Breaching a “Carbon Threshold” Could Lead to Mass Extinction

18.07.2019

Carbon dioxide emissions may trigger a reflex in the carbon cycle, with devastating consequences, study finds.

In the brain, when neurons fire off electrical signals to their neighbors, this happens through an “all-or-none” response. The signal only happens once conditions in the cell breach a certain threshold.

Now an MIT researcher has observed a similar phenomenon in a completely different system: Earth’s carbon cycle.

Daniel Rothman, professor of geophysics and co-director of the Lorenz Center in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, has found that when the rate at which carbon dioxide enters the oceans pushes past a certain threshold — whether as the result of a sudden burst or a slow, steady influx — the Earth may respond with a runaway cascade of chemical feedbacks, leading to extreme ocean acidification that dramatically amplifies the effects of the original trigger.

This global reflex causes huge changes in the amount of carbon contained in the Earth’s oceans, and geologists can see evidence of these changes in layers of sediments preserved over hundreds of millions of years.

Rothman looked through these geologic records and observed that over the last 540 million years, the ocean’s store of carbon changed abruptly, then recovered, dozens of times in a fashion similar to the abrupt nature of a neuron spike. This “excitation” of the carbon cycle occurred most dramatically near the time of four of the five great mass extinctions in Earth’s history.

Scientists have attributed various triggers to these events, and they have assumed that the changes in ocean carbon that followed were proportional to the initial trigger — for instance, the smaller the trigger, the smaller the environmental fallout.

But Rothman says that’s not the case. It didn’t matter what initially caused the events; for roughly half the disruptions in his database, once they were set in motion, the rate at which carbon increased was essentially the same. Their characteristic rate is likely a property of the carbon cycle itself — not the triggers, because different triggers would operate at different rates.

What does this all have to do with our modern-day climate? Today’s oceans are absorbing carbon about an order of magnitude faster than the worst case in the geologic record — the end-Permian extinction. But humans have only been pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere for hundreds of years, versus the tens of thousands of years or more that it took for volcanic eruptions or other disturbances to trigger the great environmental disruptions of the past. Might the modern increase of carbon be too brief to excite a major disruption?

According to Rothman, today we are “at the precipice of excitation,” and if it occurs, the resulting spike — as evidenced through ocean acidification, species die-offs, and more — is likely to be similar to past global catastrophes.

“Once we’re over the threshold, how we got there may not matter,” says Rothman, who is publishing his results this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.“Once you get over it, you’re dealing with how the Earth works, and it goes on its own ride.”

Written by: Jennifer Chu

Massive Reforestation Is Key to Averting a Climate Catastrophe

16.07.2019

woods-šuma — Photo illustration: Unsplash (Marian Kroell)

Photo illustration: Unsplash/Jeremy Bishop

Restoring the world’s forests on an unprecedented scale is “the best climate change solution available”, according to a new study. The researchers claim that covering 900m hectares of land – roughly the size of the continental US – with trees could store up to 205 billion tonnes of carbon, about two thirds of the carbon that humans have already put into the atmosphere.

While the best solution to climate change remains leaving fossil fuels in the ground, we will still need to suck carbon dioxide (CO₂) out of the atmosphere this century if we are to keep global warming below 1.5˚C. So the idea of reforesting much of the world isn’t as far-fetched as it sounds.

Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have cut down three trillion trees – about half the trees on Earth. Already 43 countries have pledged to restore 292m hectares of degraded land to forest worldwide. That’s an area ten times the size of the UK. But what the new study advocates is reforesting something like ten times that amount.

Rewilding habitats and reforesting may be easier in the future as the world is already becoming a wilder place in many areas. This may seem a strange prediction, given that the global population will grow from 7.7 billion to 10 billion by 2050, but by then nearly 70% of us will live in cities and have abandoned rural areas, making them ripe for restoration. In Europe already, 2.2m hectares of forest regrew per year between 2000-2015, and forest cover in Spain has increased from 8% of the country’s territory in 1900 to 25% today.

Massive reforestation isn’t a pipe dream and it can have real benefits for people. In the late 1990s, environmental deterioration in China became critical, with vast areas resembling the Dust Bowl of the American Midwest in the 1930s. Six bold programmes were introduced, targeting over 100m hectares of land for reforestation.
Grain for Green is the largest and best known of these. It reduced soil erosion and stabilised local rainfall patterns. The ongoing programme has also helped to alleviate poverty by making payments directly to farmers who set aside their land for reforestation.

Better yet, the new study suggests that bringing back 900m hectares of forest wouldn’t impact on our capacity to reserve land for growing food. This is certainly possible, and in line with other estimates. Reforestation may even result in production from farmland increasing, as was found in China when more stable rainfall and fertile soil followed the return of forests.

No solution without emission cuts

There should be more scepticism about how much CO₂ 900m hectares of new forest could store though. The paper insists on 205 billion tonnes of carbon, but this seems too high when compared to previous studies or climate models. The authors have forgotten the carbon that’s already stored in the vegetation and soil of degraded land that their new forests would replace. The amount of carbon that reforestation could lock up is the difference between the two.

Mature forests can store a lot of carbon, but this capacity is only reached after hundreds of years, not a couple of decades of new forest growth as assumed in this study. The most recent estimate from the IPCC suggests that new forests could store on average an extra 57 billion tonnes of carbon by the end of the century. This is still a huge number and could absorb about one sixth of the carbon that’s already in the atmosphere, but reforestation should be thought of as one solution to climate change among many.

Photo illustration: Unsplash/Evgeni Tcherkasski

Even if warming is stabilised at 1.5˚C, the study indicates that one fifth of the land proposed for reforestation could be rendered too hot for growing new forests by 2050. But this concern ignores the role of carbon dioxide fertilisation – when there are higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, photosynthesis is more efficient, meaning plants need less water and can still be productive at higher temperatures. Today, the most immediate threat to tropical forests is deforestation by people and the fires they light which get out of control, not the more subtle impacts of higher temperatures.

Reforesting an area the size of the US will have massive benefits on local environments and will store a huge amount of man-made carbon emissions. It is not, however, a substitute for reducing those carbon emissions.

Even if the world reduces its carbon emissions to zero by 2050, there will still need to be negative global carbon emissions for the rest of the century – drawing CO₂ out of the atmosphere to stabilise global warming at 1.5˚C. Reforestation is essential for creating negative emissions – not reducing the amount of carbon that humans are still emitting.

There is another sting in the tail. Massive reforestation only works if the world’s current forest cover is maintained and increasing. Deforestation of the Amazon rainforest – the world’s largest – has increased since Brazil’s new far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, came to power. Current estimates suggest areas of rainforest the size of a football pitch are being cleared every single minute.

It won’t be easy, but society needs to protect the forests we’ve got, and protect new forests in perpetuity to permanently keep carbon sequestered in trees and out of the atmosphere.

Written by

Mark Maslin, Professor of Earth System Science, UCL

Simon Lewis, Professor of Global Change Science, University of Leeds and UCL

Source: weforum.org

A 550 km-Long Mass of Rotting Seaweed Is Heading for Mexico’s Pristine Beaches

15.07.2019

Mexico beach — Photo illustration: Unsplash/Agustin Flores

Photo illustration: Unsplash/Jorge Zapata

Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula is home to clear blue seas, golden sands and a glorious backdrop that includes ancient Mayan ruins. Millions flock to its resorts every year and tourism is vital to the area’s economy.

But now much of the coast is covered in heaps of rotting seaweed, contributing to an economic and ecological crisis.

The issue has been caused by an enormous bloom of sargassum algae, which washed ashore from the nearby Sargasso Sea. There has long been sargassum in that part of the ocean. But the rate of its growth has increased rapidly in recent years – so much so that in 2018 its summer bloom almost spanned the Atlantic from West Africa to the Caribbean.

And things are set to get even worse.

The roots of the problem

At around 550 kilometres in length, another mass of sargassum algae is heading towards the Mexican coast. It’s roughly the same size as the island of Jamaica, and when it arrives it could stretch all the way south along the Yucatan Peninsula to Belize.

One of the core causes is deforestation. In addition to contributing to global warming, it also causes soil erosion, which in turn, leads to surplus nutrients being washed into rivers and flowing into the ocean.

Rising nutrient and nitrogen levels have several effects on the seawater. One is to limit the amount of oxygen in the water, creating dead zones, according to the US National Ocean Service. The other is to promote the growth of seaweed and algal blooms – like the Sargasso seaweed that is now swamping Mexican beaches.

Cross-continental causes

Several thousand kilometres to the south of the Yucatan lies the Amazon rainforest, around 17% of which has been lost to deforestation over the past 50 years. Meanwhile, the US Geological Survey points to a worsening situation in West Africa, where more than 80% of the Upper Guinean Forest was lost in the first 75 years of the 20th century and continues to face deforestation.

The huge sargassum algae islands that form out at sea are living entities. They also provide shelter for myriad tiny marine organisms. But once they wash ashore, the algae dies and starts to decompose. Toxic gases are then released into the air, while acid and heavy metals are left behind to make their way into the sea, altering the water’s acidity levels and further depleting oxygen.

The economic fallout

It’s a bleak picture. Beaches ruined by deposits of foul-smelling, rotting seaweed are bad for tourism.

And the effect of the chemicals leaching first into the ground and then into the sea is to poison the offshore waters, resulting in a loss of marine life. It is also contributing to so-called white syndrome, which kills coral tissue.

Mexico’s president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, estimates the cost of cleaning up the beaches to be around $2.7 million.

But the impact on tourism, which contributes 8.7% to Mexico’s gross domestic product and is worth around $23 billion annually, will be far greater. The government estimates a drop of 30% in some affected areas.

Written by
Sean Fleming, Senior Writer, Formative Content

Source: weforum.org

Small Loads from Internet-Connected Devices All Add Up

14.07.2019

Our always-on devices turn out to consume a lot of power. Do I really need to connect my garage door to the Internet?

A few years ago I called Sanctuary Magazine “the best green shelter magazine available anywhere” (it still is). But Australia’s Alternative Technology Association has also published the much more hardcore Renew Magazine for 40 years. When I started reading it I could barely understand it and complained it was for nerds, but either I have finally started learning what this stuff is all about or it has become more user-friendly. I suspect the latter, because I sort of understood Lance Turner’s article in issue 147 on Small loads that all add up.

It is a subject we have covered before on TreeHugger, where we have noted that every single little smart device has a small electrical drain to run its radio; I calculated that my Hue Smart Bulbs on my dining room table use more energy while they are off than while they are on, and they are not my only Smart devices. It all adds up quickly.

Lance Turner at Renew goes through the list of those little loads that we all have in our homes now, from modems and routers to range extenders, cordless phone base stations and alarm systems. According to Lance, “the average energy consumption for burglar alarms is 5.9 watts continuously, or 52 kWh a year.” That’s a lot of electricity and, for the average American electricity customer, the equivalent of driving 2.5 miles in your average American car.

Things are much better than a decade ago when everyone was talking about vampire power from wall-warts and from computers and TVs on standby mode, but the new smart devices can draw a lot of power. According to an Android site, a Sonos Play unit draws 3.8 watts on standby, an Amazon Echo Plus 3.5 watts.

Lightning exploded a tree outside our house last week, and the power surge exploded much of my home network and Internet setup, so the phone company and George Hardy of Connected Living have been busy replacing things. George and I inventoried the stuff on my network shelf; for fun, I have converted them all to average American CO2 generated and miles driven equivalent, even though I have clean Ontario power and Bullfrog offsets and ride a bike.

The results were pretty shocking; I had no idea that so much power was dribbling out of that closet. I immediately made some changes; I killed the wifi from the router, leaving just one network broadcasting. I pulled the AirPort Extreme unit; I am already saving everything on iCloud. And do I really need to be able to open my garage door with my phone? I am pulling that out too. I have probably cut that electrical load just from the closet in half.

Seriously, all of this Smart Home high tech stuff adds up; I work from home so have more of it than most people, but then other people have other phantom loads, including printers, big smart TVs, gaming consoles and computers and more. We should all be looking at each and every item.

Or, you might say that you have solar power or live in Quebec where everything is water powered and it doesn’t matter. But Lance Turner reminds us:

“One last issue to consider when buying any appliance is embodied energy. All equipment and appliances take materials, energy and resources such as water to manufacture and eventually recycle if that is possible, so the longer they last the lower their environmental footprint, all things being equal.”

So don’t buy stuff you don’t need (do I have to connect my garage door opener to the Internet?) and buy quality stuff that will last a long time. And don’t fall for all this smart home stuff; as the late lamented Mike Rogers noted last year, a well-built dumb house uses a lot less energy.

Source: www.treehugger.com

Canada Declares Climate Emergency, then Approves Pipeline Expansion

13.07.2019

Trudeau doesn’t seem to understand what ‘climate emergency’ means.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is riding a rollercoaster of public opinion these days. Many Canadians were pleased with the House of Commons’ declaration of a climate emergency on Monday, a motion put forward by Environment and Climate Change Minister Catherine McKenna that follows in the footsteps of several Canadian cities. As the CBC reported, this declaration requires that

“Canada commit to meeting its national emissions target under the Paris Agreement and to making deeper reductions in line with the Agreement’s objective of holding global warming below two degrees Celsius and pursuing efforts to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.”

But the happiness lasted only until Tuesday. PM Trudeau jetted back to Ottawa from Toronto where he’d been celebrating the Raptors’ NBA win (the House of Commons vote took place without him) and announced he was approving the Trans-Mountain pipeline expansion project. From the CBC:
“The cabinet has affirmed the National Energy Board’s conclusion that, while the pipeline has the potential to damage the environment and marine life, it’s in the national interest and could contribute tens of billions of dollars to government coffers and create and sustain thousands of jobs.”

Trudeau ‘reassured’ Canadians that every dollar made from the pipeline will be used to invest in unspecified clean energy projects. “We need to create wealth today so we can invest in the future,” he said. “We need resources to invest in Canadians so they can take advantage of the opportunities generated by a rapidly changing economy, here at home and around the world.”

It’s a head-scratcher of a decision, especially following Monday’s declaration. Patrick McCully of the Rainforest Action Network likened it to “declaring war on cancer and then announcing a campaign to promote smoking.” Green Party leader Elizabeth May said “the plan to invest profits from Trans Mountain into clean technology is a ‘cynical bait-and-switch that would fool no one'” (via CBC). NDP leader Jagmeet Singh said it’s irresponsible in light of Canada’s obligations to the Paris Agreement to reduce emissions.

Trudeau created an intense controversy by deciding to buy the pipeline in April 2018 for $4.5 billion in the midst of investor uncertainty; but then a court decision blocked construction in August, ruling that further environmental assessments and more consultation with indigenous groups were needed. Trudeau says he has met these requirements and is now ready to proceed. Some Indigenous groups disagree, calling his consultation “shallow.”

It’s a strange move in a world where divestment from fossil fuels is gathering momentum. Activist Bill McKibben wrote a few months ago about the numerous universities, colleges, and religious institutions that have opted to sell their shares in oil, gas, and coal companies – and they’re not hurting because of it:

“Early divesters have made out like green-tinged bandits: since the fossil fuel sector has badly underperformed on the market over recent years, moving money into other investments has dramatically increased returns. Pity, for instance, the New York state comptroller Thomas DeNapoli – unlike his New York City counterpart, he refused to divest, and the cost has been about $17,000 per pensioner.”

Surely, if Trudeau’s main concern is economics, there are better ways to generate wealth and financial stability for Canadians, such as investing that $4.5 billion in green energy and other sustainable projects. These would have the added benefit (and cost savings) of preserving the natural environment, rather than destroying it through construction, transportation, and inevitable contamination, and improving public health, which experts say is already being seriously affected by climate change.

Alas, there seem to be few leaders willing to go out on a limb, fight against the status quo, and create the new world order that we need if we hope to keep the global warming average below 2C. And if Trudeau doesn’t know where to start, I’d point him to the Leap Manifesto, which lays out beautifully a plan for “a country powered entirely by renewable energy.”

As the authors of the manifesto wrote, “Caring for one another and caring for the planet could be the economy’s fastest growing sectors.” If only Trudeau were daring enough to believe it.

Source: www.treehugger.com

US Top of the Garbage Pile in Global Waste Crisis

12.07.2019

plastic waste ocean — Photo-illustration: Pixabay

The world produces over two billion tonnes of municipal solid waste every year, enough to fill over 800,000 Olympic sized swimming pools.

Per head of population the worst offenders are the US, as Americans produce three times the global average of waste, including plastic and food.

When it comes to recycling, America again lags behind other countries, only re-using 35% of solid waste.

Germany is the most efficient country, recycling 68% of material.

The study has been compiled by Verisk Maplecroft, a research firm that specialises in global risk.

They’ve developed two new indices, on waste generation and recycling.

They’ve used publically-available data, plus academic research to develop a global picture of how countries are coping at a time when the world is facing a mounting crisis, primarily driven by plastic.

The waste generation index shows per capita rates of municipal solid waste, plastic, food and hazardous materials.

Municipal solid waste is rubbish that’s collected by local authorities from residential, institutional and commercial sources.

While the world produces 2.1bn tonnes of this rubbish every year, only 16% is recycled while 46% is disposed of unsustainably.

In the analysis, China and India make up over 36% of the global population and account for 27% of the waste.

US citizens produce 773kg per head of population, roughly 12% of the global total. Their output is three times that of their Chinese counterparts and seven times more than people living in Ethiopia.

Other European countries, including the Netherlands, Switzerland, France and Germany, feature on the list. The UK ranks 14th in the waste index generating 482kg of household waste per person every year.

The US is the only developed nation with waste generation that outstrips its ability to recycle.

“Where the US is doing badly is the relationship between what it generates and its capacity to recycle,” said Niall Smith, one of the authors of the report.

“And relative to it’s high income peers, that’s where it is performing poorly.”

When it comes to recycling in the US, the issue seems to be one of political will and infrastructure.

“I think you see in survey after survey that infrastructure in the US just isn’t there to provide the recycling option,” said Will Nichols, head of environmental research at Verisk Mapelcroft.

“A lot of US waste – now that it can’t get shipped to China – is just getting burnt, there just isn’t the investment in place in infrastructure to deal with this problem.”

The banning of waste imports in China, Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia is changing the global dynamic. There have been tensions between the government of the Philippines which sent back 69 shipping containers containing waste to Canada.

“They (Asian countries) don’t want to be the world’s dumping ground anymore,” said Will Nichols.

“There’s a growing middle class who are not happy with levels of pollution and China because of its political situation has the policy levers to address these issues more quickly than others.”

The report suggests there may be a rocky road ahead, especially for businesses. Verisk Maplecroft expects governments to act on waste issues but with businesses footing the bill.

Author: Matt McGrath

Source: bbc.com

Governments and Firms in 28 Countries Sued over Climate Crisis – Report

11.07.2019

Climate action lawsuits against governments and corporations have spread across 28 countries, according to a new analysis.

The study reveals that more than 1,300 legal actions concerning climate change have been brought since 1990.

While the US – with 1,023 cases – remains the leader in climate litigation, other countries are increasingly seeing individuals, charities and states take action.

Joana Setzer, co-author of the report by the Grantham Institute and the London School of Economics, said: “Holding government and businesses to account for failing to combat climate change has become a global phenomenon.

“People and environmental groups are forcing governments and companies into court for failing to act on climate change, and not just in the US. The number of countries in which people are taking climate change court action is likely to continue to rise.”

In the two and a half years since Donald Trump became US president, lawsuits have sought to prevent his attempts to roll back environmental regulations. An analysis of 154 cases in the report shows that no rollback of a climate regulation brought before the courts has yet survived a legal challenge.

Countries where legal cases have been taken include Australia, where 94 cases were launched, the UK (53), Brazil (five), Spain (13), New Zealand (17) and Germany (five).

One landmark case in Pakistan four years ago established the right to challenge a lack of action on climate change on the basis of human rights. Ashgar Leghari, a farmer in the south Punjab region of Pakistan, took the government to court claiming it was violating his human rights by failing to tackle the impacts of climate change.

He alleged that his leaders were failing to ensure water, food and energy security in the face of the challenges posed by climate change. The court found in his favour, and one of the outcomes was the establishment of a climate change commission.

The Urgenda Foundation case against the state of the Netherlands successfully argued for the adoption of stricter emissions reduction targets by the government. The result is the subject of an appeal.

In the UK, Client Earth has repeatedly won in court action against the British government over its failure to take action over illegal levels of air pollution.

More recently, an action was filed before the UN human rights committee in May this year by a group of eight people who live in the Torres Strait islands off the northern tip of Australia. It calls on the Australian government to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and adopt adequate coastal defence measures in consultation with the island community.

The report, published on Thursday, says: “Climate change litigation continues to expand across jurisdictions as a tool to strengthen climate action.

“The rise in strategic and routine cases, a ramp-up in legal action by NGOs, the expansion of climate change suits into other areas of law, and improvements in climate science suggest that the use of climate change litigation as a tool to effect policy change is likely to continue.”

Author: Sandra Laville

Source: theguardian.com

AD Climate Summit: IRENA Urges for More Climate Ambition Through Renewables

10.07.2019

Abu Dhabi Climate meeting — Photo: IRENA

IRENA presents renewable energy roadmap to address climate change and deliver jobs, economic growth and sustainable development at high-level UN Climate Meeting.

The tools required to meet the decarbonisation goals of the Paris Agreement exist today, and are technically feasible and economically attractive. This central message is being presented by IRENA at the UN’s Abu Dhabi Climate Summit taking place on June 30 and July 1 in the UAE capital. IRENA will outline that falling technology costs have made solar, wind and other renewables the competitive backbone of energy decarbonisation and the most effective climate action tool available.

“Renewable energy delivers jobs, delivers on sustainable economic development and will deliver a viable climate solution. It is the competitive backbone of global energy decarbonisation and an essential and ready instrument to achieve the Paris Agreement goals,” said Francesco La Camera, IRENA Director-General, who is participating in a series of ministerial-level sessions addressing the energy transition.

To meet climate goals however, deployment needs to happen six times faster than it is today. IRENA estimates that keeping global average temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius by 2050, means two-thirds of the world’s energy should be renewable.

More ambition needed

A clear opportunity lies in increasing ambition under Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), a framework for co-ordinated climate action under the Paris Agreement. Currently NDCs would increase installed renewable power capacity by 3.6% annually to 2030, yet annual renewable energy deployment has actually increased by 8.5% over 2015-2018. NDC targets could already more than double just by reflecting the current pace of renewable energy deployment.

In addition to climate benefits, IRENA analysis suggests that the cumulative payoff by 2050 of increased renewables deployment, in economic terms, would be a 2.5% GDP boost —between USD 65 trillion and USD 160 trillion— and up to 31 million additional renewable energy sector jobs.

Further championing renewable energy’s case at the Abu Dhabi meeting, IRENA staff and directors are participating in meetings on climate investment, NDCs, and transitioning away from coal to renewables, among others.

Source: irena.org

Powering Electric Vehicles in Egypt with ABB Fast Chargers

09.07.2019

Web_EV_chargers_in_Egypt_3 — Photo: new.abb.com

ABB’s supply of direct current (DC) fast chargers is bolstering e-mobility in Egypt, creating the future of sustainable transportation.

ABB is suppling 20 Terra 53 multi-standard DC fast chargers that are being installed in service stations and major cities across Egypt, supporting the country’s push towards e-mobility. The adoption of e-mobility in Egypt will play a pivotal role in helping the country achieve its 2030 sustainable development goals and its ambitious plan to reduce air pollution by 50 percent by 2023.

“ABB marks a new era in the e-mobility solutions in Egypt,” noted Naji Jreijiri. ABB Managing Director, Egypt, North & Central Africa.

Carbon emissions from vehicles running on fossil fuels is one of the major causes of air pollution in the country. While sales of EVs are expected to jump 40 percent globally, ownership of electric vehicles in Egypt is still low. Providing reliable, easy and fast charging solutions is key to accelerating the adoption of EVs. ABB’s chargers, supplied in partnership with the Arab Consulting Office and Revolta Egypt, is an essential step towards enabling wider use of EVs in the country.

These charging stations, which can fully charge a vehicle in as little as 15 minutes, are being installed at National Petroleum Company (NPCO) gas stations across Egypt’s national road network, car dealerships and in busy urban areas. Conditions in the country can be hot and dusty and ABB chargers have the durability to cope with such an environment.

Frank Muehlon, Head of ABB’s Global Business for Electric Vehicle Charging, said: “ABB will capitalize on its strong market leadership position and local best-in-class capabilities to continuously bring state of art developed solutions to our market and positively contribute in protecting our environment. We truly believe that this fits perfectly with Egypt’s ambitious plans for a cleaner and healthier environment.”

Every e-charger comes bundled with ABB Ability™ connected services, which continuously collect data from every charger installed around Egypt and to remotely monitor and proactively control the operation of these chargers.

ABB has laid the foundation of e-mobility and is already developing a complete range of systems for charging the vehicles, whether they are parked at the home or office, or during short stops to recharge while on longer journeys. Since entering the EV space in 2010, ABB has become a global leader in fast-charging solutions with more than 11,000 DC fast chargers sold across 76 countries worldwide.

Source: new.abb.com

The Honda e Electric Car Is Cute, Practical and Efficient. It Will Never Sell in America

08.07.2019

Honda_e_prototype — Photo-illustration: honda.co.uk

The Honda e electric car is a perfect example of a car nobody in America wants. It is not faster than a speeding bullet. It cannot leap tall buildings in a single bound. It can’t haul a tandem horse trailer over the Eisenhower Pass. It doesn’t have room for an entire NBA team and it won’t outperform a Porsche 911. So, what good is it?

The people at Honda see things differently. Kohei Hitomi, head of the e Prototype project team, says, “If we look at the market at the moment, there is a trend where manufacturers are competing with each other with driving range. Consequently, batteries are getting bigger and heavier. From Honda’s perspective, this is counterproductive because that makes cars bigger and impractical for city usage. We believe a range of more than 200 km with charging up to 80 per cent in 30 minutes is practical for daily usage — not always carrying a huge and heavy battery around for maybe that one time at the end of the week where you have to drive long distance.”

And that’s why the Honda e won’t be coming to America. It has designed the car it thinks people need, not the car they want. Which is a shame. The Honda e is an efficient package that should be entertaining to drive given its light weight, 148 horsepower, 221 foot-pounds of torque, rear-wheel-drive configuration, and 50/50 weight distribution. It will come with a 35.5 liquid-cooled battery and a projected 200 km (124 mile) range. An 80% recharge in 30 minutes is also part of the package.

But only people in France, Germany, Norway, and the UK will get to enjoy all its goodness. Honda has no plans to sell the car in America, where people prefer to drive a turbodiesel quad cab pickup truck to work 50 weeks a year just so they can tow the ski boat up to the lake house in the summer. The idea that they could rent a truck for 2 weeks when they need it and drive a more efficient vehicle the rest of the year never would occur to them.

The Honda e bears a striking resemblance to the original Honda Civic that went into production in 1972. Back then, conventional wisdom said nobody wanted small, efficient cars. Many predicted Honda would soon go bankrupt. Oddly, we hear the same refrain all the time today when it comes to Tesla. Some people never learn.

Author: Steve Hanley

Source: cleantechnica.com

Amazon Destruction Accelerates 60% to One and a Half Soccer Fields Every Minute

07.07.2019

ryk-porras-D5-LrW0cZps-unsplash — Photo-illustration: Unsplash (Ryk Porras)

Amazon deforestation accelerated more than 60% in June over the same period last year, in what environmentalists say is a sign that the policies of President Jair Bolsonaro are starting to take effect.

The rate of rainforest destruction had been stable during the first few months of Bolsonaro’s presidency but began to soar in May and June, according to Brazil’s National Institute of Space Research (INPE), a government agency whose satellites also monitor the Amazon.

769.1 square kilometres were lost last month – a stark increase from the 488.4 sq km lost in June 2018, INPE’s data showed. That equates to an area of rainforest larger than one and a half soccer fields being destroyed every minute of every day.

More than two-thirds of the Amazon are located in Brazil and environmental groups blame far-right leader Bolsonaro and his government for the increase, saying he has relaxed controls on deforestation in the country.

“Over the past six months, Bolsonaro and his environment minister have been devoting themselves to the dismantling of the Brazilian environmental governance and neutralizing regulatory bodies”, Carlos Rittl, executive secretary of the environment NGO network Observatorio do Clima (Climate Observatory) told CNN.

Greenpeace called Bolsonaro and his government a “threat to the climate equilibrium” and warned that in the long run, his policies would bear a “heavy cost” for the Brazilian economy. “Bolsonaro already accounts for gigantic setbacks for the environment and for Brazil’s image”, Márcio Astrini, a spokesman for Greenpeace in Brazil said in a statement on Friday.

CNN asked the Brazilian Environment Ministry for comment on the recent numbers but has not received a response.

Delivering on a campaign promise

During Bolsonaro’s election campaign, he promised his government would focus on recovering the Brazilian economy and said he would look at ways of exploring the Amazon’s economic potential. Six months after his inauguration, the populist president is certainly delivering on his promises.

“The strong indication of the increase in the deforestation rate during the government of Jair Bolsonaro shouldn’t surprise anyone,” Rittl said. “It’s, after all, the accomplishing of a campaign promise: Bolsonaro was the first president in all of Brazil’s history to be elected with an openly anti-environmental and anti-indigenous speech”.

Rittl says loggers, farmers and miners emboldened by Bolsonaro’s pro-business stance have jumped on the opportunity, taking advantage of reduced controls and less oversight to seize control of a growing area of land within the Amazon forest.

Meanwhile, the government is hampering the efforts of those who are supposed to keep deforestation in check.

The Brazilian Environment and Renewables Institute (IBAMA), the country’s environmental enforcement agency, has seen its budget cut by $23 million, and six months in, the government has only nominated the heads of four of IBAMA’s 27 state offices. None of those four are located in states with jurisdiction over the Amazon rainforest.

In addition, official data obtained by Observatorio do Clima and sent to CNN shows the number of operations IBAMA has conducted in 2019 has gone down since the beginning of the year, around the same time Bolsonaro was sworn in.

“The explosion of the number of [deforestation] alerts in the past couple of months should lead to an intensification of inspection operations, but that hasn’t happened,” Rittl said.

He also put some of the blame on some European countries. “As much as European leaders have made ‘beautiful’ speeches showing concern about Bolsonaro’s environmental policies, and even though the [Paris Climate] agreement has environmental safeguards, the EU is signaling that it is at least tolerant with the ongoing anti-environmental agenda”.

International criticism

French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have both said they were concerned about the erosion of environmental protections in Brazil, but neither France, Germany or the European Union have gone beyond words. Last Friday, the European Union struck a deal with the South American trade bloc Mercosur, which includes Brazil, a move environmentalists say will only put additional pressure on the Amazon and its fragile ecosystem.

The Amazon forest is often referred to as the planet’s lungs, producing 20 per cent of the oxygen in the earth’s atmosphere. It is considered vital in the ongoing efforts to slow down global warming and it is also home to uncountable species of fauna and flora. With roughly half the size of the United States of America, it is the largest rainforest on the planet.

Its area has been steadily shrinking over the past century with deforestation reaching its peak in 1995, when 29.059 km² were lost. The rate of destruction had then been decreasing, reaching its lowest point in 2012.

It has been accelerating ever since.

Source: CNN

EU Requires Carmakers to Add Fake Engine Noises to Electric Cars

06.07.2019

budapest-budimpešta-hungary-mađarska — Photo-illustration: Pixabay

Electric vehicles have been hailed as part of the answer to the climate crisis, but for some people they represent a new danger.

Pedestrians can struggle to hear quiet electric and hybrid vehicles coming, which presents a particular risk for blind and visually impaired people. But as of Monday, all new models of electric and hybrid vehicles developed and sold in the European Union must come equipped with an acoustic sound system.

Vehicles will have to produce a sound when reversing, or driving below 12 miles per hour, according to the UK government. The sound, produced by an acoustic vehicle alert system (AVAS), will be similar to that of a standard internal combustion engine, and drivers will be able to temporarily disable it if they want.

The measure was passed by the European Parliament in 2014, according to a press release from the European Commission, and a five-year transitional period has now ended.

From July 2021, the regulation will be to all new electric and hybrid vehicles registered in the bloc.

“The government wants the benefits of green transport to be felt by everyone, and understands the concerns of the visually impaired about the possible hazards posed by quiet electric vehicles,” Michael Ellis, the UK’s roads minister, said in a statement. “This new requirement will give pedestrians added confidence when crossing the road.”

The UK’s Royal National Institute of Blind People praised the development.

“After years of campaigning on this issue, we welcome the new regulations,” the RNIB tweeted.

And the charity Guide Dogs welcomed the news as a positive step in reducing the risk posed to vulnerable road users by electric and hybrid vehicles, while calling on the UK government to take further action.

“We’re calling on the government to take this announcement further by requiring AVAS on all existing electric and hybrid vehicles and to ensure drivers have them switched on,” John Welsman, guide dog owner and Guide Dogs staff member, said in a statement.

Some manufacturers, including Toyot and Jaguar, have already developed AVAS systems for their electric vehicles, while BMW has enlisted top film score composer Hans Zimmer to make driving sounds for the electric BMW Vision M Next concept car.

The sounds, recorded with Renzo Vitale, acoustic engineer and sound designer at the BMW Group, may be used in the German automaker’s next generation of electric vehicles.

You can listen to the spaceship-like sound effects on the BMW website.

Electric vehicles are an important part of a drive to cut air pollution by reducing the number of gasoline and diesel cars on the roads.

Britain and France will ban sales of new gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040; India is aiming to make every vehicle sold run on electricity by 2030; and Norway has said all new passenger cars and vans sold in 2025 should be zero-emission vehicles. China, the world’s largest car market, is working on a plan to ban the production and sale of vehicles powered only by fossil fuels.

By 2040, electric cars could make up 57% of all passenger car sales worldwide, according to an analysis by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

Source: CNN

New Cross-Sector Project Targets Wind Turbine Blades Recycling

05.07.2019

windrader-2244174_960_720 — Photo-illustration: Pixabay

The wind energy industry in Europe has joined forces with two other industry bodies to tackle the issue of turbine blades waste.

WindEurope, the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) and the European Composites Industry Association have developed a cross-sector platform to advance novel approaches to recycle wind turbine blades.

Turbine blades are made up of a composite material, which boosts the performance of wind power by allowing lighter and longer blades.

WindEurope suggests around 2.5 million tons of composite material are currently used in the wind energy industry and with around 12,000 turbines expected to be decommissioned over the next five years, broadening the recycling options is crucial.

Currently, composite materials are being recycled at a commercial scale through cement co-processing, where the cement raw materials being partially replaced by the glass fibres and fillers in the composite and the organic fraction replaces coal as a fuel.

WindEurope says the carbon output of the cement manufacturing process can be significantly reduced through this process, with the possibility of up to 16% reduction if composites represent 75% of cement raw materials.

CEO Giles Dickson adds: “Wind energy is an increasingly important part of Europe’s energy mix. The first generation of wind turbines are now starting to come to the end of their operational life and be replaced by modern turbines. Recycling the old blades is a top priority for us and teaming up with the chemical and compositors industries will enable us to do it the most effective way.”

Source: Energy Live News

Heat Stress Could Destroy 80m Jobs and Cost $2.4bn a Year

04.07.2019

working-1056583_960_720 — Photo-illustration: Pixabay

An increase in heat stress at work linked to climate change is projected to cost the global economy the equivalent of $2.4 billion (£1.9bn) a year and lead to tens of millions of job losses.

That’s according to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), which warns heat stress will have a massive impact on global productivity and economic losses.

Heat stress refers to heat in excess of what the body can tolerate without suffering physiological impairment and generally occurs at temperatures above 35°C, in high humidity.

The ILO’s projections, based on a global temperature rise of 1.5°C by the end of this century, suggests the world could see 2.2% of total working hours lost in 2030 because of higher temperatures.

That’s equivalent to the loss of 80 million full time jobs and $2.4 billion.

The report cautions this is a conservative estimate as it assumes the global mean temperature rise will not exceed 1.5°C and work in construction and agriculture – two of the sectors worst affected by heat stress – are carried out in the shade.

The regions losing the most working hours are expected to be southern Asia and western Africa, where around 5% of working hours are projected to be lost in 2030, corresponding to 43 million and nine million jobs respectively, with women the most affected.

In addition, people in the poorest regions are to suffer the most significant economic losses, particularly as they have fewer resources to adapt effectively to increased heat.

The ILO calls for greater efforts to design, finance and implement national policies to address heat stress risks and protect workers, including adequate infrastructure and improved early warning systems for heat events.

Catherine Saget, Chief of Unit in the ILO’s Research department and one of the main authors of the report said: “The impact of heat stress on labour productivity is a serious consequence of climate change, which adds to other adverse impacts such as changing rain patterns, raising sea levels and loss of biodiversity.

“In addition to the massive economic costs of heat stress, we can expect to see more inequality between low and high income countries and worsening working conditions for the most vulnerable, as well as displacement of people. To adapt to this new reality appropriate measures by governments, employers and workers, focusing on protecting the most vulnerable, are urgently needed.”

Source: Energy Live News

UK to Put Climate Crisis and Environment at the Heart of Overseas Aid

04.07.2019

london-3078109_960_720 — Photo-illustration: Pixabay

The UK will have an “ethical” development policy that puts the climate emergency and environmental protection at the heart of overseas aid, with more than £190m to be spent directly on climate-related issues in the first initiative, the government has announced.

Rory Stewart, the international development secretary, said he hoped this sum would soon be doubled and “run to billions rather than hundreds of millions” within a few years.

But he noted even this would not be enough given the massive international lack of funding for the climate. “Particularly in the midst of a leadership campaign, people talk as if we are spending eye-watering sums [on international aid], but … the global funding gap on climate change is $2.5tn. We are only just scratching the surface,” he said.

However, Stewart’s ambition of increasing spending on the environment may not become lasting government policy, as he is likely to be reshuffled when either Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt becomes prime minister. He recently said it would be “heartbreaking” to leave the post.

Of the initial £193m, about £100m will be spent on low-carbon energy and projects to cut carbon emissions in the developing world. The remainder will be split among projects to help developing countries adapt to the effects of global heating, and agriculture, including developing crops that are less susceptible to heat, drought and floods.

An unspecified tranche of the £193m is likely to be spent in the UK, as institutions around the world will be invited to bid to undertake research and development into technology that can reduce emissions and help people adapt to global heating. For instance, weather forecasting data is essential to helping people become resilient to the effects of the climate crisis, such as floods and droughts, and communications technology is needed to ensure people gain access to forecasts in a timely manner.

Current ways of measuring the success of overseas aid spending might also have to change, Stewart suggested. The focus on increasing the GDP of developing countries was “based on calculations the development economists of the 1960s pursued – a very narrow model for growth, still in use in the Treasury and DfID [Department for International Development]”.

Stewart said there was “no simple mathematical formula” that translated investment into long-lasting effects on the ground, and in many cases, development was not a simple transfer of cash, because local politics and other circumstances determined whether projects succeeded. “The secret is not numbers; the secret is values. This is ultimately an ethical project, and DfID has a moral purpose,” he declared.

Instead, Stewart said, the results of spending should be looked at on a variety of measures, including wellbeing, resilience to climate change, building communities and reducing environmental harm.

Stewart also took aim at China, saying the Belt and Road initiative to increase Beijing’s influence in developing countries was “pushing fossil fuels”. He suggested the UK’s soft power could be brought to bear by “leaning in” to China to discuss ways of using low-carbon energy instead.

By putting consideration of the climate and environmental protection into every project DfID pursues, Stewart said, overseas aid could be transformed. “If we can get this right, you can imagine international development, climate change and the environment as a single thing, not a series of weird trade-offs,” he said.

“All development policies must be ethical. The key is in partnerships – it’s not us giving lessons to other people; it’s about sharing. In the end, all politics must be morally purposed.”

Stewart gained plaudits for his passionate performance in the Tory leadership campaign, before being knocked out, leaving either Johnson or Hunt to become the next British prime minister.

Source: Guardian

1...167168169...405 Page 168 of 405

Gut Flora in Balance

The Guardian of the Overall Health

MEAL IN A SACHET

No solution without emission cuts

The roots of the problem

Cross-continental causes

The economic fallout

More ambition needed

Delivering on a campaign promise

International criticism

Newsletter

Calendar of events

2025 May

Events for 31 May

Events for 1 June

Events for 2 June

Events for 3 June

Events for 4 June

Events for 5 June

Events for 6 June

Events for 7 June

Events for 8 June

Events for 9 June

Events for 10 June

Events for 11 June

Events for 12 June

Events for 13 June

Events for 14 June

Events for 15 June

Events for 16 June

Events for 17 June

Events for 18 June

Events for 19 June

Events for 20 June

Events for 21 June

Events for 22 June

Events for 23 June

Events for 24 June

Events for 25 June

Events for 26 June

Events for 27 June

Events for 28 June

Events for 29 June

WRITE US