Carbon capture goes down the tubes

Carbon capture goes down the tubes

One of the much-heralded solutions to climate change which its supporters believe could enable the world to continue to burn fossil fuels looks likely to be a failure.

LONDON, 2 July, 2015 – Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is backed by governments and the International Energy Agency (IEA) as one of the best methods of reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and saving the planet from overheating.

The problem is that despite this enthusiasm and the fact that CCS (also called carbon sequestration) is technically possible, it is not happening. It is cheaper and easier to build wind and solar farms to produce electricity than it is to collect and store the carbon from coal-powered plants’ emissions.

For years CO2 has been used by injecting it into old oil wells to extract more fuel, but the cost of building new plants just to store the gas is proving prohibitive.

Hundreds of plants were expected to be up and running by 2030, but so far none has been built. Despite this, the IEA and governments across the world are relying on CCS to save the planet from climate change.

For example, official policy in the UK still envisages up to fifty industrial plants and power stations using CCS being linked to CO2 pipelines which would inject the gas into old oil and gas wells, removing it from the atmosphere for ever.

But research by Mads Dahl Gjefsen, a scientist at the TIK Centre of Technology, Innovation and Culture at the University of Oslo, Norway, says pessimism prevails within the industry about the future of carbon capture and storage in both the US and the European Union.

Cost too high

Collecting liquid carbon dioxide by pipeline from large plants powered by coal is designed to allow steel, cement and chemical industries to continue to operate without making climate change worse.

But the cost is proving so high that plants are not being built. This is partly because the penalties imposed by governments in the form of a carbon tax or charges for pollution permits are so low that there is no incentive for carbon capture.

Another problem is that the technology for removing carbon from fossil fuels, either before or after combustion, uses 40% more fuel to achieve the same amount of power.

In conferences designed to promote the technology enthusiasts wonder how long they can continue, despite the “fine promises” that it was this technology that would save the oil and gas industry, Gjefsen says.

He gives the example of Norway, which has invested billions of kroner in the research and development of CCS. In 2007 the former prime minister, Jens Stoltenberg, said that CCS would be “Norway’s moon landing.”

However, a full-scale treatment plant at the industrial site at Mongstad never came to fruition. The technology proved too energy-intensive and costly for large-scale use.

No takers

Four years of study and talking to industry insiders and environmental organisations, some of which have backed CCS, show the arguments for carbon capture differ from country to country, but in none of them is the technology taking off, he reports.

Gjefsen says that in America the major political restrictions on emissions never materialised. The only way that sufficient incentives could be provided to hasten the development of CCS is if emission cuts were imposed and the polluter made to pay.

In the EU, emission quotas were so generous that it was difficult to finance CCS because the price of carbon was so low.

Despite the fact that the technology is not being developed, the official position of governments remains that it is part of the solution to climate change.

They all accept the IEA estimate that to achieve a 50% cut in global CO2 emissions by 2050 (widely believed to be equivalent to limiting the increase in global temperature to 2°C), CCS will need to contribute nearly one-fifth of emissions reductions, across both power and industrial sectors.

The IEA has also estimated that by 2050 the cost of tackling climate change without CCS could be 70% higher than with it. The message from EU estimates is similar: 40% higher without CCS by 2030. – Climate News Network

Share This:

Renewable energy redoubles its global reach

Renewable energy redoubles its global reach

As the world economy and energy use both grew in 2014, renewables continued their rapid rise but carbon emissions did not. 

LONDON, 27 June, 2015 − A significant threshold has been crossed by renewable energy as analysts report that the sectorʼs size last year reached double the level it was at just 10 years earlier.

This expansion happened in a year when the global economy and energy use both grew, but without a matching rise in emissions of carbon dioxide − the main greenhouse gas targeted in efforts to restrain global warming.

The report by REN21, a global renewable energy policy network, says the result is an example of sustainable development. Despite the worldʼs annual 1.5% increase in energy consumption in recent years and 3% GDP growth last year, 2014ʼs CO emissions were unchanged from 2013ʼs total of 32.3 billion tonnes.

The reportʼs authors say this decoupling of economic and CO growth is due to Chinaʼs increased use of renewables and to efforts by OECD countries to promote more sustainable growth, including by increased energy efficiency and use of renewable energy.

“Renewable energy and improved energy efficiency are key to limiting global warming to 2°C and avoiding dangerous climate change,” says Arthouros Zervos, who chairs REN21.

Distorting subsidies

Solar, wind and other technologies, including large hydro-electric schemesused in 164 countries added another 135 Gigawatts last year to bring the worldʼs total installed renewable energy power capacity to 1,712 GW. This was 8.5% up on 2013, and more than double the 800 GW of capacity recorded in 2004. One GW can power between 750,000 and one million typical US homes.

The authors say the sectorʼs growth could be even greater were it not for more than US$550 bn paid out in annual subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear energy. They say the subsidies keep the prices for energy from these fuels artificially low, encouraging wasteful use and hindering competition.

Infographic: REN21

Christine Lins, executive secretary of REN21, says: “Creating a level playing field would strengthen the development and use of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies. Removing fossil fuel and hidden nuclear subsidies globally would make it evident that renewables are the cheapest energy option.”

By the end of 2014, renewables comprised an estimated 27.7% of the worldʼs power generating capacity − enough to supply an estimated 22.8% of global electricity demand.

The amount of electricity available from renewables worldwide is now greater than that produced by all coal-burning plants in the US. Coal supplied about 38% of US electricity in 2013, compared with around 50% in the early 2000s.

Solar photovoltaic capacity has had a rapid 68-fold growth, from 2.6 GW in 2004 to 177 GW in 2014, while wind power capacity has increased eightfold, from 48 GW in 2004 to 370 GW in 2014. Employment in the sector is also growing fast, with an estimated 7.7m people worldwide working directly or indirectly on renewable energy last year.

Outpacing fossil fuels

New investment globally in renewable power capacity was more than twice that of investment in net fossil fuel power capacity, continuing the trend of renewables outpacing fossil fuels in net investment for the fifth year running.

Investment in developing countries was up 36% from the previous year, to $131.3 bn. It came closer than ever to overtaking the investment total for developed economies, which reached $138.9 bn in 2014 − up only 3% from 2013.

China accounted for 63% of developing country investment, with Chile, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico, South Africa and Turkey each investing more than $1bn. By dollars spent, the leading countries for investment were China, the US, Japan, the UK and Germany. Leading countries for investments relative to per capita GDP were Burundi, Kenya, Honduras, Jordan and Uruguay.

But REN21 points out that more than a billion people − 15% of humanity − still lack access to electricity, and the entire African continent has less power generation capacity than Germany.

The report says that off-grid solar PV has “a significant and growing market presence”, and other distributed renewable energy technologies are improving life in remote off-grid areas.

However, it stresses that this growth rate is still not enough to achieve the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) goals of doubling renewable energy and energy efficiency, and providing universal access for all by 2030. − Climate News Network

Share This:

Court tells Dutch government it must cut back emissions

Court tells Dutch government it must cut back emissions

In a landmark ruling, the law has stepped in to demand that the Netherlands does more to tackle the imminent danger of climate change.

LONDON, 25 June, 2015 – A Dutch court has made history by ordering the Netherlands government to make deeper cuts than it is planning in its emissions of greenhouse gases.

The district court in The Hague − in its landmark legal requirement that a state should take precautions against climate change − said the government must “do more to avert the imminent danger caused by climate change”.

The court ruled that the Netherlands should, by 2020, reduce its CO2 emissions by at least 25% on their 1990 levels. The government is planning cuts of around 16%, but Denmark and Germany are already on course to cut their CO2 emissions by 40% by 2020.

The case was brought by the Urgenda Foundation – an NGO focused on the transition towards a sustainable society using only renewable energy − and nearly 900 co-plaintiffs.

Already suffering

Marjan Minnesma, director of Urgenda, said: “Millions of people who are already suffering the consequences of climate change are hoping that we, the people that have caused the emissions and have the means to reduce them, will intervene while there is still time.”

Comparable legal cases are being prepared in Belgium, Norway, the Philippines and Peru.

Urgenda says its arguments are supported by the Oslo Principles, which say that states have the legal obligation to avert dangerous climate change.

Carroll Muffett, the president and CEO of the Centre for International Environmental Law, said: “At the heart of this landmark case lies a simple, terrible truth: in failing to take ambitious action to confront climate change, the government of the Netherlands is threatening the lives, the well-being and the human rights of its own citizens.”

He added: “The case reflects a growing awareness among people worldwide that the failure to act on climate change violates fundamental principles of human rights.”

It is a precedent-setting judgement, though I think in a year or so it will not seem at all exceptional

Professor Muffett told the Climate News Network that the judgement was especially significant for what the court had said about human rights, and about the responsibility the Dutch government owed to future generations.

“A decision of this kind from any court sends an important signal,” he said. “States and polluters should take careful note.

“There is a growing movement of climate litigation around the world, a challenge to inertia. Climate change cannot wait.

Extremely careful

“The ruling is extremely careful, thoughtful − and narrow. It says the risks of acting to mitigate climate change are less than the risks of trying to adapt to it, and it insists that the Dutch government has a duty to mitigate it.

“It is a precedent-setting judgement, though I think in a year or so it will not seem at all exceptional.”

Some thought the court had not gone far enough. Wendel Trio, director of Climate Action Network Europe, said: “The task specified by the ruling is not too challenging. The target should be much higher than 25% in order to be truly in line with what is needed to tackle climate change.”

However, Professor Muffett thinks the judgement will be hugely influential. He said: “Governments, especially in Europe, will be going to the UN’s Paris climate negotiations in November very cognisant of what this court has said. The context on the road to Paris is changing fast.” – Climate News Network

Share This:

Global warming is accelerating loss of species

Global warming is accelerating loss of species

Human-induced climate change adds to threats vertebrates face from hunting and habitat loss as researchers warn that modern extinction rates are exceptionally high.

LONDON, 24 June, 2015 – Biologists have once again confirmed their own worst fears – that humans have launched a new phase of mass extinction.

There have been five catastrophic episodes in the 500 million-year history of complex life, and humanity has now precipitated a sixth, according to a new study.

Gerardo Ceballos, a researcher in the Department of Ecology Biodiversity at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, and colleagues report in the journal Science Advances that their calculations are based on the most conservative possible estimates of extinction in recent human history.

They compared those with the calculated “background”, or normal, rate of extinction throughout evolution, and came to the conclusion that vertebrate species are slipping away into the eternal night at least 114 times faster than they would if there were no humans around to hunt them, destroy their habitats or change the climates in which they had evolved.

Potentially calamitous

All such stories fall into the “stop me if youʼve heard this one” category. For more than two decades, zoologists in particular have repeatedly warned of potential calamitous extinction rates.

They have reasoned that the pressures already driving down animal populations are likely to be made worse by global warming due to the burning of fossil fuels – either by moving the climatic zones to which the creatures are adapted faster than they can migrate, or by simply becoming too warm overall, which is something that happened 55 million years ago.

One recent study even linked atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide with the worst event of all, the “Great Dying” of the Permian period 252 million years ago.

“We can confidently conclude that modern extinction rates . . . suggest a mass extinction
is under way”

But there has always been a problem of numbers – in fact, two problems of numbers. Biologists have no sure idea of how many species inhabit the planet today, and they have great difficulty establishing that any particular animal is really extinct, as opposed to just rare and difficult to identify.

So Dr Ceballos and his co-researchers went back and did the sums again, working from a recent estimate of the background rate of extinction of two mammal extinctions per 10,000 species per century.

They looked at all the written evidence for recent extinctions – the dodo of Mauritius, Steller’s sea cow, the Rodrigues giant tortoise, and all the other amphibians, birds, reptiles, fish and mammals that have slipped away to oblivion, first since 1500 and then since 1900. And the researchers then chose conservative and highly conservative calculations of loss.

Creatures vanishing

They found that, even using the most generous estimates of “normal” extinction, and the most highly conservative calculations of present loss, based on data from the 2014 International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red Listthey had evidence that creatures are now vanishing at more than 100 times the background rate.

Almost all human health and wealth is based on what grows in the ground or grazes upon it. If the loss goes on, then within as little as three human lifetimes, humanity as a species could be deprived, the researchers warn, of “many biodiversity benefits”.

With this research, they say they have placed a “lower bound” on humanity’s impact on all other living things.

They conclude: “Although biologists cannot say precisely how many species there are, or exactly how many have gone extinct in any time interval, we can confidently conclude that modern extinction rates are exceptionally high, that they are increasing, and that they suggest a mass extinction is under way – the sixth of its kind in Earth’s 4.5 billion years of history.” – Climate News Network

Share This:

Combating climate dangers is seen as medical emergency

Combating climate dangers is seen as medical emergency

International experts say the last 50 years of health advances worldwide will be jeopardised unless urgent steps are taken to confront climate change.

LONDON, 23 June, 2015 – The threat that climate change poses to human health is so great that it could undermine the last half-century of gains in development and global health, says an international commission of medical experts.

One author, fiercely critical of international efforts to confront the problem, says it is a medical emergency that demands an emergency response.

More hopefully, though, the group’s report says that international efforts to tackle climate change – “the defining challenge of our generation” – represent one of the greatest opportunities to improve health worldwide this century.

The report, published in The Lancet medical journal, is the work of the 2015 Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change.

Unparalleled chance

It says many responses to climate change have direct and indirect health benefits – from reducing air pollution to improving diet – and so efforts to reduce the threat offer an unparalleled chance for far-reaching gains in health.

But the commission is under no illusions about what is at stake. The authors say the potentially catastrophic risk to human health posed by climate change has been underestimated

They add – in a familiar refrain – that while the technologies and finance required to address the problem do exist, the global political will to implement them is lacking.

Professor Hugh Montgomery, one of the commission’s co-chairs and director of the University College London (UCL) Institute for Human Health and Performance, UK, says: “Climate change is a medical emergency. It thus demands an emergency response, using the technologies available right now.

“Under such circumstances, no doctor would consider a series of annual case discussions and aspirations adequate, yet this is exactly how the global response to climate change is proceeding.”

“Now is the time for us to lead the way in responding to another great threat to the human and environmental health of our generation

Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change

Image: The Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change

Professor Anthony Costello, another of the commission’s co-chairs and director of the UCL Institute for Global Health, says: “Climate change has the potential to reverse the health gains from economic development that have been made in recent decades – not just through the direct effects on health from a changing and more unstable climate, but through indirect means such as increased migration and reduced social stability.”

The report says the direct health impacts of climate change come from the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, especially heatwaves, floods, droughts and storms. Indirect impacts result from changes in infectious disease patterns, air pollution, food insecurity and malnutrition, involuntary migration, displacement and conflicts.

It says there are many ways in which action on climate change brings immediate health gains. For example, burning fewer fossil fuels reduces respiratory diseases, and what doctors call “active transport” (walking and cycling) cuts pollution and traffic accidents, and reduces rates of obesity, diabetes, coronary heart disease and stroke. There are also health benefits from changes to diet, such as eating less red meat.

Entrenched interests

The commission is an extensive collaboration between experts from Europe and China. Its other co-chair, Professor Peng Gong, from Tsinghua University, Beijing, says: “The health community has responded to many grave threats to health in the past.

“It took on entrenched interests such as the tobacco industry, and led the fight against HIV/AIDS. Now is the time for us to lead the way in responding to another great threat to the human and environmental health of our generation.”

The report provides a set of recommendations for policy-makers, and the authors propose the formation of a new global independent body on climate change and health − to be called Countdown to 2030: Climate Change and Health Action − to monitor and report every two years on the health impacts of climate change. – Climate News Network

Share This:

New flood alert as warming raises sea levels threat

New flood alert as warming raises sea levels threat

Scientists warn countries in northern Europe to plan for dramatic new worst-case scenarios as climate change increases the risk of seas sweeping inland.

LONDON, 22 June, 2015 − Europe could face a higher marine invasion than anybody anticipated. As polar ice melts, tides could be as much as 1.5 metres higher around the coasts of Scandinavia, Germany, the Netherlands and England, according to a new study.

This is considerably higher than the average sea level rise – driven by global warming as a consequence of burning fossil fuels – projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change under a “business as usual” scenario and a global average temperature rise of 4°C.

But there is no contradiction. The discrepancy arises because the seas have never been level, and the land keeps moving too.

Aslak Grinsted, associate professor in the Centre for Ice and Climate at the Niels Bohr Institute of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, and colleagues report in the journal Climate Research that they took a closer look at the dynamics of sea level change in the North Sea, the North Atlantic and the Baltic for the remainder of this century.

Land uplift

“Even though the oceans are rising, they do not rise evenly across the globe,” Dr Grinsted says. “This is partly due to changes in the gravitational field and land uplift.”

He and his colleagues started with the anomalies they knew best. These are in Greenland, which is covered by a sheet of ice so massive that it gathers up the sea around it. So, to reach Greenland, ships must sail uphill.

As the ice sheet melts – and there are studies that show it is melting at an accelerating rate that would heighten sea levels by 14 cms this century – the mass will be reduced and the sea levels will fall, even though more water has entered the oceans.

“In England . . . we cannot exclude a sea level rise of up to 1.75 metres this century”

But although waters are notionally lapping ever higher along coastlines, these too are changing. Northern Europe 12,000 years ago was covered by deep ice, and the bedrock below was depressed. Now the ice has gone, but the land once crushed by it is still rising.

Equipped with the latest research and measurements, the Copenhagen team began their reinterpretation of the local future. They found that what had once been considered “high” scenarios for the Netherlands and England will be surpassed.

Best estimate

Dr Grinsted says: “For London, the calculated best estimate is that sea level will rise by 0.8 metres. In England, a sea level rise of more than 0.9 meters in this century has been considered highly unlikely, but our new calculation shows that there is a 27% chance that this limit is surpassed, and we cannot exclude a sea level rise of up to 1.75 metres this century.”

For the Netherlands, the best estimate of sea level rise is 0.83 metres, but the calculations show that there is a 26% chance that it will exceed the existing high-end scenario of 1.05 metres, and could even reach 1.80 metres.

Dr Grinsted says: “Both countries have already established protections for the coasts with barriers, sluice gates and dikes, but is it enough? I hope that our calculations for worst-case scenarios will be taken into consideration as the countries prepare for climate change.”

The IPCC sea level projection is of 80 cms worldwide. Sea levels overall might change little in Scotland, Ireland and Norway. And in the Gulf of Bothnia, in Finland, where the land is rising even faster than the sea, tides could be as much as 10cms lower at the end of the century. − Climate News Network

Share This:

Rise in CO2 could restrict growing days for crops

Rise in CO2 could restrict growing days for crops

While plants in temperate zones may benefit from higher temperatures, global warming’s impact in the tropics threatens catastrophe for food security.

LONDON, 20 June, 2015 − The positive consequences of climate change may not be so positive. Although plants in the colder regions are expected to thrive as average global temperatures rise, even this benefit could be limited.

Some tropical regions could lose up to 200 growing days a year, and more than two billion rural people could see their hopes wither on the vine or in the field. Even in  temperate zones, there will be limits to extra growth.

Plants quicken, blossom and ripen as a response to moisture, warmth and the length of daylight. Global warming will clearly change the temperatures and influence the patterns of precipitation, but it won’t make any difference to the available hours of sunlight at any point on the globe.

Scientists at the University of Hawaii at Mānoa report in the Public Library of Science journal PLOS Biology that they looked at the big picture of complex change. Higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide – the greenhouse gas from car exhausts, forest fires and factory chimneys – are expected overall to aid crop and forest growth.

Extended season

Average global warming of less than 1°C in the last 30 years has extended the northern hemisphere growing season by up to 11 days, but plants are still limited by radiation.

“Those that think climate change will benefit plants need to see the light, literally and figuratively,” says Camilo Mora, lead author of the report and assistant professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Hawaii.

“A narrow focus on the factors that influence plant growth has led to major underestimations of the potential impacts of climate change on plants, not only at higher latitudes but more severely in the tropics, exposing the world to dire consequences.”

Professor Mora has made a career of thinking about global consequences. He and colleagues recently tried to calculate the possible dates at which local climates could shift inexorably in different parts of the world, and tried also to build a picture of how ocean warming and acidification would affect incomes everywhere.

“Many plants will not be able to take advantage of those warmer temperatures because there will not be enough sunlight to sustain their growth”

His team is not the first to try to calculate the potential impact of catastrophic global warming on global food supply. Cereals are vulnerable to extremes of heat, and climate change may already be affecting yields in Europe.

But the Hawaiian scientists tried a simple theoretical approach, by first identifying the ranges of temperature, soil moisture and light that drive 95% of the world’s plant growth today.

They then tried to calculate the number of days in a year in which these growth conditions could be expected at various latitudes in the future, as carbon dioxide levels – and average temperatures – climb.

They found that, nearer the poles, the number of days above freezing would increase by 7%.

“But many plants will not be able to take advantage of those warmer temperatures because there will not be enough sunlight to sustain their growth,” says Iain Caldwell, of the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology.

The same warming at the lowest latitudes could be devastating: in some tropical regions, conditions could become too hot and dry for any growth.

Overall, the planet could see an 11% reduction in the number of days suited to growth, and some places in the tropics could lose 200 growing days a year.

Although some regions in China, Russia and Canada will see an improvement, around 2.1 billion people who rely on forests and agriculture for food and revenue could lose 30% of the days they now bank on for plant growth.

But rising levels of carbon dioxide could also affect the quality of plant growth, according to a new study in Global Change Biology.

Zhaozhong Feng, of the Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, and colleagues looked at the results of eight experiments in four continents on crops, grasslands and forests, and found that as carbon dioxide levels go up, the nitrogen content of the crop is lowered. In the case of wheat and rice, this would also mean lower protein levels.

Negative effect

“Furthermore, we can see that this negative effect exists regardless of whether or not the plants’ growth increases, and even if fertiliser is added,” says Johan Uddling, a plant physiologist at Gothenburg, and a co-author of the report. “This is unexpected and new.”

In the same week, a team of scientists at the University of Alaska Fairbanks produced evidence that climate change has already begun to alter the forests of the far north.

They report in the journal Forest Ecology and Management that in the interior of Alaska, already at the optimum temperature range for white spruce, tree growth slowed as summer temperatures rose.

In Western Alaska, once at the low end of the ideal temperature range for the same species, trees are now growing more rapidly.

“For the first time across a major forest region, we have real data showing that biome shift has started”, said Glenn Juday, professor of forest ecology at the university’s School of Natural Resources.

“This is not a scenario model, or a might, or a maybe. The boreal forest in Interior Alaska is very near dying from unsuitably warm temperatures. The area in Western Alaska where the forest transitions to tundra is now the productive heart of the boreal forest.” − Climate News Network

Share This:

India blames heatwave deaths on climate change 

India blames heatwave deaths on climate change 

Fierce temperatures in India doubled the heat-related deaths normally recorded in May − and the government insists natural causes are not to blame.

CHENNAI, 19 June, 2015 − India, one of the key players in the efforts to reach an international agreement on global warming, has no doubt of its malign effects. It was, says a government minister, the warming climate that caused last month’s devastating heatwave.

From mid-April till the end of May, nearly 2,200 people were killed by the heat − 1,636 of them in Andhra Pradesh, the worst-affected state. The normal May figure for the whole of India is about 1,000 heat-related deaths.

Dr Harsh Vardhan, India’s Minister of Science and Technology and Earth Sciences, has blamed the heat deaths squarely on climate change.

Improve understanding

Launching a supercomputer at the National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting to improve understanding of climatic changes, he said: “It’s not just another unusually hot summer − it is climate change.

“Let us not fool ourselves that there is no connection between the unusual number of deaths from the ongoing heatwave and the certainty of another failed monsoon.”

Dr Vardhan said that May’s heatwave, followed by the delay to the start of the monsoon, on which nearly half of India’s farmlands depend, was a definite manifestation of climate change.

Jejabba, a 63-year-old farmer in Andhra Pradesh state, was one of those who lost their lives because of this year’s scorching heat.

He took his cows out to graze in a mango grove near his house around 11am, but was tired and dehydrated when he returned home four hours later. After he began vomiting, and then fainted, he was rushed to the small government hospital 5km from his village, but died on the way.

“In my 17 years of service, I have not
come across such an alarming number
of deaths due to a heatwave”

“Summer is severe, and many people have been affected by the heatwave in our village,” says Jejabba’s distant cousin, Pindigi Ramamurthi, who runs a grain store in the village. “Just the previous day, we took our two children to hospital after they began vomiting. The doctor admitted them for a few hours to administer fluids, and luckily that revived them.”

Local officials recorded Jejabba as “the latest of the summer deaths”. But when his widow asked for compensation − the state government pays 100,000 rupees (US$1,570) to the family of a victim − the local panchayat (civic) official, who has to recommend the payment, told her she must get a certificate from the hospital doctor.

“The doctor told the family he could not give the certificate because Jejabba did not die in his hospital,” Ramamurthi recalls. “Why couldn’t the poor fellow have stayed alive just an hour or so longer till we reached the hospital? Now the widow must suffer this red tape.”

In parts of southern India, daytime temperatures reached between 45° and 47°C during this year’s heatwave − up to 7°C above normal.

Alarming number

Dr Srihari Rao, resident medical officer at the government general hospital in Tirupati, about 45km from Jejabba’s home, says: “In my 17 years of service, I have not come across such an alarming number of deaths due to a heatwave.

“Almost every day in May there was a death in the district from sunstroke. The majority of the dead were in the 65 to 80 age group, but there was also a case of a 19-year-old girl dying from dehydration.”

Dr Rao said infants, aged people and farmers had been particularly severely affected.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported last year that there would be significant changes in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, including heatwaves in India. Its report was based on weather records from 1906 to 2005.

Researchers at the India Meteorological Department, after conducting a study of heatwaves over the last 50 years, have called for public information campaigns to be launched on the dangers, and also stressed the importance of using social care networks to reach vulnerable sections of the population. − Climate News Network

Share This:

Long-lived carbon dioxide warms world for many millennia

Long-lived CO2 warms world for many millennia

The heat given off by burning fossil fuels warms the Earth far less than the carbon dioxide emitted, which research shows traps the heat in the atmosphere for thousands of years.

LONDON, 15 June, 2015 − Gun the engine, and the ignition of fossil fuel produces not just working energy but heat that dissipates quickly into the atmosphere. But it also produces carbon dioxide that dissipates into the atmosphere.

And in less than two months, according to new research, that pulse of carbon dioxide will have engendered more heat for the planet than the original touch of the accelerator. Xiaochun Zhang and Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution at Stanford, California, in the United States report in Geophysical Research Letters that the carbon dioxide warming exceeds the heat released by a single act of oil combustion in just 45 days.

Light the gas in the cooking stove and the heating cost to the planet is exceeded in 59 days. Burn a lump of coal, and the atmosphere feels the greater heat in just 34 days. And in all three cases, the pulses of carbon dioxide will go on heating the planet – and on, and on.

“Ultimately, the warming induced by carbon dioxide over the many thousands of years it remains in the atmosphere would exceed warming from combustion by a factor of 100,000 or more,” said Professor Caldeira.

No escape

Caldeira and another colleague only recently calculated that the average interval between the combustion of fossil fuel and the consequent global warming was about 10 years. The latest research involves no contradiction.

“It takes a decade before we feel the maximum amount of warming caused by a CO2 emission (and it stays warm for many centuries, if not millennia). Energy is added to the atmosphere from the heat given off when a lump of coal is burned. Meanwhile, the CO2 given off in that burning prevents energy from escaping the atmosphere and going into outer space,” Professor Caldeira told Climate News Network.

“This also results in more energy in the atmosphere. It only takes a month-or-so time scale before the greenhouse effect caused by CO2 emitted upon combustion prevents an amount of energy from escaping to space equivalent to the amount of energy released upon combustion.

“After about a month, the two effects have done about the same to warm the Earth, but as time goes on the CO2 greenhouse effect continues affecting the climate system,” he told Climate News Network.

Swift reaction

Ultimately, such research is a graphic illustration of humanity’s unwitting experiment, since the start of civilisation, with the climate in which civilisation first evolved. It is also one in which the penalty exacted follows unexpectedly swiftly upon the act committed. The two scientists considered the consequences not just of any single act of combustion, but of the impact of continuous burning of coal, oil and natural gas for the CO2 levels in the atmosphere, and the consequent warming.

Under steady, continuous combustion, the warming caused by the consequent carbon dioxide exceeds the heat released by coal in 95 days, by oil in 124 days, and by gas in 161 days. “If a power plant is burning continuously, within three to five months, depending on the type of power plant, the CO2 from the power plant is doing more to heat the Earth than the fires in its boiler,” Professor Caldeira said.

“As time goes by, the rate of burning in the power plant stays the same, but the CO2 accumulates, so by the end of the year, the greenhouse gases will be heating the Earth much more than direct emissions from the power plant.” − Climate News Network

Share This:

Delegates accused of ‘fiddling’ while the planet burns

Delegates accused of ‘fiddling’ while the planet burns

Tame end to Bonn climate talks leaves critics fearing that hopes are fading of a binding agreement being signed to keep global warming in check.

LONDON, June 11, 2015 − For a meeting on which the future of the planet depends, there were remarkably few headlines coming out of the UN climate change conference in Bonn as it ended yesterday.

Critics believe that progress, after nearly two weeks of talks, was so slow that the chances of world leaders signing up to an agreement on tackling climate change in Paris later this year are receding − and that there is a lack of political will to do so.

Delegates agreed that a “streamlined” text of a legal agreement based on the negotiations so far should be drawn up and sent to governments to review.

This will cover issues such as how the agreement can be financed, who will cut greenhouse gas emissions, how to adapt to climate change, and compensation for nations badly affected. The negotiators will then come back to Bonn and try again.

Optimists will argue that this is progress, and that the talks were not supposed to be final, but merely moving towards a legally-binding agreement that will be signed by heads of state at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris in December.

Sleepwalking

However, for many environment groups lobbying the talks, it was certainly not enough. The phrase “sleepwalking into Paris” was how Christian Aid  described it.

Their senior climate change adviser, Mohamed Adow, was quoted by the BBC as saying: “There has been too much time spent fiddling around with the unimportant details of the text. Negotiators have acted like schoolchildren colouring in their homework timetable and not getting round to any actual homework.”

It was not all bad news. One of the surprising breakthroughs was an agreement that will enable poorer countries to receive money for keeping their forests standing.

Trying to preserve the world’s forests in order to store carbon, and so protect the climate, has been a thorny issue since the first Earth Summit in Rio in 1992.

“Negotiators have acted like schoolchildren colouring in their homework timetable and not getting round to any actual homework”

The scheme for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, known as UN-REDD, was originally going to be a Forest Convention, but developing countries rejected that on the grounds that it was up to them how they used their own natural resources. In any case, they said, the developed world had already cut down its forests.

After 20 years of talking, the increasing recognition that forests are more valuable in their pristine state than logged or clear-cut, and that rich countries were prepared to compensate poorer ones for not cutting them down, finally led to agreement.

Brazil, still battling to reduce Amazon deforestation, was among the countries pushing for an early settlement.

Package of deals

Although the agreement has been reached, it cannot come into operation until the end of the Paris conference, when it is supposed to be part of the package of deals that will save the climate from going over the internationally-agreed 2˚C temperature rise limit above pre-industrial levels.

The main sticking point in the past, at the Bonn talks, and for the future is the small matter of $100 billion pledged in aid by the rich countries to developing nations by 2020 to help them to adapt to climate change and still develop at the same time.

Money has been trickling in to various funds set up for the purpose, but there is no sign that the bulk of the donations will actually materialise.

Another serious problem is that the pledges that larger countries have made to reduce emissions are not enough to stop the world overheating beyond the 2˚C limit agreed by politicians.

So far, more than 30 countries have pledged to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, with around 150 smaller countries yet to set goals.

A bright spot on the pledges front was the agreement of the G7 group of countries to phase out all electricity production from fossil fuels by the end of this century.

However, as critics pointed out, what the leaders failed to do was outline any measures they were prepared to take now to set the world on the right course.

Another vexed issue yet to be resolved is compensation for the loss and damage suffered by poorer countries because of sea level rise and storms for which they are not responsible.

Impatient with progress at the talks, some of the poorer nations − Vanuatu, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Fiji, the Solomon Islands, and the Philippines − announced that they would be taking a human rights case again big oil, coal and gas companies, and demanding compensation.

There are signs that public opinion − so often in the past indifferent to the issue of climate change − is now taking the issue more seriously.

A vast poll that involved testing public opinion in 70 countries on the same day found that 80% of people are very concerned about climate change, and 67% back a legally-binding agreement for all countries to reduce emissions.

Avoided showdown

Jan Kowalzig, Oxfam climate change policy adviser, summed up the feelings of environmental observers in Bonn when he said: “Negotiators avoided a showdown over crunch issues such as finance and increasing near-term emissions cuts, but they are only delaying the inevitable.

“A clearer mandate from heads of state and ministers is needed to ignite the talks and ensure key questions are answered.

“Political leaders need to give a clear steer on how to address the inadequacy of current emissions reductions pledges, but also on the urgent financial support needed for the most vulnerable countries and populations.”

Once governments have had a chance to review the “streamlined texts”, delegates will return to Bonn in August and October for more rounds of talks, before the Paris summit at the end of the year. – Climate News Network

Share This: