Category: Uncategorized

Just 100 companies are responsible for 71pc of greenhouse gases since 1988, report finds

Just 100 companies are responsible for 71pc of greenhouse gases since 1988, report finds

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

By Paul Homewood

 

 

From the Telegraph:

 

Just 100 companies are responsible for 71pc of greenhouse gases since 1988, report finds

Jon Yeomans 10 July 2017

Oil rig
The fossil fuel industry has expanded “prodigiously” since 1988, the CDP says

 

The Chinese coal industry and stock market debutant Saudi Aramco have been named as the world’s biggest emitters of carbon dioxide.

As new data claims to have identified the top 100 emitters of greenhouse gases over the last three decades, a leading NGO has warned that natural  resources companies need to transform their business models to adapt to a low-carbon future.

Just 100 firms are responsible for 71pc of carbon dioxide gases released into the atmosphere since 1988, the year that climate change was first recognised as an international problem, according a report by the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP).

Despite growing awareness of the role of fossil fuels in global warming, the CDP points out that the industry has “expanded prodigiously” since 1988, with coal use becoming even more prevalent. Approximately 833 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent were emitted between 1988 and 2015, compared to 820 gigatonnes between 1988 and the start of the industrial revolution in the 18th century.

The Chinese coal industry is by far and away the biggest culprit in CDP’s list, responsible for 14pc of emissions, followed by oil giant Saudi Aramco, on 4.5pc, and Russian company Gazprom, on 3.9pc. London-listed giants Shell and BP chart ninth and eleventh, with responsibility for 1.7pc and 1.5pc of emissions respectively.

The CDP is part-funded by private benefactors, governments and companies and counts former Financial Services Authority boss Lord Adair Turner as an advisor. To calculate its list, it used mostly publicly available data, and attributed all the fossil fuels burned in industry back to the producers that originally took them out of the ground.

China is now tackling air pollution

“Our purpose is not to name and shame firms, our purpose is to provide transparency and call attention to the quite extraordinary fact that just 100 companies played a crucial role in the problem,” said Pedro Faria, technical director of the Carbon Majors Database. “It’s obvious they have a share of responsibility in the solution.”

While corporate transparency and self-reporting around emissions had improved, Mr Faria said that oil giants and mining companies needed transition plans in place for the shift to a low-carbon economy.

The mining industry plays its part in emissions

“There will be a shock in demand for their products and they should be preparing for that,” Mr Faria said. He suggested that companies needed to think about diversifying their portfolios away from fossil fuels, adopt more renewable energy, and invest in carbon capture and storage facilities, which take harmful CO2 out of the air and trap it.

CDP’s warning comes as more and more countries consider carbon pricing systems that will charge companies for each unit of harmful gases they produce.

A spokesman for BP said that it was “determined to be part of the solution” to climate change.

De Beers wants to be carbon neutral within five to 10 years

“Specifically, we’re calling for a price on carbon, increasing the proportion of natural gas in our business, investing in renewables and low-carbon innovation, and pursuing increasing energy efficiency,” he said.

A spokesman for Shell said it backed the goal of a “net-zero emissions world by 2050”. “The greatest contribution we can make in the near term is providing more natural gas to replace coal in power generation, which reduces overall emissions in the global energy system,” he said.

Diamond giant De Beers, part of Anglo American – which charted 31st on CDP’s list – recently announced plans to be the world’s first carbon neutral miner within five to 10 years. It wants to use waste rock from mining to absorb carbon in the atmosphere through a process called mineral carbonation.

“Since the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change, there has been a huge jump in carbon pricing schemes,” said Dr Evelyn Mervine, a geologist at De Beers. “What’s clear is there will be carbon pricing by 2030s – it will be a cost of doing business.”

 

http://ift.tt/2uGaNnx

 

The implication is clear -without this handful of wicked companies, we would all have lovely weather and live happily ever after.
But there is a slight problem.
Now you’re probably way ahead of me here, but the last time I checked, China’s coal industry did not burn all the coal it dug up, and Shell did not burn its oil.
It is in fact we consumers who do that, either directly, or by using electricity, or buying goods produced using fossil fuel energy.
The Telegraph might like to consider exactly where the energy comes from that produces the paper it needs, that powers its computers, heats and lights its buildings, and flies its correspondents around the world.

 

I would hesitate to call it an anti capitalist project, as it has to include China’s coal industry. But it is certainly anti industry, anti technology and anti consumer.

The Telegraph has plumbed new lows in publicising this one sided nonsense, without even attempting to challenge its obvious flaws.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

July 11, 2017 at 01:21PM

Monster Solar Minimum Approaching?

Monster Solar Minimum Approaching?

via Watts Up With That?
http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

Monster minimum or short solar cycle? Guest essay by David Archibald This recent post was on the fact that the Sun’s EUV emissions had fallen to solar minimum-like levels well ahead of solar minimum. The implication was that the Solar Cycle 24/25 minimum was either going to be very deep and prolonged, or that Solar … Continue reading Monster Solar Minimum Approaching?

via Watts Up With That? http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

July 11, 2017 at 11:55AM

Looks Like Global Action On Climate Change Is Dead

Looks Like Global Action On Climate Change Is Dead

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
http://www.thegwpf.com

 Without the U.S. in the game, all the biggest players are going to be increasing emissions, not decreasing them.  In reality, the whole “global action on climate change” thing is completely dead.

As a basic starting point, I suggest that on any story of political importance in the New York Times, the truth is probably exactly the opposite of what they report.  Consider that lead story on the front page of yesterday’s Sunday print edition: “World Leaders Move Forward on Climate Change, Without U.S.”   Scary!  The U.S. is getting completely isolated from the world community!

In a final communiqué at the conclusion of the Group of 20 summit meeting in Hamburg, Germany, the nations took “note” of Mr. Trump’s decision to abandon the pact and “immediately cease” efforts to enact former President Barack Obama’s pledge of curbing greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.  But the other 19 members of the group broke explicitly with Mr. Trump in their embrace of the international deal, signing off on a detailed policy blueprint outlining how their countries could meet their goals in the pact. 

You can definitely count on Pravda not to look into what these other 19 countries have promised to do and let you know if there is any substance to it.  So the hard work falls once again to the Manhattan Contrarian.  If you just Google the letters “INDC” (“Intended Nationally Determined Contribution”) along with the name of a country, you can find out exactly what that country has promised to do as part of the Paris Agreement.  So let’s take a look at what a few of the big countries are up to.

  • China.  We already know that answer from my post just last week.  China, through its companies, is planning to build over the course of the next decade or so well more than double the number of coal power plants that the U.S. has today.  Its INDC calls for its proceeding to increase carbon emissions as much as it wants through 2030, and only then (when everyone in China presumably has electricity and a couple of cars)  to level things off.  By that time its emissions will probably be at least triple those of the U.S.
  • India.  India’s INDC openly admits that it intends to increase its electricity supply by more than triple between now and 2030, with no commitment whatsoever as to how much of that will come from fossil fuels.  Oh, they say that they plan to lower the “emissions intensity” of their energy generation, and greatly expand (useless) wind and solar capacity, as well as nuclear.  Whoopee!
  • Indonesia.   These things get more comical the more of them you read.  The first thing you learn in reading Indonesia’s INDC is that the large majority of its emissions come from burning down the rain forest (“most emissions (63%) are the result of land use change and peat and forest fires”) and very little from using fossil fuels for energy (“fossil fuels contribute[e] approximately 19% of total emissions”).  So they’ll promise to burn down less of the rain forest, and nothing whatsoever as to reducing use of fossil fuels for energy.  Their (completely illusory) “reduction target” of 29% by 2030 is not against a fixed amount of past usage (like the United States’ benchmark of 2005 emissions), but rather is against what they call a “business as usual” scenario of projected future emissions that are a multiple of today’s.
  • Russia.  What, you didn’t know that Russia was a member of the G20?  What is the chance that Russia would make an honest promise about emissions reductions?  Their INDC calls for reducing emissions by 25-30% below 1990 by 2030.  Impressive!  Wait a minute!  The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.  Then they closed down all that inefficient Soviet industry.  According to a graph at Climate Action Tracker here, by 2000 their emissions were down by almost 40% from the 1990 level, and they have only crept up a little from there since.  In other words, Russia’s supposed “commitments” again represent increases from today’s level of emissions.  Yet another total scam.
  • Germany.  Germany is part of the supposed EU commitment to reduce emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030.  Oh, but now that Germany has gotten its electricity production from renewables up to about 30%, it seems that it has hit a wall, and its carbon emissions have actually gone up for both of the last two years (2015 and 2016), according to Clean Energy Wire.  Exactly how do they plan to meet their goal?  Excellent question.

In other words, this whole thing is a total farce.  The G20 “climate” thing — let alone New York Times reporting on same — is nothing more than an international effort to bully the United States into crippling its economy while everyone else goes right ahead and uses fossil fuels exactly as they please.  Whatever else you might say about President Trump, he seems to be unusually immune to this kind of bullying.

Full post

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) http://www.thegwpf.com

July 11, 2017 at 11:51AM

Energy Superpower: US Oil Exports Forecast To Exceed Most OPEC Members By 2020

Energy Superpower: US Oil Exports Forecast To Exceed Most OPEC Members By 2020

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
http://www.thegwpf.com

The US will quadruple its crude oil exports to volumes greater than those of most Opec members within three years, an influential consultant has forecast, as Texas producers seek customers for seemingly unstoppable supplies.

By 2020, exports of US crude would reach 2.25m barrels a day, according to PIRA Energy. By comparison, last year Kuwait exported 2.1m b/d, Nigeria 1.7m b/d and the US itself 520,000 b/d.

The forecast suggests that the Opec exporters’ cartel faces a drawn-out struggle as it tries to raise crude prices by curtailing output in the face of a prolific US shale oil industry, which has roared back to life in 2017 as prices have recovered and averaged near $50 a barrel. US crude production is likely to hit 9.3m b/d this year, up from 8.9m b/d in 2016, and will rise to 9.9m b/d in 2018, the US Energy Information Administration estimated on Tuesday.

“The US will become one of the top 10 exporters in the world,” said Gary Ross, PIRA’s global head of oil. “They’re not a member of Opec, and they’re not about to control production in an effort to keep prices up. This is very bad news for Opec.”

The US prohibited most exports of crude oil until late 2015, when Barack Obama signed legislation overturning the 40-year-old ban. Since then, American barrels have been flowing to new markets such as Europe and China. The Trump administration has embraced the trend as it pursues a vision of “energy dominance”.

Full post

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) http://www.thegwpf.com

July 11, 2017 at 11:51AM