Global Warming

  • Home
  • Global Warming

Global Warming Global warming facts and figures for those who trust knowledge-producing institutions and democratic

Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager (10 trillion USD in assets under management in January 2...
09/11/2022

Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager (10 trillion USD in assets under management in January 2022) gave this shocking interview on 24 October 2022, unfortunately available only in French or German.

https://www.pme.ch/invest/2022/10/24/larry-fink-ceo-de-blackrock-la-suisse-est-pour-nous-lun-des-marches-les-plus-importants-539793

Here is a translation of the part about fossil fuels [my notes in square parenthesis]:

Let's talk about BlackRock's sustainability strategy. What is your position on oil and gas facilities?

We believe in the strategy that climate risks are also investment risks. If you owned carbon stocks [ie, fossil fuels] last year, you did very well. But if you own sustainability stocks [renewable energy] you have done rather poorly over the one-year horizon.

The conclusion?

When we talk about climate risk as an investment risk [who does?] we are talking about a longer time horizon. With a three-year horizon, the comparison of returns would have been more balanced [ie, we choose fast profits over sustainability].

How important is it to you to reduce carbon emissions?

Decarbonisation is very expensive. This is particularly true given the imbalances between supply and demand in gas and oil. For gas in Europe, we have extreme valuations. On the other hand, oil prices have returned to the same level as before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, in the long term, the energy transition is taking place and companies need to adapt their business models accordingly.

So you are not turning away from investments in gas or oil?

We have always said that we will not give up our investments in this region. We have always been an investor in gas pipelines, such as the Saudi pipeline, the Abu Dhabi pipeline, the Texas to Mexico pipeline. We are convinced that gas will continue to play a very important role in the energy mix.

This is not unanimously accepted.

Some will disagree with me. But we have not changed our mind: a quick divestment from oil and gas is not a fair and just transition. It requires a long-term planning process while investing in decarbonisation technologies [but BlackRock does not invest in decarbonisation technologies].

So where do you see the path to carbon reduction for energy production?

I am a big supporter of new technologies and believe in carbon sequestration and recovery [certainly meaning *oil* recovery, ie, CCUS]. We believe that these technologies will compensate for the continued consumption of carbon [ie, admitting CCS and CCUS are a ploy to allow the continued consumption of fossil fuels]. The pipelines that were built for gas can one day be used for hydrogen [hinting at the planned future of fossil fuel companies as they see it: blue hydrogen, ie, hydrogen from fossil fuels with carbon sequestration paid for by taxpayers].

How do you judge the development of investments in the field of sustainability in general?

As in any emerging market, there is bad behavior. But that does not mean that everything is bad. There has to be a long term comprehensive plan and a phased approach if it is to be done in a fair and equitable way. The only way to do it fairly and equitably in Europe is for governments to subsidise energy costs [hinting at subsidies for fossil fuel companies to implement CCS or CCUS].

What do you think of the action of governments before the crisis?

In many places in Europe, there were debates about limiting supply while demand remained constant. And so we had a big imbalance in hydrocarbon [fossil fuel] reinvestment. Now we see how energy prices have risen [suggesting that trying to reduce the extraction of fossil fuels can only result in high energy prices, ie, pain for everyone].

But how do you make the transition to zero emissions?

It is like a balloon. If you take out a little air, the balloon shrinks if you don't reinflate it. The same applies to conventional sources of oil and gas: if you deflate the balloon, you lose about 8% of the available energy every year. In the case of fracking, the figure is as high as 20%. In order to maintain stable energy costs for households in Europe, it is therefore essential that we continue to reinvest in these areas [justifying BlackRock’s planet-dooming investments].

What about alternative energy sources?

We have always believed that there needs to be a long-term strategy to use traditional energy sources [ie, fossil fuels] combined with investment in new technologies to replace traditional ones. Now solar and wind energy are certainly competitive with oil or gas. But the problem is that there is not always sun and wind [totally ignoring storage and the fact hybrid wind/solar plants need very little of it]. This is why wind and solar energy will not be able to prevail on their own at present. New technologies are needed.

De passage à Zurich, le patron du plus grand gestionnaire de fortune du monde se confie sur le développement durable, les cryptomonnaies, la situation mondiale et ses racines à Credit Suisse.

08/09/2022

Life-cycle GHG emissions over the lifetime of BEVs are substantially less than for ICEVs, even in countries with substantial fossil-fuel power generation:

https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021_0.pdf

The above study assumes batteries last as long as the vehicle and will need to be entirely replaced for each vehicle.

However, reality shows that batteries on average last much longer than the vehicle and can be reused:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2022/08/01/electric-car-batteries-lasting-longer-than-predicted-delays-recycling-programs

This means the yellow portion of the emissions bars for BEVs will actually be shorter and BEVs will therefore emit even less over their lifetimes.

04/08/2022

https://iflscience.com/-64562

…researchers at the University of Waterloo in Canada found that just 200 companies (known as the Carbon Underground 200 or CU200) own 98 percent of the potential emissions from the world's remaining oil, gas, and coal reserves…

CU200 fossil fuel reserves have the potential to produce 674 gigatons of carbon emissions, more than enough to push global average temperatures beyond 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

Within the CU200 group, just 10 shareholders own 49.5 percent of the potential emissions from the world's largest energy firms…

These actors included: Blackrock, Vanguard, the Government of India, State Street, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Dimensional Fund Advisors, Life insurance Corporation, Norges Bank, Fidelity Investments, and Capital Group.

Also significant is there are only 2 private oil companies in the top 10 (8 are state-owned) and they produce only 12% of the top 10's cumulated production (4.1/34.8 million barrels/day):

https://www.offshore-technology.com/analysis/companies-by-oil-production/

This means any attempt at leaving oil in the ground must involve the governments of these state-owned oil companies: Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Iran, Norway, Brasil... etc

02/08/2022

Switzerland's Nant de Drance pumped hydro energy storage system cost 2 billion CHF (around 2.1 billion USD) for a storage capacity of 20 million kWh and peak charge/discharge capacity of 900 MW: a giant 105 USD/kWh battery.

It is 80% efficient, round trip, which means it returns 80% of the electricity it takes in back to the grid.

It has by itself increased Switzerland's installed energy capacity by 33%.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/01/world/water-battery-switzerland-renewable-energy-climate-scn-hnk-spc-intl/index.html

The good news is there are around 600,000 potential sites for similar pumped hydro energy storage systems around the world, spread out on every continent and only 1% of these would be needed to meet total global energy storage needs.

https://www.nationalmap.gov.au/ =s-h3So4iEf8t2cGpdzjOwwIjI4iaU

25/06/2022

Human activities have caused global temperatures to increase by 1.25°C, and the current emissions trajectory suggests that we will exceed 1.5°C in less than 10 years...

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abo3378

As Dr. Katherine Hayhoe has frequently remarked, beyond 1.5°C, the situation for large parts of the planet may well become unmitigatable, and significant areas of the planet uninhabitable. Not a single organism will remain unaffected. This could start occuring within the next 10 years - not at the end of the century. Simply put, the world that we grew up in is gone, never to return in our lifetimes, nor even those of our grandchildren. We are in uncharted territory, in conditions that have not previously prevailed in all of human civilisation.

06/03/2022

NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and other federal agencies conclude sea levels along U.S. coastlines will rise between 10 to 12 inches (25 to 30 centimeters) on average above today’s levels by 2050:

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/sea-level-to-rise-up-to-a-foot-by-2050-interagency-report-finds

About 2 feet (0.6 meters) of sea level rise along the U.S. coastline is increasingly likely between 2020 and 2100 because of emissions to date. Failing to curb future emissions could cause an additional 1.5 - 5 feet (0.5 - 1.5 meters) of rise for a total of 3.5 - 7 feet (1.1 - 2.1 meters) by the end of this century:

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/sealevelrise/sealevelrise-tech-report.html

From section 2.4 of the full report, sea levels in 2150 would reach 2.2 meters in the intermediate scenario, but could go as high as 3.9 meters:

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/sealevelrise/sealevelrise-tech-report-sections.html

07/12/2021

Indonesia has a real plan to phase out fossil fuel subsidies and impose a carbon tax to ensure a just transition to a low carbon economy. Others may take note:

"...transforming the economy to meet the new goal would cost $20 billion per year in 2021 and 2022, and an average of $150 to $200 billion per year between 2021 to 2030, or 3.4% to 4.5% of gross domestic product (GDP).

To finance that, the government must phase out fossil fuel subsidies and reallocate some investments, on top of generating revenue from the recently passed carbon tax...

By cutting fossil fuel subsidies and setting up carbon trading, the government could generate savings and new revenue, respectively, to the equivalent of 2.2% of GDP in 2030."

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/indonesia-needs-200-bln-annual-investment-2021-2030-decarbonise-govt-2021-10-13/

14/11/2021

Coal finally required to be "phased down" for the first time in a COP agreement, even after support from China and India, but still no word on keeping oil or natural gas in the ground.

National pledges are also still insufficient to limit Global Warming to 1.5°C as they currently have the world on track for about 2.4°C of warming by 2100.

https://reut.rs/3c8S1Mq

Since 1970, the oceans have absorbed 93% of the heat trapped by the Earth due to the increase in man-made greenhouse gas...
27/08/2021

Since 1970, the oceans have absorbed 93% of the heat trapped by the Earth due to the increase in man-made greenhouse gasses, increasing their temperature by 0.13°C per decade.

Thanks to the oceans, the surface temperature of the Earth has increased by only 0.8°C since 1970.

If Earth did not have oceans, global surface temperatures would have increased by *more than 36°C since 1970*...

https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/ocean-warming

The ocean absorbs most of the excess heat from greenhouse gas emissions, leading to rising ocean temperatures. Increasing ocean temperatures affect marine species and ecosystems. Rising temperatures cause coral bleaching and the loss of breeding grounds for marine fishes and mammals. Rising ocean te...

08/08/2021

"Let’s consider a scenario in which half of all the meat eaten by Americans was grown in bioreactors by 2050. Currently, about 41 percent of the land area (780 million acres) of the contiguous United States is devoted to pasturage and livestock feed. Cutting that in half could free up 390 million acres that could revert to nature. That is an area that is nearly four times bigger than all national and state parks and wilderness areas in the contiguous U.S."

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2021/07/16/lab-grown-meat-promises-to-cut-water-and-land-use-by-more-than-96-why-are-us-regulators-dragging-their-feet-in-approving-this-sustainable-innovation

Even if we were to immediately stop *all* man-made greenhouse gas emissions, global warming would continue for up to 30 ...
01/08/2021

Even if we were to immediately stop *all* man-made greenhouse gas emissions, global warming would continue for up to 30 years:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/9/12/124002

After that time, temperatures would remain stable at that high level, probably 1-2°C above today's, for hundreds of years, as the excess carbon is slowly reabsorbed by the Earth. During those hundreds of years, land ice will continue melting and sea level will continue to rise, probably 3.4 meters per century, to a maximum of 10 (Pleistocene maximum) to 20 meters (Pliocene maximum):
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/past-antarctic-ice-melt-reveals-potential-for-extreme-sea-level-rise-20191106-p537y4.html

Once the CO2 level drops back down to 280 ppm, several hundred years from now, the ice caps may start to regrow. If Greenland's ice cap is completely gone at this point which is likely, it would probably take 3 million years to regrow to where it was in preindustrial times. Same with the sea level, which will probably take 3 million years to come down to preindustrial:
https://oceanwide-expeditions.com/blog-amp/how-and-when-did-greenland-become-covered-in-ice

But if course, we will not stop all man-made GHG emissions in a single day, so these numbers will all be higher, though by how much depends entirely on how soon we reduce emissions.

Sea levels rose as much as three metres a century during the last interglacial period as Antarctic ice sheets melted - but climate change could be faster.

11/05/2021
23/09/2020

A project by Airbus for developing hydrogen-powered aeroplanes show the limitations of hydrogen as an energy transport medium: its density of only 0.07 kg/dm3 in liquid form

Vehicles have to be entirely redesigned with much larger tankage capacity, affecting performance and reducing range, not to mention the huge adaptation costs to terminals for handling a new fuel

Given hydrogen is simply a synthetic fuel, made from water using (hopefully carbon-free) power, wouldn't another synthetic fuel be more appropriate? For example, synthetic jet fuel, chemically identical to regular jet fuel but made from water, CO2 and carbon-free energy

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/21/airbus-reveals-plans-zero-emission-aircraft-fuelled-hydrogen

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352146519305824

11/09/2020

A carbon tax of 200$ per ton of CO2 would make a decisive difference to Global Warming, amongst other things rendering synthetic gasoline cheaper than fossil gasoline:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/06/carbon-engineering-liquid-fuel-carbon-capture-neutral-science/

But if we do nothing, the long term costs of Global Warming are estimated to rise to 100,000$ per ton of carbon, or 27,000$ per ton of CO2…

https://phys.org/news/2020-09-climate-ultimately-humanity-ton-carbon.html

16/08/2020

Revenue of US energy companies (ie: a major part of the world's petroleum companies) in April-May-June 2020 was 54% lower than during the same period last year (1) thanks in part to the pandemic but also to the rise of renewable energy, which now produces 10% of the world's electricity (2) up from 4.6% in 2015

(1)https://insight.factset.com/sp-500-earnings-season-update-august-7-2020

(2)https://www.sciencealert.com/renewables-are-hitting-record-highs-as-coal-power-continues-its-decline

08/08/2020

A hypothetical 2050 scenario for Carbon Capture and Storage, or the fossil fuel industry's pipe dream for how others will pay for them to continue extracting (1):

"By the late 2020s, two methods had emerged as the most effective ways to do this. One was DAC, which involves trapping carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by sucking air through an absorbent material. The other was “bioenergy with carbon capture and storage” (BECCS), where the absorption is done by trees and crops as they grow. That biomass is then burned for energy and the resulting carbon dioxide is captured. Either way, it is stored underground, permanently removing it from the atmosphere."

"...Their new business model was selling fuels in markets ... at “net-zero” prices which included the certified capture of an amount of carbon equivalent to that given off by the fuel’s combustion."

***

The author conveniently ignores what effect the cost of removing 40 billion tons of CO2 from the atmosphere each year (current global production) would have on the global economy

Even at only 200 USD per ton, as cited by the article and which is not yet feasible, this would equal 8 trillion USD every year...

Given each barrel of oil produces 430 kg of CO2, consumers would have to accept an increase in the price of oil of 86 USD per barrel for this scenario to work out (430 X 200 / 1000). At the current price of 40 USD/barrel, this indicates a rise of 215%!

Given electricity is already cheaper than gas for such uses as driving a car and as its cost continues to fall with wind and solar capacity increase (2) Carbon Capture and Storage simply cannot be economically viable

But because all IPCC Global Warming mitigation scenarios rely on CCS (3) there is no other solution than to stop burning fossil fuels, as early as possible

(1)www.economist.com/the-world-if/2020/07/04/what-if-carbon-removal-becomes-the-new-big-oil

(2)https://www.energysage.com/electric-vehicles/costs-and-benefits-evs/evs-vs-fossil-fuel-vehicles/

(3https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/02/SR15_Chapter2_Low_Res.pdf

16/06/2020

Salvation through Science:
The Promise of Regenerative Agriculture

In October 2019, the UN came out with a study that claimed locking carbon into overexploited soils could stop global warming for twenty years, for a one-time global investment of 300 billion USD:
https://time.com/5709100/halt-climate-change-300-billion/

A relatively modic sum, given global warming may cost the planet that same amount every year, by 2050:
https://www.un.org/press/en/2001/ENGDEV559.doc.htm

Here is an example of Regenerative Agriculture, offsetting all livestock GHG emissions by fixing carbon in the soil:
https://www.csuchico.edu/regenerativeagriculture/demos/white-oak-pastures.shtml

“For us, regenerative agriculture means that we leave the land and the system better off every year that we operate.”

… a system... much better for the environment, the animals and the people who work with them, and for the people who eat these meats. ... raising multiple species of animals and using... rotational grazing practices…

“Holistic management changed the way I looked at land. When I was fifty years old, I looked at the land as just kind of the medium that held the seed out so it could catch the rain and the sun. I don’t look at it like that anymore. Now I look at it as a system/cycle.”

“The microbes feed plants which feed the animals which spread urine and f***s to microbes which feeds the plants which feed the animals.”

“The cows graze the grass, the sheep and goats prefer the weeds, and the poultry species peck at the roots, bugs and grubs. All species naturally fertilize the land. This way, the pastures are grazed and fertilized in three different ways.” By moving the animals from place to place they avoid overgrazing. The idea is to always allow several inches of grass left to help it recover and re-establish itself. They aim to let the animals "trample 1/3, eat 1/3 and leave 1/3."

“we recorded financial losses for three years, and I had previously never had a year in my life in which I lost money." .. today, “it is now working financially, and I am glad that I made the changes.”

The hard work is paying off. A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study done by a Quantis, a third party sustainability science firm, found that White Oak Pastures *offsets more than 100% of their cattle greenhouse gas emissions* and 85% of the farm’s total carbon emissions. That means they are storing more carbon in the soil than their cows emit in their lifetime (carbon negative) and are, step by step, getting close to a carbon neutral operation overall.

“I wish that you could know how much fun it is, how great it is to work with friends and family, how good it is to be in touch with the changing of the seasons, how rewarding it is to see the condition of the soil improve, how peaceful it is to watch animals express their instinctive behavior…"

22/03/2020

The world is currently “way off track meeting either the 1.5°C or 2°C targets that the Paris Agreement calls for”
- António Gutteres, 10 March 2020
(link in comments)

Climatologists now agree Earth will warm 4°C or higher above preindustrial levels when CO2 concentrations hit 560 ppm (s...
08/02/2020

Climatologists now agree Earth will warm 4°C or higher above preindustrial levels when CO2 concentrations hit 560 ppm (sometime before 2067, or 2050 considering 10% methane contribution)
https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-clouds-are-the-key-to-new-troubling-projections-on-warming

"French scientists at the National Center for Scientific Research concluded that the new models predicted that rapid economic growth driven by fossil fuels would deliver temperature rises averaging 6 to 7 degrees C (10.8 to 12.6 degrees F) by the end of the century."

"...global cloud cover may have a tipping point, beyond which clouds would “become unstable and break up,” sending warming into an upward spiral.

The tipping point would not be reached until CO2 levels were at around 1200 ppm, more than four times pre-industrial levels, and three times current levels. But once it was passed, he projected that temperatures would soar by an additional 8 degrees C (14.4 degrees F) as a result of the lost clouds."

Recent climate models project that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 above pre-industrial levels could cause temperatures to soar far above previous estimates. A warming earth, researchers now say, will lead to a loss of clouds, allowing more solar energy to strike the planet.

The carbon border tax will tax imports from foreign countries to put them on equal footing with EU producers who have to...
02/02/2020

The carbon border tax will tax imports from foreign countries to put them on equal footing with EU producers who have to buy carbon credits: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-eu-carbontax-explainer/explainer-what-an-eu-carbon-border-tax-might-look-like-and-who-would-be-hit-idUSKBN1YE1C4

Also, with a carbon tax of 200 USD/tCO2, producing carbon-free fuel from air and water becomes competitive:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/06/carbon-engineering-liquid-fuel-carbon-capture-neutral-science/

So introducing a 200 USD carbon tax *and* border carbon tax may not only reduce the consumption of fossil fuels globally, but also kickstart the development of carbon-free fuels to address those sectors which cannot be electrified or are slow to do so

The European Commission plans a carbon border tax aimed at shielding European st...

Modelling past and future warming under RCP 8.5, the "business as usual" scenario which the world is currently following...
26/01/2020

Modelling past and future warming under RCP 8.5, the "business as usual" scenario which the world is currently following:
https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/simulated-global-temperature-change-0

This animated spiral portrays the simulated changes in the global averaged monthly air temperature from 1850 through 2100 relative to the 1850 - 1900 average. The temperature data are from Community Climate System (CCSM4) global climate model maintained by the National Center for Atmospheric Researc...

Address


Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Global Warming posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

  • Address
  • Alerts
  • Claim ownership or report listing

  • Want your business to be the top-listed Media Company?

Share