Last year the eu set up a second ets to bring in some previously excluded sectors, such as road transport and domestic heating, by 2027. For fear of a political backlash, this “ets2” has a clause to suppress its carbon price, should it rise above €45 a tonne in the first three years. Still, the aim is to reduce these sectors’ emissions by 42% by 2030, compared with 2005, and to issue no new permits for them after 2044.

These carbon prices should be enough to bring about the lion’s share of the 90% reduction envisaged for 2040, provided that politicians have the courage to avoid interfering if higher carbon prices become too painful for consumers and industry.

The second factor that may help is Russia’s war in Ukraine. When gas prices jumped in 2022, firms were forced to cut their energy use or close production lines. This lowered emissions from ets-covered industries by 5% in 2022 and another 7% in 2023. Although gas prices have now fallen, the disadvantage in fossil-fuel costs compared with America will continue to force firms to adjust, though the eu’s carbon border tax (cbam) will apply in full from 2026, protecting eu industry somewhat by taxing imports based on their carbon content. Renewable energy and grid extensions have also become an easier political sell, as green energy makes Europe depend less on autocratic providers of fossil fuels.

The third factor is low-cost green kit from China that will cheapen the transition. In Spain, Europe’s sunniest country, electricity is practically free during the day. As the solar boom continues, power generation will become emissions-free much faster than previously thought. At the same time, cheap Chinese electric vehicles (evs) are entering the market, lowering costs for drivers wishing to go green.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/04/25/carbon-emissions-are-dropping-fast-in-europe

With its enormous economic, military and political clout, America is the colossus that stands in the way of a planetary crackdown on emissions. Congress is deeply entangled with the fossil fuel industry, and in the short term will stay that way. In time, we can hope for its corruption to wane and a belated survival instinct to kick in. But at this pivotal point, when science tells us we have to peak emissions by 2025, the only way forward is through the executive.

President Biden can’t stop oil companies from drilling on private or state lands, which are the source of the vast majority of our current output, but he can phase out oil and gas production on public lands. And he can reinstate a ban on oil and gas exports from private lands. He can stop saying yes to all new oil and gas projects — including the planned Sea Port Oil Terminal off the Texas coast, intended to increase our exports — and more exploration and drilling sites in the Gulf of Mexico.

He can declare the destabilized climate to be the emergency it is and stop the billions of dollars in fossil fuel financing invested abroad, which locks in decades’ worth of extraction. He can direct the Environmental Protection Agency to establish national limits for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. He can end the Department of Energy’s fossil fuel financing programs and require that all new vehicle sales are zero-emission by 2030. He can prosecute polluters and utilities for the damages they cause under nuisance and fraud suits, as Gov. Gavin Newsom has just done in California, and bring antitrust violation suits against entities that obstruct the clean energy transition.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/19/opinion/climate-summit-2023-un.html

Interesting…

America’s energy system has a problem: Solar and wind developers want to build renewable energy at a breakneck pace — and historic climate legislation has fueled their charge with financial incentives worth billions of dollars. But too often the power that these projects can produce has nowhere to go. That’s because the high-voltage lines that move energy across the country don’t have the capacity to handle what these panels and turbines generate. At the same time, electric vehicles, data centers, and new factories are pushing electricity demand well beyond what was expected just a few years ago.

As a result, the U.S. is poised to generate more energy — and, crucially, more carbon-free energy — than ever before, but the nation’s patchwork system of electrical grids doesn’t have enough transmission infrastructure to deliver all that renewable energy to the homes and businesses that could use it. Indeed, this transmission gap could negate up to half of the climate benefits of the Inflation Reduction Act, according to one analysis.

On Monday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, approved a new rule that could help complete this circuit. The agency, which has jurisdiction over interstate power issues, is essentially trying to prod the country’s many electricity providers to improve their planning processes and coordinate with each other in a way that encourages investment in this infrastructure. The hope is that this new regulation will not only address the outstanding interconnection challenge and growing demand but also fortify the grid in the face of extreme weather, given that more transmission will make it easier to shift electricity from one grid to another when there are disaster-driven outages.

However…

However, the reality of the rulemaking process means that the action might not come as quickly as the moment seems to demand. Though the rule was approved on Monday, it doesn’t take effect until 60 days after its publication, and then grid operators and transmission planners will have 10 to 12 months to outline how they intend to comply with the new rule. Only then will the actual planning begin.

[…]

Of course, these new requirements could be delayed or derailed by lawsuits — a likely prospect given the history of legal challenges faced by major FERC rules in the past. Both Powell and Phillips said that they believe that the new policy is durable enough to withstand those challenges. Powell told Grist that the rule went through a lengthy review process that involved extensive public comment. FERC went through 15,000 pages of those comments and ensured that the arguments and issues raised in each were weighed and considered before the final rule was completed.

https://grist.org/energy/ferc-transmission-rule-electricity-grid/

I’m sure it’ll be challenged— and who knows with this Trump-stacked judiciary what will happen.

Reconductoring is included and that’s a good thing too.

How long until climate change makes humans extinct?
============================================

A supercomputer simulation just predicted when humans will go extinct

And according to a new simulation, humanity's end could come in as little as 250 million years if climate change continues the way it has. — Joshua Hawkins

First-ever supercomputer simulation predicts when humans will become extinct on Earth

But you need not fear as this doomsday scenario isn't forecast to happen for another 250 million years. — Dylan Murray

Supercomputer shares terrifying prediction of date human life will become extinct

The projected timeline for these events extends over the course of 250 million years. This vast timeframe offers humanity ample opportunity to prepare and adapt. — James Kay

This Supercomputer Just Made A Prediction About The Human Species, And It’s Quite Terrifying

Recent simulations run by a supercomputer have painted a chilling picture of our planet’s future. If climate change continues at its current pace, humanity could vanish within the next 250 million years, leaving behind an uninhabitable world. — Sarah Jensen

I used to be worried about nuclear war too, until someone told me that it won't likely kill literally every human on the planet so now I guess there's nothing to worry about.

Man the excuses for not doing anything on the climate are starting to get silly even by denialist standards.

Man the excuses for not doing anything on the climate are starting to get silly even by denialist standards. — Mr Bee

:up:

Just ignore climate deniers. See ignore list extension thread. I promise you won’t be missing anything.

Yes, your grand-grand kids will have to live like cavemen but at least they're not dead!

Yes, your grand-grand kids will have to live like cavemen but at least they're not dead! — Benkei

I'm even luckier — my daughters seem to have chosen not to reproduce, so my grandchildren will never die.

Smart daughters... I love my kids but I have recurring doubts whether I did the right thing having kids, considering the extremist right wing politics, ecological degradation and increased inequality that grips most of Europe.

A while back I mentioned the 'climate grift', and how it undermines the credibility of environmentalism.

Well, here you go:

Rich nations are earning billions from a pledge to help fix climate

It’s like arguing world hunger is a hoax because some nonprofits funnel money to rich people. That is to say: stupid.

Literally nothing he said indicates this.
A grift can be in service of a legitimate cause. And it does undermine the credibility of the movement.
If it doesn't to you, you're short of a full deck. And yeah. No surprise if so. This isn't even moral - it's based on the fact that this is what it has done

:ok:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/21/monkeys-mexico-heatwave

The tropics are becoming uninhabitable. Expect the refugees to be called 'economic migrants' or worse.

Likely the people who caused this mess will also block those migrants from entering their countries.

And later on down the line when climate change becomes an unbearable crisis that's impossible to ignore, they will likely push for equally reckless solutions like geoengineering.

they will likely push for equally reckless solutions like geoengineering. — Mr Bee

Find Lagrange Point On eBay
Fantastic Prices On Lagrange Point - Shop From Great Retailers On eBay. Find It On eBay. Everything You Love On eBay. Great Selection, Great Prices.

L1 is the one I want, between sun and Earth, and some of that space blanket reflective stuff. It's that bad right now that I want to do some reckless geoengineering If we start to get cold, we can roll up the blanket later. I wonder if they deliver?

Frozen iguanas are falling from trees in Florida
News article dated 24 January 2024

In Florida, colder than normal temperatures are having a major impact on certain animal species. This weekend, several weather forecasters issued unofficial warnings – not about snow or ice, but about the possibility of falling iguanas.

While falling iguanas are more often stunned rather than dead, they can be inconvenient or even dangerous. In some cases, they’ve damaged cars or injured people. So, when walking in Florida during colder temperatures, looking up is advisable. — Sarah Bregel, BBC

While extreme weather due to climate change is on the rise, Matt Devitt, chief meteorologist at Wink News in southwest Florida, says that’s not what’s behind the uptick in falling iguanas – and in turn, the increase in falling iguana warnings and recommended protocol. Instead, we’re hearing about it more frequently because iguanas aren’t native to Florida and their population is beginning to surge.

"The iguanas were brought over from Central and South America in the 1960s and '70s, but the population was limited then," says Devitt. "They’ve exploded in population over the past decade, which is why people are starting to notice what the cold does to them."

Do you read your own sources at all, or is the headline enough for you? Here is a marginal population way outside its normal range and barely surviving until the climate had sufficiently warmed for them to thrive, and now they have become noticeable. But fool that you are, you think this is some kind of counter evidence. What a pathetic idiot!

Like I suggested to Mr Bee: since climate change denial and spamming this thread with stupid bullshit doesn’t warrant a banning, the ignore list feature works brilliantly.

The posts have already been established as worthless, so there’s nothing to miss.

Like I suggested to Mr Bee: since climate change denial and spamming this thread with stupid bullshit doesn’t warrant a banning, the ignore list feature works brilliantly. — Mikie

Yeah, but I'm not trying to convince myself, but to prevent the world from drowning in bullshit for the sake of the community. All that is required for the lie to triumph is for truth tellers to be silent.

Many of us focused on the problem of climate change have been waiting for the day when renewable energy would become cheaper than fossil fuels.

Well, we’re there: Solar and wind power are less expensive than oil, gas and coal in many places and are saving our economy billions of dollars. These and other renewable energy sources produced 30 percent of the world’s electricity in 2023, which may also have been the year that greenhouse gas emissions in the power sector peaked. In the United States alone, the amount of solar and wind energy capacity waiting to be built and connected to the grid is 18 times the amount of natural gas power capacity in the queue.

So you might reasonably conclude that the market is pivoting, and the end for fossil fuels is near.

But it’s not. Instead, fossil fuel interests — including think tanks, trade associations and dark money groups — are often preventing the market from shifting to the lowest cost energy.

Similar to other industries from tobacco to banking to pharmaceuticals, oil and gas interests use tactics like lobbying and manufacturing “grass-roots” support to maximize profits. They also spread misinformation: It’s well documented that fossil fuel interests tried to convince the public that their products didn’t cause climate change, in the same way that Big Tobacco tried to convince the public that its products didn’t harm people’s health.

But as renewables have become a more formidable competitor, we are now seeing something different: a large-scale effort to deceive the public into thinking that the alternative products are harmful, unreliable and worse for consumers. And as renewables continue to drop in cost, it will become even more critical for policymakers and others to challenge these attempts to slow the adoption of cheaper and healthier forms of energy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/01/opinion/clean-energy-solar-wind.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/01/opinion/clean-energy-solar-wind.html — Mikie

Mikie, the article that you linked to is an opinion guest essay by Andrew Dessler. He is a climate scientist and not an expert on renewable energy. Many people would see him as biased and that he has a conflict of interest.

If you want to get the facts from the New York Times then I suggest that you read this article:
https://nypost.com/2023/11/02/opinion/collapse-of-projects-shows-again-that-wind-power-is-not-affordable

Here are some highlights:

Collapse of projects shows again that wind power is not affordable

The renewable-power fantasy is being blown apart by furious financial headwinds.

Already this year projects have tumbled in Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts, and now Danish wind-power giant Ørsted has canceled two wind farms in New Jersey.

Over and over, the litany of causes is the same: inflation, higher interest rates that drive up capital costs and severe kinks in the supply chain.

Indeed — and yet this broken industry is what New York’s climate activists have pinned their clean-energy hopes on.

If offshore wind had to compete on the free market, we wouldn’t even be talking about it.

Electric Cars Are Suddenly Becoming Affordable

More (somewhat) good news. Thinking my next car will be a used EV.

More efficient manufacturing, falling battery costs and intense competition are lowering sticker prices for battery-powered models to within striking distance of gasoline cars.

If offshore wind had to compete on the free market, we wouldn’t even be talking about it. — Agree-to-Disagree

The problem with the free market in this case is it doesn't price in the externalities associated with burning fossil fuels (global warming, increased asthma deaths, increased smog).

The planet just marked a “shocking” new milestone, enduring 12 consecutive months of unprecedented heat, according to new data from Copernicus, the European Union’s climate monitoring service.

Every single month from June 2023 to May 2024 was the world’s hottest such month on record, Copernicus data showed

12 Months of Records

Turning the planet into Venus seems to be the goal.

"It found that just one-third of all young Americans said they would back Biden if the election was held at the time the survey was conducted. The poll also reflects a virtual tie in the race."
https://www.npr.org/2024/06/05/nx-s1-4987296/young-voters-biden-gaza-inflation-abortion-trump-genforward-poll

So, the "drill, baby, drill" and "ban all Muslims" guy is tied with the Democrat. We can't look to young people to win the election. Men prefer Trump over Biden. Looks like women are our last best hope.

Looks like women are our last best hope. — RogueAI

Could be.

The problem with the free market in this case is it doesn't price in the externalities associated with burning fossil fuels (global warming, increased asthma deaths, increased smog). — RogueAI

What happens if some people are affected by the externalities, but other people are not. How do you price an externality that affects different people in different ways?

Turning the planet into Venus seems to be the goal. — Mikie

This is the sort of stupid comment that destroys the credibility of the people who make it.

Is this a joke, or are they serious? Would banning advertising for fossil fuels save us from climate change? Fossil fuels don't need to be advertised. Most people know about fossil fuels and want to use them. The main effect of advertising is probably to influence which oil company you buy from.

‘Godfathers of climate chaos’: UN chief urges global fossil-fuel advertising ban

Fossil-fuel companies are the “godfathers of climate chaos” and should be banned in every country from advertising akin to restrictions on big tobacco, the secretary general of the United Nations has said while delivering dire new scientific warnings of global heating.

In a major speech in New York on Wednesday, António Guterres called on news and tech media to stop enabling “planetary destruction” by taking fossil-fuel advertising money while warning the world faces “climate crunch time” in its faltering attempts to stem the crisis.

“Many governments restrict or prohibit advertising for products that harm human health, like tobacco,” he said. “I urge every country to ban advertising from fossil-fuel companies. And I urge news media and tech companies to stop taking fossil-fuel advertising.” — The Guardian