Tag Archives: Emissions

PLEA Network

7 November 2015, The Guardian, Obama rejects Keystone XL pipeline and hails US as leader on climate change. Barack Obama ended seven years of high-wire political drama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline on Friday, saying the decision reflected America’s determination to be a global leader in the fight against climate change. The move, less than four weeks before more than 190 countries gather in Paris to try to reach a global deal to reduce carbon pollution, reinforces Obama’s commitment to making climate change the domestic and international legacy of his second term in the White House – even in the face of Republican hostility. “America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action on climate change,” Obama said from the White House on Friday, flanked by both secretary of state John Kerry and vice-president Joe Biden. “Frankly, approving that project would have undercut that global leadership, and that is the biggest risk we face: not acting.” The president went on: “Today, the United States is leading on climate change.” Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL was the biggest victory in years for grassroots campaigners, who chained themselves to the gates of the White House and built unlikely alliances with landowners and ranchers in heartland states like Nebraska and Texas, to mobilise opposition to what had once been seen as a routine project. As secretary of state, “I feel like the boots have beaten the big oil suits for the first time in our country’s history,” said Jane Fleming Kleeb, leader of Bold Nebraska, which had fought the pipeline’s route across the state. TransCanada, the Canadian firm behind the pipeline, said it was disappointed with Obama’s decision. “Today, misplaced symbolism was chosen over merit and science – rhetoric won out over reason,” Russ Girling, the chief executive of TransCanada, said in a statement. Read More here

 

 

PLEA Network

6 November 2015, Carbon Brief, Look beyond emissions gap to see full force of climate pledges, says UNEP report. Climate pledges submitted to the UN reduce the emissions gap between current action and what is needed to avoid dangerous climate change, with social and political effects that reach far beyond their impact on aggregate emissions. That’s the optimistic conclusion of the latest UN Environment Programme (UNEP)Emissions Gap Report, published this morning. Nevertheless, it confirms that the collective ambition of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) is “far from enough”, leaving a “very significant” emissions gap in 2030. The analysis comes just a week after a similar report from the UN climate body the UNFCCC, which aggregated the impact of the 119 INDCs submitted by 1 October. While many of the conclusions are similar, today’s UNEP report goes beyond a simple adding up pledges and considers the wider impacts of the INDCs, as well as options for closing the emissions gap through enhanced action, sub-national initiatives and efforts to reduce deforestation. Bending the curve. Like last week’s report, UNEP concludes that the INDCs represent a real increase in ambition, compared to the policies in place before the pledges were made. Some of the INDCs include both conditional and unconditional elements. However, even if fully implemented, the INDCs would leave emissions on an upwards trajectory in 2030, UNEP says. 

A gap of 12-14 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent remains between emissions in 2030 and the cost-effective path to staying below 2C, it concludes. The 2C limit is the internationally agreed goal for avoiding the worst effects of climate change. All these points are illustrated on the UNEP graphic, below. The baseline scenario shows what might have happened to emissions if no new climate policies had been implemented after 2010. Current policies means what was in place before any INDCs were submitted in March. Read More here
PLEA Network

6 November 2015, Renew Economy, Big step finally taken towards making your fridge and air-con climate friendly. It’s hard to imagine the rhetoric soaring to greater heights. “A great signal for Paris”,”a much needed shot in the arm for climate action”, “provide an example of successful international cooperation”, “provide critical momentum for the climate negotiations”, “a strong signal to the UNFCCC to adopt a robust agreement at COP 21”, “boosting global cooperation ahead of Paris to benefit the planet”… Expectations were almost palpable. “A singular opportunity for countries to take action on climate”,”would set the stage for an ambitious and durable global climate agreement”, “lay the foundation for a global agreement in Paris that will protect generations to come”, “demonstrate that governments around the world have the political will to take bold action to avert a climate catastrophe”, “potentially catalyse far-reaching action at Paris”… Stirring stuff indeed, but who’d have guessed what all the fuss was about? You’d be forgiven for missing the muted clamour anticipating a long overdue agreement on the need to respond to the science calling for international action on the world’s most powerful and rapidly growing greenhouse gases. In a much anticipated gathering of the global community of nations in Dubai over the past week, intense negotiations have been taking place. The ultimate goal of the talks, which began in 2008, is to amend the Montreal Protocol to formally address the need to address the alarmingly rapid rise of the hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, highly potent greenhouse gases used across the refrigeration and air conditioning industries. A recent NASA study reported to the meeting also confirmed that contrary to previous understanding HFCs do have a small yet significant effect on ozone depletion, a point poignantly underscored by the appearance of the third largest Ozone hole this year. Read More here

PLEA Network

5 November 2015, Carbon Brief, Q&A: What does the VW scandal mean for CO2 emissions? The Volkswagen (VW) emissions scandal spilled over into climate policy on Tuesday, after the company admitted to “irregularities” in its CO2 testing results. The firm’s share price — already down 60% after revelations it had deliberately cheated air pollution tests — fell a further 9% by Wednesday morning. However, the irregularities also have implications for CO2 emissions, as well as UK and EU climate targets. Carbon Brief investigates. What are CO2 test “irregularities”? On Tuesday, VW issued a “clarification” about the CO2 emissions testing of up to 800,000 of its vehicles in Europe. The statement says: “During the course of internal investigations irregularities were found when determining type approval CO2 levels…It was established that the CO2 levels and thus the fuel consumption figures for some models were set too low during the CO2 certification process.” Though the precise nature of these problems remains unclear, it has attracted wide media coverage. The Times notes petrol cars have become embroiled in the scandal for the first time. The BBC says the “dirty laundry” is piling up for VW. The Guardian says VW might have manipulated CO2 tests, in addition to its now-notorious “defeat device” for NOx air pollution. The New York Times says VW’s pollution problems have taken a “costly new turn”. A Guardian live-blog says costs for VW could exceed the €2bn it has set aside. Current EU regulations limit car CO2 emissions to no more than 130 grammes of CO2 per kilometre, notes Politico. This is set to fall to a fleet-wide average of 95gCO2/km in 2020. In the UK, vehicle excise duty is linked to CO2 emissions meaning some cars may have had unduly low rates, says Autocar. The Telegraph says some drivers could face higher taxes. However, this year’s budget changed the rules to decouple car tax and CO2 emissions from 2017. Read More here