would deliver 1,000 megawatts of hydropower from Quebec to the New York metro area and could supply about a million homes — helping to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.</p><p>The project — a joint venture of the province-run Hydro-Québec and Transmission Developers Inc., a subsidiary of the private equity firm Blackstone Group — has already received the necessary permits for construction, but no contracts for the power have been signed.</p><p>Construction, however, could still start next year, with the project scheduled to come online in 2025.</p><p>Massachusetts has an even bigger project in the works. <a href="https://www.necleanenergyconnect.org/project-overview" target="_blank">New England Clean Energy Connect</a> would bring 1,500 megawatts of capacity through a 145-mile-long transmission line running through Maine from Canada to Massachusetts. It too would come from Hydro-Québec, this time working in conjunction with Central Maine Power.</p><p>The project, which is projected to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 3 million tons a year in New England, has received its necessary permits from the state of Maine but still awaits federal permits from the Department of Energy and the Army Corps of Engineers.</p><p>Opposition groups, including some environmental organizations, are also <a href="https://www.nrcm.org/programs/climate/proposed-cmp-transmission-line-bad-deal-maine/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">challenging various aspects of the project</a> in court. And a coalition of First Nations communities that have seen dams built on their ancestral lands have voiced their opposition. (You can read more about that transmission line in <a href="https://therevelator.org/hydropower-necec/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Part I of this series</a>.)</p><p>More could be on the way. Nalcor Energy — the province-run hydro company of Newfoundland and Labrador — is nearing completion on its 824-megawatt <a href="https://muskratfalls.nalcorenergy.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Muskrat Falls hydro project</a> on the Churchill (or Grand) River. Costs have just <a href="https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/business/regional-business/muskrat-falls-costs-top-131-billion-503057/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">surpassed $13 billion</a> — twice what was first estimated.</p><p>Some of the energy is already slated to be sent to other parts of Canada and then — hopefully, <a href="https://muskratfalls.nalcorenergy.com/project-overview/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">according to Nalcor</a> — to New England.</p>
<h3>Environmental Considerations</h3><p>What's the net impact of these planned projects? That's hard to say. Tallying the environmental benefit or harm from large-scale hydro is complicated.</p><p>One of the biggest metrics of assessing environmental impact is greenhouse gas emissions.</p><p>The first phase of emissions comes just from building its infrastructure. Large-scale hydropower involves the construction of generating stations, and often accompanying dams and reservoirs. And then there are hundreds of miles of transmission lines that need to be constructed to move that power.</p><p>What comes next, once a project comes online, depends on multiple factors. Research has shown that hydropower emissions vary widely based on the location, climate and area of land flooded. Hydro emissions are also highest when a reservoir is first flooded and then decrease in the following years.</p><p>All told, over the life cycle of a project, most hydropower is cleaner than fossil fuels, although not always as clean as wind and solar. A <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-017-0032-9" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">study</a> in <em>Nature Energy</em> on the projected life-cycle emissions of energy sources put solar at 6 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt hour and wind at 4. The researchers estimated typical hydro at 97, but there's great variation between sites.</p><p>A 2014 <a href="https://www.hydroquebec.com/data/developpement-durable/pdf/comparing-power-generation-options-and-electricity-mixes.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">report</a> prepared by the research group CIRAIG on behalf of Hydro-Québec found the average life-cycle emissions of the company's fleet of 62 generation stations was between 6 and 17 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt hour.</p><p>Alain Tremblay, Hydro-Québec's lead scientist on greenhouse gas emissions, says tracking from their most recent complex of dams on the Romaine River shows emissions between 5 and 10 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt hour.</p>
<p>There are other environmental considerations beyond greenhouse gas emissions.</p><p>The nonprofit Natural Resources Council of Maine opposes the New England Clean Energy Connect, in part out of concern about fragmented habitat and critical wildlife populations, including brook trout. The transmission line would require clearing a 53-mile stretch of forest through the North Maine Woods.</p><p>In New York the nonprofit <a href="https://www.riverkeeper.org/" target="_blank">Riverkeeper</a> reversed its earlier support for the Champlain Hudson Power Express and has now <a href="https://www.riverkeeper.org/news-events/news/energy/riverkeeper-statement-regarding-the-champlain-hudson-power-express/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">come out against that project</a>, which would send its electrical cable down the length of the Hudson River.</p><p>"This sets a precedent that the Hudson is a conduit for extension cords from Canada or from anywhere," says John Lipscomb, Riverkeeper's vice president of advocacy. "It should be off limits to that kind of thing."</p><p>The Hudson contains legacy pollution from polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) dumped decades ago and other contaminants that could be turned up as the cable is dug in the riverbed. Over the years some of that pollution has been remediated, but not all. And plans to avoid putting cable in the areas of the worst-known contamination aren't sufficient to protect the ecosystem, he says.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MjYzNS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNzAyMzAzNX0.8in_ymMRAcp03rlSx96nunmf8TUnwEfoKFPpn1Fhmqc/img.png?width=980" id="926a2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3e71d0055729b3ec7582ade7e2129da6" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Atlantic sturgeon were brought to the brink of extension in the 20th century and are now are listed as an endangered species. NOAA
<p>There's also concern that imperiled fish species, like endangered shortnose sturgeon and Atlantic sturgeon, could be harmed by the electrical cable. The river was designated as critical habitat for Atlantic sturgeon, but no <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/regulators-warned-of-champlain-hudson-power-express-projects-environmental-impact-2020-10-08/" target="_blank">Endangered Species Act review</a> has been initiated to assess if the cable could threaten fish populations.</p><p>"Both of these fishes have nervous systems similar to that of sharks, which are incredibly sensitive to electric signals," says Roger Downs, conservation director of the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter. "It's a huge experiment to suddenly put an electrical signal down the backbone of this river."</p><p>Lipscomb shares this concern. After all the work that's been done in recent years to help restore the Hudson and its estuary, he says "it's heartbreaking that we still think of this river as a resource."</p><p>Hydropower may be renewable, he says, but from an environmental perspective it isn't sustainable. "Unless a river's value is zero," he says. "If a river has any value as an ecosystem, as a host for life, then hydropower isn't even a consideration."</p>
<h3>Upstream Justice Concerns</h3><p>In 1990 a group of Cree and Inuit protestors paddled the Hudson River to Manhattan to ask New Yorkers to <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-wednesday-edition-1.3044034/commemorating-25th-anniversary-of-historic-odeyak-voyage-1.3044498" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">oppose a power purchase</a> agreement between the state and Quebec and the construction of a second dam in the James Bay hydroelectric project in northern Quebec.</p><p>They were successful. Now, 30 years later, a different group of First Nations is making a similar plea.</p><p>On October 7 the First Nations of Pessamit, Wemotaci, Pikogan, Lac Simon and Kitcisakik sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Energy stating their opposition to the Massachusetts transmission line. The groups wrote that one-third of Hydro-Québec's installed power is "produced in our respective ancestral territories from reservoirs, dams, power plants and various other installations, without prior consultation, without our consent and without compensation."</p><p>Over the decades of hydropower buildout in Canada many First Nations communities — but not all — have been consulted on projects and struck agreements with power companies.</p><p>Major hydroelectric projects have altered the flow of rivers and in some cases, the food and cultural resources used by Indigenous communities.</p><p>There are also health concerns.</p><p>A 2016 <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.6b04447" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">study</a> by Harvard University researchers, published in <em>Environmental Science and Technology,</em> found that flooding reservoirs for hydroelectric projects in Canada would increase the risk of mercury poisoning in Indigenous communities at 90% of the dam sites.</p><p>When land is flooded for a reservoir, the microbes in the soil convert naturally occurring mercury into more dangerous methylmercury, which then works its way up the food chain. That puts anyone who relies on local wildlife such as fish, birds and seals at risk. In the northern reaches of Canada, that's largely Indigenous people.</p><p>The researchers looked at how three Inuit communities downstream of Nalcor's Muskrat Falls project would fare. And they found that, on average, risk of exposure for community members would double after the area was flooded. That could translate to higher risks for cardiovascular disease and neurodevelopmental delays for children.</p><p>The more people rely on local food sources, the more harm they're exposed to. And in this remote region where store-bought food is very expensive, that's a serious concern.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MjYzOC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTA1Mzc0MH0.QuQG5HVESeGCC-l0a561BfaZMDy-FUWAql5aCjCkhOc/img.jpg?width=980" id="c5668" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="055402f58261cdd4c3addaa56347c8f9" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Near Happy Valley-Goose Bay on the Churchill (Grand) River downstream from Muskrat Falls. Douglas Sprott / CC BY-NC 2.0
<p>"People have a very high prevalence of economic insecurity and that translates into insecure access to Western foods at the grocery store," says Ryan Calder, a co-author of the study and now an assistant professor of environmental health and policy at Virginia Tech. "Traditional food systems account for a smaller and smaller fraction of overall calories, but a wildly disproportionate fraction of nutrient intake."</p><p>Despite this, he doesn't think their research should be taken as a commentary on whether hydroelectric power itself is good or bad. "We really just criticized [the company's] risk assessment," he says.</p><p>Earlier studies by Nalcor claimed the effect on the Inuit would be negligible as the mercury would quickly dilute in downstream waters.</p><p>"They had no basis for saying there was going to be no impact," says Calder. "It was clear that they were trying to ignore their obligations — if not legal, then certainly moral — to Indigenous people."</p><p>The researchers also found that about half of the other sites they studied would have equal or greater concentrations of methylmercury than Muskrat Falls.</p><p>Roberta Frampton Benefiel of <a href="http://www.grandriverkeeperlabrador.ca/" target="_blank">Grand Riverkeeper Labrador</a>, who lives near the Muskrat Falls project, says she wasn't surprised by Nalcor's position. "Aboriginal people don't count to this government and so we have to make the Aboriginal people count," she says.</p><p>She has spoken to environmental organizations in the United States to help raise awareness about some of the local effects of dam development in Canada.</p><p>"I want people in the United States to understand that when they flip their light switch, if they accept these power lines from Canada, they're poisoning northern communities," she says.</p>
<h3>More Dams?</h3><p>New York and Massachusetts have been eager for hydropower from Canada as long as it doesn't mean the construction of new dams for the transmission projects.</p><p>Hydro-Québec says it has enough reserves for export to New York and Massachusetts without redirecting power from its existing United States or Canadian customers.</p><p>It's nearly finished with the last dam in the complex of four generating stations on the Romaine River, which along with other projects, has added 5,000 megawatts of capacity over the last decade. Although it does has the <a href="https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_LTRA_2019.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lowest reserve margin</a> of utilities in the region, according to the North American Electric Reliability Corporation's 2019 assessment.</p><p>In previous years Hydro-Québec did preliminary work to explore the possibility of new dams on the Little Mécatina River, but company spokesperson Lynn St-Laurent says they currently have no plans for new dams and that project is no longer in their strategic plan.</p><p>Gary Sutherland, director of strategic affairs for northeast markets at Hydro-Québec, says that additional energy demand for export could be met with increased energy efficiency in Quebec and more wind projects. Quebec Premier François Legault <a href="https://twitter.com/francoislegault/status/1316155854610001920" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">tweeted last week</a> that the province's next addition of capacity, if needed, would be the 200-megawatt <a href="https://energycentral.com/news/quebec-interest-wind-power-projects-back-horizon" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Apuiat wind farm</a>.</p><p>Elsewhere in Canada, however, dam building continues.</p><p>Manitoba Hydro and four First Nations are in the process of building the <a href="https://www.enr.com/articles/45695-mega-canadian-hydro-project-moves-forward-despite-surprises-bitter-cold" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Keeyask project</a>, a 695-megawatt hydroelectric generating station on the Nelson River.</p><p>British Columbia also continues to muddle along on development at Site C, a 1,100-megawatt dam on the Peace River that has faced mounting problems and protests.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MjY0MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNzkxNTIzN30.qQ8Ig5mi290gQcTE_vwWxHVQE2VEHK_kU4C07jHBS0U/img.jpg?width=980" id="f4830" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="60e9b436682d334050473e4f446c730c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Construction of the Site C dam in British Columbia in 2017. Jason Woodhead / CC BY 2.0
<p>This includes, according to a report in <em><a href="https://thenarwhal.ca/topics/site-c-dam-bc/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Narwhal</a></em>, legal challenges from "landowners and First Nations who oppose flooding 128 kilometers of the Peace River and its tributaries, putting Indigenous burial grounds, traditional hunting and fishing areas, habitat for more than 100 species vulnerable to extinction and some of Canada's richest farmland under up to 50 meters of water."</p><p>Construction has also <a href="https://vancouversun.com/business/site-c-still-scaling-up-construction-to-meet-important-milestone-while-remains-up-in-the-air" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">uncovered geological issues</a> that could make parts of the foundation unstable, prompting <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/site-c-letter-1.5741443" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">numerous calls</a> to stop development.</p><p><a href="https://1694d3a6-ec13-42ea-a8f0-a29cda354660.usrfiles.com/ugd/1694d3_b5baab11560f4bf4a3910e992c608509.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">New research</a> by energy analyst Robert McCullough, who runs a Portland, <a href="https://www.mresearch.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Oregon-based consulting firm</a>, found that if the project continues its likely to have surplus energy that will need to be sold outside the province at a loss to ratepayers.</p><p>But a poor financial outlook doesn't always mean the end of dam projects in Canada.</p><p>In Labrador Nalcor also has another large project planned — the 2,250-megawatt Gull Island dam, farther upstream from Muskrat Falls, which could be built if there's a buyer for the power.</p><p>It's a prospect Benefiel finds shocking, considering the company's most recent project was so over budget that it prompted a provincial <a href="https://www.muskratfallsinquiry.ca/" target="_blank">Commission of Inquiry</a>, which found that Muskrat Falls put the financial health of the entire province at risk.</p>
<h3>Is Hydro Needed?</h3><p>Considering all the complexities of hydro projects and the related transmission infrastructure, is it necessary to move U.S. states off fossil fuels and toward clean energy goals?</p><p>That depends on who you talk to.</p><p>Despite investment in wind and solar, "hydro has a couple of things going for it," says Rothstein of the Northeast Clean Energy Council. The first is that it's able to compete on costs, and second is the "dispatchability."</p><p>Thanks to decades of dam building, Canadian hydropower is ready to go — pending transmission capacity. It's also seen as less variable than wind and solar, although hydropower does fluctuate by season and by year, depending on precipitation.</p><p>"I think hydro will play a role, but it's not going to be the only resource," says Rothstein. Offshore wind holds the biggest potential for large-scale projects in the region, he says.</p><p>New York has already awarded contracts to procure <a href="https://www.utilitydive.com/news/new-york-awards-record-1700-mw-offshore-wind-contracts/559091/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">1,700 megawatts of offshore wind</a> and in July <a href="https://renewablesnow.com/news/new-york-opens-procurement-round-for-4-gw-of-renewables-707197/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">put out a call</a> to solicit another 2,500 megawatts of offshore wind and 1,500 megawatts of land-based, large-scale renewables.</p><p>Massachusetts is making strides toward wind energy, too. In 2016 Gov. Charlie Baker signed an energy bill requiring the state's utilities to<a href="https://www.wbur.org/earthwhile/2019/05/31/more-offshore-wind-power-massachusetts" target="_blank"> procure 1,600 megawatts of offshore wind</a> and could soon double that.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1MjY2NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NzE5MTUwNX0.qJN9i3xJcDJ9GrKI8cM8v0WIFkWcMGzNFzvn5yz0p54/img.jpg?width=980" id="cc8a4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c558d5f64337d0e12e7603c52be882b2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
The Block Island Wind Farm off the coast of Rhode Island is the first U.S. offshore wind farm. Dennis Schroeder / NREL / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
<p>All told around a half a dozen major projects now await a green light, pending permitting decisions by the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.</p><p>All down the East Coast, "there's a whole constellation of projects close to breaking water," says Rothstein.</p><p>In the past offshore wind has been stymied by NIMBYism, but he says both the public perception of wind has changed and so have costs. New projects being proposed are farther offshore and out of view. And more established, global wind developers are competing for projects, helping to bring down prices.</p><p>Sierra Club's Downs thinks northeast states could meet their goals without imported hydro. Instead he'd like to see more focus on large-scale solar installations in upstate New York on brownfields or fallow farmland, and more offshore wind.</p><p>"And then we need to be doing more and more programs for smaller, community-based wind and solar," he says.</p><p>Whatever mix of low-carbon power is secured, Downs hopes it doesn't turn rivers into transmission corridors and does account for the full environmental and social costs of power generation.</p><p>"We have an obligation to protect cultural rights, Indigenous rights and also the vast Canadian wilderness," says Downs. "We shouldn't be exporting our environmental problems."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://therevelator.org/hydro-dams-transmission/" target="_blank">The Revelator</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The Drax coal-fired power station near Selby, North Yorkshire, England. Warwick Sweeney / Photographer's Choice / Getty Images Plus
Thirty of the world's largest investors, who together control $5 trillion in assets, have pledged to cut the greenhouse gas emissions of their portfolios by as much as 29 percent in five years.
<p>The investors, who include Allianz, the Church of England and the California Public Employees' Retirement System, are all part of the UN convened <a href="https://www.unepfi.org/net-zero-alliance/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance</a>. The group formed in 2019 with the goal of reducing the emissions of their investment portfolios to net zero by 2050 and limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. On the road to that goal, the group announced their <a href="https://www.unepfi.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Alliance-Target-Setting-Protocol_Final-Consultation-Draft.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">2025 Target Setting Protocol</a> Tuesday, which includes the goal to reduce emissions across members' portfolios by 16 to 29 percent of 2019 levels by 2025.</p>
<p>"According to the UNEP Emissions Gap Report, every year of postponed emissions peak means that deeper and faster cuts will be required," UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative leader Eric Usher said in a <a href="https://www.unepfi.org/news/industries/investment/net-zero-asset-owner-alliance-sets-unprecedented-5-year-portfolio-decarbonization-targets/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">press release</a>. "The Target-Setting Protocol represents world-leading progress on the required emissions reductions from some of the biggest investors in the world."</p><p>To reach their goal, the investors will pinpoint the 20 companies most responsible for their portfolios' emissions, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/13/top-asset-managers-commit-to-big-carbon-emissions-cuts?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco&fbclid=IwAR0KiEWbHZMlu9oKxXTOJ7tmvDOGZZmHOwX7Wp_ZN4ja8yxfOJJXmOJA6P8" target="_blank">The Guardian explained</a>. They will also set specific targets for highly emitting sectors like <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/oil-and-gas" target="_self">oil and gas</a>, transport and utilities.</p>
<p>Some financial institutions have acted on the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a> by divesting entirely from certain companies or refusing to fund certain ventures. For example, Norway's largest private asset manager <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/norway-asset-fund-divest-exxon-chevron-2647116709.html" target="_self">divested</a> in August from companies that lobby against climate action or make more than five percent of their revenue from <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal" target="_self">coal</a> or <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/oil-sands" target="_self">oil sands</a>. The Net-Zero Asset Owners Alliance, however, takes a different approach, seeking instead to engage with the companies it invests in in order to push the overall economy towards a just transition to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/" target="_self">renewable energy</a>.</p><p>"Although decarbonization of portfolios could be easily achieved by selling carbon intensive investments, it is highly questionable if such actions alone would have a positive impact on the real economy," the group explained in the press release. "Additionally, it might undermine Alliance members ability to engage with these [companies] to effect reductions in the real economy."</p><p>Part of that engagement means encouraging companies to share regular reports on their climate actions and to craft plans to green their business, according to The Guardian. The alliance itself will also release yearly reports, and plans to grow its membership to 200 or the assets under its control to $25 trillion.</p>
<p>"Alliance members start out by changing themselves and then reach out to various companies to work on the change of their businesses," Alliance Chair Günther Thallinger, who serves on the board of management for Allianz SE, said in the press release. "Reaching net-zero is not simply reducing emissions and carrying on with the business models of today. There are profound changes and opportunities that will come from the net-zero economy, we see new business opportunities and strong wins for those who are ready to lead."</p><p>The alliance is part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change's (UNFCCC's) broader Race to Zero campaign, in which cities, companies and investors work to increase the number of entities that have committed to net-zero emissions by 2050 or earlier, <a href="https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4021571/institutional-investors-managing-usd5tr-pledge-2025-portfolio-co2-goals" target="_blank">Business Green reported</a>. The plan is to have as many as possible commit before the next major UN climate summit, the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/cop26-postponed-coronavirus-2645616746.html" target="_self">delayed COP26</a>.</p>
<p><em>Correction: An earlier version of this article said that Norway's largest hedge fund divested from companies that lobby against climate action. The article has been updated to identify the fund as Norway's largest private asset manager.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- Microsoft Promises to Be Carbon Negative by 2030 - EcoWatch ›
- BP to Cut Oil and Gas Production 40%, Invest 10x More in Green ... ›
- Oxford Endowment Ditches Fossil Fuels in 'Historic' Decision ... ›
- Climate Action Must Go Deeper Than 'Carbon Neutral' - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
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
As the climate crisis has become ever-harder to ignore, more people are questioning whether infinite economic growth is possible on a planet of finite resources. inkelv1122 / Flickr / CC by 2.0
By Ruby Russell
It was only in the mid-20th century, in the wake of the shattering impact of World Wars and when capitalism and communism were competing for global dominance, that we began to measure the success of an economy in terms of gross national product, or GDP.
<p>The faster GDP was rising, the better an economy could be said to be performing. But something happens as all that economic activity expands. The amount of energy and resources <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/total-economic-transformation-getting-from-here-to-there-on-climate-change/a-51433268" target="_blank">we use also increase</a>.</p><p>Ever since the industrial revolution, fossil fuels have set us on a course of furiously expanding production, which has also meant more <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/paper-cups-a-silent-killer-of-indias-honeybees/a-44302733" target="_blank">waste</a> and more <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/can-plastic-recycling-solve-the-fast-fashion-problem/a-44197074" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pollution</a>. Historically, greenhouse gas emissions have risen alongside GDP. As economies have grown richer, nature has <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/wealthy-countries-pledge-98-billion-climate-fund-to-aid-poorer-nations/a-50993966" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">paid the price</a>. </p><p>And as the <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-global-climate-strikers-take-on-inactive-leaders/a-55039689" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">climate crisis</a> has become ever-harder to ignore, more people are questioning whether infinite economic growth is possible on a <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/global-biodiversity-outlook-targets-extinction-summit-new-york-pledge/a-54932895" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">planet of finite resources</a>. </p>
Zero-Emissions With Twice the GDP
<p>"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in their <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/" target="_blank">Fifth Assessment</a>, have 116 mitigation scenarios with a chance of staying below the 2 degree Celsius threshold. All of those scenarios assume 2-3% GDP growth rates," says Jon Erickson, an ecological economist at the Gund Institute for Environment in Vermont, adding that this implies doubling the global economy by somewhere <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/net-zero-by-2050-what-does-it-mean/a-48958487" target="_blank">around 2050</a>.</p><p>These scenarios rely not just on switching to renewables, but also on the large-scale <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/carbon-capture-paris-agreement-co2-emissions-soil-reforestation-biochar-biomass/a-54717755" target="_blank">extraction of massive volumes</a> of carbon from the atmosphere using as-yet unproven technology, which Erickson describes as "wildly unrealistic." </p><p>"None of those models and the IPCC community even bother simulating a scenario where the global economy contracts, stabilizes and maybe even degrows," Erickson says. "Yet that's probably the one realistic scenario that would significantly affect greenhouse gas emissions." </p><p>It is easy to see why the idea that we must keep growing is hard to give up. When economic activity declines and we go into recession, people lose their jobs and are plunged into poverty. </p><p>Yet those arguing for "degrowth" — a managed contraction of economic activity— say it doesn't have to be this way. </p>Time for a Different Approach?
<p>Federico Demaria, an economist at the Autonomous University of Barcelona, who has authored several books on degrowth, says that neoclassical economics — which has dominated economic discourse over recent decades, has "never looked at the question of how an economy could be managed without growth. It only looked at questions like, why do economies grow? If it's not growing, how can we make it grow? Or, how can we make it grow even faster?"</p><p>These have become pertinent questions even — or especially — for wealthy, industrialized economies, where growth has slowed over recent decades. "What the mainstream economists are doing is just trying to relaunch growth," Demaria says.</p><p>A different approach, which aims to rein in growth without inflicting the pain that recession has traditionally entailed, comes from the field of ecological economics. </p>Embedding Economics in Ecology
<p>Neoclassical economic models picture economies as closed systems, with no inputs of materials or energy and no outputs of pollution and waste. But ecological economists insist there is no real separation between economy and ecology. After all, if we destroy the planet that feeds us, economic activity will collapse pretty quickly too.</p><p>In an effort to fix this oversight, Demaria is among those devising <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-0484-y#:~:text=A%20combination%20of%20market%2Dincentive,mitigating%20its%20environmental%20impact2" target="_blank">new economic models</a> that include factors like emissions and resources use. They are also working in things like social equality, debt, deficits and monetary systems, which have social impacts, and play into cycles of boom and bust.</p><p>Which is why Demaria says their work is attracting attention from surprising quarters. </p><p>"The main idea of ecological macroeconomics is that the economy is embedded into the environment," he says. "The second problem is that the neoclassical models were not realistic — look at the financial crisis; they didn't see it coming because they were completely unable to model it. So central banks, for example, are showing a lot of interest in ecological macroeconomics." </p>Degrowth Vs. Green Growth
<p>Yet mainstream environmentalism is still firmly entrenched in the idea of "green growth."</p><p>The IPCC, the <a href="https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2019/10/15/delivering-green-growth" target="_blank">World Bank</a>, the <a href="https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">OECD</a> and countless think tanks and national governments rely on us being able to "decouple" growth from its ecological impact. And some economies, like Germany, have grown while emissions level off, or even decline. </p><p>Countless <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13563467.2019.1598964" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">scientific papers</a> have been dedicated to the fierce debate over whether these cases represent an absolute break or just a tempering of the link between growth, emissions and resource-use. </p><p>But proponents of <a href="https://eeb.org/library/decoupling-debunked/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">degrowth </a>argue that to date, decoupling has only happened in wealthy economies that have outsourced emissions-heavy sectors like manufacturing to economies like China, and that globally the correlation is still strong. </p><p>As exemplified by the IPCC scenarios, the argument for "green growth" rests on the assumption that technology will save us. By recycling more, swapping energy from fossil fuels to that from renewables, and improving efficiency so we need less of it overall, proponents of green growth hope to keep expanding without sacrificing our planet's ability to feed us and maintain a stable climate.</p>Increased Efficiency, Greater Energy Use
<p>Yet technological advances don't always have the desired outcome.</p><p>When new engines that needed less coal to produce the same amount of energy were introduced in the 19th century, coal consumption didn't fall. Instead, better efficiency increased profits, made products cheaper, and drove up demand, meaning coal use <a href="https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/jevons-the-coal-question" target="_blank">actually went up</a>. </p><p>This trend — called <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800905001084" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Jevons paradox</a> — has persisted, meaning that improvements in efficiency tend to come with a rebound effect that wipes out any actual energy savings. Similar effects can be seen in resource use, and even labor, as automation has done more to boost consumption and production <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/do-we-need-to-work-less-to-save-the-world/a-53742751" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">than free time for workers</a>.</p><p>In a system geared toward infinite expansion, opportunities to tighten our belts tend to be seized as new ways to keep getting bigger. </p><p>But degrowthers argue that we do have to tighten our belts — and it doesn't have to be painful. If we could reverse the central logic of economic systems that prioritize growth over human and ecological wellbeing, they don't believe we would miss the furious activity that's keeping a minority of the human population in must-have products and ever-more material wealth.</p>From Your Site Articles
- First-of-its-Kind Report Finds Climate Change Threatens U.S. ... ›
- Climate Change Tops World Economic Forum Agenda, Both Greta ... ›
- Addressing the Climate Crisis Strengthens Economies, New ... ›
- Five Reasons to Ditch Economic Growth - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less