13 Comments
User's avatar
Ron's avatar

Thanks for a great summary of recent developments on the climate front. I recommend that those concerned about climate change watch Johan Rockstrom's recent TED talk. In his view, we are getting dangerously close to some potential climate tipping points. He also thinks, and I agree, that we won't be able to stay under the 1.5 degree temperature increase advocated by the IPCC, but will end up overshooting that target. But Rockstrom also says it should be possible to bring the temperature increase back to 1.5 degrees or less by appropriate actions.

Brian R Smith's avatar

It's the appropriate actions that continue to go undefined. In 2023 the UK's dependence on FFs for primary energy was ~78%. And total government revenues from UK oil and gas production were £9 billion in financial year 2022 to 2023, compared with £1.4 billion in 2021 to 2022, an increase of £7.6 billion." (GOV.UK)

In the US, "America's oil and natural gas industry supports 10.3 million jobs in the United States and nearly 8 percent of our nation's Gross Domestic Product.(US Census)

Or consider China, worlds biggest FF user & CO2e emitter. "China's total fossil fuel subsidies were the highest in the world at $2.2 trillion in 2022, amounting to 12.5% of the country's total GDP, according to the IMF."

I'm just asking a practical question: Since renewables can't electrify everything, and every country's economy is deeply dependent on FFs (including for ~70-80% of power generation), what "appropriate actions" can countries undertake that would not undercut growth & tank their economies? ...remembering that the only way to reduce emissions is to use less (a lot less!) FF energy.

Nancy Anderson's avatar

Aaaaiiiiiie re Harris' interview. I just wrote her at the White House:

"I am a grandmother of four and I'm concerned about the planet that I and my generation will be leaving our grandchildren. We have blown past 350 ppm carbon dioxide. Storms are extreme. Heat is lethal. Our coasts are falling into the sea.

I am concerned about your statement that fracking can continue. This quote was in The Hill: “What I have seen is that we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.”

I know we need to win Pennsylvania. Can we limit fracking by not building any more LNG plants? We must find ways to keep fossil fuels in the ground if we are to stop climate chaos. Instead the oil companies are expanding their drilling and pipelines and exports.

I hope you realize that we cannot continue to put CO2 in the air and leave a habitable planet for our grandchildren. Reining in the fossil fuel plutocracy will not be easy but somehow you must begin that process as soon as you are elected.

Thank you for listening. I'm working to make you President. Please do not turn out to be an ostrich.

Bill McKibben's avatar

i think you've spoken for a lot of us

Michael's avatar

We should stop using the phrase, "global warming." More accurate is "global rapid heating.". I doubt there is any locale in the northern hemisphere that hasn't set new records in high temperatures the last three years. We're on the slope of an exponential function and it's one we don't want to ride

Jon Anda's avatar

1. CBMs give a level playing field for allowance-buying EU cooperates versus importers who do not. A tariiff is, weill, a whole bunch of what is in IRA. The US got behind in cleantech and dove headlong into projectionism to catch up. EU started ETS nearly two decades ago. We took a bet that truckloads of carrots will get the job doze.

2. How many internal carbon pricers pass the cost on to customers? Easy in tech. Not iin undustry..

3. The US. helping internationally has been a disgrace. Without accepting responsibility for a quarter of today's climate forcing - debate slips into foreign aid ...and funds remains crumbs.

4. The US allocates capital on prices. We perpetuate a huge market failure... that CBM shines a light on. And US dealing misaccounted-for LNG is like fentanyl for developing countries trying energy transition.

We need to get real about the economic system (and pollution) we gave the world. And try leading.

portia's avatar

You are so neutral on solar geoengineering, and yet you subtly seem to promote it without telling exactly how it is done. Also, there is stuff going on up there where sulpher dioxide and other particulate and who-knows-what is being sprayed EVERY DAY. By the way, back in the 60s when I was growing up, sulpher dioxide and particulates being spewed from factory smokestacks was ILLEGAL. https://michiganintheworld.history.lsa.umich.edu/environmentalism/exhibits/show/main_exhibit/origins/-environmental-crisis--in-the-

Do we want to cause extinctions while using some dubious methods of 'dimming the sun'? Spiders and all manner of other life migrate in the sky, where spraying chemicals disrupts life cycles and food sources.

"Chapman says nightly moth migrations are everywhere, and bats know all about them. Chapman cites reports of bats in the American Southwest suddenly swarming half a mile up into the sky.

"The reason they're going up there is that there is a huge migration of moths coming in and out of Mexico into the Southern states," he says, "and the bats were taking advantage of this, so you know, it's kind of a whole ecosystem based on this huge flow of insects through the atmosphere."

These insects, it seems, don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

https://www.npr.org/2010/02/05/123330735/high-above-insects-travel-on-sky-superhighways

THE EARTH IS NOT A LABORATORY--STOP ACTING AS THOUGH SCIENTISTS AND PRIVATE 'REVENUE STREAM SEEKERS' HAVE CARTE BLANCHE TO MAKE UNILATERAL DECISIONS AS IF ONLY THEIR PROFIT VARIABLES MATTER.

Dave Bekowies's avatar

NO!

THANK YOU!!! So VERY much!!!

Jenny Linford's avatar

As someone in London, interesting- and heartening- to read your take on July's thrilling general election result in Britain.