SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
intergovernmental panel on climate change
Climate Tipping Points, Ecological Collapse Could Arrive Sooner Than Expected: Study
"Urgent action is needed now more than ever to prevent a catastrophic ecological collapse," said one campaigner in response to the new research.
Jun 23, 2023
A new study released Thursday warns that international experts may have been overly cautious in their warnings about widespread ecological collapse such as a catastrophic breakdown in the Amazon rainforest, which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said last year could come by the year 2100.
Scientists at Rothamsted Research and Southampton, Sheffield, and Bangor Universities in the United Kingdom found that as numerous factors such as water stress and pollution from mining compound the degradation of ecosystems in forests and bodies of water, the environments can be pushed toward tipping points more quickly.
The IPCC, suggests the study, which was published in Nature Sustainability, has been issuing its warnings about a tipping point in the Amazon while focusing on just a single factor, such as deforestation or planetary heating. Both of those drivers could interact with other environmental changes and accelerate tipping points such as dieback—in which the rainforest ecosystem would be replaced by one resembling a dry savanna.
"It is not clear whether the IPCC estimate for a tipping point in the Amazon forest before 2100 includes the possibility for interacting drivers and/or noise; if not, our findings suggest that a breakdown may occur several decades earlier," reads the report. "This would occur where local-scale failures in elements (such as species populations, fish stocks, crop yields, and water resources) combine with more extreme events (such as wildfires and droughts) to precondition the large-scale system, already vulnerable to the influence of other large-scale tipping elements, to collapse earlier—a meeting of top-down and bottom-up forces."
The researchers used computer models to assess the potential fates of two lake ecosystems and two forests, allowing for 70,000 adjustments of variables.
In the study, up to 15% of ecological collapses occurred as the result of new events or environmental stressors, even in cases where the primary stress affecting the ecosystem remained at the same level.
At Lake Erhai in southern China, for example, "abrupt lake eutrophication [the presence of excessive nutrients or minerals] was initially perceived to have been driven by transgression of a threshold in nutrient enrichment driven by agricultural runoff but historical analysis has shown that the shift was also affected by lake water-level management, seasonal climate, and fish farming," reads the study.
Because international experts may not have been considering variables such as water resources when they warned that the Amazon is headed for a climate tipping point by the turn of the next century, study co-author Professor Simon Willcock of Rothamsted Research toldThe Guardian, "We could realistically be the last generation to see the Amazon."
"It could happen very soon," he added.
The scientists said their research shows that even if some aspects of an ecosystem are managed sustainably, preventing stresses including planetary heating and extreme weather events—both being driven by the continued extraction of fossil fuels—is crucial for avoiding tipping points.
"Urgent action is needed now more than ever to prevent a catastrophic ecological collapse," said Tanya Steele, CEO of the World Wildlife Fund in the U.K., in response to the research.
Willcock noted that the study's findings suggest that an accelerated recovery of ecosystems is possible with a multi-pronged approach that would address deforestation, planetary heating, and other stresses.
"Potentially if you apply positive pressure," Willcock told The Guardian, "you can see rapid recovery,"
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Someone Needs to Show President Biden the Latest IPCC Report,' Greenpeace Says After Texas LNG Approvals
"The stunning amount of new LNG export deals being approved underscores the climate hypocrisy of the Biden administration."
Apr 20, 2023
Climate groups called out U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday after a federal agency gave a green light to three liquefied natural gas projects in Texas despite local opposition and scientists' calls to swiftly transition away from fossil fuels.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)—which has two Democrats, two Republicans, and one vacancy—issued orders on Glenfarne's Texas LNG project, NextDecade's Rio Grande LNG export terminal, and Enbridge's related Rio Bravo Pipeline.
"This president has the gall to say he cares about environmental justice and the climate emergency."
In response to the moves, Greenpeace USA campaigner Destiny Watford pointed to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released last month as well as projections from the International Energy Agency (IEA).
"Someone needs to show President Biden the latest IPCC report, where it clearly says that we need to move away from dirty energy sources like LNG if we want to keep our planet livable," Watford declared. "U.S. LNG export capacity is on track to exceed the IEA's net-zero emissions estimate for global LNG trade by 2030."
"This is a level that we cannot overstep if we want to avoid the worst impacts of climate change—and the U.S. could pass that mark by itself," she stressed. "The stunning amount of new LNG export deals being approved underscores the climate hypocrisy of the Biden administration. This president has the gall to say he cares about environmental justice and the climate emergency while continuing to sanction limitless production and export of oil and gas."
\u201cWe're here on HWY 48 near Port Isabel, TX protesting the @FERC approving Rio Grande LNG, Texas LNG, and the Rio Bravo Pipeline. We're calling attention to the destruction our community and sacred lands face from LNG & SpaceX.\n @VocesUnidasRGV https://t.co/sfD3MLZCnp\u201d— Another Gulf Is Possible (@Another Gulf Is Possible) 1682022540
FERC's moves follow the Biden administration's recent approval of an LNG project in Alaska, which came on the heels of allowing ConocoPhillips' controversial Willow oil project in the state. The president is also under fire for last weekend's Group of Seven statement that leaves the door open to future gas investments.
Oil Change International U.S. program co-manager Allie Rosenbluth argued Thursday that "the approval of any new fossil fuel project is a failure of the Biden administration's stated commitment to take action on both climate change and environmental justice."
"It's bad for the communities in Brownsville and the Rio Grande Valley who will suffer the worst consequences of this massive industrial plant on their health and well-being, it's bad for our country as laggards to climate commitments, and it's bad for our planet, as the clock is ticking to stave off the worst climate disasters," she said of FERC's new orders.
"Industry false solutions, such as carbon capture and certified gas, are making these projects even more dangerous," Rosenbluth continued, highlighting that "the company behind Rio Grande LNG claims it will 'certify' the greenhouse gas intensity of LNG to be sold from the proposed export terminal."
Citing a new report from Oil Change International and Earthworks on gas certifiers, the campaigner explained:
The investigation uncovered failures with monitoring technology, documented the concerns of methane emissions experts, revealed an absence of data transparency, and exposed conflicts of interest. Furthermore, the report detailed how the gas and LNG industry cannot rely on simply cleaning up to align with climate goals. They must also plan for a phaseout [of] gas production. This evidence calls into question the degree to which the gas certification process is misleading gas markets, giving consumers and investors a false sense of security about the environmental impacts of methane gas.
In Texas, "the fight is far from over," Rosenbluth said. "This March, after years of trans-Atlantic organizing, French bank Société Générale withdrew from Rio Grande LNG and no final investment decision on the LNG terminal has been made. People around the world will continue to fight these projects and demand a just transition to renewable energy."
\u201cA new report from @Earthworks and @PriceofOil shows how the gas industry is selling "certified gas" as a solution to its out of control methane pollution.\n\nI spoke with authors @JoshEisenfeld and @LorneStockman about this new form of industry deception \u2b07\ufe0f\nhttps://t.co/50UmK1Yw8Q\u201d— Emily Sanders (@Emily Sanders) 1681913140
The Houston Chroniclereported Thursday that Glenfarne's LNG project "has less financial traction" than NextDecade's terminal.
The newspaper also flagged a disagreement between FERC's two Democratic commissioners:
In August, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled FERC needed to more closely examine Rio Grande LNG's impact on climate change and local communities. Commissioner Allison Clements said the commission had failed to do what was requested of it and that moving forward without doing so creates "a lose-lose situation" that would invite more legal challenges and deprive potentially impacted communities of the chance to comment on the developments.
"This procedural corner-cutting represents a gobsmacking departure, frankly, from the lessons I took away from the environmental justice roundtable we held just a month ago," Clements said.
FERC Chairman Willie Phillips, viewed as more moderate on climate issues than his predecessor Richard Glick, said he thought the commission had reached "an appropriate middle ground."
"Importantly, today's order takes an unprecedented and bipartisan step to protect environmental justice communities from potential concerns about the project's effect on air quality," Phillips said. "The commission is for the first time on its own accord, requiring that the project sponsors ensure that the overlapping construction and operation of a project do not cause any significant air quality impacts on environmental justice communities."
Phillips is notably a Biden appointee. When the president selected him in September 2021, green groups sounded the alarm, given his record in government and as a private attorney, and branded the candidate as "a crony of the fossil fuel industry."
Carrizo Comecrudo Tribal Chairman Juan Mancias said Thursday that "the court sent Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG back to FERC for a review because these gas projects are cutting corners to try and build on our sacred lands. FERC did a piss-poor job, once again, of reviewing the dangers that LNG will bring to our people: pollution, risks of explosions, and destruction of our sacred sites."
"Neither FERC nor the LNG companies have ever consulted with the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas," Mancias added. "FERC is promoting and perpetuating the sacrifice zones that come with short-sighted colonialism."
"We are disappointed, but unfortunately not surprised, that FERC has failed us again."
The tribe is far from alone in opposing the projects. Sierra Club Gulf Coast campaign representative Rebekah Hinojosa said that "for nearly a decade, our community has made it clear to FERC that we oppose Rio Grande LNG, Rio Bravo Pipeline, and Texas LNG because this is environmental racism," but the agency and industry "are forcing dangerous gas plants on the Rio Grande Valley that do nothing to help our community so fossil fuel corporations can profit."
"We are disappointed, but unfortunately not surprised, that FERC has failed us again by conducting a haphazard review of Texas LNG and Rio Grande LNG and by deciding to move forward with these destructive gas projects that will destroy some of our remaining wildlife habitat, be the biggest polluters in our poor community, and raise energy prices for families across the country," she said.
"We're not backing down," Hinojosa vowed. "FERC will hear our outrage."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Coal Phaseout Must Speed Up to Avert 'Climate Chaos': Analysis
"The transition away from existing and new coal isn't happening fast enough," said one expert. "The more new coal projects come online, the steeper the cuts and commitments need to be in the future."
Apr 06, 2023
To avert the worst consequences of the climate crisis, the world must stop building new coal plants and shut down existing ones at nearly five times the current rate.
That's according to an analysis published Wednesday by Global Energy Monitor (GEM) and nearly a dozen other groups, including Reclaim Finance, the Sierra Club, and the Alliance for Climate Justice and Clean Energy.
GEM's ninth annual survey of the world's existing and proposed supply of coal-fired power—the largest single source of energy-related CO2 emissions—found that "outside China, the global coal pipeline is drying up," albeit not at a quick enough pace.
"Urgent action is necessary to ensure an end to coal and a fighting chance at a livable climate."
Seventeen countries retired a combined 26 GW of operating coal capacity in 2022. Meanwhile, 25 GW of operating coal capacity received an announced close-by date of 2030.
However, to meet the Paris agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels—beyond which the climate emergency's impacts will grow even deadlier, especially for humanity's poorest members who bear the least responsibility for the crisis—coal power must be phased out completely by 2040. To stay on track while giving developing countries extra time to switch to renewables, high-income countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) must shutter their coal plants by 2030.
This "would require an average of 117 GW of retirements per year, or four-and-a-half times the capacity retired in 2022," according to the report. "An average of 60 GW must come offline in OECD countries each year to meet their 2030 coal phaseout deadline, and for non-OECD countries, 91 GW each year for their 2040 deadline. Accounting for coal plants under construction and in consideration (537.1 GW) would require even steeper cuts."
Lead author Flora Champenois, the project manager for GEM's Global Coal Plant Tracker, said in a statement that "the transition away from existing and new coal isn't happening fast enough to avoid climate chaos."
"The more new projects come online, the steeper the cuts and commitments need to be in the future," she noted.
Last year, the world added 45.5 GW of new coal capacity, meaning that the operating coal fleet grew by 19.5 GW overall.
"Fourteen countries commissioned new coal power in 2022," the report notes. "More than half (59%) of the newly commissioned capacity was in China (25.2 GW), with a remaining 16% in South Asia (India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh), 11% in Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, and Cambodia), 9% in East Asia (Japan and South Korea), and 5% in other regions."
Outside China, the global coal fleet continued to shrink in 2022 as planned projects were canceled and old plants closed. But coal retirements slowed down compared with previous years due in large part to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which sent gas prices soaring.
\u201c\ud83c\uddea\ud83c\uddfa retired only 2.2 GW last year after a record 14.6 GW, but coal is not making the comeback many expected from the energy crisis. The rebound in retirements in the next few years could make up for the lower than expected retirements in 2022.\u201d— Global Energy Monitor (@Global Energy Monitor) 1680739205
"While coal under development—or coal in pre-construction and construction—has collapsed by two-thirds since the Paris agreement, nearly 350 GW of new capacity is still proposed across 33 countries, and an additional 192 GW of capacity is under construction," the report notes. "China's pre-construction and construction capacity surpassed the rest of the world's in 2021, and the gap widened in 2022. New coal capacity under development in China increased by 38% (266 GW to 366 GW), while the capacity in the rest of the world decreased by 20% (214 GW to 172 GW). China now accounts for two-thirds (68%) of global capacity under development, up from 55% a year ago."
Wednesday's analysis follows the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) latest warning that burning existing fossil fuels will consume the world's remaining "carbon budget," or the maximum amount of planet-heating pollution compatible with preventing temperature rise from exceeding 1.5°C. The IPCC has made clear the need for "rapid and deep, and in most cases immediate greenhouse gas emission reductions."
Upon the publication of the IPCC's assessment two weeks ago, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres outlined "an 'Accelerated Agenda' renewing calls for an immediate end to new coal, and for a phaseout of existing coal by 2030 in developed countries and 2040 in the rest of the world," GEM's new report points out. "Under such a scenario, only 70% of OECD operating coal capacity is currently on pace (330 GW), and outside the OECD, only 6% of coal capacity has a known closure date before 2040 (93 GW)."
"Urgent action is necessary to ensure an end to coal and a fighting chance at a livable climate," the report adds. "To accomplish this, countries need to translate announcements into plant-by-plant retirement plans as well as ramp up phaseout commitments. Details on how current and future policies and funds will be implemented to impact coal retirement dates and ensure a swift and equitable end to new coal will be essential."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular