5 December 2015, The Spectator, An age of climate realism is upon us. At last, cooler heads are prevailing….The Paris meeting is not even attempting to achieve what the 2009 Copenhagen summit failed to do: reach a legally binding treaty on cutting CO2 emissions. Instead, the aim is to replace the legally binding targets of the Kyoto Protocol (which runs out in 2020) with voluntary pledges tailored to the national considerations of individual countries. In short, the Paris climate deal will mean abandoning the notion of making decarbonisation legally binding — at least for the time being. Even so, governments from around the world are keen to sign an agreement that will allow political leaders to declare a victory, and to move on. At the same time, officials readily accept that painful decisions will be kicked into the long grass. Thus, the Paris accord is likely to be a ‘wait and see’ arrangement which, for the next decade at least, suspends any attempt of reaching a binding decarbonisation treaty. Such an outcome will almost certainly trigger a fundamental reassessment of Europe’s go-it-alone-no-matter-what-the-costs decarbonisation policies. Why has it proven impossible for such summits to make the kind of progress that was, until recently, billed as a matter of saving the world? Firstly, policies that commit western governments to unilateral decarbonisation have turned out to be more costly and politically toxic than conventional wisdom proclaimed. Rather than running out of fossil fuels — and thereby making renewable energy more competitive — the US shale revolution and the prospect of its global proliferation has triggered a glut of cheap oil and gas. Fuel prices have fallen and look set to remain low for the foreseeable future. As a result, the bridge to a world powered by renewable energy has become longer rather than shorter. Read More here Note that “the pause” noted in the article is a red herring – read more here
Category Archives: Fossil Fuel Reduction
3 December 2015, Climate News Network, Coal plant plans raise climate risk. COP21: As some of the world’s political leaders strive to save the planet from overheating, others still see increased coal burning as the answer to their future energy needs. More than 2,400 coal power plants already under construction or planned will have to be cancelled if the planet is not to overheat by more than 2˚C, according to an analysis released at the COP21 climate summit in Paris. Even if existing plants are allowed to continue producing electricity beyond 2030 until the end of their technical lifetimes, the world will reach temperatures that risk runaway climate change, says the report by Climate Action Tracker (CAT). The report assessed the impact of planned new coal plants globally, and found that the several of the 28 European Union members states (EU28) planned to replace existing coal stations with new ones. The EU 28 and eight large countries assessed − China, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Africa, South Korea, the Philippines and Turkey – that each plan to build new plants will together add nearly half the world’s total – 2,011 power stations. Plans undermined The report makes clear that the efforts of the 195 countries meeting in Paris to reduce carbon dioxide emissions will be undermined unless plans to replace old coal plants with new ones are scrapped. Read More here
25 November 2015, Renew Economy, Australia can meet its Kyoto target – but “real emissions” will not fall to -5% by 2020. In line with our earlier update, Environment Minister Greg Hunt will today announce that Australia’s greenhouse gas abatement task to meet its 2020 emissions reduction target has fallen “below zero”, meaning that Australia will meet its 2020 target. While we will officially meet our Kyoto target, Australian emissions will not fall to -5 per cent on 2000 levels by 2020. Australian emissions are projected to grow from today (currently -2 per cent on 2000 levels) through to 2020, increasing 6 per cent to be plus 4 per cent on 2000 levels by 2020, well short of the -5 per cent target. Below, we summarise how Australia’s Kyoto target can be met, despite emissions continuing to grow. What is an “abatement task” and how is it derived? Read more here
24 November 2015, Renew Energy, Carbon budgets: Knowing when to hold and when to fold. As global leaders pull up a seat around the negotiating table in Paris in the next fortnight, there is no doubt discussion will quickly turn to the carbon budget and how to spend it. That’s the budget that will determine whether the world stays under two degrees of warming or sails into the unchartered waters of three, four or even a five-degree temperature increase. No one imagines that decision will be made this December at this Conference of the Parties. However to retain any hope of a safe and stable climate, the next decade will see debate around the division of the world’s carbon budget front and centre of discussions between nations, scientists, economists and financial analysts. It’s the gravitational pull of this discussion that will ensure the now heated debate surrounding divestment versus engagement as the most effective form of shareholder activism gets a more forensic examination. Certainly the debate is a now a fairly regular presence in the media, as individual and institutional investors become increasingly wary of the environmental, social and long-term financial risks posed by various holdings within their portfolios. In the last few years the issue’s profile has been raised in response to the fossil fuel divestment movement. Pressure for change is growing from within the community, fuelled in part by a growing awareness of how personal finances are being invested by banks and other institutions. This awareness is largely driven by technological change – investors now have access to more information than at any point in history – if BHP Billiton has a dam wall collapse the world knows within minutes. Read More here