Showing posts with label coal. Show all posts

Monday, February 18, 2019

Los Angeles Finally Joins the Transition Away From Fossil Fuel Investment

Last October, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law the realization that by 2045 California will be a net zero (carbon neutral) economy/state. That rocked the news for a while, and news circulated about the transition. Speculation as to whether that transition was even possible came from the conservative side of the state, whereas the more liberal side of the state claimed that the law was not enough to make the Paris Agreement targets.

Further criticism circulated in the news regarding Governor Brown's treatment of the fossil fuel industry. Critics charged that he was not being tough enough on them. These critics included those in favor of shutting down Aliso Canyon Gas Storage Facility located in Porter Ranch, California (the Valley). The following news from Mayor Garcetti last week in an article from the 'Los Angeles Times' titled "Los Angeles ditches plan to invest billions in fossil fuels, Mayor Eric Garcetti says" outlined the plan to achieve transition away from fossil fuels:

Los Angeles has steadily moved away from coal for electricity, divesting from the Navajo plant in Arizona three years ago and announcing plans to stop buying power from Utah’s Intermountain plant by 2025. But with coal, the most polluting fossil fuel, now nearly removed from the city’s energy mix, it’s time to start planning for a future with zero planet-warming energy sources, Garcetti said Monday — and that means no natural gas.

“It’s the right thing to do for our health. It’s the right thing to do for our Earth. It’s the right thing to do for our economy,” Garcetti said. “And now is the time to start the beginning of the end of natural gas.”

“This is the Green New Deal,” he added, referring to the sweeping climate change policies championed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y) and endorsed by several contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination. “Not in concept, not in the future, but now.”

The mayor’s decision comes several months after state lawmakers passed a bill requiring California to get 100% of its electricity from climate-friendly sources by 2045, up from a previous target of 50% renewable by 2030.

This comes at the news from Los Angeles Department of Water and Power to the Mayor's office regarding the cost associated with repairing (rebuilding) the seven water cooled (ocean cooled) natural gas power plants along with three other plants at a cost of $3.8 billion. Whereas the cost to rebuilding the three other plants with solar and energy efficiency would be $2.2 billion. The time has come to transition toward total (carbon neutral) clean energy.

The Mayor has challenged LA DWP with the task and he is right to do so. Not just to make incremental adjustments. A new leader should be bold and insist on LA DWP moving at another speed, preferably WARP speed compared to their normal GOVERNMENT speed -- which is filled with obstacles and potential funding limitations. I commend Mayor Garcetti for taking a bold action step which is in line with Germany and other nations around the world. I have written on the obvious fact that the transition toward renewable clean energy is inevitable. Plus, the capital available for investment was small a few years ago, but has been growing over time.

European nations are taking bold steps to change their dependence on dirty energy. China has liberated us with the ever dropping price of solar. Solar is dropping in price as we speak. In a few years, photovoltaics will be a dominant source of energy generation. Clean solar photovoltaic energy is on its way. Current limitations in the renewable energy sector which are screamed by the opposition are 'STORAGE'. How are we (as a nation) going to efficiently store the clean renewable energy to meet off hours demand? Batteries? More research needs to be done, but is not far off.

Both the government and the private sector are racing to meet the demands of the future transition toward renewable energy. A sustainable environment is what is being asked of our nation's residents. Now, both the private sector along with the government need to make this happen. Typically, throughout history, when the pressure is applied to an industry, change happens. In this case, a range of industries are responding to a global pressure and similar to the improvements which are made during war time, the current global investment is exciting and should yield some amazing results.

The future is exciting.

Related Blog Posts:

Parameters: Germany Plans To Cut Coal Dependence By 2038

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels

Governor Jerry Brown Leads The U.S. With Ambitious Calls For 100% Renewable By 2045 -- Wow!!!

Update: Congress asks Federal Agencies about Dangerous Chemicals -- PFOA and PFOS

Parameters: GM Lays Off Thousands Of Workers -- Why? People Are Not Buying Cars?

EPA Estimates Of Methane - GHG - are off by 60%

135 Climate Scientists Urge Prime Minister Theresa May to Challenge President Trump on his Climate Stance during visit to the UK

Parameters: Oil vs. Corn based Ethanol - A Tug-Of-War between Trump Administration and Congressional Leaders

French President Macron Calls On U.S. Congress To Save The Planet

Parameters: Shells Oil Corporation Invests In Renewable Energy Infrastructure

Parameters: South Korea Uses Renewable Energy For Olympic Games

French President Macron Organizes Climate Conference With Pledges Of Trillions Of Dollars For Climate Risk Management From World Organizations

Do You Need Clean Air To Breathe? An Introduction To Environmental Justice

Environmental Entrepreneurs Weigh In On Repealing The Clean Power Plan

EPA Blatantly Suppresses Scientific Results Regarding Climate Change?

EPA Director Finally Realizes Reality Of Trying To Roll-Back Obama Era Clean Air Act Regulation

President Trump's Understanding of the Paris Agreement

Paris Climate Agreement Is A Start Toward The Renewable Energy Future

World Goes Left, While Trump Leads Right - On Climate - Why?

Wednesday, February 6, 2019

Parameters: Germany Plans To Cut Coal Dependence By 2038

Source: Climate Action

Whenever the transition toward renewable energy is brought up in discussions, people typically tighten up showing a large amount of uncertainty about the topic. Regardless of their knowledge of the process or the timeline, one certainty exists in today's world: A large number of countries, local governments, states along with industries are starting to make the transition toward a renewable energy-based system in the future. Each might possess an individual pace. But ultimately, each are headed in the correct direction: away from a fossil fuel dependent economy (and world).

Renewable Energy Not Fossil Fuels

The transition toward renewable energy has been under fire to different degrees in different nations. In the European countries, renewable energy is becoming more favorable with the political will emerging. Just recently, an article in 'The Ecologist' stated that Lithuania received the European Commission's support to transition toward renewable energy:

International renewable energy industry experts predict that within the next two decades, traditional energy sources such as gas, coal, and oil due will be replaced 100 percent by renewables as a result of their current slow-to-non existent growth rates.

In light of these findings, Lithuanian energy experts believe that by continually meeting EU energy directives, incentivising electricity production, and pursuing corporate responsibility targets where companies aim to be powered 100 percent by renewables, then Lithuania can set an example to policy makers and solar energy suppliers in neighbouring Latvia and Estonia on how to reduce the entire Baltic region’s need for Russian energy and pursue its own energy autonomy.

European investors have been increasingly committing more over time as banks are reassured by technologists and policy makers along with industry analysts that the transition is not only going to happen -- but that the transition will have ample funding with more on the way. Not to mention that political will is increasing slowly but surely.

Now, Germany recently announced a major change (Big News!!!) to take place by 2038. The organization 'Climate Action' presented the news as follows:

The Federal Government in Germany has announced plans to phase out coal by 2038.

The Commission on Growth, Employment and Structural Change released a 20-year report which has agreed to cancel out coal by 2038.

With only one vote against, the commission agreed on a total of 40 billion euros in aid for the states affected by the coalition exit. The federal Government will now turn the commission report into a reliable energy concept.

Olaf ScholzIf, Federal Finance Minister, said: “If we do not lose sight of the common goal, we can develop Germany into an exemplary state of energy policy."

In the years 2023, 2026 and 2029, the Commission will undertake a review by an independent panel of experts.

In response to this review, the power plant capacity will be reduced to 17 gigawatts of brown coal and hard coal in 2030, more than halving it. Depending on the report, the withdrawal of coal could take place, according to the recommendation of the commission, by 2035.

Greenpeace have called for this target to be brought forward to 2030 to ensure that carbon emissions are reduced sooner.

It was reported that, in 2018, the production of coal accounted for 38 per cent of Germany’s energy generation. This move away from fossil fuel generation will put Germany back on track to meet the targets set at the Paris Agreement.

This news follows a report that found that the immediate phase-out of fossil fuels is crucial to meet important climate targets.

The report found that if carbon intensive technologies were replaced by carbon-free alternatives, carbon emissions would steadily decline, dropping to near zero in 40 years. This would result in a 64 per cent chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Great. Everything stated above is encouraging. Germany is taking the lead in changing the entire system of nations. The rest of Europe are on board too as reported in the article before the above statement. The European Commission must continue to offer assurance (i.e. support). From the news reports over the last couple of years, the support not only seems to be building, but nations are actually taking action in the European Union.

Although, the size of Germany has always been brought up in discussions here in the United States. The argument is that a smaller nation is able to make sweeping changes more easily than larger ones can. Alright. I can see that. But that is no excuse for not making changes here -- especially on a state by state basis -- which is comparable to the size of Germany.

Size -- California vs. Germany??

Right after the article above was published (and I read the article), I was talking with my colleague who holds German citizenship. She was born in Germany. In a prior discussion about Germany moving toward the use of natural gas, she warned that the move could be potentially dangerous considering the main source of gas presently -- Gazprom -- from Russia. This would put Germany at the hands of Russian gas giants (effectively Russia) for a stable and steady gas supply.

Although, since that discussion, the natural gas industry has started to boom (in the sense of shipping). Technology has improved the ability to ship liquified natural gas all around the world. Now, back to the discussion at hand. This massive shift in dependence on fossil fuels in a reasonable amount of time makes other countries uneasy. Some here in the United States view this transition as 'short sighted' since the infrastructure and change is occuring on such a short time scale.

But is the timescale that short? What kind of transition plan is reasonable? How long should the U.S. or Germany rely on coal/fossil fuels?

The change that Germany is embarking on reminds me of the recent (as in the past few months) commitment to renewable energy made by then Governor Jerry Brown regarding the state of California. Governor Brown signed into law last year the commitment to have California on a carbon neutral (net zero) program for energy by 2045. This was ambitious to say the least.

Remember that California's economy is the fifth largest in the world. Which may cause someone to immediately draw parallels between Germany's transition and California's transition. Let's look at the size (landmass) difference between the two for a closer comparison. First, Germany's landmass is shown below:

Next, California's landmass is shown below:

As you can see, California has a larger landmass than Germany. With Governor Jerry Brown signing into law the transition to a carbon neutral economy by 2045, the current announcement above for Germany by 2038 is not too far fetched. Especially given the size of the two landmasses. Additionally, Germany is probably better suited to the transition toward renewable energy -- which is why the date is set for a complete transition earlier.

Regardless, the news above is exciting to those who are big fans for the transition toward a greater dependence on renewable energy. As this post is published (Wednesday morning), a subcommittee is gathering in the U.S. Congress --House Committee on Energy & Commerce -- is meeting to discuss action for the United States of America. I will write a follow up post on the hearing in the near future. We should watch and note these commitments of transitioning toward renewable energy. Further, these commitments should serve as a motivation to build momentum toward change. The future of transitioning toward renewable energy is turning into a reality and is really exciting.

Related Blog Posts:

Governor Jerry Brown Leads The U.S. With Ambitious Calls For 100% Renewable By 2045 -- Wow!!!

Parameters: GM Lays Off Thousands Of Workers -- Why? People Are Not Buying Cars?

President Trump's Understanding of the Paris Agreement

Paris Climate Agreement Is A Start Toward The Renewable Energy Future

World Goes Left, While Trump Leads Right - On Climate - Why?

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Should Pollution Concern Us?

The title is simple right?

Easy question, should the amount of pollution over major cities concern the citizens of this planet?

Depending on who you ask, the answer might differ. Why does this have to be the case?

Recently, I found a great short video by California's previous Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on the adverse effects of pollution. I thought that I would bring the contents of the video to your attention just in case you were too busy to take out a minute and a half to watch the video below:

If you did not watch the video, here are the highlights of the important video:

1) 7 million people die world-wide because of pollution related illnesses

2) That is more than the following combined: suicides, traffic fatalities, and war casualties!

3) Politicians take the stand that the problem is "too costly to fix" -- imagine that politicians love to spend money to get results which promote votes from their constituents.

4) Politicians are trying to shut down the EPA's ability to regulate carbon.

5) Arnold's Solution: strap their mouths (politicians) to the tailpipe of a truck exhaust pipe and then turn on the engine and see how long it takes for them to "tap out".

6) In California, politicians have shown that the possibility exists to protect the environment and the economy at the same time.

7) After California passed strict climate change laws, the economy grew by 12.4%

8) If the biggest economy in the country can thrive under the strictest environmental laws, that means the same is possible all over the country as a whole.

9) California has outpaced Texas in GDP growth since 2011.

Pictures of Air Pollution Around The World:

1) United States of America (USA):

Source: RT.com

Source: Wikipedia

Source: USAtoday.com

2) India:

Source: Map of India

Source: airpollutioninda

Source: Washington Post

Source: Times of India

3) China

Source: SoftPedia

Source: Bored Panda

5) Russia:

Source: worstpolluted.org

Source: TESteach

Source: DW.com

There are many more pictures available for your viewing online with a search of the topic: "air pollution in .... images" where "..." stands for the country of interest (Russia, USA, China, India, etc.).

Below is a satellite image of the particulate matter (of size 2.5 micrometer) distribution across of the globe. USA is quite blue -- meaning relatively lower levels compared to other parts of the world.

Source: NASA

As the pictures still portray above of air pollution around the world, there is still work to be done. The overarching take home message to all residents of the world should be the following:

Each of us breathe the same air in the world. Working together, the world would be a healthier place to live. As it stands now, we are on a deadly trajectory for the future.

Action is needed!

Until next time, Have a great day!