NO FUTURE IN GAS - video

"Renewables provide the cheapest source of energy and are creating the energy jobs of the present AND the future.

Yet, our State (Victorian) Government has given the go ahead to open up polluting gas fields and a mega gas import terminal that will have little to no impact on our gas bills but a huge impact on our climate. To cut power prices, we need to invest in renewables and help get Brunswick and Victoria off gas. Download our fact sheet here. 

Didn't know there was a problem with gas? Watch this video." 

Dr Tim Read - Greens MP

The 40 Things Biden Should Do First on Climate Change (excerpt): Bloomberg Green

 

Randolph Bell, Director for Global Energy Security, Atlantic Council

Take care of fugitive methane emissions.

“Failing to fully address methane leakage is increasingly a risk for the climate and for the U.S. economy. Methane makes up at least 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions—recent analysis suggests far more—and is at least 25% more potent at trapping heat than carbon dioxide. With natural gas projected to play an important role in the global energy system even under aggressive decarbonization scenarios by providing low-carbon power in the developing world and feedstock for hydrogen production (with carbon capture and storage), addressing methane is crucial for meeting climate goals.”

“The U.S.’s methane problem has the attention of major oil & gas producers, who decried the Trump Administration’s August reversal of an Obama-era rule on methane. Engie’s decision last month, under pressure from the French government, to delay its $7 billion deal with U.S. LNG company NextDecade because of U.S. methane emissions underscores the risks to the U.S. economy.”

“President-elect Biden can immediately direct the EPA to initiate a new rulemaking process to ensure that industry monitors and addresses leaks in new equipment, as Obama’s rule did. Biden can also be more ambitious and address leaks in older equipment, an effort that was not completed under Obama.” —As told to Akshat Rathi

 

Go to complete Bloomberg Green story 

 

Related: Preparing for climate refugees

Vigorous action needed, and soon, on climate change (excerpt): Yale Climate Connections

"Our essays in this series have presented compelling scientific evidence about the warming of the planet, reviewed the evidence that human activity is its principal cause, and discussed the resulting economic and environmental damages.

Now comes the question of what we are going to do about it. The options are clear:

– Nations can work toward eliminating greenhouse gas emissions and reducing the scale of future warming.
– Governments and private actors can, and will, invest in measures to protect home and livelihood from effects of changes that cannot be prevented.
– Or human societies and natural ecosystems will suffer the severe harms of inaction.

The more they (really we) do now and in the near future, the smaller will be the residual damages imposed on ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren. The choice is ours.

The suffering is already here, of course. In some places, it is almost impossible to bear despite growing investments in adaptation. So what is missing? A commitment to emissions reductions appropriate to the special nature of the climate change threat. Fortunately, with a smart choice of policy measures, the emissions control challenge can still be met at a tolerable economic cost."

Go to complete Yale Climate Connections article 

 

Related: A nine-point plan for the UK to achieve net zero carbon emissions (excerpts): Guardian

 

economic impact, ecology, ecocide, greenhouse gas pollution, #globalheating, extreme heat, children,

More natural gas isn’t a “middle ground” — it’s a climate disaster (excerpt): Vox

To tackle climate change, natural gas has got to go.

 

Methane gas energy has to go. Leave gas in the ground.

"Methane leakage may make natural gas as bad as coal, but it’s not the reason gas has no future

The paper leads with a quick note on methane leakage in natural gas production. Methane is a fast-acting greenhouse gas with enormous short-term impacts on climate. It leaks at every stage of the natural gas production and transportation process.

While gas itself is less carbon-intensive than coal, if enough methane leaks during its production, its greenhouse gas advantages are wiped out.

Gas wells destroy farmland.

Does that much methane leak? Some studies have suggested that, yes, methane leakage is bad enough to make natural gas the greenhouse equivalent of coal. Other studies have suggested that gas still has an advantage (and proponents note that leakage could be reduced).

For our purposes here, it doesn’t matter. None of the five arguments against natural gas rely on any particular estimate of leakage. All of them would apply even if natural gas achieved zero leakage (which is impossible). The same is true regarding the local environmental impacts of natural gas production (air pollution, habitat loss, earthquakes) — they are dreadful, but even if they were eliminated, the following arguments would still apply.

1) Gas breaks the carbon budget

Honestly, this one is enough to rule out gas on its own. .......... "

Read the complete Vox article by David Roberts

Images not from Vox 

Related:  Revealed: how the gas industry is waging war against climate action (excerpt) : The Guardian

 

Fact check on PM Morrison's gas plan.

 

 #methanegas,methane gas,greenhouse gas pollution,carbon dioxide,#economy,#stranded assets,#renewables,#jailclimatecriminals,

 

Video - 'We're just flaring a tremendous amount of gas': Oil executives in leaked recording share their REAL views on climate change and burning natural gas while publicly claiming to have emissions under control (excerpt) : Mail Online

Summary from article


"• A discussion by the Independent Petroleum Association of America among oil and gas executives was secretly recorded in June 2019

• In recording they shared their true stances against climate change and their opposition to federal regulation of methane emissions 

• Ron Ness, the president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council, said: 'We’re just flaring a tremendous amount of gas. The value of it is very minimal'

• He slammed stronger regulation of natural gas as an 'unnecessary burden'  

• Dan Haley, the president of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, suggested the industry use emotional marketing tactics to 'win these battles'

• He said: 'The activists are doing this when they talk about banning fracking in Colorado. They don’t show explosions. They show women and children' 

• Comments come as oil and gas leaders are criticized for flaring natural gas, which creates pollution and emits planet-warming greenhouses gases "

Go to the extensive Mail Online article

Related:  Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions, study says (excerpt): The Guardian (3 years old but still relevant)

Related: 'Australia in January,

 California in August':

 Aussies watch on in horror

 as wildfires ravage

 US west coast (excerpt): SBS

#fossilfuelcompanies, oil companies,  #methanegas, gas, greenhouse gas pollution, 

How Hard Is It to Quit Coal? For Germany, 18 Years and $44 Billion (excerpt): NYT

An open-pit coal mine and power plant

 in Schophoven, Germany, this week. 

Credit...Federico Gambarini/DPA/

Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Germany announced on Thursday that it would spend $44.5 billion to quit coal — but not for another 18 years, by 2038.

The move shows how expensive it is to stop burning the world’s dirtiest fossil fuel, despite a broad consensus that keeping coal in the ground is vital to averting a climate crisis, and how politically complicated it is.

Coal, when burned, produces huge amounts of the greenhouse gas emissions that are responsible for global warming.

Germany doesn’t have shale gas, as the United States does, which

Resistance to the Adani Coal Mine in Australia

has led to the rapid decline of coal use in America, despite President Trump’s support for coal. Germany also faces intense opposition to nuclear power. After the Fukushima disaster in 2011, that opposition prompted the government to start shutting down the country’s nuclear plants, a transition that should be complete by 2022.

The money announced Thursday is to be spent on compensating workers, companies and the four coal producing states — three in the country’s east and one in the west. It followed months of negotiations between regional officials and Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government.

Germany’s timetable, though, could present challenges to the European Union’s efforts to swiftly cut its greenhouse gas emissions, as the bloc’s new leadership has announced. Countries around the world are watching how quickly the 28-country union, which, taken together is currently the third-largest emitter of planet-warming gases, can reduce its carbon footprint. Germany is the largest economy in the European Union.

Go to NYT article

By Somini Sengupta and Melissa Eddy, Jan. 16, 2020 

Related: The Observer view on the climate catastrophe facing Earth : The Guardian

 

Revealed: how the gas industry is waging war against climate action (excerpt) : The Guardian

Methane gas contributes to climate change

"After the gas ban was beaten back in Seattle, Caleb Heeringa, a spokesman for the Sierra Club in the city, said advocates saw coordinated industry and union pushback against gas-related climate efforts grow.

A new group called the Partnership for Energy Progress (PEP) was taking root. The partnership is an organization of western utilities, labor unions and businesses that plans to spend $2.8m in 2020 convincing consumers that “natural gas is part of a clean energy future”, and fighting state and local climate restrictions on gas, according to records reviewed by the Guardian."

Methane gas well. They leak.

.................

"The American Gas Association (AGA), which represents mainly investor-owned gas providers, now convenes monthly calls “that bring together appliance, homebuilder, fuel, and other associations to compare notes and support efforts to push back on decarbonization and electrification issues”, according to the same document."

Communities say no to gas wells.

........................

"As the public learns more about the harms of natural gas, the industry is playing both defense and offense.

Burning natural gas produces less planet-heating carbon dioxide than burning coal or oil. Gas advocates have positioned it as a smart alternative to those dirtier fossil fuels. Even the Obama administration backed gas as a “bridge fuel”.

But the extraction and transportation of natural gas leaks methane: a climate pollutant with a short-term warming potential far more powerful than carbon dioxide. Scientists are revealing we have greatly underestimated the methane emitted by the gas industry.
Fossil gas is responsible for 42% of the US greenhouse gas emissions that come from burning fossil fuels, according to data from the Department of Energy interpreted by Robert Howarth, who researches methane at Cornell University.

#jailclimatecriminals

“Gas is one of the biggest drivers of emissions growth both in the US and globally, and the future trends for expansion on the system are really worrying,” said Sheryl Carter, director of the power sector climate program at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The infrastructure investments that are being made right now … they last for 40 to 60 years. So that really locks in those emissions increases.”"

Read the complete The Guardian story 

Related: What Can I Do? The Truth About Climate Change and How to Fix It by Jane Fonda
Published August 20, 2020 

#jailclimatecriminals, greenhouse gas pollution, methane gas, #America, #Australia, #climate crisis, #climateaction, #climatecriminals, #economy, 

Greenhouse Gas Removal: The Royal Society of Engineers 2018 Report

Cover image Visualisation

 of global atmospheric carbon dioxide

 surface concentration by Cameron Beccario,

 earth.nullschool.net,

using GEOS-5 data provided by the

Global Modeling and Assimilation Office

(GMAO) at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

"In 2017 the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering were asked by the UK Government to consider scientific and engineering views on greenhouse gas removal. This report draws on a breadth of expertise including that of the Fellowships of the two academies to identify the range of available greenhouse gas removal methods, the factors that will affect their use and consider how they may be deployed together to meet climate targets, both in the UK and globally."




"Recommendations
 Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) from the atmosphere will be required to fulfil the aims of the Paris agreement on climate change. This report recommends the following international action to achieve this GGR: 

RECOMMENDATION 1 

Continue and increase global efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Large-scale GGR is challenging and expensive and not a replacement for reducing emissions. 

RECOMMENDATION 2 

Implement a global suite of GGR methods now to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. This suite should include existing land-based approaches, but these are unlikely to provide sufficient GGR capacity so other technologies must be actively explored. 


RECOMMENDATION 3 

Build CCS infrastructure. Scenario building indicates that substantial permanent storage, presently only demonstrated in

geological reservoirs, will be essential to meet the scale required for climate goals. 











RECOMMENDATION 4 

Incentivise demonstrators and early stage deployment to enable development of GGR methods. This allows the assessment of the real GGR potential and of the wider social and environmental impacts of each method. It would also enable the process of cost discovery and reduction.

RECOMMENDATION 5 

Incentivise removal of atmospheric greenhouse gases through carbon pricing or other mechanisms. GGR has financial cost at scale and so will require incentives to drive technological development and deployment of a suite of methods. 

RECOMMENDATION 6 

Establish a framework to govern sustainability of GGR deployment. Undertake rigorous life cycle assessments and environmental monitoring of individual methods and of their use together.

RECOMMENDATION 7

 Build GGR into regulatory frameworks and carbon trading systems. In the UK, as an example, active support for GGR implementation (soil carbon sequestration, forestation, habitat restoration) should be built into new UK agricultural or land management subsidies. 

RECOMMENDATION 8 

Establish international science-based standards for monitoring, reporting and verification for GGR approaches, both of carbon sequestration and of environmental impacts. Standards currently exist for biomass and CCS, but not for GGR methods at large.RECOMMENDATION 5Incentivise removal of atmospheric greenhouse gases through carbon pricing or other mechanisms. GGR has financial cost at scale and so will require incentives to drive technological development and deployment of a suite of methods."

Online Report: https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/greenhouse-gas-removal/royal-society-greenhouse-gas-removal-report-2018.pdf

Read the complete report 

#jailclimatecriminals  #cambio-climatico, #climatecrisis, #climateemergency, #jailclimatecriminals, #criminalesclimáticosdelacárcel, #greenhousegas

Gas lobby seizes Covid moment, and declares war on Australia’s future: RenewEconomy

Green Deal

'The history of war tells us that such events are usually launched on doubtful and fabricated pretexts: The US war in Iraq, the German invasion in Europe at the start of WWII, all the way back to Julius Caesar’s invasion of Britain, and just about every war in between.

And so it is with the extraordinary attack launched on Australia’s future by its incumbent fossil fuel industry, and the gas lobby in particular. Its casus belli is the Covid-19 pandemic, and the fossil fuel industry has been enabled to do this after being invited by the Morrison regime to do more or less at it pleases and design its own future.

The reach and sheer audacity of the proposals unveiled over the past week is extraordinary, and the lasting impact on Australia’s future may dwarf anything that Tony Abbott and his Far Right cheerleaders may have done; notwithstanding his white-anting of the Carbon Pollution Reductions Scheme more than a decade ago, the scrapping of the carbon price in 2014 and the unceasing campaign against science and engineering.

This is the critical decade. Scientists tell us, repeatedly and with a near unanimous voice, that serious emissions reductions must be achieved in the next 10 years if the world is to flatten the emissions curve and give itself half a chance of capping average global warming at less than 2°C. A target of 1.5°C may already be out of reach.

Australia finds itself at a critical juncture. It benefits from the stunning cost reductions in solar, wind and battery storage, and key institutions have mapped out a path to a high renewable energy grid. Experts are shining the light on a future of green manufacturing and “green energy exports” that could enhance the position of the country as a significant energy superpower.
But the fossil fuel industry and its backers, with their focus almost entirely on short-term profits and ideological claptrap, have other ideas. They have decided to throw a live grenade into Australia’s own economic bunker, and its environment, and put the future of the current and emerging generation at risk.

Consider the list of what has emerged from the government-appointed gas-industry led reviews in the past week, including the King Review, the Covid Commission, the technology investment roadmap, and from the intense pressure being put on energy regulators.


– Bastardising the remit of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency in an attempt to to force them to invest away from renewable and smart and enabling technologies and into gas and carbon capture and storage

– Polluting the already controversial and ineffective Climate Solutions Fund by creating a “base-line” that industry experts suggest will allow big polluters to increase their emissions and get paid for doing so.'

– Delaying critical energy market rule changes and reforms that might have encouraged smart new technologies such as battery storage and demand management, and end the rorting of the current system by incumbent coal, gas and hydro generators.

– Pushing the case for gas and CCS in a “technology investment roadmap” that otherwise clearly identifies wind, solar, storage and other technologies such as EVs, heat pumps, energy efficiency and demand management as the cheapest and most reliable options.

However, none of these quite reaches the breadth, depth and cynicism of the so-called Covid-Commission, which appears entirely possessed with the narrow interests of the gas industry, from where many of these commissioners have emerged.


Read more of this Renew Economy story

http://www.howglobalwarmingworks.org/ is worth a visit

This site's information helps people understand global warming's scientific mechanism.

How Global Warming Works: Climate Change's Mechanism Explained

by Professor Michael Ranney, Dr. Daniel Reinholz, and Dr. Lloyd Goldwasser (with help from Professor Ronald Cohen)

You may have heard of global climate change, which is often called “global warming.” Whether or not people accept that humans are causing global warming, most folks have an opinion about it. But how much do regular people understand the science of climate change? If you were asked to explain how global warming works, could you? Take a moment to try to explain to yourself how virtually all climate scientists think the Earth is warming. What is the physical or chemical mechanism?

Don’t feel bad; if you’re anything like the people we’ve surveyed in our studies, you probably struggled to come up with an explanation. In fact, in one study, we asked almost 300 adults in the US––and not a single person could accurately explain the mechanism of global warming at a pretty basic level. This is consistent with larger surveys that have shown that people often lack knowledge about climate change. But how can we make informed decisions without understanding the issues we’re debating?

Go to How Global Warming Works site to see videos etc

Climate change: Big lifestyle changes 'needed to cut emissions': BBC

"People must use less transport, eat less red meat and buy fewer clothes if the UK is to virtually halt greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the government's chief environment scientist has warned.

Prof Sir Ian Boyd said the public had little idea of the scale of the challenge from the so-called Net Zero emissions target.

However, he said technology would help.

The conundrum facing the UK - and elsewhere - was how we shift ourselves away from consuming, he added.

In an interview with BBC News, Sir Ian warned that persuasive political leadership was needed to carry the public through the challenge.

Asked whether Boris Johnson would deliver that leadership, he declined to comment.

Mr Johnson has already been accused by environmentalists of talking up electric cars whilst reputedly planning a cut in driving taxes that would increase emissions and undermine the electric car market."

Read the BBC article 

Related: Death, blackouts, melting asphalt: ways the climate crisis will change how we live : The Guardian

Video / Climate Scientist Jason Box: “Our Economic System Is Crashing With Reality”: Democracy Now

Democracy Now!

 

Published on Aug 2, 2019

 

A heat wave is causing unprecedented melting of the Greenland ice sheet. Meanwhile, the World Meteorological Organization just declared July 2019 the hottest month ever recorded. We speak with Jason Box, professor and ice climatologist at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, about the intensifying climate crisis. 

He says humanity must move toward living in balance with the environment. “If we don’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ultimately stabilize CO2 … there’s no real prospect for a stable society or even a governable society,” Box says. “Perpetual growth on a finite planet is, by definition, impossible.”

Related:  

Heatwave: think it’s hot in Europe? The human body is already close to thermal limits elsewhere :The Conversation

How BHP's climate stance caught its fellow miners on the hop: Financial Review

" 'Society’s combustion of fossil fuels and industrial processes like steelmaking and agriculture have released greenhouse gases at rates much faster than at any other time in the geological past.'

It could be a line from any climate change rally over the past two decades.

Instead the words came straight from the mouth of BHP chief executive Andrew Mackenzie, who warned in a speech in London on Tuesday of an "escalation towards a crisis" and signalled the resources giant would push customers to reduce emissions."

Read the Financial Review article 

But is this just 'greenwashing' ?

Climate change: what to expect and are there really two sides? | Ask Bob: Video

Published on Nov 4, 2017

Many view climate change as the most pressing issue of our time. But how, specifically, is it going to affect us and our planet? Is there still time to make a difference? And what does it mean to believe "both sides" of climate change science? CBC's Bob McDonald weighs-in.

Related:

How high will sea levels rise- ABC Science

Climate Change Denial 101x: Video

Answering some of the common climate denial myths.

Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate?

Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. 

Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. 

Any research used to develop this content has been cited on a references page within the subsection for this lecture. 

Related: 

Climate change and sea-level rise in the Australian region

Climate crisis: CO2 levels rise to highest point since evolution of humans: Independent

“We don’t know a planet like this.”

" Levels of the damaging greenhouse gas carbon dioxide have reached an alarming new milestone at the world’s oldest measuring station in Hawaii.

The Mauna Loa Observatory, which has measured the parts per million (ppm) of CO2 in the atmosphere since 1958, took a reading of 415.26ppm in the air on 11 May – thought to be the highest concentration since humans evolved.

The Scripps Institution of Oceanography measures CO2 levels at Mauna Loa daily. The observatory, on Hawaii’s largest volcano, was built to test air quality on the remote Pacific islands because it is far from continents and pollution, while the area lacks vegetation, which can interfere with results.

The readings form the Keeling curve, which shows the rapid increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The 1958 readings showed the concentration of CO2 was 313ppm in March 1958, and that had risen to 400ppm by May 2013.

Meteorologist Eric Holthouse retweeted the Mauna Loa readings and said: “This is the first time in human history our planet’s atmosphere has had more than 415ppm CO2.

“Not just in recorded history, not just since the invention of agriculture 10,000 years ago. Since before modern humans existed millions of years ago.

Read Independent Story 

See also:

Climate Change and the Reinsurance Implications: Insurance Journal

Urunga NSW: Very affected by sea level rise.

Unundation of Urunga NSW with 7m sea rise. Click to enlarge.

• We are looking more and more unlikely to prevent global heating.

• Scientists are predicting the melting of the ice covering Greenland  with a subsequent sea level rise of 7m.

• This rise does not factor in sea rise from the melting of Antarctica and other ice.

• Already many properties and infrastructures are likely to flood when a high tide is combined with high local rainfall. What were a hundred year rainfall events are now ten year events.

• The frequency of high rainfall events will increase with global heating and more and more severe hurricanes are predicted because of warmer seas.

• Low coastal areas will also be subjected to severe storm surges.

• Would you buy a property likely to be inundated in twenty years, fifty years, a hundred years? Many wouldn't. Even the perception of possible inundation will greatly affect property values. Insurers are already reluctant to insure many properties that were once only likely to flood every 100 years.

• When certain properties are in less demand their value falls.

• Would you buy a property with a value likely to fall?

•  The view of Urunga above shows areas likely to be inundated by even a 7m sea level rise. Note the flooding of infrastructure and roads. Newry Island has disappeared.

• Property above a 10m rise will become highly sought after and will greatly rise in value. Property able to be accessed by road will increase in value but properties isolated by sea rise will lose value. New, costly road routes above the Bellinger/Kalang Rivers floodplain will be required. Will NSW be able to afford to update all its infrastructure? Water supply will be affected.

Isaac Cordal sculpture depicting politicians discussing global warming

Learn more about how sea rise inundation will affect Australian property.

Click here to go to Coastal Risk Australia site

'Retreat' Is Not An Option As A California Beach Town Plans For Rising Seas: NPR 


#inundation  #sea rise  #searise  #climatecrisis  #climatechange  #ice  #melting ice  #insurancerisk  #floods  #climate catastrophe  #Urunga

Victoria can, and should, lead the country on climate change: SMH

Grey Power Climate Protectors

"Many people see climate change as a federal domain, but actually the states are responsible for energy supply and have most of the regulatory levers – like the EPA – to cut pollution across all sectors of the economy. Plus Andrews has already done the hard yards cranking up the renewables we will need as we phase out Victoria’s ageing coal power stations.

All of which means Victoria can, and should, lead the entire country on the issue.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that human civilisation has just 12 years to avert an ecological and humanitarian catastrophe. We live in an extraordinary time and it calls for extraordinary leadership, not merely sound management. The Andrews government has just won an election with a massive mandate on climate change and renewable energy and here is the perfect political moment to act. Will they seize it?"

Read the SMH article