Emission reduction – Page 8

June 9, 2022June 28, 2022

UK electricity generation to be carbon neutral by 2035 says Boris Johnson

By 2030 all cars sold will need to be electric or some other form of fuel. Combustion engines will be banned, this is good news. However, if the national grid continues to burn fossil fuels, the cars will still pollute, even if their efficiency, and therefore the amount of emissions that they create will have fallen.

This will mean that all power in the UK will come from wind, solar, hydro and nuclear.

One of the big advantages, is that this will shield us from price rises of gas impacting electricity prices. Unfortunately, at this time, many houses will still be heated by gas. This can be replaced over time.

At the moment gas power plants are still very important for keeping the lights on in the uk, but this will disappear over the next 15 years.

While there are still challenges, what we need as a country is to be moving in the right direction as fast as possible. Renewables plus nuclear is already above 50% – renewables supplied 43% with nuclear adding another 16%.

By removing carbon emissions from our electricity generation and travel, each family in the UK will cut their emissions by about 17%. No where near finished, but a very good start.

June 8, 2022June 28, 2022

A simple change in how bitcoin is verified, could cut energy consumption by 99%

Bitcoin and other crypto currencies have rightly gained a reputation of using insane amounts of power to run. Even by using the excess heat to heat other buildings, it is still a problem.
Bitcoin mining already uses as much power as Sweden. However this could all change. Currently, the software uses, “proof of work” which requires massive computer arrays to validate purchases.

Rival system such as Ethereum uses “Proof of Stake” where miners have to pledge their coins to verify transactions. Any inaccurate information leads to penalties.

With how much energy bitcoin is using, they must follow suit or find another way to cut their energy demands dramatically.

Bitcoin mining is requiring so much power, that coal powerplant stations that are due for dismantling are being given a reprieve. This is concerning, particularly in America where their power grid had made much progress, but could see all this reverserd.

We do not want to be in a world, where countries that do not clean up how they power the grid, can make huge piles more money, simply by continuing to pollute.

June 7, 2022June 28, 2022

Nature communications has calculated that half of world rooftops would supply all the electricity we need

I wrote a short time ago about the solar area needed to power the world. As a result, I was fascinated to find this article from a few months ago.

On the vast majority of rooftops, nothing is done with this space. Covering the half of these roofs that face the right way, with solar panels, would be able to power the world.

This would have another advantage. If the whole world was solar powered, and we connected all countries around the world, then batteries could be unnecessary – Europe could power America and Australia during the night, and they could return the favour during our night.

The UK has been very foolish, but greatly increasing the price of Solar. This must be reversed to not put off the Solar roll out.

June 6, 2022June 28, 2022

Apparently fossil fuel cars make ‘hundreds of times’ more waste than electric cars

It seems obvious. Into one car you simply put electrons, into the other car you pump as much as 50kg of fuel, which uses more resources?

How anyone can compare the 30kg or so lost at the end of an electric cars life, to the 50kg or so that the average combustion car burns each week, is baffling

Over the lifetime of an electric car, roughly 30kg of raw material will be used. A combustion engine car will use 17,000 litres of oil.

June 4, 2022June 28, 2022

Forests appear to reduce the planets temperatures by half a degree – we cant afford to loose this

In a time when half a degree more or less warming, might be the difference between tens of millions of people becoming climate refugees, and hundreds of millions (or even billions), the idea that without our forests the planet would be at least half a degree warmer, should give us even more incentive to protect the forests that remain.

Rainforests are fantastic places and now it is clear that we need them to keep the planet cool copyright Freebie photography

June 3, 2022June 28, 2022

I have written in the past about the discovery that seaweed added to a cows diet greatly reduces methane emissions, now Morrisons wants to act

Morrisons is to have its cows given additives of seaweed in an attempt to reduce methane emissions.

Cows that can graze along the sea shore will happily eat seaweed, but adding it to all cow diets will greatly reduce emissions

This additive reduces methane emissions by as much as 80%, and given that morrisons currently has roughly 10% of the country shopping there, they have the potential of reducing cow based emissions by 8%. Now other brands need to follow Morrisons lead on this, but about 5% of the UK emissions is accounted for by the emissions of cows, which means that Morrisons move alone, should cut carbon emissions in the UK by around 0.5%, now while this is not huge, if everyone across the country chose to use this meat, 5% of emissions is a pretty substantial cut.

More to the point, with the main supermarket chains in such close competition in the UK, I find it hard to believe that others are not going to follow Morrisons lead. I for one will be happy to get our beef from Morrisons (though in our case, we have already replaced most of our beef mince with turkey mince which has a far lower carbon footprint anyway.

June 3, 2022June 28, 2022

Several years ago, I wrote about the Prime minister of the UK fighting against this ‘green C**P’ now they want us to look at them as the saviours of the energy crisis?

Back in 2013 David Cameron did a u-turn on government support for Wind and Solar power generation. This has greatly impacted the uptake of both – and the savings are small and will be dwarfed by the likely financial cost of the delay that they forced on us.

Gas prices have already risen by 50% and are likely to spike further later this year. The chancellor has made small moves to try to stop this (and has recently given up by promising us all money off our bill).

What is scary, is that had the Conservative government of 2013 not done what they did, we would already be generating more clean energy than that which gets imported from Russia.

Labour has pledged a 28 billion fund to lead a green recovery, his homes grant scheme has insulated just 10% of the pathetically small number of homes it had promised to insulate.

The Renewable Energy Association believe that it could build enough energy generation within 18 months to offset the loss of the terrawatt-hour imported from Russia – if obstacles were removed. Renewables are faster to come on line and cheaper than either Shale or north sea drilling.

Bizarrely, the Mail suggests that those fighting fracking are funded by Putin – a clearly stupid idea, as Putin wants fracking stopped so that he can supply the UK instead. Of course these extreme views have never felt the need to conform to something as unimportant as the truth. I would hope, however, that the absurdity of these positions would be so obvious as to make a mockery of them, and give the far right of the conservative party the backbone to do what is needed and ignore the contradictory voices coming from even further right.

We need to move away from gas. For goodness sakes, it is not a renewable resource, so one day the planet will have to survive without it. Lets make that day now, and not require our descendants to learn to survive in a world decidedly less pleasant to those wanting to live here.

June 2, 2022June 28, 2022

Tory MPs are arguing that the green transition is too expensive, an argument that has proved false many times over – currently being shown to be rubbish by the EU

It is a progressions that is very old

Deny that there is a problem – in this case deny the increasingly clear evidence of climate change
Claim that mitigation of the problem (which until recently they denied existed) is way to expensive – why would a sane person listen to some one who has been denying the problem for years
Once the damage is done, say that it is too late anyway

Temperatures at some Arctic weather stations hit 30 degrees earlier this year. At the same time, down in Antarctica temperatures hit 40 degrees above normal. These readings are not anomolies. We have also seen mass coral bleachings on the great barrier reef (during a La Nina year, which is supposed to be cooler)

Scientists have predicted for decades, that climate breakdown will be incredibly fast when its starts in earnest, and at this point there will be little or nothing that we can do about it.

Have we crossed this terrifying point? We don’t know, but what we do know is that far from giving up saying it is too late and we just need to accept it, we need to accelerate our efforts to green our economy.

It is important to remember that the climate mitigation that was claimed to be too expensive, will be a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of living in a world that is subject to runaway climate change.

Despite what many right wing conservatives currently claim, if oil prices remain high we could be looking at a significant saving not a cost from these decarbonisation projects.

May 31, 2022June 28, 2022

5 of the worlds biggest agribusinesses sought to weaken EU deforestation just 8 days after voting to accelerate action

Can this have possibly been the same people? Is there really anyone stupid enough to try to weaken EU forest protection 1 week after saying they would accelerate protection?

This sort of behaviour should be punished hard. Agriculture is responsible for about 25% of the worlds greenhouse emissions and so they must make progress if the world is to succeed in cutting emissions. The 5 firms in question include ADM Bunge Cargill LDC and Viterra.

They tried to explain away this discrepancy, but what is clear is that we must force these companies to be honest about how they are performing. Furthermore, we the consumers, must be willing to leave products behind if the manufacturer is behaving so badly.

May 22, 2022June 28, 2022

Tesla has been cut from the S&P 500 Environmental Social and Governance Index, what have they done (SARCASM)

So in theory an Environmental Social and Governance Index is important. This allows customers and investors to look at a company, and by looking at the size of one number they can tell if the company is doing well in these ways or badly. At least that is the theory.

Clearly it is not working in practice. The reason given for Tesla’s removal was claims of racial discrimination and crashes that are supposedly linked to its autopilot system. In the same rewriting, Twitter will be added to the list, alongside Oil refiner Phillips 66. Chevron and and delta airlines are also being dropped.

One of the main factors for Tesla’s dropping is the fact that it does not publish details related to its low carbon strategy or business conduct code.

Now, if you were being generous you could suggest that the company is following its rules without using its head, but this I believe is wrong.

It is true that an electric car has a higher carbon footprint in manufacture – batteries are energy intensive to create. What is also true, is that at the moment, even while giving fossil fuel cars every advantage possible (most calculations of their emissions treats petrol as though it appears on the side of the road, and ignores the extraction refining and transport which can as much as triple the carbon emissions for a tank of fuel) an electric car saves more carbon than the extra that it emits in manufacturing within the first 5000-10000 miles.

Now to put this in context, Exxon is listed in the top 10 on this list! Apparently, having concrete ideas on how to reduce your carbon footprint gets recognized but having already lowered it (and indeed the impact of your products reducing emissions by hundreds of tonnes over their lifetime is ignored).

Now, just to push the point home, Ark invest founder Cathie Woods slammed this removal. Cathie Woods is not only seen as incredibly effective an investment manager, but has been very clever in investing in clean companies. Indeed when asked for a quote she said “Ridiculous, not worthy of any other response”

Some commentators have suggested that this is just the Index protecting itself – several oil companies and similar are high on the list; Tesla creates an existential risk to companies like this.