Category Archives: Economics

Tax havens threaten oceans and rainforests

Most of the foreign money funding ocean plunder and the felling of the Amazon forest comes through tax havens, researchers say.

LONDON, 14 August, 2018 – Tax havens have provided more than two-thirds of the foreign capital known to be linked to Amazon deforestation and pirate fishing, a new study says.

The researchers say 70% of known vessels involved in illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing are or have been flagged under a tax haven jurisdiction. On average, they report, 68% of all investigated foreign capital (US$18.4bn of a total $26.9bn) which went to sectors associated with Amazon  deforestation between 2000 and 2011 was transferred through tax havens.

The report is the work of a team of researchers from the Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC) and the Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere programme (GEDB), who say it is the first study to show how tax havens are linked to economic sectors with the potential to cause serious global environmental damage.

They say the release of the Paradise Papers and Panama Papers exposed how multinationals, politicians and the rich use offshore tax havens to conceal their wealth and money flows, and to reduce their exposure to tax. Accepting that the term “tax haven” is contested, their report uses a definition proposed in a report prepared for the US Congress.

The study’s lead author, Victor Galaz, deputy director of the SRC, says: “Our analysis shows that the use of tax havens is not only a socio-political and economic challenge, but also an environmental one. While the use of tax haven jurisdictions is not illegal in itself, financial secrecy hampers the ability to analyse how financial flows affect economic activities on the ground, and their environmental impacts.”

The study, published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, is part of an on-going research project, Earth System Finance: New perspectives on financial markets and sustainability, led by GEDB and the Stockholm Resilience Centre in collaboration with Future Earth.

Systematic approach

The researchers say most previous analyses of the environmental impacts of tax havens are the work of investigative journalists focusing on a few locations. The new study, in contrast, takes a more systematic approach to analyse how the havens influence the sustainability of the ocean and the Amazon rainforest, two examples of the global environmental commons.

The Amazon forest is critical for stabilising the Earth’s climate system, and the oceans provide protein and income for millions of people worldwide, particularly in low-income food-deficit countries.

“The absence of a more systemic view is not surprising considering the chronic lack of data resulting from the financial opaqueness created by the use of these jurisdictions,” says co-author Beatrice Crona, GEDB’s executive director.

The study says lack of transparency hides how tax havens are linked to the degradation of environmental commons that are crucial for both people and planet at global scales.

“The use of tax havens is not only a socio-political and economic challenge, but also an environmental one”

It includes the first calculation of the foreign capital that flows into the beef and soya sectors operating in the Brazilian Amazon, both linked to deforestation.

The Cayman Islands proved to be the largest governmental source of transfers for foreign capital to both sectors. Well-known as a tax haven, the Islands provide three benefits to investors: legal efficiency, tax minimisation, and secrecy.

The study also includes a systematic analysis of tax havens’ role in global IUU fishing. With 70% of the vessels found to carry out or support IUU fishing, and for which flag information is available, flagged under a tax haven jurisdiction now or in the past, Belize and Panama are frequently mentioned.

Many of these tax havens are also so-called flags of convenience states, countries with limited monitoring and enforcement capacity that do not penalise vessels sailing under their flag even if they are identified as operating in violation of international law.

Dual identities

This combination of tax havens and flags of convenience allows companies to operate fishing vessels with dual identities, one used for legal and the other for illegal fishing.

“The global nature of fisheries value chains, complex ownership structures and limited governance capacities of many coastal nations, make the sector susceptible to the use of tax havens,” says co-author Henrik Österblom, SRC  deputy science director.

Among issues which the researchers suggest should be central to future research and to the governance of tax havens is the loss of tax revenue the havens cause. This, they argue, should be seen as an indirect subsidy to economic activities which damage the global commons, and organisations like UN Environment should assess the environmental costs involved.

And they argue that the international community should view tax evasion and aggressive tax planning as not only a socio-political problem, but also an environmental one. Putting tax havens on the global sustainability agenda, they say, is key to protecting the environment and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. – Climate News Network

Most of the foreign money funding ocean plunder and the felling of the Amazon forest comes through tax havens, researchers say.

LONDON, 14 August, 2018 – Tax havens have provided more than two-thirds of the foreign capital known to be linked to Amazon deforestation and pirate fishing, a new study says.

The researchers say 70% of known vessels involved in illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing are or have been flagged under a tax haven jurisdiction. On average, they report, 68% of all investigated foreign capital (US$18.4bn of a total $26.9bn) which went to sectors associated with Amazon  deforestation between 2000 and 2011 was transferred through tax havens.

The report is the work of a team of researchers from the Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC) and the Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere programme (GEDB), who say it is the first study to show how tax havens are linked to economic sectors with the potential to cause serious global environmental damage.

They say the release of the Paradise Papers and Panama Papers exposed how multinationals, politicians and the rich use offshore tax havens to conceal their wealth and money flows, and to reduce their exposure to tax. Accepting that the term “tax haven” is contested, their report uses a definition proposed in a report prepared for the US Congress.

The study’s lead author, Victor Galaz, deputy director of the SRC, says: “Our analysis shows that the use of tax havens is not only a socio-political and economic challenge, but also an environmental one. While the use of tax haven jurisdictions is not illegal in itself, financial secrecy hampers the ability to analyse how financial flows affect economic activities on the ground, and their environmental impacts.”

The study, published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, is part of an on-going research project, Earth System Finance: New perspectives on financial markets and sustainability, led by GEDB and the Stockholm Resilience Centre in collaboration with Future Earth.

Systematic approach

The researchers say most previous analyses of the environmental impacts of tax havens are the work of investigative journalists focusing on a few locations. The new study, in contrast, takes a more systematic approach to analyse how the havens influence the sustainability of the ocean and the Amazon rainforest, two examples of the global environmental commons.

The Amazon forest is critical for stabilising the Earth’s climate system, and the oceans provide protein and income for millions of people worldwide, particularly in low-income food-deficit countries.

“The absence of a more systemic view is not surprising considering the chronic lack of data resulting from the financial opaqueness created by the use of these jurisdictions,” says co-author Beatrice Crona, GEDB’s executive director.

The study says lack of transparency hides how tax havens are linked to the degradation of environmental commons that are crucial for both people and planet at global scales.

“The use of tax havens is not only a socio-political and economic challenge, but also an environmental one”

It includes the first calculation of the foreign capital that flows into the beef and soya sectors operating in the Brazilian Amazon, both linked to deforestation.

The Cayman Islands proved to be the largest governmental source of transfers for foreign capital to both sectors. Well-known as a tax haven, the Islands provide three benefits to investors: legal efficiency, tax minimisation, and secrecy.

The study also includes a systematic analysis of tax havens’ role in global IUU fishing. With 70% of the vessels found to carry out or support IUU fishing, and for which flag information is available, flagged under a tax haven jurisdiction now or in the past, Belize and Panama are frequently mentioned.

Many of these tax havens are also so-called flags of convenience states, countries with limited monitoring and enforcement capacity that do not penalise vessels sailing under their flag even if they are identified as operating in violation of international law.

Dual identities

This combination of tax havens and flags of convenience allows companies to operate fishing vessels with dual identities, one used for legal and the other for illegal fishing.

“The global nature of fisheries value chains, complex ownership structures and limited governance capacities of many coastal nations, make the sector susceptible to the use of tax havens,” says co-author Henrik Österblom, SRC  deputy science director.

Among issues which the researchers suggest should be central to future research and to the governance of tax havens is the loss of tax revenue the havens cause. This, they argue, should be seen as an indirect subsidy to economic activities which damage the global commons, and organisations like UN Environment should assess the environmental costs involved.

And they argue that the international community should view tax evasion and aggressive tax planning as not only a socio-political problem, but also an environmental one. Putting tax havens on the global sustainability agenda, they say, is key to protecting the environment and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. – Climate News Network

Climate strategy needs tailoring to poorest

Climate change presents a dilemma. Inaction means ultimate catastrophe. But before then an ill-considered climate strategy could harm the poorest even more.

LONDON, 10 August, 2018 – An effective climate strategy to protect everyone on Earth, and the natural world as well, is what the planet needs. But Austrian-based scientists have now confirmed something all climate scientists have suspected for more than a decade: there can be no simple, one-size-fits-all solution to the twin challenges of climate change and human poverty.

That catastrophic climate change driven by “business as usual” fossil fuel energy reliance will by 2100 impose devastating costs worldwide, and drive millions from their homes and even homelands,  has been repeatedly established.

So has the need to shift from fossil fuels to renewable resources, almost certainly by imposing some kind of “carbon tax” worldwide.

But a new study from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis warns that if agriculture is included in stringent climate mitigation schemes, there will be higher costs in the short term.

If humans don’t act, then climate change driven by global warming will create conditions that will put an extra 24 million people, or perhaps 50 million extra, at risk of hunger and malnutrition.

Crop yields could fall by 17%, and market prices could rise by 20% by 2050.

“Carbon pricing schemes will not bring any viable options for developing countries where there are highly vulnerable populations”

And if they do act with a global carbon tax or its equivalent, then by 2050 an extra 78 million – or perhaps 170 million, many of them in sub-Saharan Africa and India – could be priced out of the food market.

So for many of the poorest people on the planet, the cure could be worse than the disease.

“The findings are important to help realise that agriculture should receive a very specific treatment when it comes to climate change policies,” said Tomoko Hasegawa, a systems engineer and researcher at IIASA, and of Japan’s National Institute for Environment Studies.

“Carbon pricing schemes will not bring any viable options for developing countries where there are highly vulnerable populations. Mitigation in agriculture should instead be integrated with development policies.”

Thinking ahead

Studies such as these should not be understood as excuses for doing nothing: they are precautionary exercises in foresight. All human acts impose some kind of environmental and social costs. Rich nations can absorb the price of climate mitigation. The poorest communities, ironically the ones most at risk from climate change, cannot.

Dr Hasegawa and her co-authors report in the journal Nature Climate Change that they looked at eight global agricultural models to analyse a range of outcomes for 2050.

Their scenarios contemplated socio-economic development options. These included the one in which the world actually pursued the sustainable programme implicitly agreed in 2015 in Paris, when 195 nations vowed to contain warming to “well below” 2°C by 2100.

They also included one in which the world followed current development trends, along with various levels of global warming, and various mitigation policies.

Possible solutions

And the researchers concluded that, instead of simply focusing on reducing emissions, policymakers would have to look at the big picture.

Carbon taxes will in various forms raise the prices of food, in some models by 110%. But the same study offers potential solutions. Right now, grazing animals in the developing world produce three-fourths of the world’s ruminant greenhouse gases, but only half its milk and beef. So techniques used in the developed world could if introduced at the same time reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote economic growth, reduce poverty and improve health in the poorest nations.

There are other options: money raised from carbon taxes could be used for food aid programmes to help those areas hardest hit. The point the researchers make is that when it comes to mitigation policies, governments and international organisations need to think carefully.

“Although climate change is a global phenomenon, its specific impacts and efforts to mitigate its impacts will be realised at national and local levels,” the scientists conclude. “As such, future research will be required to assess the unique local and national challenges to adapting to and mitigating climate change while also reducing food insecurity.” – Climate News Network

Climate change presents a dilemma. Inaction means ultimate catastrophe. But before then an ill-considered climate strategy could harm the poorest even more.

LONDON, 10 August, 2018 – An effective climate strategy to protect everyone on Earth, and the natural world as well, is what the planet needs. But Austrian-based scientists have now confirmed something all climate scientists have suspected for more than a decade: there can be no simple, one-size-fits-all solution to the twin challenges of climate change and human poverty.

That catastrophic climate change driven by “business as usual” fossil fuel energy reliance will by 2100 impose devastating costs worldwide, and drive millions from their homes and even homelands,  has been repeatedly established.

So has the need to shift from fossil fuels to renewable resources, almost certainly by imposing some kind of “carbon tax” worldwide.

But a new study from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis warns that if agriculture is included in stringent climate mitigation schemes, there will be higher costs in the short term.

If humans don’t act, then climate change driven by global warming will create conditions that will put an extra 24 million people, or perhaps 50 million extra, at risk of hunger and malnutrition.

Crop yields could fall by 17%, and market prices could rise by 20% by 2050.

“Carbon pricing schemes will not bring any viable options for developing countries where there are highly vulnerable populations”

And if they do act with a global carbon tax or its equivalent, then by 2050 an extra 78 million – or perhaps 170 million, many of them in sub-Saharan Africa and India – could be priced out of the food market.

So for many of the poorest people on the planet, the cure could be worse than the disease.

“The findings are important to help realise that agriculture should receive a very specific treatment when it comes to climate change policies,” said Tomoko Hasegawa, a systems engineer and researcher at IIASA, and of Japan’s National Institute for Environment Studies.

“Carbon pricing schemes will not bring any viable options for developing countries where there are highly vulnerable populations. Mitigation in agriculture should instead be integrated with development policies.”

Thinking ahead

Studies such as these should not be understood as excuses for doing nothing: they are precautionary exercises in foresight. All human acts impose some kind of environmental and social costs. Rich nations can absorb the price of climate mitigation. The poorest communities, ironically the ones most at risk from climate change, cannot.

Dr Hasegawa and her co-authors report in the journal Nature Climate Change that they looked at eight global agricultural models to analyse a range of outcomes for 2050.

Their scenarios contemplated socio-economic development options. These included the one in which the world actually pursued the sustainable programme implicitly agreed in 2015 in Paris, when 195 nations vowed to contain warming to “well below” 2°C by 2100.

They also included one in which the world followed current development trends, along with various levels of global warming, and various mitigation policies.

Possible solutions

And the researchers concluded that, instead of simply focusing on reducing emissions, policymakers would have to look at the big picture.

Carbon taxes will in various forms raise the prices of food, in some models by 110%. But the same study offers potential solutions. Right now, grazing animals in the developing world produce three-fourths of the world’s ruminant greenhouse gases, but only half its milk and beef. So techniques used in the developed world could if introduced at the same time reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote economic growth, reduce poverty and improve health in the poorest nations.

There are other options: money raised from carbon taxes could be used for food aid programmes to help those areas hardest hit. The point the researchers make is that when it comes to mitigation policies, governments and international organisations need to think carefully.

“Although climate change is a global phenomenon, its specific impacts and efforts to mitigate its impacts will be realised at national and local levels,” the scientists conclude. “As such, future research will be required to assess the unique local and national challenges to adapting to and mitigating climate change while also reducing food insecurity.” – Climate News Network

Washington’s political lobbying shackles science

Money talks, says a study of Washington’s political lobbying and its influence on climate change law. Most of the most vocal money comes from big energy.

LONDON, 24 July 2018 – Between 2000 and 2016 Washington’s political lobbying used money as lavishly as ever. The electricity utilities, fossil fuel companies and transportation companies spent around $2bn to “lobby” the US Congress and Senate on matters of climate legislation. Those sectors most likely to be affected by any changes in the law spent most on the issue.

In contrast, environmental organisations and the renewable energy sector each spent no more than a thirtieth of such sums.

And during the first 16 years of the new century, lobby spending in the US fluctuated: between 2000 and 2006, lobbyists for big energy spent only about $50m.

But as President Obama began office in the White House in 2009, and the US Congress started to contemplate legislation to contain or limit global warming driven by profligate fossil fuel use worldwide, lobbyist spending had peaked at $362m, according to new research in the journal Climatic Change.

“The process may limit the communication of accurate scientific information in the decision-making process”

Since then, President Trump has announced the US withdrawal from a global agreement to contain climate change signed by President Obama. The implication is that when it comes to influencing climate legislation, money talks more urgently and effectively than evidence.

Lobbying is not new. In democracies, all groups active in business, politics, the law and the economy seek to persuade lawmakers, and persuasion involves expense. But voters and ordinary citizens most affected by climate change and energy policy may be aware of neither the thrust and professionalism of the persuasion, nor the price paid for it.

“Lobbying is conducted away from the public eye,” says the sociologist Robert Brulle of Drexel University in Philadelphia, who worked through almost 2 million official quarterly reports required by law in the US of all professional lobbyists paid to lobby on behalf of a client who make more than one contact with government officials and spend more than 20% of their time on lobbying.

“There is no open debate or refutation of viewpoints offered by professional lobbyists meeting in private with government officials. Control over the nature and flow of information to government decision-makers can be significantly altered by the lobbying process and creates a situation of systematically distorted communication.

Small fraction

“The process may limit the communication of accurate scientific information in the decision-making process.”

In fact, professional lobbyists spent more than $50bn during the 16 relevant years of this century, and climate issues constituted only a fraction of that investment.

Professor Brulle found that the electrical utilities sector spent $554m – a quarter of all climate lobbying – over the 16 years. Fossil fuel investors spent $370m and the transport providers dug into their pockets for $252m during these years.

It is no secret that big fossil fuel companies have resisted the logic of climate science and countered attempts to contain global warming.

Five years ago, Professor Brulle set himself the challenge of identifying political manipulation of US climate change legislation: he looked at Inland Revenue Service data from 91 climate denial organisations and found that they had received $558m in “dark money” – that is, money from 140 foundations and trusts whose own sources of finance were not clear.

Forceful messaging

Three years ago a researcher at Yale University worked through 20 years of contrarian literature, US media coverage and presidential documents to confirm that organisations with powerful corporate benefactors – and these included at least one oil giant – were better at getting their message across.

The conclusion, once again: money talks. And, Professor Brulle warns, his latest study still doesn’t reveal quite how forcefully money talks.

His figures cover “only reported lobbying spending. It does not count activities related to lobbying, including grassroots mobilisation, media relations and public relations. It has been estimated that an equally large amount is spent on these activities.” – Climate News Network

Money talks, says a study of Washington’s political lobbying and its influence on climate change law. Most of the most vocal money comes from big energy.

LONDON, 24 July 2018 – Between 2000 and 2016 Washington’s political lobbying used money as lavishly as ever. The electricity utilities, fossil fuel companies and transportation companies spent around $2bn to “lobby” the US Congress and Senate on matters of climate legislation. Those sectors most likely to be affected by any changes in the law spent most on the issue.

In contrast, environmental organisations and the renewable energy sector each spent no more than a thirtieth of such sums.

And during the first 16 years of the new century, lobby spending in the US fluctuated: between 2000 and 2006, lobbyists for big energy spent only about $50m.

But as President Obama began office in the White House in 2009, and the US Congress started to contemplate legislation to contain or limit global warming driven by profligate fossil fuel use worldwide, lobbyist spending had peaked at $362m, according to new research in the journal Climatic Change.

“The process may limit the communication of accurate scientific information in the decision-making process”

Since then, President Trump has announced the US withdrawal from a global agreement to contain climate change signed by President Obama. The implication is that when it comes to influencing climate legislation, money talks more urgently and effectively than evidence.

Lobbying is not new. In democracies, all groups active in business, politics, the law and the economy seek to persuade lawmakers, and persuasion involves expense. But voters and ordinary citizens most affected by climate change and energy policy may be aware of neither the thrust and professionalism of the persuasion, nor the price paid for it.

“Lobbying is conducted away from the public eye,” says the sociologist Robert Brulle of Drexel University in Philadelphia, who worked through almost 2 million official quarterly reports required by law in the US of all professional lobbyists paid to lobby on behalf of a client who make more than one contact with government officials and spend more than 20% of their time on lobbying.

“There is no open debate or refutation of viewpoints offered by professional lobbyists meeting in private with government officials. Control over the nature and flow of information to government decision-makers can be significantly altered by the lobbying process and creates a situation of systematically distorted communication.

Small fraction

“The process may limit the communication of accurate scientific information in the decision-making process.”

In fact, professional lobbyists spent more than $50bn during the 16 relevant years of this century, and climate issues constituted only a fraction of that investment.

Professor Brulle found that the electrical utilities sector spent $554m – a quarter of all climate lobbying – over the 16 years. Fossil fuel investors spent $370m and the transport providers dug into their pockets for $252m during these years.

It is no secret that big fossil fuel companies have resisted the logic of climate science and countered attempts to contain global warming.

Five years ago, Professor Brulle set himself the challenge of identifying political manipulation of US climate change legislation: he looked at Inland Revenue Service data from 91 climate denial organisations and found that they had received $558m in “dark money” – that is, money from 140 foundations and trusts whose own sources of finance were not clear.

Forceful messaging

Three years ago a researcher at Yale University worked through 20 years of contrarian literature, US media coverage and presidential documents to confirm that organisations with powerful corporate benefactors – and these included at least one oil giant – were better at getting their message across.

The conclusion, once again: money talks. And, Professor Brulle warns, his latest study still doesn’t reveal quite how forcefully money talks.

His figures cover “only reported lobbying spending. It does not count activities related to lobbying, including grassroots mobilisation, media relations and public relations. It has been estimated that an equally large amount is spent on these activities.” – Climate News Network

Smarter renewables open up new markets

The need to stop global warming in its tracks has spurred the growth of two smarter renewables that are helping to reshape the electricity industry.

LONDON, 9 July, 2018 – It’s bad news for Old King Coal, Big Oil and their mates, but smarter renewables are helping to break new ground. The offshore wind industry and concentrated solar power have so far been tried only on a large scale, and in a few pioneer countries. But that is changing fast.

Both ways of generating electricity, from wind and sun, were once thought technically feasible but too expensive to compete with fossil fuels. Advances in technology, though, and economies of scale have meant that costs are falling quickly.

One key factor in their new success has been that surplus renewable energy can now be stored, either by batteries or heat reservoirs, and can then be used at periods of peak demand.

Offshore wind power, pioneered in Denmark in 1991, has now become a major provider of energy in the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands. Outside Europe China is also a major investor. Altogether 17 countries now have offshore wind, but more than 100 have coastlines where the technology could be deployed, so the potential is enormous.

Among the countries now considering large-scale offshore wind farms are Poland and Ireland in Europe, the US and, in the Far East, Taiwan, according to the organisers of a conference on offshore wind technology to be held in November.

Increasing efficiency

One innovation that has made a difference is the improved design of turbine blades that makes them more efficient, as well as the enormous increase in the size of offshore installations (up to 9 megawatts for each turbine), and the development of floating wind farms.

Although installing wind onshore is far cheaper than offshore, it is often far more difficult to obtain permission to build because of public opposition. Offshore, the turbines can be much larger, the wind flows are more regular, and uncertainties and costs from delays are reduced.

The second technology that is taking off is concentrated (or concentrating) solar power (CSP), a way of producing electricity that has been around for longer than offshore wind.

Till now its development has always taken second place to solar panels, which are quicker and cheaper to install. The cost of generating electricity from panels had also fallen so dramatically that they seemed to have edged out their solar rival.

But CSP is making a comeback, largely because it can now guarantee a 24-hour supply by using heat generated during the day to drive turbines at night.

“CSP has become a technology of major interest . . . the potential in the Middle East and North Africa is enormous”

Another advantage is that, unlike solar panels which lose efficiency if they get too hot, CSP thrives in such conditions – the hotter the better. This makes the Middle East, where temperatures are getting ever higher as a result of climate change, a huge potential market for CSP.

In Europe Spain, with abundant sunshine, has led the way. More recently, across the Straits of Gibraltar Morocco has become a world leader. It has a 40% target for renewable energy by 2020, rising to 52% by 2030, and already has a 160 megawatt CSP plant up and running. Three more are expected to come on line in the next few months.

So far the best form of CSP has not been settled. Some systems use parabolic troughs which concentrate the sun’s rays on a tower containing molten salt, or a combination of other substances capable of heating to a temperature of 500°C or more. The heat can then be used directly to drive turbines housed in underground reservoirs, generating electricity for later use and ensuring an uninterrupted supply.

Some systems use mirrors that follow the sun’s path to make the maximum use of its rays. Others include hybrids that use both mirrors and solar panels.

Price hopes

Currently, with the support of the World Bank, Morocco is running a competition for more hybrid CSP systems to reduce the price of the electricity. Although the first Moroccan venture produced electricity at $189 a megawatt hour, the second is already down to $140 and later proposals are expected to be between $50 and $100.

This hope of reduced costs is partly because Dubai, another desert kingdom intent on exploiting the sun’s power, is building a 200 megawatt CSP plant due to generate current at $73 a megawatt hour under a 35-year power purchase agreement with China’s Shanghai Electric.

These prices are still relatively high compared with onshore wind, but all have the advantage of removing the intermittency of other renewables by building in 24-hour supply. They also have other benefits for countries which otherwise would have to import fossil fuels, saving substantial sums.

With countries with plenty of sunshine and deserts, like Egypt, and in some cases lots of money for investment, like Saudi Arabia and China, CSP has become a technology of major interest. Like offshore wind it is currently in development in a relatively few countries, but the potential in the Middle East and North Africa is enormous. – Climate News Network

The need to stop global warming in its tracks has spurred the growth of two smarter renewables that are helping to reshape the electricity industry.

LONDON, 9 July, 2018 – It’s bad news for Old King Coal, Big Oil and their mates, but smarter renewables are helping to break new ground. The offshore wind industry and concentrated solar power have so far been tried only on a large scale, and in a few pioneer countries. But that is changing fast.

Both ways of generating electricity, from wind and sun, were once thought technically feasible but too expensive to compete with fossil fuels. Advances in technology, though, and economies of scale have meant that costs are falling quickly.

One key factor in their new success has been that surplus renewable energy can now be stored, either by batteries or heat reservoirs, and can then be used at periods of peak demand.

Offshore wind power, pioneered in Denmark in 1991, has now become a major provider of energy in the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands. Outside Europe China is also a major investor. Altogether 17 countries now have offshore wind, but more than 100 have coastlines where the technology could be deployed, so the potential is enormous.

Among the countries now considering large-scale offshore wind farms are Poland and Ireland in Europe, the US and, in the Far East, Taiwan, according to the organisers of a conference on offshore wind technology to be held in November.

Increasing efficiency

One innovation that has made a difference is the improved design of turbine blades that makes them more efficient, as well as the enormous increase in the size of offshore installations (up to 9 megawatts for each turbine), and the development of floating wind farms.

Although installing wind onshore is far cheaper than offshore, it is often far more difficult to obtain permission to build because of public opposition. Offshore, the turbines can be much larger, the wind flows are more regular, and uncertainties and costs from delays are reduced.

The second technology that is taking off is concentrated (or concentrating) solar power (CSP), a way of producing electricity that has been around for longer than offshore wind.

Till now its development has always taken second place to solar panels, which are quicker and cheaper to install. The cost of generating electricity from panels had also fallen so dramatically that they seemed to have edged out their solar rival.

But CSP is making a comeback, largely because it can now guarantee a 24-hour supply by using heat generated during the day to drive turbines at night.

“CSP has become a technology of major interest . . . the potential in the Middle East and North Africa is enormous”

Another advantage is that, unlike solar panels which lose efficiency if they get too hot, CSP thrives in such conditions – the hotter the better. This makes the Middle East, where temperatures are getting ever higher as a result of climate change, a huge potential market for CSP.

In Europe Spain, with abundant sunshine, has led the way. More recently, across the Straits of Gibraltar Morocco has become a world leader. It has a 40% target for renewable energy by 2020, rising to 52% by 2030, and already has a 160 megawatt CSP plant up and running. Three more are expected to come on line in the next few months.

So far the best form of CSP has not been settled. Some systems use parabolic troughs which concentrate the sun’s rays on a tower containing molten salt, or a combination of other substances capable of heating to a temperature of 500°C or more. The heat can then be used directly to drive turbines housed in underground reservoirs, generating electricity for later use and ensuring an uninterrupted supply.

Some systems use mirrors that follow the sun’s path to make the maximum use of its rays. Others include hybrids that use both mirrors and solar panels.

Price hopes

Currently, with the support of the World Bank, Morocco is running a competition for more hybrid CSP systems to reduce the price of the electricity. Although the first Moroccan venture produced electricity at $189 a megawatt hour, the second is already down to $140 and later proposals are expected to be between $50 and $100.

This hope of reduced costs is partly because Dubai, another desert kingdom intent on exploiting the sun’s power, is building a 200 megawatt CSP plant due to generate current at $73 a megawatt hour under a 35-year power purchase agreement with China’s Shanghai Electric.

These prices are still relatively high compared with onshore wind, but all have the advantage of removing the intermittency of other renewables by building in 24-hour supply. They also have other benefits for countries which otherwise would have to import fossil fuels, saving substantial sums.

With countries with plenty of sunshine and deserts, like Egypt, and in some cases lots of money for investment, like Saudi Arabia and China, CSP has become a technology of major interest. Like offshore wind it is currently in development in a relatively few countries, but the potential in the Middle East and North Africa is enormous. – Climate News Network

Electric vehicle sales promise shock for Big Oil

If motor manufacturers are right about the prospects for electric vehicle sales, an oil price crash won’t be far behind.

LONDON, 5 July, 2018 – Oil and gas companies have underestimated probable electric vehicle sales and the effect they will have on their own businesses and profits, a new report says.

If the car manufacturers’ projections of future sales of electric cars are correct, then demand for oil will have peaked by 2027 or even earlier, sending the price of oil in a downward spiral as supply exceeds demand, says Carbon Tracker (CT), an independent financial think-tank carrying out in-depth analysis on the impact of the energy transition on capital markets.

It says fossil fuel companies have taken into account some engine fuel efficiencies and the effect they would have on oil demand, but not the expected increase in electric vehicles themselves. There is a big mismatch between forecasts of EV market penetration from vehicle manufacturers and from oil majors, says Laurence Watson, a CT data scientist.

“The oil industry is underestimating the disruptive potential of electric vehicles, which could reduce oil demand by millions of barrels a day. Increases in fuel efficiency will also eat into oil demand and the industry’s profits. The oil majors’ myopic position presents a serious investor risk,” he told the Climate News Network.

Expectations far lower

The report looks at all the projections of the oil majors, including Exxon and BP, and says their figures for electric vehicle growth in the 2020s are 75% to 250% smaller than those expected by the global car manufacturers that have announced targets.

Electric vehicle sales in China alone, a figure bolstered by government intervention, are expected to be seven million a year by 2025. These, plus the three million a year aim of Volkswagen by the same date, would exceed oil industry estimates for sales for the whole world.

There are immense variables taken into account in the report. These include the number of miles driven by the average electric vehicle and the sort of car it replaces.

These variables depend on the influence of various governments’ policies to reduce oil in transportation in order to keep global temperature rise below 2°C beyond pre-industrial levels. The need to reduce air pollution also strongly favours the introduction of electric vehicles in cities.

More demand reduction

Another of the imponderables is the increasing efficiency of the internal combustion engine, which in itself also reduces demand for oil. It follows a growing trend already well-established in several countries, including Sweden, which from 2019 will produce no more vehicles powered by internal combustion alone.

The take-up of electric vehicles is crucial to the future of the oil industry because transportation takes up 50% of total oil demand. About half of the demand from transport is from light passenger vehicles, those that are most likely in the short term to switch to electricity.

Heavy-duty transport, aviation and shipping are also beginning to switch, but it is cars that will make the early difference.

The report argues that it is not total oil demand that matters but the difference between supply and demand. The 2014 crash in the oil price was caused by a surplus of 2 million barrels of oil a day, mainly because of a boom in US shale production.

“The oil industry is underestimating the disruptive potential of electric vehicles, which could reduce oil demand by millions of barrels a day”

To get the price back up in order to improve oil company profits took the combined efforts of the OPEC oil countries and the Russian government in cutting production, a process that needed three years.

According to the CT report, demand for oil will fall by 8 million barrels of oil a day by 2030 because of the expected deployment of electric vehicles, meaning that the oil-producing countries will have to constantly reduce their production in order to keep prices up.

The report argues that although oil demand will continue to be very large, the peak demand will have been reached around 2025. Demand displacement by electric vehicles “will significantly disrupt oil and gas company business models. Furthermore, we believe that when global oil demand peaks this will fundamentally alter investors’ approach to the industry.” – Climate News Network

If motor manufacturers are right about the prospects for electric vehicle sales, an oil price crash won’t be far behind.

LONDON, 5 July, 2018 – Oil and gas companies have underestimated probable electric vehicle sales and the effect they will have on their own businesses and profits, a new report says.

If the car manufacturers’ projections of future sales of electric cars are correct, then demand for oil will have peaked by 2027 or even earlier, sending the price of oil in a downward spiral as supply exceeds demand, says Carbon Tracker (CT), an independent financial think-tank carrying out in-depth analysis on the impact of the energy transition on capital markets.

It says fossil fuel companies have taken into account some engine fuel efficiencies and the effect they would have on oil demand, but not the expected increase in electric vehicles themselves. There is a big mismatch between forecasts of EV market penetration from vehicle manufacturers and from oil majors, says Laurence Watson, a CT data scientist.

“The oil industry is underestimating the disruptive potential of electric vehicles, which could reduce oil demand by millions of barrels a day. Increases in fuel efficiency will also eat into oil demand and the industry’s profits. The oil majors’ myopic position presents a serious investor risk,” he told the Climate News Network.

Expectations far lower

The report looks at all the projections of the oil majors, including Exxon and BP, and says their figures for electric vehicle growth in the 2020s are 75% to 250% smaller than those expected by the global car manufacturers that have announced targets.

Electric vehicle sales in China alone, a figure bolstered by government intervention, are expected to be seven million a year by 2025. These, plus the three million a year aim of Volkswagen by the same date, would exceed oil industry estimates for sales for the whole world.

There are immense variables taken into account in the report. These include the number of miles driven by the average electric vehicle and the sort of car it replaces.

These variables depend on the influence of various governments’ policies to reduce oil in transportation in order to keep global temperature rise below 2°C beyond pre-industrial levels. The need to reduce air pollution also strongly favours the introduction of electric vehicles in cities.

More demand reduction

Another of the imponderables is the increasing efficiency of the internal combustion engine, which in itself also reduces demand for oil. It follows a growing trend already well-established in several countries, including Sweden, which from 2019 will produce no more vehicles powered by internal combustion alone.

The take-up of electric vehicles is crucial to the future of the oil industry because transportation takes up 50% of total oil demand. About half of the demand from transport is from light passenger vehicles, those that are most likely in the short term to switch to electricity.

Heavy-duty transport, aviation and shipping are also beginning to switch, but it is cars that will make the early difference.

The report argues that it is not total oil demand that matters but the difference between supply and demand. The 2014 crash in the oil price was caused by a surplus of 2 million barrels of oil a day, mainly because of a boom in US shale production.

“The oil industry is underestimating the disruptive potential of electric vehicles, which could reduce oil demand by millions of barrels a day”

To get the price back up in order to improve oil company profits took the combined efforts of the OPEC oil countries and the Russian government in cutting production, a process that needed three years.

According to the CT report, demand for oil will fall by 8 million barrels of oil a day by 2030 because of the expected deployment of electric vehicles, meaning that the oil-producing countries will have to constantly reduce their production in order to keep prices up.

The report argues that although oil demand will continue to be very large, the peak demand will have been reached around 2025. Demand displacement by electric vehicles “will significantly disrupt oil and gas company business models. Furthermore, we believe that when global oil demand peaks this will fundamentally alter investors’ approach to the industry.” – Climate News Network

Rising seas’ cost may be $27tn a year by 2100

In 80 years the rising seas’ cost may be $27tn a year globally, with the oceans possibly nearing two metres above their present levels.

LONDON, 4 July, 2018 – The rising seas’ cost may be US$27tn a year for the world by 2100 if it fails to meet the UN’s 2ºC global warming limit by then, with sea level rise of, at its worst, almost six feet (nearly two metres), new research says.

A study led by the UK’s National Oceanography Centre (NOC) says the worldwide cost of flooding caused by rising sea levels, at their median level, could by 2100 be $14 trillion, if governments miss the United Nations target of keeping the rise in global temperatures, caused by unremitting fossil fuel use, to less than 2ºC above pre-industrial levels. But the extent and cost could be much higher.

The target was agreed by 195 nations in Paris in 2015, with many politicians and most scientists urging them to treat 2ºC as a more modest and feasible limit while aiming if possible for 1.5°C. The cuts in greenhouse gas emissions already promised through the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are not yet enough to achieve the 2ºC limit, let alone the more stringent figure, and much deeper cuts will be needed.

“These results place further emphasis on putting even greater efforts into mitigating rising global temperatures”

The researchers also found that it was upper-middle income countries such as China that would see the largest increase in flood costs, while the richest ones would suffer the least, because of the high levels of protection infrastructure they already enjoyed. The research is published in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

Svetlana Jevrejeva of the NOC is the study’s lead author. She said: “More than 600 million people live in low-elevation coastal areas, less than 10 metres above sea level. In a warming climate, global sea level will rise due to the melting of land-based glaciers and ice sheets, and from the thermal expansion of ocean waters. So sea level rise is one of the most damaging aspects of our warming climate.”

The researchers explored the pace and consequences of global and regional sea level rise under warming limited to both 1.5 ºC and 2 ºC, and compared their findings with projections for unmitigated warming.

Using World Bank income groups (high, upper-middle, lower-middle and low income countries), they then assessed the impact of sea level rise in coastal areas from a global perspective.

Steep increase

Dr Jevrejeva said: “We found that with a temperature rise trajectory of 1.5°C, by 2100 the median sea level will have risen by 0.52m (1.7ft). But, if the 2°C target is missed, we will see a median sea level rise of 0.86m (2.8ft), and a worst-case rise of 1.8m (5.9ft).”

If warming was not mitigated the global annual flood costs without adaptation would increase to $14tn annually for the median sea level rise of 0.86m, and up to $27tn per year for 1.8m. This would account for 2.8% of global GDP in 2100.

The conclusions she and her colleagues reached sound hair-raising and possibly far-fetched. But an earlier study put the possible global cost by 2100 of coastal flooding at nearly four times more than the NOC team – $100tn.

Another group of researchers suggested that if global warming continued at its present rate it could start a process in Antarctica which would lead ultimately to sea level rise of almost three metres.

Impact on tropics

The projected difference in coastal sea levels is also likely to mean that tropical areas will see very high sea levels more often, the study says.

“These extreme sea levels will have a negative effect on the economies of developing coastal nations, and the habitability of low-lying coastlines,” said Dr Jevrejeva.

“Small, low-lying island nations such as the Maldives will be very easily affected, and the pressures on their natural resources and environment will become even greater.

“These results place further emphasis on putting even greater efforts into mitigating rising global temperatures.” – Climate News Network

In 80 years the rising seas’ cost may be $27tn a year globally, with the oceans possibly nearing two metres above their present levels.

LONDON, 4 July, 2018 – The rising seas’ cost may be US$27tn a year for the world by 2100 if it fails to meet the UN’s 2ºC global warming limit by then, with sea level rise of, at its worst, almost six feet (nearly two metres), new research says.

A study led by the UK’s National Oceanography Centre (NOC) says the worldwide cost of flooding caused by rising sea levels, at their median level, could by 2100 be $14 trillion, if governments miss the United Nations target of keeping the rise in global temperatures, caused by unremitting fossil fuel use, to less than 2ºC above pre-industrial levels. But the extent and cost could be much higher.

The target was agreed by 195 nations in Paris in 2015, with many politicians and most scientists urging them to treat 2ºC as a more modest and feasible limit while aiming if possible for 1.5°C. The cuts in greenhouse gas emissions already promised through the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are not yet enough to achieve the 2ºC limit, let alone the more stringent figure, and much deeper cuts will be needed.

“These results place further emphasis on putting even greater efforts into mitigating rising global temperatures”

The researchers also found that it was upper-middle income countries such as China that would see the largest increase in flood costs, while the richest ones would suffer the least, because of the high levels of protection infrastructure they already enjoyed. The research is published in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

Svetlana Jevrejeva of the NOC is the study’s lead author. She said: “More than 600 million people live in low-elevation coastal areas, less than 10 metres above sea level. In a warming climate, global sea level will rise due to the melting of land-based glaciers and ice sheets, and from the thermal expansion of ocean waters. So sea level rise is one of the most damaging aspects of our warming climate.”

The researchers explored the pace and consequences of global and regional sea level rise under warming limited to both 1.5 ºC and 2 ºC, and compared their findings with projections for unmitigated warming.

Using World Bank income groups (high, upper-middle, lower-middle and low income countries), they then assessed the impact of sea level rise in coastal areas from a global perspective.

Steep increase

Dr Jevrejeva said: “We found that with a temperature rise trajectory of 1.5°C, by 2100 the median sea level will have risen by 0.52m (1.7ft). But, if the 2°C target is missed, we will see a median sea level rise of 0.86m (2.8ft), and a worst-case rise of 1.8m (5.9ft).”

If warming was not mitigated the global annual flood costs without adaptation would increase to $14tn annually for the median sea level rise of 0.86m, and up to $27tn per year for 1.8m. This would account for 2.8% of global GDP in 2100.

The conclusions she and her colleagues reached sound hair-raising and possibly far-fetched. But an earlier study put the possible global cost by 2100 of coastal flooding at nearly four times more than the NOC team – $100tn.

Another group of researchers suggested that if global warming continued at its present rate it could start a process in Antarctica which would lead ultimately to sea level rise of almost three metres.

Impact on tropics

The projected difference in coastal sea levels is also likely to mean that tropical areas will see very high sea levels more often, the study says.

“These extreme sea levels will have a negative effect on the economies of developing coastal nations, and the habitability of low-lying coastlines,” said Dr Jevrejeva.

“Small, low-lying island nations such as the Maldives will be very easily affected, and the pressures on their natural resources and environment will become even greater.

“These results place further emphasis on putting even greater efforts into mitigating rising global temperatures.” – Climate News Network

British app traps Peru’s illegal goldminers

A smartphone app devised by a British campaign group has brought to justice illegal goldminers in Peru, and is also being tested in African forests.

LONDON, 3 July, 2018 – An indigenous community in the Peruvian Amazon has helped to catch illegal goldminers red-handed using a smartphone app developed by a London-based environmental group, the Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK).

The app employs smartphones linked to satellites, and by involving communities in monitoring provides a tool which connects local people with national law enforcement, in an attempt to stop deforestation.

Rachel Agnew, the Foundation’s head of communications, says: “The beauty of it is that it’s adaptable to a wide range of contexts. The tech actually evolved from a large mapping project when we discovered that it was possible to transmit small pockets of data from remote parts of the forest, via satellite, in real time.”

Using RFUK’s specially designed ForestLink system,  remote communities can send alerts and evidence of threats to the forest, including illegal mining and oil spills, to law enforcement agencies, even from areas with no mobile or internet connectivity.

“Local people . . . are on the frontlines of the fight against deforestation”

The forest group involved in the miners’ detention, the Masenawa community in Peru’s Madre de Dios region, has been working with RFUK and another local organisation, Federación Nativa del Rio Madre de Dios y Afluentes  (Fenamad), since 2016 to monitor illegal activity, using ForestLink.

The miners were caught in June just a few kilometres from the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve. They had set up a temporary camp as they searched for gold using heavy machinery, which attracted the attention of the Masenawa, who were on a monitoring mission.

Using a satellite uplink-fitted smartphone, the monitors promptly sent evidence of the mining to Fenamad, which reported it to the Peruvian authorities. The government’s environmental police force then intervened, destroying the miners’ machines, vehicles and other equipment in a series of controlled explosions. Five suspects were detained, and charges are now pending.

“Communities are the natural guardians of the Amazon. Technologies like ForestLink are helping indigenous peoples to protect the rainforest from illegal mining, even in areas outside their titled lands,” explained Fenamad’s real-time monitoring coordinator, Rosa Baca, in a statement.

Threats and beatings

The president of the Masenawa community, Carmen Irey Cameno, is a vocal opponent of goldmining. Since denouncing the illegal activity several members of the community have been threatened and two members of Cameno’s own family have been beaten up in retaliation.

“It’s alarming to see environmental defenders threatened and intimidated in this way”, said RFUK’s Peru and Andean Amazon coordinator, Aldo Soto. “At the same time, the determination of Carmen and her people in protecting their environment is truly inspiring.

“What this intervention shows is the power of harnessing technology for social good and putting it in the hands of local people, who are on the frontlines of the fight against deforestation.”

Madre de Dios is considered the capital of biodiversity in Peru, home to several natural reserves as well as the Manu National Park. In recent years illegal goldmining has become one of the leading drivers of deforestation in the region.

Grave threat

Goldmining, whether legal or not, has also become one of the most serious environmental and human rights problems across Peru, with an estimated US$15 billion-worth produced illegally between 2003 and 2014.

Research elsewhere in Latin America, published in 2017, has shown that when the price of gold rises, deforestation increases, while a price drop reduces the threat to the trees. Other researchers have found evidence showing a link between metals mined in Peru and Colombia and smelters in the European Union.

By 2015, there were an estimated 30,000 artisanal goldminers (all of whom needed a permit, RFUK says) operating in Madre de Dios alone.

The RFUK Real-Time Monitoring project is in use not only in Peru, but also in three African states: Ghana, Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

In one of the most recent reprisal attacks on environmental protection groups reported worldwide, five wildlife rangers and a driver involved in safeguarding the gorillas of the Virunga national park in the DRC were killed in an ambush in April 2018. More than 170 rangers have been killed in the park while protecting animals in the last 20 years. – Climate News Network

A smartphone app devised by a British campaign group has brought to justice illegal goldminers in Peru, and is also being tested in African forests.

LONDON, 3 July, 2018 – An indigenous community in the Peruvian Amazon has helped to catch illegal goldminers red-handed using a smartphone app developed by a London-based environmental group, the Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK).

The app employs smartphones linked to satellites, and by involving communities in monitoring provides a tool which connects local people with national law enforcement, in an attempt to stop deforestation.

Rachel Agnew, the Foundation’s head of communications, says: “The beauty of it is that it’s adaptable to a wide range of contexts. The tech actually evolved from a large mapping project when we discovered that it was possible to transmit small pockets of data from remote parts of the forest, via satellite, in real time.”

Using RFUK’s specially designed ForestLink system,  remote communities can send alerts and evidence of threats to the forest, including illegal mining and oil spills, to law enforcement agencies, even from areas with no mobile or internet connectivity.

“Local people . . . are on the frontlines of the fight against deforestation”

The forest group involved in the miners’ detention, the Masenawa community in Peru’s Madre de Dios region, has been working with RFUK and another local organisation, Federación Nativa del Rio Madre de Dios y Afluentes  (Fenamad), since 2016 to monitor illegal activity, using ForestLink.

The miners were caught in June just a few kilometres from the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve. They had set up a temporary camp as they searched for gold using heavy machinery, which attracted the attention of the Masenawa, who were on a monitoring mission.

Using a satellite uplink-fitted smartphone, the monitors promptly sent evidence of the mining to Fenamad, which reported it to the Peruvian authorities. The government’s environmental police force then intervened, destroying the miners’ machines, vehicles and other equipment in a series of controlled explosions. Five suspects were detained, and charges are now pending.

“Communities are the natural guardians of the Amazon. Technologies like ForestLink are helping indigenous peoples to protect the rainforest from illegal mining, even in areas outside their titled lands,” explained Fenamad’s real-time monitoring coordinator, Rosa Baca, in a statement.

Threats and beatings

The president of the Masenawa community, Carmen Irey Cameno, is a vocal opponent of goldmining. Since denouncing the illegal activity several members of the community have been threatened and two members of Cameno’s own family have been beaten up in retaliation.

“It’s alarming to see environmental defenders threatened and intimidated in this way”, said RFUK’s Peru and Andean Amazon coordinator, Aldo Soto. “At the same time, the determination of Carmen and her people in protecting their environment is truly inspiring.

“What this intervention shows is the power of harnessing technology for social good and putting it in the hands of local people, who are on the frontlines of the fight against deforestation.”

Madre de Dios is considered the capital of biodiversity in Peru, home to several natural reserves as well as the Manu National Park. In recent years illegal goldmining has become one of the leading drivers of deforestation in the region.

Grave threat

Goldmining, whether legal or not, has also become one of the most serious environmental and human rights problems across Peru, with an estimated US$15 billion-worth produced illegally between 2003 and 2014.

Research elsewhere in Latin America, published in 2017, has shown that when the price of gold rises, deforestation increases, while a price drop reduces the threat to the trees. Other researchers have found evidence showing a link between metals mined in Peru and Colombia and smelters in the European Union.

By 2015, there were an estimated 30,000 artisanal goldminers (all of whom needed a permit, RFUK says) operating in Madre de Dios alone.

The RFUK Real-Time Monitoring project is in use not only in Peru, but also in three African states: Ghana, Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

In one of the most recent reprisal attacks on environmental protection groups reported worldwide, five wildlife rangers and a driver involved in safeguarding the gorillas of the Virunga national park in the DRC were killed in an ambush in April 2018. More than 170 rangers have been killed in the park while protecting animals in the last 20 years. – Climate News Network

Urban trees match rainforests as carbon stores

Not just decorative, urban trees do much more: they enrich civic life, moderate climate change and save the taxpayer millions.

LONDON, 29 June, 2018 – London researchers have identified a new reason for preserving urban trees. Woodland in the world’s great cities, originally intended to enhance the streets, can store as much carbon as a comparable stand of tropical rainforest.

Great concentrations of people in rapidly expanding cities are both driving climate change and at the same time increasingly vulnerable to the extremes of heat threatened by runaway global warming. So the finding is another reminder of the impact that megacities have both on climate change and on the answers to climate change.

Other research teams have already emphasised the direct value of green canopy in crowded urban streets: one study has calculated that megacities benefit to the value of around $500 million a year just by having tree-lined streets and shaded parks.

Another has matched the foliage in the avenues with real estate prices to find that, in California at least, street trees add up to $1 billion to property values.

“The approach has been really successful so far, so we’re extending it across London, to other cities in the UK and internationally”

And, for once, urban foresters gain something from the increasingly warm and sometimes stifling conditions in the cities: street, garden and park trees flourish as the temperatures creep up.

London geographers report in the journal Carbon Balance and Management that they used airborne LiDAR data – the acronym is short for light detection and ranging – and ground measurements to generate a map of the carbon stored in 85,000 trees in just one area of London, the borough of Camden.

They found that parkland such as Hampstead Heath – a famous London open space – stored up to 178 metric tons of carbon per hectare: this is comparable with the 190 tonnes that are typically stored in tropical rainforests.

Trees have value: they provide shade, absorb rainwater, filter the air, and offer habitat for other creatures. One calculation suggests that the services delivered by London’s planes, oaks and horse chestnuts are worth $175 million (£133 m) a year in total: the carbon storage capacity alone is valued at $6.3m (£4.8m) a year. The next step is to take the technique beyond the boundaries of one local authority.

Vital resource

“An important outcome of our work was to highlight the value of urban trees, in their various and very different settings. The approach has been really successful so far, so we’re extending it across London, to other cities in the UK and internationally,” said Mat Disney, an author, and leader of the University College London geography LiDAR research group.

And his co-author Phil Wilkes, also at UCL, said: “Urban trees are a vital resource for our cities that people walk past every day. We were able to map the size and shape of every tree in Camden, from forests in large parks to individual trees in back gardens.

“This not only allows us to measure how much carbon is stored in these trees but also assess other important services they provide, such as habitat for birds and insects.” – Climate News Network

Not just decorative, urban trees do much more: they enrich civic life, moderate climate change and save the taxpayer millions.

LONDON, 29 June, 2018 – London researchers have identified a new reason for preserving urban trees. Woodland in the world’s great cities, originally intended to enhance the streets, can store as much carbon as a comparable stand of tropical rainforest.

Great concentrations of people in rapidly expanding cities are both driving climate change and at the same time increasingly vulnerable to the extremes of heat threatened by runaway global warming. So the finding is another reminder of the impact that megacities have both on climate change and on the answers to climate change.

Other research teams have already emphasised the direct value of green canopy in crowded urban streets: one study has calculated that megacities benefit to the value of around $500 million a year just by having tree-lined streets and shaded parks.

Another has matched the foliage in the avenues with real estate prices to find that, in California at least, street trees add up to $1 billion to property values.

“The approach has been really successful so far, so we’re extending it across London, to other cities in the UK and internationally”

And, for once, urban foresters gain something from the increasingly warm and sometimes stifling conditions in the cities: street, garden and park trees flourish as the temperatures creep up.

London geographers report in the journal Carbon Balance and Management that they used airborne LiDAR data – the acronym is short for light detection and ranging – and ground measurements to generate a map of the carbon stored in 85,000 trees in just one area of London, the borough of Camden.

They found that parkland such as Hampstead Heath – a famous London open space – stored up to 178 metric tons of carbon per hectare: this is comparable with the 190 tonnes that are typically stored in tropical rainforests.

Trees have value: they provide shade, absorb rainwater, filter the air, and offer habitat for other creatures. One calculation suggests that the services delivered by London’s planes, oaks and horse chestnuts are worth $175 million (£133 m) a year in total: the carbon storage capacity alone is valued at $6.3m (£4.8m) a year. The next step is to take the technique beyond the boundaries of one local authority.

Vital resource

“An important outcome of our work was to highlight the value of urban trees, in their various and very different settings. The approach has been really successful so far, so we’re extending it across London, to other cities in the UK and internationally,” said Mat Disney, an author, and leader of the University College London geography LiDAR research group.

And his co-author Phil Wilkes, also at UCL, said: “Urban trees are a vital resource for our cities that people walk past every day. We were able to map the size and shape of every tree in Camden, from forests in large parks to individual trees in back gardens.

“This not only allows us to measure how much carbon is stored in these trees but also assess other important services they provide, such as habitat for birds and insects.” – Climate News Network

New fuel from CO2 can slow climate change

New fuel from CO2, the source of all fossil fuels, can help to slow climate change. And maybe the carbon dioxide would not need burying for so long.

LONDON, 27 June, 2018 – North American scientists may be one step nearer the dream solution to low-carbon energy, new fuel from CO2, if they can suck it straight from the air and convert it directly into gasoline, diesel or jet fuel.

That is, they could deliver instant fossil fuels. They could do what nature has done – all coal, oil and natural gas began with carbon dioxide absorbed by living tissue – without the time and expense of deep burial for a hundred million years or so.

In principle, they could also use their direct air capture technology to draw the greenhouse gas from the air, turn it into liquid and store it in a secure geological formation for 100,000 years.

Since the search for low-carbon technologies is driven by the environmental and climate costs of global warming and climate change as a consequence of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion, the trick of converting atmospheric carbon into fuel directly would go some way to limiting climate change.

“Making fuels that are easy to store and transport eases the challenge of integrating renewables into the energy system”

As ever, the only barrier to such ingenuity would be the cost and the challenge of turning the technology from laboratory prototype to commercial success on an industrial scale.

David Keith, a Harvard researcher who founded a Canadian start-up called Carbon Engineering, and colleagues report in the journal Joule that they have a design for a process that could capture a million tons of carbon dioxide a year in a continuous process, using a fan system and some clever chemistry to absorb and concentrate the captured CO2.

They also calculate that the cost per ton captured will work out somewhere between $94 a ton of carbon dioxide and $232.

And from that point, the captured carbon dioxide could become a feedstock for the manufacture of liquid fuel. Scientists have argued for nearly a decade that the exhausts from power stations and combustion engines should be considered as an asset to be exploited, and researchers around the world have been racing to find ways to take surplus atmospheric carbon and turn it into something that will power a truck or tractor or get a commercial flight airborne.

Argument persists

They have shown in principle that atmospheric carbon dioxide can be converted to rock, potentially for burial, but although other groups have shown that long-term storage of captured carbon dioxide should be possible, there is still argument over whether such storage is either practical or economic.

Some researchers are convinced that the world’s needs could be delivered entirely by renewable energy such as wind and sunlight, but wheeled transport needs portable fuel. So other groups have looked closely at the idea of deriving energy from natural resources.

Others have explored the “bionic leaf” that could mechanically turn atmospheric carbon dioxide into biofuel or fertiliser; or into jet fuel.

The latest study offers another way to close the loop, by “inhaling” air, trapping the carbon dioxide with an absorbent liquid, and turning it, with hydrogen, into fuel, using technologies and techniques already commercially in use. But, of course, it requires energy – from natural gas or direct electricity – to power the process that will turn carbon dioxide from spent fossil fuel back into fuel again and keep levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide down.

Reductions possible

Something like one-fifth of the global carbon dioxide emissions that are changing the atmosphere and heating the globe are from transport. If the direct-air capture technique could be linked directly to wind or solar energy, those emissions could be reduced.

“Electricity from solar and wind is intermittent; we can take this energy straight from big solar or wind institutions at great sites where it is cheap and apply it to reclaim and recycle carbon dioxide into new fuel,” said Professor Keith.

“Making fuels that are easy to store and transport eases the challenge of integrating renewables into the energy system.” – Climate News Network

New fuel from CO2, the source of all fossil fuels, can help to slow climate change. And maybe the carbon dioxide would not need burying for so long.

LONDON, 27 June, 2018 – North American scientists may be one step nearer the dream solution to low-carbon energy, new fuel from CO2, if they can suck it straight from the air and convert it directly into gasoline, diesel or jet fuel.

That is, they could deliver instant fossil fuels. They could do what nature has done – all coal, oil and natural gas began with carbon dioxide absorbed by living tissue – without the time and expense of deep burial for a hundred million years or so.

In principle, they could also use their direct air capture technology to draw the greenhouse gas from the air, turn it into liquid and store it in a secure geological formation for 100,000 years.

Since the search for low-carbon technologies is driven by the environmental and climate costs of global warming and climate change as a consequence of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion, the trick of converting atmospheric carbon into fuel directly would go some way to limiting climate change.

“Making fuels that are easy to store and transport eases the challenge of integrating renewables into the energy system”

As ever, the only barrier to such ingenuity would be the cost and the challenge of turning the technology from laboratory prototype to commercial success on an industrial scale.

David Keith, a Harvard researcher who founded a Canadian start-up called Carbon Engineering, and colleagues report in the journal Joule that they have a design for a process that could capture a million tons of carbon dioxide a year in a continuous process, using a fan system and some clever chemistry to absorb and concentrate the captured CO2.

They also calculate that the cost per ton captured will work out somewhere between $94 a ton of carbon dioxide and $232.

And from that point, the captured carbon dioxide could become a feedstock for the manufacture of liquid fuel. Scientists have argued for nearly a decade that the exhausts from power stations and combustion engines should be considered as an asset to be exploited, and researchers around the world have been racing to find ways to take surplus atmospheric carbon and turn it into something that will power a truck or tractor or get a commercial flight airborne.

Argument persists

They have shown in principle that atmospheric carbon dioxide can be converted to rock, potentially for burial, but although other groups have shown that long-term storage of captured carbon dioxide should be possible, there is still argument over whether such storage is either practical or economic.

Some researchers are convinced that the world’s needs could be delivered entirely by renewable energy such as wind and sunlight, but wheeled transport needs portable fuel. So other groups have looked closely at the idea of deriving energy from natural resources.

Others have explored the “bionic leaf” that could mechanically turn atmospheric carbon dioxide into biofuel or fertiliser; or into jet fuel.

The latest study offers another way to close the loop, by “inhaling” air, trapping the carbon dioxide with an absorbent liquid, and turning it, with hydrogen, into fuel, using technologies and techniques already commercially in use. But, of course, it requires energy – from natural gas or direct electricity – to power the process that will turn carbon dioxide from spent fossil fuel back into fuel again and keep levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide down.

Reductions possible

Something like one-fifth of the global carbon dioxide emissions that are changing the atmosphere and heating the globe are from transport. If the direct-air capture technique could be linked directly to wind or solar energy, those emissions could be reduced.

“Electricity from solar and wind is intermittent; we can take this energy straight from big solar or wind institutions at great sites where it is cheap and apply it to reclaim and recycle carbon dioxide into new fuel,” said Professor Keith.

“Making fuels that are easy to store and transport eases the challenge of integrating renewables into the energy system.” – Climate News Network

Cost of fossil fuel investment is too high

Fossil fuel investment is not just bad for the global climate. It could also be dangerous for investors, and for national economies.

LONDON, 12 June, 2018 – European and Chinese scientists have identified a simple new way to become poor: fossil fuel investment. Not only could it leave you without a penny to your name. It could perhaps precipitate a global financial crash within one generation.

Coal, oil and natural gas are already huge investments. The International Energy Agency foresees price rises until 2040, and investor confidence is high. But researchers from the Netherlands, the UK and Macao don’t see it that way.
They warn in the journal Nature Climate Change that, whatever the markets think, and whatever governments do, change is on the way.

Other forces are now driving global power and transportation in directions that suggest a dramatic decline in demand for fossil reserves. These will become what the money markets call “stranded assets”, and their value will slump some time before 2035.

And this bursting of what researchers call “the carbon bubble” – a reference to a three-centuries old financial disaster known to historians as the South Sea Bubble – could wipe between one and four trillion US dollars off the global economy. The financial crash of 2008  was triggered by a loss of a mere $0.25 trillion.

“Our analysis suggests that, contrary to investor expectations, the stranding of fossil fuel assets may happen even without new climate policies”

The scientists base their conclusion on a computer simulation known by the migraine-inducing acronym E3ME-FTT-GENIE, which is short for Energy-Environment-Economy Macroeconomic-Future Technology Transformations Grid Enabled Integrated Earth. They say it is the only such model that looks at the big picture: the macroeconomy, energy, the environment and global energy and transport systems according to both sector and geography.

Their argument is that the world is heading towards greater fuel efficiencies, renewable energy and low carbon technologies, whatever governments and the money markets may think.

In 2015, in Paris, 195 nations vowed to contain global warming – driven by greenhouse gases emitted from fossil fuel combustion – to “well below” 2°C above the historic levels. Economists and climate scientists have repeatedly warned that fossil fuels would be a bad bet. There has been evidence since the Paris Agreement that national and international action so far taken is not enough: the world could be heading for at least a 3°C rise this century.

The implication of the latest study is that, unless the world faces this reality, and switches to low-carbon investments, the global economy could suddenly collapse.
“Our analysis suggests that, contrary to investor expectations, the stranding of fossil fuel assets may happen even without new climate policies. This suggests a carbon bubble is forming and is likely to burst,” said Jorge Viñuales, of the University of Cambridge, and one of the authors.

“Individual nations cannot avoid the situation by ignoring the Paris Agreement or burying their heads in coal and tar sands. For too long, global climate policy has been seen as a prisoner’s dilemma game, where some nations can do nothing and get a free ride on the efforts of others. Our results show this is no longer the case.”

$4tn time-bomb

There is a catch: suppose nations become aware of the danger. A sudden push to fulfil the 2°C promise, combined with declines in fossil fuel demand but continued high output of fossil fuels, could trigger a collapse that would wipe $4 trillion off the global balance sheets.

Canada, Russia and the US would see their fossil fuel industries collapse. Fuel-importing nations such Japan, China and most EU countries might gain, especially if they had invested in low-carbon technologies to create jobs and boost gross domestic product.

“If we are to defuse this time-bomb in the global economy, we need to move promptly but cautiously. The carbon bubble must be deflated before it becomes too big, but progress must also be carefully managed,” said Hector Pollitt, of the University of Cambridge, and another of the authors.

“If countries keep investing in equipment to search for, extract, process and transport fossil fuels, even though their demand declines, they will end up losing money on these investments on top of their losses due to limited exports,” said Jean-François Mercure of Radboud University at Nijmegen in the Netherlands, and of Cambridge, who led the study. “Divestment from fossil fuels is both a prudent and necessary thing to do.” – Climate News Network

Fossil fuel investment is not just bad for the global climate. It could also be dangerous for investors, and for national economies.

LONDON, 12 June, 2018 – European and Chinese scientists have identified a simple new way to become poor: fossil fuel investment. Not only could it leave you without a penny to your name. It could perhaps precipitate a global financial crash within one generation.

Coal, oil and natural gas are already huge investments. The International Energy Agency foresees price rises until 2040, and investor confidence is high. But researchers from the Netherlands, the UK and Macao don’t see it that way.
They warn in the journal Nature Climate Change that, whatever the markets think, and whatever governments do, change is on the way.

Other forces are now driving global power and transportation in directions that suggest a dramatic decline in demand for fossil reserves. These will become what the money markets call “stranded assets”, and their value will slump some time before 2035.

And this bursting of what researchers call “the carbon bubble” – a reference to a three-centuries old financial disaster known to historians as the South Sea Bubble – could wipe between one and four trillion US dollars off the global economy. The financial crash of 2008  was triggered by a loss of a mere $0.25 trillion.

“Our analysis suggests that, contrary to investor expectations, the stranding of fossil fuel assets may happen even without new climate policies”

The scientists base their conclusion on a computer simulation known by the migraine-inducing acronym E3ME-FTT-GENIE, which is short for Energy-Environment-Economy Macroeconomic-Future Technology Transformations Grid Enabled Integrated Earth. They say it is the only such model that looks at the big picture: the macroeconomy, energy, the environment and global energy and transport systems according to both sector and geography.

Their argument is that the world is heading towards greater fuel efficiencies, renewable energy and low carbon technologies, whatever governments and the money markets may think.

In 2015, in Paris, 195 nations vowed to contain global warming – driven by greenhouse gases emitted from fossil fuel combustion – to “well below” 2°C above the historic levels. Economists and climate scientists have repeatedly warned that fossil fuels would be a bad bet. There has been evidence since the Paris Agreement that national and international action so far taken is not enough: the world could be heading for at least a 3°C rise this century.

The implication of the latest study is that, unless the world faces this reality, and switches to low-carbon investments, the global economy could suddenly collapse.
“Our analysis suggests that, contrary to investor expectations, the stranding of fossil fuel assets may happen even without new climate policies. This suggests a carbon bubble is forming and is likely to burst,” said Jorge Viñuales, of the University of Cambridge, and one of the authors.

“Individual nations cannot avoid the situation by ignoring the Paris Agreement or burying their heads in coal and tar sands. For too long, global climate policy has been seen as a prisoner’s dilemma game, where some nations can do nothing and get a free ride on the efforts of others. Our results show this is no longer the case.”

$4tn time-bomb

There is a catch: suppose nations become aware of the danger. A sudden push to fulfil the 2°C promise, combined with declines in fossil fuel demand but continued high output of fossil fuels, could trigger a collapse that would wipe $4 trillion off the global balance sheets.

Canada, Russia and the US would see their fossil fuel industries collapse. Fuel-importing nations such Japan, China and most EU countries might gain, especially if they had invested in low-carbon technologies to create jobs and boost gross domestic product.

“If we are to defuse this time-bomb in the global economy, we need to move promptly but cautiously. The carbon bubble must be deflated before it becomes too big, but progress must also be carefully managed,” said Hector Pollitt, of the University of Cambridge, and another of the authors.

“If countries keep investing in equipment to search for, extract, process and transport fossil fuels, even though their demand declines, they will end up losing money on these investments on top of their losses due to limited exports,” said Jean-François Mercure of Radboud University at Nijmegen in the Netherlands, and of Cambridge, who led the study. “Divestment from fossil fuels is both a prudent and necessary thing to do.” – Climate News Network