Rich countries must end oil and gas production by 2034, report says


Rich countries must end oil and gas production by 2034, report says

According to a report by the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research in University of Manchester published Monday evening.

The report looked at the global carbon budget – the amount of carbon the world can afford to emit without exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of global temperature rise, the most ambitious target of the 2015 Paris Agreement.

He found that to have a 50% chance of achieving this goal, developed countries must phase out oil and gas production by 2034. Developing countries would have until 2050 to end production.

“That’s what the science is telling us clearly. It’s a bit of basic arithmetic. That’s all it is,” Kevin Andersonco-author of the report and professor of energy and climate change at the University of Manchestertold Le Climat 202.

Anderson co-wrote the report with Daniel Calverley, an independent climate researcher. Their work was commissioned by the International Institute for Sustainable Developmenta think tank focused on sustainability.

The researchers ranked each country based on its ability to maintain a vibrant economy without oil and gas revenues. Their main conclusions were:

  • “Max Capacity” countries with an average non-oil gross domestic product per person of $50,000 must end production by 2034, with a 74% reduction by 2030. They include the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia.
  • “Big capacity” countries with an average non-oil GDP of nearly $28,000 must end production by 2039, with a 43% reduction by 2030. They include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Kazakhstan.
  • “Average capacity” countries with an average non-oil GDP of $17,000 must end production by 2043, with a 28% reduction by 2030. They include China, Brazil and Mexico.
  • “Low capacity” countries with an average non-oil GDP of $10,000 must end production by 2045, with an 18% reduction by 2030. They include Indonesia, Iran and Egypt.
  • “Weakest Capacity” countries with an average non-oil GDP of $3,600 must end production by 2050, with a 14% reduction by 2030. They include Iraq, Libya and South Sudan.

“This new study is a timely reminder that all countries must phase out oil and gas production quickly, with rich countries moving the fastest, while ensuring a just transition for workers and the communities that depend on them,” Christiana Figueresformer executive secretary of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Changesaid in a statement.

“In addition, rich countries can and should provide the support and resources that less wealthy countries need to make the same transition,” she added.

Scientifically speaking, the report is clear about the dangers of burning more fossil fuels. But politically speaking, the report’s recommendations could be a tough sell for world leaders, as demonstrated by the UN climate summit in Scotland last year.

  • The “core members” of the initiative are Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Greenland, Ireland, Quebec, Sweden and Wales.
  • However, the four biggest oil-producing countries – the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Canada – have still not joined the alliance.

In the United States, the American Petroleum Institutethe nation’s largest oil and gas lobby group, has urged the Biden administration to unleash fossil fuel production on federal lands and waters after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine rattled global oil markets. energy.

Asked about the report, a spokeswoman for the trade group said in an email: “The current crisis in Europe is a clear reminder that ensuring continued access to affordable and reliable energy while tackling climate change cannot be neither. We can and must do both, and as populations grow and economies develop, our industry will play a vital role for decades to meet the growing demand for affordable, reliable and cleaner energy around the world. .

Anderson, the study’s co-author, ultimately lamented the lack of political will to tackle climate change at the speed and scale demanded by science.

“Physics doesn’t care about passing politics,” he said. “He is only interested in [carbon dioxide] molecules.”

The SEC has proposed a landmark climate disclosure rule. Here’s what you need to know.

In a public meeting, the three Democratic SEC commissioners voted to approve the proposal, while the only Republican commissioner voted against. SEC President Gary Genslerwho was nominated by President Bidensaid the rule would provide “consistent and comparable information” to investors.

The rule reflects the Biden administration’s broader drive to address the risks that climate change poses to the financial system and economic stability. The public will have 60 days to submit comments after the proposed rule is posted. Then the commissioners will take the comments into consideration and vote on a final rule – a process that could take several months.

While climate advocates called the rule important, some expressed disappointment with its treatment of Scope 3 emissions, which include emissions generated by suppliers and customers.

“It’s really important, and I’m glad the SEC is moving forward,” said Alex MartinSenior Policy Analyst for Climate Finance at Americans for Financial Reform. “But from our point of view, Scope 3 [mandate] needs to be strengthened, and we will demonstrate this during the public consultation period.

Law students protest major law firm for representing Big Oil

Climate-conscious law students protested outside the offices of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Monday in Washington, New York and San Francisco over the company’s work with the oil and gas industry, intensifying a year-long fight to hold the company accountable for its representation of corporate polluters.

“This protest represents a renewed call for Gibson Dunn and his ilk to articulate and embrace an ethical standard for their work on fossil fuels and environmental justice, which has so far been met with silence,” Grecia Nunez, second-year law student American University of Washington College of Law and group member Law Students for Climate Accountabilitysaid in a statement.

Gibson Dunn, a prominent law firm with a 132-year heritage and offices on five continents, has come under scrutiny for years for its work with the fossil fuel industry. The company represented Chevron in a costly battle over the oil waste left behind in Ecuador and the Dakota Access Pipeline in Montana.

Law Students for Climate Accountability first called on Gibson Dunn to cut ties with fossil fuel companies last April. Large law firms generally operate on a profit basis and are not legally bound to follow climate risk regulations, but in its 2021 Climate Change Law Firm ScorecardLaw Students for Climate Accountability gave Gibson Dunn an F and found he had led the second most climate-exacerbating litigation of any law firm.

Asked to comment, the spokeswoman for Gibson Dunn Pearl Piatt said in an email to The Climate 202: “We respect everyone’s right to exercise their First Amendment rights, but we also support our client, Chevron, who supports the Paris Agreement. and is focused on promoting a low-carbon future.”

Biden urges business leaders to invest in climate action

Speaking to a group of American business leaders on Monday evening, President Biden highlighted the companies’ commitment to fighting climate change and reducing costs for American families.

While most of Biden’s remarks at Business RoundtableAt the CEO’s quarterly CEO meeting focused on the response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the president also called on leaders to invest in clean energy technologies.

“Invest in America itself,” Biden said. “Manufacturing. Climate resilience, clean energy. So America can win the competition in the 21st century.”

As it enters its third year, California drought strangles agriculture industry

California was once a farming haven, but with a worsening three-year drought and dwindling water supplies, the state’s farms are disappearing, The Post’s Scott Wilson reports.

California had its driest start to the year in at least a century due to climate change, which prevented a single major reservoir from filling to its average for this time of year. As a result, the federal government Central Valley Project — a system of pumps, aqueducts and reservoirs that supplies the region’s surface water — declared a second consecutive year without water delivery. The announcement means farmers across the valley have to rely on depleted groundwater supplies and what little they have been able to store.

According to a study carried out for the State by the University of California at Merced, California farmers have already left nearly 400,000 acres of land unplanted last year due to water scarcity. The result, according to the study, was a direct cost to farmers of $1.1 billion and the loss of nearly 9,000 jobs.

Maxine finally achieved her lifelong dream of being retweeted by Room assessor yesterday. And FYI, we are also pro-door hook.

Source link


Comments are closed.