Tag Archives: bbc

New Zealand rejects climate refugee asylum bid

New Zealand rejects climate refugee asylum bid

Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

New Zealand will pack up members of a Kiribati family and send them back to their drowning island rather than grant them refuge.

That’s thanks to a ruling by New Zealand’s High Court, which rejected Ioane Teitiota’s historic bid for aslyum. Attorneys had argued that Teitiota and his family shouldn’t be forced to return to an island that is frequently flooding as seas rise, inundating farms and contaminating drinking water supplies. The BBC reports on the ruling:

[T]he judge said environmental problems did not fit internationally recognized criteria for refugee status.

“By returning to Kiribati, he would not suffer a sustained and systemic violation of his basic human rights such as the right to life … or the right to adequate food, clothing and housing,” High Court Justice John Priestley wrote in his judgment. …

But Mr Teitiota’s lawyer had challenged that decision, arguing that he and his family — including his three New Zealand-born children — would suffer harm if forced to return to Kiribati because of the combined pressures of over-population and rising sea-levels.

Which is a reminder of an obvious conundrum faced by residents of low-lying Pacific islands — where the hell are they supposed to go?


Source
New Zealand denies climate change asylum bid, BBC

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

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

,

Politics

Visit site: 

New Zealand rejects climate refugee asylum bid

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Sprout, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on New Zealand rejects climate refugee asylum bid

As Warsaw climate talks end, scraps of good news in a mess of bad

As Warsaw climate talks end, scraps of good news in a mess of bad

Shutterstock

The latest round of U.N. climate talks extended the worldwide drought on climate-fighting leadership. Things were going so badly on Thursday that many of the world’s biggest environmental groups stormed out in frustration.

But late during the two weeks of negotiations in Warsaw, Poland, known as COP19, which ended Saturday, a few drops of refreshing news splashed down. Here’s a full rundown.

The big news

In 2015, each of the planet’s nations will offer a proposal for contributing to a reduction in worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. This agreement didn’t come until Saturday night, a day after the talks were supposed to have ended. The AP reported that the “modest deal” averted “a last-minute breakdown.”

The U.S. and other countries plan to publish their commitments to reduce emissions in early 2015 — ahead of what’s supposed to be a final round of negotiations for a new climate treaty in Paris in late 2015. But India, China, and other developing countries have argued that they shouldn’t be forced to spend their own money fighting climate change. As such, they refused to agree to make such commitments. (This despite the fact that nearly half the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were put there by the developing world, and that China and India are respectively the world’s worst and fourth-worst climate polluters.)

At the last minute, a compromise emerged: Instead of publishing “commitments” in early 2015, countries have agreed to announce their planned “intended … contributions” to fight climate change “well in advance” of the Paris meetings. India and China choreographed the semantic gymnastics because they don’t want to hear “legal” this and “contract” that if they fail to follow through. From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation:

Nearly 24 hours into extra time, a plenary meeting approved a modified text that had been thrashed out during an hour-long emergency huddle.

Negotiators agreed that all countries should work to curb emissions from burning coal, oil and gas as soon as possible, and ideally by the first quarter of 2015.

“Just in the nick of time, the negotiators in Warsaw delivered enough to keep the process moving,” said Jennifer Morgan of the World Resources Institute think tank.

Forests

Deforestation through fires, logging, and conversion of forests into fields is responsible for 20 percent of global warming. And the signature achievement of the Warsaw talks was agreement over efforts to tackle deforestation.

The main agreement related to the awkwardly named Redd+. Acronyms generally suck, but we’re going to go ahead and use “Redd+” because it’s better than the alternative, which would be to write, over and over again, the phrase “reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation — plus activities that reforest the world.”

The BBC explains from Warsaw:

A package of measures has been agreed here that will give “results-based” payments to developing nations that cut carbon by leaving trees standing. …

Earlier this week the UK, US, Norway and Germany agreed to a $280 million package of finance that will be managed by the World Bank’s BioCarbon fund to promote more sustainable use of land.

Now negotiators have agreed to a package of decisions that will reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation plus pro-forest activities (known as Redd+).

The conference agreed on a “results-based” payments system that means that countries with forests will have to provide information on safeguards for local communities or biodiversity before they can receive any money.

Observers praised the forestry agreements. “Negotiators provided the bare minimum to move forward on the climate deal,”  said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. ”But the talks made gains on the international technology mechanism [which will help developing countries use technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change] and hit it out of the ballpark with REDD+.”

Loss and damage

Developing countries are pushing for compensation from the West when weather that’s worsened by our greenhouse gas emissions causes them harm. The idea is not popular with developed countries. (The U.S. has tried to rebrand “loss and damage” as “blame and liability.”)

During the Warsaw talks, developed countries agreed to discuss proposals about providing expertise, and possibly aid, to help developing countries cope with climate impacts through what will be known as the Warsaw International Mechanism. (This assistance would be in addition to that provided through the Green Climate Fund, which is intended to help developing countries reduce emissions and adapt to climate change using $100 billion a year starting in 2020.) In exchange, developing countries agreed to delay those discussions until 2016 — after the next climate treaty is finalized.

But that’s pretty much it. And it’s not nearly enough.

“It is irresponsible of the governments of Poland, US, China, India and EU to pretend to act against global warming and catastrophic climate change while agreeing on baby steps at COP19,” said Martin Kaiser, Greenpeace International’s head delegate, in an emailed statement. “The comatose nature of these negotiations sends a clear signal that increased civil disobedience against new coal plants and oil rigs is needed to prevent catastrophic climate change.”

Here’s hoping the drought of climate leadership breaks for the next round of U.N. climate meetings late next year in Lima, Peru.


Source
Modest deal breaks deadlock at UN climate talks, AP
FACTBOX – Main decisions at U.N. climate talks in Warsaw, Reuters
Warsaw climate talks: Principles of global deal agreed on after deadlock over ‘contributions’, Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Warsaw climate conference finds weak compromise, The Nation
‘Signature’ achievement on forests at UN climate talks, BBC

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

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

,

Politics

Read this article – 

As Warsaw climate talks end, scraps of good news in a mess of bad

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on As Warsaw climate talks end, scraps of good news in a mess of bad

Have we hit a “permanent slowdown” in the growth of global CO2 emissions?

Have we hit a “permanent slowdown” in the growth of global CO2 emissions?

Shutterstock/Leena Robinson

The world keeps making climate change worse, pumping out more greenhouse gases every year than the year before. But in an encouraging sign, the rate at which emissions are growing appears to be slowing down.

Global emissions hit 38 billion tons of carbon dioxide last year — up 1.1 percent from 2011. That’s bleak, but the glimmer of hope here is that emissions increased during the last decade by much more than that — by an average of 2.9 percent every year.

The slowdown is attributed to the worldwide growth of the renewables sector; to America’s fracking boom (which produces cheap natural gas that’s reducing coal use but also hobbling the growth of renewables); to new hydropower projects that are offsetting the use of coal in China; and to falling energy consumption and transportation in Europe triggered in part by a bad economy.

The latest annual estimate by the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre says this “may be the first sign of a more permanent slowdown in the increase in global CO2 emissions, and ultimately of declining global emissions.”

That “may be” is a big caveat. It depends largely on continued improvements by the world’s three biggest greenhouse gas polluters — China, the U.S., and the European Union, which together accounted for 55 percent of global emissions last year.

Of course, positive though this development might be, nobody is suggesting that these improvements alone will be enough to curb the climate disaster engulfing the globe.

“It is good news but nowhere near good enough,” Grist board member Bill McKibben told BBC News. “The solution we need here is dictated by physics, and at the moment the physics is busy melting the Arctic and acidifying the ocean. We can’t just plateau or go up less, we have to very quickly try and get the planet off fossil fuels.”

Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency and the European Commission’s Joint Research CentreClick to embiggen.


Source
Report suggests slowdown in CO2 emissions rise, BBC
Trends in global CO2 emissions: 2013 report, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and the European Commission Joint Research Centre

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

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

Originally posted here: 

Have we hit a “permanent slowdown” in the growth of global CO2 emissions?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Have we hit a “permanent slowdown” in the growth of global CO2 emissions?

Italian mafia boss says pollution turned him into a police informant

Italian mafia boss says pollution turned him into a police informant

Shutterstock

The Italian mob didn’t just murder its enemies. With its illegal dumping of toxic waste, it also condemned people living in and around Naples to cancer.

As the Italian Senate investigates links between toxic dumping and cancer clusters, a former mob boss is claiming that his disgust with the pollution prompted him to become a police informant. From the BBC:

Two decades ago doctors noticed that the incidence of cancer in towns around Naples was on the rise. Since then, the number of tumours found in women has risen by 40%, and those in men by 47%.

As senators investigate a possible link to the mafia — which secured lucrative contracts to dispose of waste, then dumped much of it illegally — one ex-mafia boss, Carmine Schiavone, looks on with particular interest.

He was once at the very heart of the criminal network that sowed the land with poison. He knows how much damage the mafiosi have done. …

He became what’s called a mafia pentito — “a penitent one”, siding with the police, and testifying for the state against his fellow mob bosses. …

But it seems that it was not the killing, in the end, that made him sick of his life of crime. What made him a pentito, he says, was his fear about the impact the Casalesi’s illegal dumping of waste was having on the land. …

“I did it when I knew that people were doomed to die from cancer. They had injected all this land — millions of cubic metres — with toxic substances. A scary cocktail.”

Too bad the victims and their families won’t be able to fuhgettaboutit.


Source
The toxic reason a mafia boss became a police informant, BBC

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

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

,

Living

Original source:

Italian mafia boss says pollution turned him into a police informant

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Italian mafia boss says pollution turned him into a police informant

Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Denis Sinyakov / Greenpeace

Russian Coast Guard officers responded to Greenpeace with water cannons, guns and a mass arrest.

Greenpeace activists last week scaled the Prirazlomnaya platform, the first of many offshore Arctic oil platform planned in Russian waters. The protesters, perched high above the frigid waters, were forced down with water cannons. Armed officers boarded Greenpeace’s icebreaker, and arrested all 30 activists.

The demonstration was designed to bring international attention to Russia’s burgeoning plans to allow Big Oil to drill in its offshore waters (onshore drilling is already widespread). ExxonMobil and Statoil are among the companies planning to take part in the precarious deepwater plunder.

Obviously, the 30 activists are not pirates. Pirates are seafaring robbers. Yet that’s what some Russian law enforcement authorities are claiming, and that’s how the Greenpeace arrestees may be charged.

“Yarr, maties, we’ve come to loot your oil drill! Wait, whar’s the treasure?”

The environmentalists could be sentenced to as much as 15 years in prison and fined $15,000 apiece if found guilty of trumped-up piracy charges. From Reuters:

Environmental activists who protested at an offshore oil platform in the Russian Arctic last week will be prosecuted, possibly for piracy which is punishable by up to 15 years’ jail, Russian investigators said on Tuesday.

They said the “attack,” in which Greenpeace activists tried scaling the Gazprom-owned Prirazlomnaya platform, Russia’s first offshore Arctic oil platform, had violated Russian sovereignty.

“When a foreign ship full of electronic equipment intended for unknown purposes and a group of people, declaring themselves to be environmental activists, try to storm a drilling platform there are legitimate doubts about their intentions,” the investigators said in a statement.

Even President Vladimir Putin spoke out against the ludicrous notion that these people are pirates. ”It is absolutely evident that they are, of course, not pirates, but formally they were trying to seize this platform,” Putin said at an Arctic forum, according to a separate Reuters report. “It is evident that those people violated international law.”

And while we’re discussing harebrained Russian claims, one official said Greenpeace had endangered the area’s wildlife and its ecology, which “is being protected zealously” by Russia. Right.

Greenpeace, meanwhile, decried the authorities’ treatment of the protesters. From the BBC:

The environmental organisation said its protest against “dangerous Arctic oil drilling” was peaceful and in line with its “strong principles.”

“Our activists did nothing to warrant the reaction we’ve seen from the Russian authorities,” it said.

The multinational makeup of the protesters is helping deliver a storm of worldwide press coverage. The protesters are from 18 countries, including the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and Russia. Consular officials have interviewed some of those who were arrested.

Putin’s Russia is not the best place to be jailed for protest. While the Greenpeace drama unfolded, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, one of the Pussy Riot members who was sentenced to two years in Russian jail for singing a song that asked the Virgin Mary to throw Putin out of power, has been moved to solitary confinement as punishment for a hunger strike. Tolokonnikova was protesting “slave labor” and the treatment of “women like cattle” in jail.

We’ll see whether pseudo-piracy provokes similarly disproportionate treatment.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Continue reading:

Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Beleaguered bees catch a break as E.U. bans dangerous pesticides

Beleaguered bees catch a break as E.U. bans dangerous pesticides

Nick Foster

Now I can forage without fear.

Heads up, pollinators of the world: Now would be a great time to take that European vacation you’ve always dreamed of. The European Commission — the E.U.’s governing body — voted on Monday to implement a continent-wide ban on the class of insecticides widely suspected of contributing to colony collapse disorder, the mysterious phenomenon that’s been decimating bee populations since 2006.

In January, the European Food Safety Authority warned that three types of neonicotinoid pesticides should be considered unacceptable for use based on their danger to bees. A growing body of scientific evidence has found that, while neonics can’t be blamed directly for colony collapse disorder, they do mess with bees’ navigation, foraging, and communication abilities, throw off their reproductive patterns, and weaken their immune systems, leaving colonies more vulnerable to natural threats like mites and fungi. Neonics are the world’s most ubiquitous pesticides, used extensively on major crops like corn, soy, and canola. They’re applied to seeds before planting and then show up in the pollen bees come to collect.

Three neonics — thiamethoxam, clothianidin, and imidacloprid — will be banned for two years from use on crops bees pollinate, likely starting in December. From the BBC:

There was ferocious lobbying both for and against in the run-up to Monday’s vote, the BBC’s Chris Morris reports from Brussels.

Nearly three million signatures were collected in support of a ban. …

Chemical companies and pesticide manufacturers have been lobbying just as hard — they argue that the science is inconclusive, and that a ban would harm food production.

A study funded by major chemical manufacturers Syngenta and Bayer CropScience asserts that “If Neonicotinoid seed treatment were no longer available in Europe, there would be a significant reduction of food production,” and estimates that “over a 5-year period, the EU could lose up to €17bn [$22.3 billion].” On the other hand, 35 percent of the world’s food crops depend on pollinators, “accounting for an annual value of 153 billion Euros [$200 billion],” according to a 2012 study in the journal Ecotoxicology that reviewed 15 years of research on neonicotinoids’ effects on bees. With bee populations declining at an average annual rate of about 30 percent, I’d say the odds point to a neonic ban as a risk worth taking.

Experts agree. From The Guardian:

Prof Simon Potts, a bee expert at the University of Reading, said: “The ban is excellent news for pollinators. The weight of evidence from researchers clearly points to the need to have a phased ban of neonicotinoids. There are several alternatives to using neonicotinoids and farmers will benefit from healthy pollinator populations as they provide substantial economic benefits to crop pollination.” …

The chemical industry has warned that a ban on neonicotinoids would lead to the return of older, more harmful pesticides and crop losses. But campaigners point out that this has not happened during temporary suspensions in France, Italy and Germany and that the use of natural pest predators and crop rotation can tackle problems.

The U.K. opposed the ban. The country’s chief scientific adviser, Sir Mark Walport, “has said restrictions on the use of pesticides should not be introduced lightly, and the idea of a ban should be dropped,” according to the BBC.

Efforts to ban neonics in the U.S. have gone absolutely nowhere. Last summer, the EPA rejected a petition to stop the sale of clothianidin, one of the pesticides that the E.U. is now banning. Clothianidin has been on the market since 2003, despite the fact that a leaked memo revealed that EPA scientists found a Bayer-produced study of the pesticide’s effects inadequate. EPA now plans to complete its evaluation of neonicotinoid safety in 2018.

Here’s hoping the E.U.’s landmark ban forces action on this side of the pond.

Claire Thompson is an editorial assistant at Grist.

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

,

Food

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Read more: 

Beleaguered bees catch a break as E.U. bans dangerous pesticides

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, Landmark, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Beleaguered bees catch a break as E.U. bans dangerous pesticides

Shell VP: Yeah, we’re gonna spill some oil in the arctic

Shell VP: Yeah, we’re gonna spill some oil in the arctic

Your quote of the day comes from the BBC.

There’s no sugar-coating this, I imagine there would be spills, and no spill is OK. But will there be a spill large enough to impact people’s subsistence? My view is no, I don’t believe that would happen.

That’s Shell’s Alaska vice president, Pete Slaiby, discussing the company’s new, fraught drilling operations off the North Slope of Alaska. During the summer, the company had a neardaily series of screwups that did little to inspire confidence in its ability to successfully extract oil from the ocean floor without spilling it all over themselves and the ocean and the animals in the ocean and probably you, too, somehow. So I’m not sure if Slaiby’s admission is a refreshing demonstration of realism or a heart-attack-inducing statement of indifference.

artic pj

The Arctic Ocean, where drilling is probs no big deal.

I do however love his statement that, yeah, there’ll be spills, but, don’t worry: minor ones. How … does that work? The entire context for the BBC article is that Native populations in Alaska are nervous about the prospect of drilling and a spill.

“We are the oldest continuous inhabitants of North America,” says Point Hope’s Mayor Steve Oomituk. “We’ve been here thousands of years.”

Oomituk shares the fear of many in the small community — population 800 — that offshore drilling by Shell could destroy the food chain that they rely on for survival. Over 80% of the food eaten in Point Hope is caught by the people themselves. …

“If an oil rig spilled and made a mess of the ocean, how am I ever going to eat a whale that’s not contaminated? Crude oil stays on the bottom of the ocean,” [local resident Patrick Jobstone] says.

To which Shell responds, in essence: Don’t worry your pretty little heads.

The brashness of the dismissal is ridiculous for several reasons. First, this is one of the most remote, unforgiving parts of the world. It took months to stop a spill 100 miles from one of the busiest regions in the United States during warm weather. How long would it take to get spill-response equipment and material in place off the Alaskan coast?

And, second, Shell’s clownish failures over the summer included its inability to demonstrate that its containment system worked. Earlier today, details of that failure were released. From KUOW.org:

Before Shell can drill for oil in the Arctic Ocean, it needs to prove to federal officials that it can clean up a massive oil spill there. That proof hinges on a barge being built in Bellingham, [Wash.,] called the Arctic Challenger. …

According to [Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement] internal emails obtained by KUOW, the containment dome test was supposed to take about a day. That estimate proved to be wildly optimistic.

Day 1: The Arctic Challenger’s massive steel dome comes unhooked from some of the winches used to maneuver it underwater. The crew has to recover it and repair it.
Day 2: A remote-controlled submarine gets tangled in some anchor lines. It takes divers about 24 hours to rescue the submarine.
Day 5: The test has its worst accident. On that dead-calm Friday night, Mark Fesmire, the head of BSEE’s Alaska office, is on board the Challenger. He’s watching the underwater video feed from the remote-control submarine when, a little after midnight, the video screen suddenly fills with bubbles. The 20-foot-tall containment dome then shoots to the surface. The massive white dome “breached like a whale,” Fesmire e-mails a colleague at BSEE headquarters.
Then the dome sinks more than 120 feet. A safety buoy, basically a giant balloon, catches it before it hits bottom. About 12 hours later, the crew of the Challenger manages to get the dome back to the surface. “As bad as I thought,” Fesmire writes his BSEE colleague. “Basically the top half is crushed like a beer can.”

But don’t worry, Native people. A spill will be nothing to worry about. Like Shell’s massive 2011 spill in the North Sea, labeled the worst spill in the region in a decade. No bigs.

Here’s a thought, Shell/Slaiby. If “no spill is OK,” don’t fucking drill.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Continued here: 

Shell VP: Yeah, we’re gonna spill some oil in the arctic

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Shell VP: Yeah, we’re gonna spill some oil in the arctic

For the first time, a fossil fuel tanker is navigating the Arctic

For the first time, a fossil fuel tanker is navigating the Arctic

The Ob River is a massive tanker that can carry 150,000 cubic meters of liquified natural gas. (You can tell it carries liquified natural gas because the side of the vessel says “L N G” in massive letters.) And the ship is about to do something that no tanker has done before: traverse the winter Arctic to ship fossil fuels from Norway to Japan.

MarineTraffic.com

You can follow its progress from your own natural gas-warmed home! Click to embiggen.

From the BBC:

The tanker was loaded with LNG at Hammerfest in the north of Norway on 7 November and set sail across the Barents Sea. It has been accompanied by a Russian nuclear-powered icebreaker for much of its voyage. …

“It’s an extraordinarily interesting adventure,” Tony Lauritzen, commercial director at [the company that owns the vessel,] Dynagas, told BBC News.

“The people on board have been seeing polar bears on the route. We’ve had the plans for a long time and everything has gone well.”

Oh, good! There are still polar bears!

According to the BBC, the Hammerfest LNG facility (which, I’ll note, is an awesome name) was created to ship gas to the United States. With the natural gas boom created by fracking, the market has shifted to the east — particularly Japan, which needs energy sources in lieu of its nuclear plants. Under traditional conditions, that would have required a route around Europe, through Mediterranean and the Suez Canal, and around the southern expanse of Asia. Now, however, it can slip above Russia and down to Japan in 20 fewer days.

Why is this possible? You know why this is possible. Because we’ve polluted the atmosphere with things like the methane in that tanker.

The owners [of the Ob River] say that changing climate conditions and a volatile gas market make the Arctic transit profitable.

But the fossil fuel profiteers want to assure you that climate change is just a tiny part of this.

“The major point about gas is that it now goes east and not west,” says Gunnar Sander, senior adviser at the Norwegian Polar Institute and an expert on how climate change impacts economic activity in the Arctic.

“The shale gas revolution has turned the market upside down; that plus the rapid melting of the polar ice.”

He stresses that the changes in climate are less important than the growing demand for oil and gas.

Yes, that’s important to note. This huge tanker is shipping fossil fuels through the Arctic — something that has never been feasible before – just because there’s demand for it on the other side. If the Arctic hadn’t melted, they would have done this anyway, somehow.

As the commercial director of Dynagas said: “It’s an extraordinarily interesting adventure.” This changing climate, this brand new world is indeed a fascinating, uncharted adventure for us all!

Polar bears included.

artic pj

The Arctic Ocean, off the coast of Norway.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

See original article here: 

For the first time, a fossil fuel tanker is navigating the Arctic

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on For the first time, a fossil fuel tanker is navigating the Arctic