Smoke From Wood Burning Stoves Pose Major Climate and Health Problems
Another potent climate change driver has been on the radar of many scientists lately. The problem is soot emissions from wood fired stoves used extensively throughout the developing world. The soot emissions are believed to be so potent that they are considered by some to be the second biggest driver of climate change after CO2.
The NYT reports:
While carbon dioxide may be the No. 1 contributor to rising global temperatures, scientists say, black carbon has emerged as an important No. 2, with recent studies estimating that it is responsible for 18 percent of the planet’s warming, compared with 40 percent for carbon dioxide. Decreasing black carbon emissions would be a relatively cheap way to significantly rein in global warming – especially in the short term, climate experts say. Replacing primitive cooking stoves with modern versions that emit far less soot could provide a much-needed stopgap, while nations struggle with the more difficult task of enacting programs and developing technologies to curb carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels.
[And] unlike carbon dioxide, which lingers in the atmosphere for years, soot stays there for a few weeks.
In order to minimize soot emissions, wood stoves must be outfitted with basic smoke stack technologies such as filters and scrubbers. Retrofitting home burners with filters would not only mitigate climate change, but it would provide locals with much safer breathing air, as particulate pollution is extremely unhealthy for human lungs. Whether this can be accomplished will depend on whether the international community can come together to fund a widespread program. This will be necessary since some of the worst particulate polluters are often some of the world’s poorest people.
Energy Giants Ignore Their Own Greenwashing Campaigns
NYT had an interesting article this week about Big Oil’s resistance to developing renewable energy sources. Normally, this wouldn’t be a big surprise– as Big Oil is naturally in the business of producing big oil. However, given the nearly ubiquitous marketing campaigns run by the energy giants touting their newfound green credentials, their failure to live up to these claims is hypocritical and deceptive. For example:
- BP has been shrinking its renewables program since 2007, despite the continued claim that it is moving Beyond Petroleum.
- Royal Dutch Shell announced last month that it was freezing research and investments in wind, solar, and hydrogen power (although it will continue its biofuels research). While Shell claims to have spent $1.7 billion since 2004 on alternative energy projects, it has spent $87 billion in that same timeframe on oil and gas projects.
- Exxon Mobil’s CEO Rex Tillerson notes, “In my view, nothing has really changed. We don’t oppose alternative energy sources and the development of those. But to hang the future of the country’s energy on those alternatives alone belies reality of their size and scale.” Exxon’s own long-term forecast predicts that by 2050, oil, gas, and coal will account for 80% of the world’s energy supplies– which is the same as today.
Of course, none of these facts should come as a surprise. Without a comprehensive carbon policy from Washington, the most profitable thing these companies can do is to sell hydrocarbons. Unless and until we more accurately price the real cost of burning fossil fuels via a carbon tax or cap-and-trade, these companies will have no reason to change their behavior (and nor should they be expected to). But in the meantime, the public needs to recognize that their big green marketing campaigns are nothing more than a distraction. Real change will only come when our “leaders” in Washington can do what’s needed and pass a meaningful climate bill.
Congressman: God Decides When ‘The Earth Will End’
This clip shows Congressman John Shimkus’s (R-Ill) introductory remarks at a House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment hearing last week.
Study Finds Sharp Decline in Ocean Organism Resulting from Climate Change
According to a study published in Nature Geoscience, ocean acidification driven by climate change is sharply affecting the health of microscopic sea organisms called foraminifera. These amoeba-like organisms live on the surface water of oceans and traditionally absorb huge amounts of carbon pollution from the atmosphere.
The foraminifera have been a buffer against climate change, as they absorb CO2 from the air and transform it into their calcium-based shells. When they die, their shells sink to the ocean floor, thereby storing the carbon indefinitely. However, due to increased ocean acidification resulting from greenhouse gas emissions, modern shells now weigh 30-35% less than those found in sediments ranging from before the Industrial Revolution. This decline in shell size is both a cause and effect of climate change. It is caused by increased ocean acidification, but it will also magnify the effect of greenhouse gas emissions, since less carbon will now be removed from the atmosphere.
Additionally, the study found a historic link between higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and low shell weights in a 50,000-year-long record obtained from a Southern Ocean marine sediment core.
Obama May Support Single National Standard for Vehicle Efficiency
While early indications appeared that the Obama Administration was going to grant California its waiver to independently regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, it now looks like they are considering a single national standard. On Sunday, Obama’s assistant for energy and climate, Carol Browner said “The hope across the administration is that we can have a unified national policy when it comes to cleaner vehicles.”
The impact of such a policy shift would depend entirely on how strict any national standard is crafted. Historically, car companies and anti-environmentalists have supported national emissions standards because Congressional legislation is invariably weaker and more watered down than legislation that comes out of liberal states like California. And if federal pre-emption is followed, states are locked out of creating their own standards.
While federal standards, in theory, could be just as strong, if not stronger than state laws, this is never the case. Current federal law aims to have a national average of 35 mpg by 2020, while California’s proposed rule would be 42 mpg. It seems unlikely, especially having seen the extreme partisanship with the stimulus package, that Obama would have the political capital and votes in Congress to buck this historic trend and push-through a meaningful national standard.
EPA Rejects Bush Administration Position on Coal Emissions
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said on Tuesday that the agency would reconsider regulating CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants, in opposition to the previous administration’s position laid out by former Administrator Stephen Johnson in December.
Jackson noted that the Bush Administration’s position is not “the final word on the appropriate interpretation of the Clean Air Act,” but she stopped short of issuing a stay of former Administrator Johnson’s memorandum. Jackson’s position brings the Obama Administration’s position closer to that expressed by the EPA Appeals Board in November, which held that the permitting process for new coal plants must consider the use of “best available controls” by that plant to limit CO2 emissions.
Environmental groups are optimistic that this is the first step towards implementing an emissions regime for coal-fired plants. Already, many coal energy projects have been put on hold over fears that impending regulations could make these projects unfeasible since carbon sequestration techniques are extremely expensive and unproven.
Places to Visit Before Climate Change Ruins Them
CNN has a list from author Bob Henson of the Five places to go before global warming messes them up:
(1) Great Barrier Reef, Australia
“Many of the world’s reefs already are experiencing “bleaching” in which algae living in the coral die and leave behind whitened skeletons.
“The Great Barrier Reef — which is composed of about 2,900 individual reefs and is off the northeast coast of Australia — is seeing limited bleaching now, and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority expects the problem to grow in coming decades.”
“But for cities near the coast such as New Orleans, which already sits below sea level, rising waters could spell trouble for tourists and residents alike, even in the relative near term.
“Henson doesn’t expect New Orleans to be underwater anytime soon. But travel to the Louisiana city may become more difficult in the future, he said. Scientists expect floods to become more frequent.” READ MORE
Energy Secretary Chu: Progress Needed in Batteries, Solar and Biofuels
Energy Secretary Steven Chu discussed the ways the U.S. should fight climate change in an interview with the New York Times. Chu noted that while President Obama and much of Congress has endorsed a cap-and-trade system similar to that in-place in Europe, alternatives could still emerge like a simple tax on carbon emissions or a modified cap-and-trade.
Chu highlighted three fields in particular that would require significant scientific breakthrough to combat climate change: electric batteries, solar power, and biofuels. Of course, batteries and biofuels are keys to shifting our automobiles off of petroleum, and solar could eventually replace dirty coal.
However, (taking a page from Friedman’s playbook) Chu noted that countries like India and China, which have large coal reserves, will not abandon that cheap energy source, so the U.S. better lead the world in finding a way to burn it cleanly.
Chu noted that while the technology may not be there yet, these feats are far from impossible. He analogized the situation to the turn of the nineteenth century when European scientists Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch made scientific discoveries that allowed the development of cheap nitrogen fertilizers that saved Europe from starvation.
UK Looks to Weatherize Every Home by 2030
British Energy and Climate Change minister Ed Miliband proposed a comprehensive scheme to dramatically increase the energy efficiency of all UK homes by 2030. If implemented, the plan could help cut carbon emissions from households by a third by 2020. Heating and powering of households currently accounts for 27% of the UK’s overall carbon emissions. Under a very progressive plan, the UK aims to reduce overall emissions by 80% by 2050.
The weatherization and other efficiency measures proposed on Thursday would retrofit 7 million homes by 2020 and every home by 2030. All households would be eligible to apply for a loan from energy companies, in order to pay for insulation or renewable sources of heating. The loan would be repaid from the resulting energy savings and from cash payments households would receive in return for cutting carbon emissions.
Miliband could just as easily have been describing America’s problem when he stated, “We need to move from incremental steps forward on household energy efficiency to a comprehensive national plan.”
Although the U.S. is increasing its attention on weatherization efforts under Obama, and the stimulus bill does include $5 billion to weatherize modest-income homes, there is no comprehensive plan on the table equivalent to that proposed by the UK.
Northern Ireland Environmental Minister Bans Climate Change Ad
Reminding us that “leadership” is a flexible word that is often more synonymous with “ignorance” than its traditional meaning, Northern Ireland’s environmental minister on Monday announced that he is blocking an ad on climate change because it claims the problem is man-made, instead of a god-made. This shining example of rational thought is named Sammy Wilson and is a hard-line protestant and leading member of the Democratic Unionist Party.
The banned advertisement is part of the British “Act on CO2” campaign that encourages the public to reduce the use of electricity and fossil fuels.
[Note: the above ad is just one from the Act on CO2 campaign.]
Gasoline Prices Magically Rise as Oil Stagnates
The entire oil production chain stinks. From the cartel of petro-states that drill it to fund their illegitimate regimes, to the traders that hoard it and play market games, to the allegedly independently operated refineries that mysteriously require unexplained maintenance all at the same time, the path to the pump is to corrupt and too easily manipulated. Practically every step along this chain there is the will and the ability to artificially decrease the supply in order to prop up prices.
Despite the fact that a barrel of crude has been sitting around $40, the average price of a gallon of gas is now $1.92, up from $1.79 a month ago.
Gregg Laskoski, managing director of public relations for AAA Auto Club South said that some of the increase in price can be attributed to lower output by U.S. refineries. Laskoski noted the odd situation where “A recession and rising unemployment translates into fewer motorists on the road and diminishing fuel consumption, and yet, retail prices climb higher.”
The sooner we transition off of this corrupt and polluting commodity, the sooner our economy, planet, and way-of-life, can regain some security.
Chu: Climate Change Could Wipe Out California Agriculture (and Maybe Cities)
Energy Secretary Steven Chu warned this week that climate change could wipe out all agriculture in California by the end of the century and also put that state’s cities in peril. The changing climate is increasing California’s temperatures, prolonging droughts, and melting the snowpack in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Chu noted that 90% of that essential snowpack could disappear by century’s end.
Chu warned that this changing climate and loss of water resources could end California’s entire agricultural industry and make the viability of life in the already arid region tenuous.
“I don’t think the American public has gripped in its gut what could happen,” Chu told the LA Times. “We’re looking at a scenario where there’s no more agriculture in California,” adding, “I don’t actually see how they can keep their cities going” either. READ MORE
A Bad Public Relations Week for Coal
Green Inc. notes that it has been a bad week for coal in the national media, listing a series of unrelated stories that cast a negative light on this dirty energy source:
THE GREAT FALLS TRIBUNE
A Bad Week for Coal Plants in North-Central Montana
Last Thursday, the Air Force announced that it had rejected proposals to build a large coal-to-liquid-fuels plant at or near Malmstrom Air Force Base. Tuesday, Southern Montana Electric Generation and Transmission announced it is giving up on a proposed coal-fired power plant northeast of the city, at least for now.
List of Top Wind Power States
According to the American Wind Energy Association, as of today, the top five states for wind energy generation are:
1. Texas, 7,116 MW
2. Iowa, 2,790 MW
3. California, 2,517 MW
4. Minnesota, 1,752 MW
5. Washington, 1,375 MW
Report: 2008 Was a Big Year for Wind Energy Growth
The American Wind Energy Association, an industry trade group, released a report this week indicating a record growth in wind energy in 2008, with more than 8,000 MW of new generating capacity having been installed. This increase grew the nation’s total wind power capacity by 50% and actually accounted for about 42% of all new power capacity added to the national grid last year. However, despite this good news, the report also warned that 2009 is set to see a halt in that growth due to the poor economy and credit crisis.
