29 August 2016, Reuters, Insurers call on G20 to phase out fossil fuel subsidies by 2020. Insurers with $1.2 trillion under management called on Tuesday for the Group of 20 to set a timetable to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels by 2020 when they meet at a summit in China this weekend. Aviva, Aegon NV and MS Amlin said fossil fuel subsidies were at odds with commitments by G20 nations to combat global warming agreed by almost 200 countries last year at a Paris summit. “Climate change in particular represents the mother of all risks,” Aviva CEO Mark Wilson said in a statement. The companies called on the G20 leaders, who meet in the Chinese city of Hangzhou on Sept. 4-5, to set “a clear timeline for the full and equitable phase-out by all G20 members of all fossil fuel subsidies by 2020”. A phase-out should start with the elimination of all subsidies for fossil fuel exploration and coal production, they said. Their statement was also signed by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries and UK-based energy firm Open Energi. G20 leaders have repeatedly promised to phase out fossil fuels, the main man-made source of greenhouse gases blamed for climate change, since a meeting in 2009 in Pittsburgh. The British-based Overseas Development Institute think-tank estimated that average annual subsidies for fossil fuel production were $444 billion in 2013 and 2014, roughly four times the subsidies for renewable energy in 2013. Last week, investors managing more than $13 trillion of assets urged the G20 to ratify the Paris climate deal by the end of 2016 to help avert droughts, floods, mudslides and rising sea levels. No G20 nations have yet completed the ratification process, according to a U.N. tracker. China and the United States, the top two emitters, are widely expected to join up around the time of the G20 summit. Read more here
Tag Archives: consumption
19 August 2016. Climate News Network, Internet energy impacts on climate. New research warns that the growing reliance on smart technologies is leading to a rapid rise in internet energy demand that will push up carbon dioxide emissions. Switch off your computer, dust off your old typewriter, sharpen all the pencils you can find, lay in stocks of postage stamps − and that’s just the start. Our immersion in the digital society – and particularly our growing reliance on the Internet of Things – could mean uncontrolled demand for energy and spiralling emissions of carbon dioxide and the other greenhouse gases that are driving climate change. Researchers from the School of Computing and Communications (SCC) at the University of Lancaster, UK, say the growth of remote digital sensors and devices connected to the internet – the Internet of Things – can cause unprecedented and, in principle, almost unlimited rises in the energy consumed by smart technologies. They warn that the world now needs to consider how to limit data growth on the internet. Read More here
31 July 2016, Scientific American, The Sticky Truth about Economic Growth and Climate Change. Why we need to talk about the costs of mitigation. That averting climate change will save us money should be a tautology, but for reasons including entrenched interests, it is not. The pre-cautionary principle alone would tell us that we do not want to learn what costs climate change will incur, so better to pay a small premium to avoid the risk at all. Instead, calculated estimates pin the cost of avoiding catastrophic effects from climate change at something like 1% of global GDP. So who will pay for it, and who loses from a more sustainable economy? In recent years, several studies have come out running cost-benefit analysis on a policy switch to a clean energy system. Yet, besides governmental ‘push’ factors, we should not forget market ‘pull’ factors. Even if there was less of a push by the government to clean up our air and water supply, as well as mitigate climate change, the coal industry is for example changing regardless thanks to cheap natural gas as well as self-inflicted wounds. While coal mine employment in the U.S. did drop 91,600 in 2011 to 74,900 in 2014, there are now more workers in the solar sector than in oil and gas. So overall, not counting the benefits of lowered air pollution and avoiding climate change, the overall job situation seems to be moving towards net positive. So, case closed? Not quite. Read More here
19 July 2016, Renew Economy, Frydenberg’s choice: Make a big step forward, or a big step back. The make-up of Australia’s new parliament cut a depressing vista on Monday. There was Pauline Hanson, demanding royal commissions into Islam and climate science, who along with other minor party and independent Senators will most likely hold the balance of power in the Senate, with as many as 7 seats but a minimum of 3. In the government, the Coalition led by Malcolm Turnbull has elevated more conservatives to the front bench. Zed Selseja, a conservative who opposes gay marriage and weekend penalty rates, is minister assisting social services.Hanson gave us a taste of what is to come in an extraordinary debate on ABC’s Q&A, which was punctuated with the sort of ignorance and ideology we often see in the energy sector – see South Australia. Matt Canavan, a conservative who dismisses climate science, is appointed resources minister responsible for the coal industry and building dams in northern Australia. Be under no doubt about Canavan: the only energy that matters to him, he has said often, is cheap energy, dirty or not. Read More here