Category Archives: Hagen

These Stunning Photos of Greenland’s "Dark Snow" Should Worry You

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Isn’t ice supposed to be white? Jason Box

This story originally appeared in Slate and is republished here as part of our Climate Desk collaboration.

Jason Box knows ice. That’s why what’s happened this year concerns him so much.

Box just returned from a trip to Greenland. Right now, the ice there is…black:

Dark ice is helping Greenland’s glaciers retreat. Jason Box

Crevasses criss-cross the Greenland ice sheet, allowing melt water to descend deep beneath the ice. Jason Box

This year, Greenland’s ice was the darkest it’s ever been. Jason Box

Box and his team are trying to discover what made this year’s melt season so unusual. Jason Box

Box marks his study sites, appropriately, with black flags. Jason Box

Box’s ‘Dark Snow’ project is the first scientific expedition to Greenland to be crowdfunded. Jason Box

The ice in Greenland this year isn’t just a little dark—it’s record-setting dark. Box says he’s never seen anything like it. I spoke to Box by phone earlier this month, just days after he returned from his summer field research campaign.

“I was just stunned, really,” Box told me.

The photos he took this summer in Greenland are frightening. But their implications are even more so. Just like black cars are hotter to the touch than white ones on sunny summer days, dark ice melts much more quickly.

As a member of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, Box travels to Greenland from his home in Copenhagen to track down the source of the soot that’s speeding up the glaciers’ disappearance. He aptly calls his crowdfunded scientific survey Dark Snow.

This year was another above-average melt season in Greenland. National Snow and Ice Data Center

There are several potential explanations for what’s going on here. The most likely is that some combination of increasingly infrequent summer snowstorms, wind-blown dust, microbial activity, and forest fire soot led to this year’s exceptionally dark ice. A more ominous possibility is that what we’re seeing is the start of a cascading feedback loop tied to global warming. Box mentions this summer’s mysterious Siberian holes and offshore methane bubbles as evidence that the Arctic can quickly change in unpredictable ways.

This year, Greenland’s ice sheet was the darkest Box (or anyone else) has ever measured. Box gives the stunning stats: “In 2014 the ice sheet is precisely 5.6 percent darker, producing an additional absorption of energy equivalent with roughly twice the US annual electricity consumption.”

Perhaps coincidentally, 2014 will also be the year with the highest number of forest fires ever measured in Arctic.

Box ran these numbers exclusively for Slate, and what he found shocked him. Since comprehensive satellite measurements began in 2000, never before have Arctic wildfires been as powerful as this year. In fact, over the last two or three years, Box calculated that Arctic fires have been burning at a rate that’s double that of just a decade ago. Box felt this finding was so important that he didn’t want to wait for peer review, and instead decided to publish first on Slate. He’s planning on submitting these and other recent findings to a formal scientific journal later this year.

Arctic and sub-Arctic fires were more powerful in 2014 than ever recorded before. Jason Box/NASA

Box’s findings are in line with recent research that shows the Arctic is in the midst of dramatic change.

In total, more than 3.3 million hectares burned in Canada’s Northwest Territories alone this year—nearly 9 times the long term average—resulting in a charred area bigger than the states of Connecticut and Massachusetts combined. That figure includes the massive Birch Creek Complex, which could end up being the biggest wildfire in modern Canadian history. In July, it spread a smoke plume all the way to Portugal.

In an interview with Canada’s National Post earlier this year, NASA scientist Douglas Morton said, “It’s a major event in the life of the earth system to have a huge set of fires like what you are seeing in Western Canada.”

Box says the real challenge is to rank what fraction of the soot he finds on the Greenland ice is from forest fires, and what is from other sources, like factories. Box says the decline of snow cover in other parts of the Arctic (like Canada) is also exposing more dirt to the air, which can then be more easily transported by the wind. Regardless of their ultimate darkening effect on Greenland, this year’s vast Arctic fires have become a major new source of greenhouse gas emissions from the thawing Arctic. Last year, NASA scientists found “amazing” levels of carbon dioxide and methane emanating from Alaskan permafrost.

Earlier this year, Box made headlines for a strongly worded statement along these lines:

That tweet landed Box in a bit of hot water with his department, which he said now has to approve his media appearances. Still, Box’s sentiment is inspiring millions. His “f’d” quote is serving as the centerpiece of a massive petition (with nearly 2 million signatures at last count) that the activist organization Avaaz will deliver to “national, local, and international leaders” at this month’s global warming rally in New York City on Sept. 21.

Read More:

These Stunning Photos of Greenland’s "Dark Snow" Should Worry You

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, Jason, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These Stunning Photos of Greenland’s "Dark Snow" Should Worry You

World Leaders Have Failed to Seriously Confront Climate Change. Could That Change Next Week?

Mother Jones

Break out your protest sign materials and take your polar bear costume to the dry cleaner, boys and girls: This coming weekend marks the kickoff of Climate Week NYC 2014, a flurry of meetings and protests about climate action. It all starts with the People’s Climate March in Columbus Circle on Sunday. Organizers are already calling it the biggest climate march in history, with over 100,000 folks expected to turn up.

But the week’s main event is on Tuesday at the United Nations, where Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will preside over a confab of heads of state (including President Obama), diplomats, CEOs, and policy wonks who will all be talking about how to prevent global warming from reaching catastrophic levels.

The UN conference is meant as a preparation for the major international climate negotiations scheduled for next winter in Paris, a summit that is theoretically intended to produce an aggressive carbon-cutting treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol. In other words, in classic UN fashion, it’s a meeting about a meeting, or as Mashable’s Andrew Freedman more eloquently put it, “the cocktail party ahead of a formal dinner.” So it’s probably safe to assume that next week we’ll be served appetizers and amuse-bouches rather than a substantive meal, climate action-wise.

Still, New York is a city on the front lines of climate change: Just yesterday the last subway line damaged two years ago by Hurricane Sandy finally came back online. So the excitement is building. Here are a few things to look for:

Continue Reading »

Excerpt from:  

World Leaders Have Failed to Seriously Confront Climate Change. Could That Change Next Week?

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, Prepara, PUR, Radius, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on World Leaders Have Failed to Seriously Confront Climate Change. Could That Change Next Week?

This Legendary Accounting Firm Just Ran the Numbers on Climate Change

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

With every year that passes, we’re getting further away from averting a human-caused climate disaster. That’s the key message in this year’s “Low Carbon Economy Index,” a report released by the accounting giant PricewaterhouseCoopers.

The report highlights an “unmistakable trend”: The world’s major economies are increasingly failing to do what’s needed to to limit global warming to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit above preindustrial levels. That was the target agreed to by countries attending the United Nations’ 2009 climate summit; it represents an effort to avoid some of the most disastrous consequences of runaway warming, including food security threats, coastal inundation, extreme weather events, ecosystem shifts, and widespread species extinction.

To curtail climate change, individual countries have made a variety of pledges to reduce their share of emissions, but taken together, those promises simply aren’t enough. According to the PricewaterhouseCoopers report, “the gap between what we are doing and what we need to do has again grown, for the sixth year running.” The report adds that at current rates, we’re headed towards 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit of warming by the end of the century—twice the agreed upon rate. Here’s a breakdown of the paper’s major findings.

The chart above compares our current efforts to cut “carbon intensity”—measured by calculating the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per million dollars of economic activity—with what’s actually needed to rein in climate change. According to the report, the global economy needs to “decarbonize” by 6.2 percent every year until the end of the century to limit warming to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. But carbon intensity fell by only 1.2 percent in 2013.

The report also found that the world is going to blow a hole in its carbon budget—the amount we can burn to keep the world from overheating beyond 3.6 degrees:

The report singles out countries that have done better than others when it comes to cutting carbon intensity. Australia, for example, tops the list of countries that have reduced the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per unit of GDP, mainly due to lower energy demands in a growing economy. But huge countries like the United States, Germany, and India are still adding carbon intensity, year-on-year:

Overall, PricewaterhouseCoopers paints a bleak picture of a world that’s rapidly running out of time; the required effort to curb global emissions will continue to grow each year. “The timeline is also unforgiving. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and others have estimated that global emissions will need to peak around 2020 to meet a 2°C 3.6 degrees F budget,” the report says. “This means that emissions from the developed economies need to be consistently falling, and emissions from major developing countries will also have to start declining from 2020 onwards.” G20 nations, for example, will need to cut their annual energy-related emissions by one-third by 2030, and by just over half by 2050. The pressure will be on the world’s governments to come up with a solution to this enormous challenge at the much-anticipated climate talks in Paris next year.

Link to original – 

This Legendary Accounting Firm Just Ran the Numbers on Climate Change

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Legendary Accounting Firm Just Ran the Numbers on Climate Change

Bad News For Obama: Fracking May Be Worse Than Burning Coal

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

If you’re a politician, science is a bitch; it resists spin. And a new set of studies—about, of all things, a simple molecule known as CH4—show that President Obama’s climate change strategy is starting to unravel even as it’s being knit. To be specific: most of the administration’s theoretical gains in the fight against global warming have come from substituting natural gas for coal. But it looks now as if that doesn’t really help.

In a very real sense it’s not entirely the president’s fault. When Obama took office in 2008 he decided to deal with health care before climate change, in essence tackling the biggest remaining problem of the 20th century before teeing up the biggest challenge of the 21st. His team told environmentalists that they wouldn’t be talking about global warming, focusing instead on ‘green jobs.’ Obama did seize the opportunity offered by the auto industry bailout to demand higher mileage standards—a useful move, but one that will pay off slowly over the decades. Other than that, faced with a hostile Congress, he spent no political capital on climate.

Continue Reading »

More: 

Bad News For Obama: Fracking May Be Worse Than Burning Coal

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized, Venta, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bad News For Obama: Fracking May Be Worse Than Burning Coal

5 Terrifying Facts From the Leaked UN Climate Report

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

How many synonyms for “grim” can I pack into one article? I had to consult the thesaurus: ghastly, horrid, awful, shocking, grisly, gruesome.

This week, a big report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was leaked before publication, and it confirmed, yet again, the grim—dire, frightful—reality the we face if we don’t slash our global greenhouse gas emissions, and slash them fast.

This “Synthesis Report,” to be released in November following a UN conference in Copenhagen, is still subject to revision. It is intended to summarize three previous UN climate publications and to “provide an integrated view” to the world’s governments of the risks they face from runaway carbon pollution, along with possible policy solutions.

As expected, the document contains a lot of what had already been reported after the three underpinning reports were released at global summits over the past year. It’s a long list of problems: sea level rise resulting in coastal flooding, crippling heat waves and multidecade droughts, torrential downpours, widespread food shortages, species extinction, pest outbreaks, economic damage, and exacerbated civil conflicts and poverty.

But in general, the 127-page leaked report provides starker language than the previous three, framing the crisis as a series of “irreversible” ecological and economic catastrophes that will occur if swift action is not taken.

Here are five particularly grim—depressing, distressing, upsetting, worrying, unpleasant—takeaways from the report.

1. Our efforts to combat climate change have been grossly inadequate.
The report says that anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse gas emissions continued to increase from 1970 to 2010, at a pace that ramped up especially quickly between 2000 and 2010. That’s despite some regional action that has sought to limit emissions, including carbon-pricing schemes in Europe. We haven’t done enough, the United Nations says, and we’re already seeing the effects of inaction. “Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history,” the report says. “The climate changes that have already occurred have had widespread and consequential impacts on human and natural systems.”

2. Keeping global warming below the internationally agreed upon 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (above preindustrial levels) is going to be very hard.
To keep warming below this limit, our emissions need to be slashed dramatically. But at current rates, we’ll pump enough greenhouse gas into the atmosphere to sail past that critical level within the next 20 to 30 years, according to the report. We need to emit half as much greenhouse gas for the remainder of this century as we’ve already emitted over the past 250 years. Put simply, that’s going to be difficult—especially when you consider the fact that global emissions are growing, not declining, every year. The report says that to keep temperature increases to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, deep emissions cuts of between 40 and 70 percent are needed between 2010 and 2050, with emissions “falling towards zero or below” by 2100.

3. We’ll probably see nearly ice-free summers in the Arctic Ocean before mid-century.
The report says that in every warming scenario it the scientists considered, we should expect to see year-round reductions in Arctic sea ice. By 2050, that will likely result in strings of years in which there is the near absence of sea ice in the summer, following a well-established trend. And then there’s Greenland, where glaciers have been retreating since the 1960s—increasingly so after 1993—because of man-made global warming. The report says we may already be facing a situation in which Greenland’s ice sheet will vanish over the next millennium, contributing up to 23 feet of sea level rise.

4. Dangerous sea level rise will very likely impact 70 percent of the world’s coastlines by the end of the century.
The report finds that by 2100, the devastating effects of sea level rise—including flooding, infrastructure damage, and coastal erosion—will impact the vast majority of the world’s coastlines. That’s not good: Half the world’s population lives within 37 miles of the sea, and three-quarters of all large cities are located on the coast, according to the United Nations. The sea has already risen significantly: From 1901 to 2010, global mean sea level rose by 0.62 feet.

5. Even if we act now, there’s a real risk of “abrupt and irreversible” changes.
The carbon released by burning fossil fuels will stay in the atmosphere and the seas for centuries to come, the report says, even if we completely stop emitting CO2 as soon as possible. That means it’s virtually certain that global mean sea level rise will continue for many centuries beyond 2100. Without strategies to reduce emissions, the world will see 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit of warming above preindustrial temperatures by the end of the century, condemning us to “substantial species extinction, global and regional food insecurity, and consequential constraints on common human activities.”

What’s more, the report indicates that without action, the effects of climate change could be irreversible: “Continued emission of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and long-lasting changes in all components of the climate system, increasing the likelihood of severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts for people and ecosystems.”

Grim, indeed.

Visit link:

5 Terrifying Facts From the Leaked UN Climate Report

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 5 Terrifying Facts From the Leaked UN Climate Report

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

26 Aug 2014 7:46 PM

Share

Share

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

×

Yep, we know that greenhouse gas emissions are through the roof, and that climate change is already happening in a big, bad way, and that it’s only getting worse. But did you see the news stories about the latest draft report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)? They are positively horrifying! We are royally f#!@%$#cked, everybody. The key word that the report uses to describe our plight: irreversible.

From The New York Times:

The world may already be nearing a temperature at which the loss of the vast ice sheet covering Greenland would become inevitable, the report said. The actual melting would then take centuries, but it would be unstoppable and could result in a sea level rise of 23 feet, with additional increases from other sources like melting Antarctic ice, potentially flooding the world’s major cities.

The IPCC — a team of scientists and other experts appointed by the United Nations to periodically review the latest research on climate science — has been rolling out its fifth assessment report in four installments, and this draft is the latest.

While it restates many things included in earlier reports, this time it uses stronger words in hopes that you and I and everyone else will actually freak out the way we should given the circumstances. Grueling heat waves, droughts, floods, and all kinds of extreme weather are likely to continue and intensify. And the IPCC is trying to get the world to do something about it.

Using blunter, more forceful language than the reports that underpin it, the new draft highlights the urgency of the risks likely to be intensified by continued emissions of heat-trapping gases, primarily carbon dioxide released by the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas.

And that’s because — despite what we know — we’re not doing better at curbing emissions.

From 1970 to 2000, global emissions of greenhouse gases grew at 1.3 percent a year. But from 2000 to 2010, that rate jumped to 2.2 percent a year, the report found, and the pace seems to be accelerating further in this decade.

There is a bit of good news, though: Efforts to curb emissions have been relatively successful at the local and regional levels in many countries, and continuing to lower emissions would at least slow the pace of all this change, if not stop it.

Anyway, at least this report is a “draft,” right? “It’s not final,” The New York Times notes, and could, theoretically, “change substantially before release,” which is slated for early November in Copenhagen. But even if it does, chances are it’ll still be pretty darn grim.

Source:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Are Growing, and Growing More Dangerous, Draft of U.N. Report Says

, The New York Times.

UN climate change report warns of ‘irreversible’ impacts

, The Christian Science Monitor.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Read more:  

The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, Hagen, KTP, LG, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The U.N.’s latest report on climate change is terrifying

Your iPhone is about to get (a little) less toxic

Your iPhone is about to get (a little) less toxic

Ian Higgins

Apple is upping its green game in a big way, thanks in no small part to former-EPA-chief-turned-Apple-exec Lisa Jackson. On Wednesday, the company announced an official ban of two toxins from its iPhone and iPad production lines, following a five-month-long “Bad Apple” campaign launched by China Labor Watch and Green America.

Benzene and n-hexane, used primarily to clean and polish electronics during the final stages of production, are known to cause a slew of negative health effects including leukemia and nerve damage. Activist groups harangued the company for its use of the chemicals until it conducted its own investigation of 22 of its plants.

Naturally, Apple’s internal probe found nothing of consequence (the use of the chemicals wasn’t widespread, it insists, and didn’t endanger a single worker; what little it did find fell well within the company’s existing safety standards). In true EPA style, though, Jackson and her team tightened the existing rules to explicitly prohibit the use of benzene and n-hexane in final assembly processes. Although the company will still use a tiny bit during the earlier stages of production, Apple, Jackson writes, “treats any allegations of unsafe working conditions extremely seriously.” Hmm.

From the AP:

“This is doing everything we can think of to do to crack down on chemical exposures and to be responsive to concerns,” Lisa Jackson, Apple’s vice president of environmental initiatives, said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We think it’s really important that we show some leadership and really look toward the future by trying to use greener chemistries.”

Hear, hear. And at least Apple has now released an actual list of the substances it regulates to the public, making world domination by iThings a little more transparent.


Source
Apple Bans Use of 2 Chemicals in iPhone Assembly, Associated Press

Sara Bernard is a Grist fellow, wilderness junkie, and globetrotter. Follow her on Twitter.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Living

Follow this link:  

Your iPhone is about to get (a little) less toxic

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Your iPhone is about to get (a little) less toxic

Fracking operations get even closer to drinking water sources than we thought

Fracking operations get even closer to drinking water sources than we thought

Daniel Foster

Fracking companies have tried their best to quell the public’s fears about the practice. But, uh, they’re not doing a very good job of it. A new study shows that oil and gas companies are fracking at much shallower depths than previously thought — sometimes even through potential underground sources of drinking water.

To be clear, the study — which looked at the fracking operations at two geological formations in Wyoming — did not find current drinking water sources to be contaminated. But Stanford researchers Dominic DiGiulio and Robert Jackson did discover that, even as oil and gas companies usually report that fracking takes place thousands of feet below aquifers, some fracking chemicals actually get scarily close to aquifers that have been categorized as safe for human consumption. Even if no one is drinking out of these aquifers today, that doesn’t mean we won’t want or need to use them in the future. Unless they become full of chemicals that are known carcinogens and neurotoxins, that is.

From the LA Times:

DiGiulio and Jackson plotted the depths of fracked wells, as well as domestic drinking water wells in the Pavillion area. They found that companies used acid stimulation and hydraulic fracturing at depths of the deepest water wells near the Pavillion gas field, at 700 to 750 feet, far shallower than fracking was previously thought to occur in the area.

“It’s true that fracking often occurs miles below the surface,” said Jackson, professor of environment and energy at Stanford. “People don’t realize, though, that it’s sometimes happening less than a thousand feet underground in sources of drinking water.”

On top of that, the study reports that some of the geological formations in which fracking occurs are not as sealed off as oil and gas companies would like us to believe, meaning that fracking chemicals are more likely to seep out. Just one more thing to add to the list of why we love fracking (HA).


Source
Oil companies fracking into drinking water sources, new research shows, Los Angeles Times

Samantha Larson is a science nerd, adventure enthusiast, and fellow at Grist. Follow her on Twitter.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Follow this link: 

Fracking operations get even closer to drinking water sources than we thought

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fracking operations get even closer to drinking water sources than we thought

Fracking wells at the Pittsburgh airport? Sure — what could go wrong?

Fracking wells at the Pittsburgh airport? Sure — what could go wrong?

Fred

Here’s a great idea: You have a fairly new and extremely unregulated technology that’s used to extract a natural resource with a known tendency toward explosion. Why not install that technology at a major international airport?

Alright – to be fair, applying the title of “major international airport” to Pittsburgh International Airport is a bit of a stretch these days. If you’re going by The New York Times’ description of its once-great terminals, it’s about two tumbleweeds shy of American ghost town candidacy. When US Airways abandoned PIT as a hub in 2004, its annual traffic dropped from 21 million passengers in 1997 to eight million in 2013. The airport is broke.

As has become business as usual in Pennsylvania, PIT has turned to the massive deposits of natural gas buried under its runways as a source of revenue. Consol Energy will set up a well right alongside the airport parking lot this month. The gas deposits themselves lie roughly a mile directly underneath the airport.

From The New York Times:

“It’s like finding money,” said Rich Fitzgerald, the county executive of Allegheny County, which owns the airport. “Suddenly you’ve got this valuable asset that nobody knew was there.”

As was made abundantly clear by the Times’ income-focused coverage, this has been painted as an economic boon for the county with no mention of the potential health and environmental hazards associated with fracking. But that policy has worked out great for Pennsylvania so far, so why not run with it?

The real potential for crisis, however, lies in endangering one of the state’s greatest monuments, which can be found opposite the airport TGI Friday’s. I’m talking about George Washington, our nation’s founding father, standing proudly next to Franco Harris, former Steelers running back, captured mid-Immaculate Reception:

This is fine art and it needs to be protected! Clean water, uncontaminated air, and potential for earthquakes are essentially an afterthought here. When Franco Harris is threatened, every limbic system in Western Pennsylvania should leap to attention, so I’m frankly appalled that no action has been taken against this well. Come on now, yinz!


Source
Now Arriving at Pittsburgh International: Fracking, The New York Times

Eve Andrews is a Grist fellow and new Seattle transplant via the mean streets of Chicago, Poughkeepsie, and Pittsburgh, respectively and in order of meanness. Follow her on Twitter.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Cities

,

Climate & Energy

Credit:

Fracking wells at the Pittsburgh airport? Sure — what could go wrong?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fracking wells at the Pittsburgh airport? Sure — what could go wrong?

Keystone XL could be even worse than you thought

Keystone XL could be even worse than you thought

Rena Schild /

Shutterstock

If the Keystone XL pipeline is built, it could lead to up to four times as much CO2 pollution as the State Department has estimated, according to a new study. And the study wasn’t written by activists. It was conducted by scientists at the Stockholm Environment Institute and published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Why are these new figures so much higher than previous ones? The Associated Press explains: “The U.S. [State Department’s] estimates didn’t take into account that the added oil from the pipeline would drop prices by about $3 a barrel, spurring consumption that would create more pollution, the researchers said.”

Here’s more from Climate Central:

The researchers found that for every barrel of increased crude oil production in the Canadian tar sands, global oil consumption could increase 0.6 barrels because the additional oil on the market would cause a decrease in global oil prices.

Depending on how much new oil production Keystone XL allows, the net yearly impact of the pipeline may range from nearly zero to 110 million tons of CO2 emissions each year — a range four times wider than that forecasted by the State Department, the study says.

The State Department’s position on Keystone XL, which is expected to pump 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta to Texas, is that it will have an impact on climate change, but a much smaller one than if the pipeline isn’t built. That’s because Canada will find other, more carbon-intensive ways of getting that oil to refineries, such as via rail or other pipelines to the Canadian coast.

Danny Harvey, a University of Toronto professor whose research focuses on energy and climate change, said the paper shows strong evidence that the climate change effects of Keystone XL would be significant if it’s built.

He said he is “baffled” by the State Department’s conclusion that Keystone XL will have a minimal impact on the climate, and that he doubts the department’s statements that rail and other pipelines are likely to be sufficient to make up for the lost oil transporting capacity of Keystone XL if it isn’t built.

This debate matters because President Obama said last year that he won’t approve the pipeline if it would “significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution.” He’s expected to make his decision after the November midterm elections.

New concerns about CO2 pollution won’t dampen GOP enthusiasm for the pipeline, of course. If Republicans take control of the Senate after the midterms — Nate Silver says they have about a 60 percent chance of doing so — they plan to make approval of Keystone one of their top priorities.


Source
Keystone XL Emissions Could Be Four Times Higher Than U.S. Calculated, Says New Study, Associated Press
Keystone XL Will Spike Oil Demand and CO2, Study Says, Climate Central
Uniting to Take Congress, G.O.P. Tries to Become the Party of ‘Yes’, The New York Times

Lisa Hymas is senior editor at Grist. You can follow her on Twitter and Google+.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Read more:

Keystone XL could be even worse than you thought

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Keystone XL could be even worse than you thought