➽ April 29, 2017: 200,000 people came together for the People’s Climate March in Washington, DC, with millions more in total marching in communities around America and the world.
We sent a message loud and clear to President Donald Trump and US Congress: it’s time to stop the backsliding on climate change; it’s time to meet the most urgent challenge of our generation.
➽ Hot off the Press:
After the first US oil firm in history passed a climate change resolution against its own board’s advice, we think we’re ready to make climate history with Exxon
If you have a pension, you are probably an Exxon shareholder. Let’s ride this momentum and finally hold Big Oil to account.
You may not know it, but there was some unbelievable climate momentum building recently at Exxon’s AGM, beginning of June this year. After decades of inaction in the face of runaway climate change, Exxon shareholders are finally preparing to do something about it.
Exxon’s AGM came hot on the heels of climate history: just a few weeks before, investors forced Occidental Petroleum to report on how climate change affects its business—even though the board of directors opposed it. It is the first time in history that a US oil firm has passed a pro-environment resolution.
Wait, it gets better. The resolution passed because its largest shareholder, BlackRock, supported it—and BlackRock is also the second-biggest shareholder in Exxon. An almost identical motion was going forward at Exxon’s AGM.
The last piece of the puzzle? You. That’s right, you are probably an investor in Exxon
If you live in the US, the UK, Canada or Australia, you’ve probably contributed to a mutual fund, superannuation fund, or pension fund – like Vanguard, Canada Pension Plan or AustralianSuper—that invests in Exxon. Or maybe you’ve paid into a 401(k) or other private pension.
You could be the key to making sure major investors vote for our proposals and finally hold big oil to account. Can you add your voice now?
If we get Exxon—of all corporations—to agree to take climate change seriously and file a report on how a two-degree increase in global temperatures will have a disastrous effect on both the climate and its bottom line, well, that changes everything. And the best part is that even since Exxon’s Board of Directors opposed the motion—and they did!—it doesn’t matter as long as a majority of shareholders supported it.
This is one of the most effective ways to get a massive, multinational billion-dollar corporation to change its ways. In the past, we have gained historic support for a resolution calling on Canada’s biggest tar sands company to disclose its lobbying and political spending. We also forced mining giant Newmont to promise investors that a controversial mining project wouldn’t go ahead without community consent.
There is one group that Big Oil is always sure to listen to: its shareholders. And that gives anyone with a pension, a mutual fund, a 401(k) or superannuation fund enormous power. Let’s use it.
Thanks for all that you do,
Liz, Michael, Lisa and the rest of the team at SumOfUs
Occidental Holders Override Board in Approving Climate Proposal, Bloomberg, May 12, 2017
➽ Tell the fossil fuel industry it’s time for climate action.
B u s i n e s s a s u s u a l
Tell ExxonMobil and Chevron: It’s Time to Act on Climate
At our recent Houston event, Climate Change and Climate Risk, investment risk expert Robert Litterman told the crowd that “it is time to slam on the brakes, and that’s not going to be good for the fossil fuel companies.”
It’s a critical message and the shareholder community is listening: just days later, ExxonMobil shareholders approved a climate resolution by an unprecedented 62.3 percent! This is the highest vote for any climate-related measure at the world’s largest publicly traded oil company. UCS supporters like you helped win this major victory at ExxonMobil’s annual meeting last week by demanding action from cities, states, the nation, and corporations.
Growing numbers of Chevron shareholders also supported resolutions demanding better disclosure of climate risks, business strategies, and corporate lobbying. In the face of the national and global call for climate action, investors want more information about what the low-carbon transition means for the future of major fossil fuel companies!
The fossil fuel industry has tried to outmaneuver climate activists, but thanks to you, we’ve gained incredible ground. Even as President Trump seeks to pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement, we are showing these companies that climate action must remain a priority. These companies have nowhere to hide. Now, they must act.
Shareholders and the public have made it abundantly clear that reliance on fossil fuels cannot be the way forward. The votes last week represent a groundbreaking shift in the public conversation, and the fossil fuel industry needs to respond.
While these companies claim to be addressing climate risks, they also fund groups such as the American Legislative Exchange Council, which spreads climate disinformation and lobbies against climate action including US participation in the Paris Climate Agreement. And just days after ExxonMobil’s annual meeting, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman stepped up his investigation into whether the company misled investors and the public about the climate risks of its product.
It’s time for ExxonMobil and Chevron to respond to the concerns spelled out in the climate resolutions that garnered major support among their own shareholders. It’s time for them to lay out a clean and honest plan to join the global effort on climate change.
Kathy MulveyClimate Accountability Campaign Manager and Advocate
Union of Concerned Scientists
Help this little island nation bring back hope for their loving sea to stop rising !!
Help all of these island nations & many more islands and coastal cities & regions regain Hope of Surviving.
Give Your Children and Theirs in turn Hope for Their Future — and Hope for Their Parents & Grandparents (You!) to assume Their Liability (Yours!)
➽ The first step towards solving a problem is recognizing it. The following Independent (UK) article discloses a researcher estimate that today’s young people would have to spend up to 500 trillion EUR on extraction technologies, if high emissions continue.
So, albeit an article chiefly rendering a lump in the stomach, the fact that scientists finally are pointing towards the necessity of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) removal — as a complement to or perhaps even a substitue for GHG emissions reduction and scanty* renewable energy initiatives — feels at least refreshing.
(*) As in “Scanty investment is a pointless waste of money”.
Furthermore, the Read More addendums (not the Read More links) below the article learn about a ground-breaking lawsuit brought against the US Government by 21 children. Common caring people breathing down the necks of Big Oil and their political partners and their also-rans indicate that changes are on their way. Which is good, and necessary as an conceptual awareness builder for the masses — however impotent as a paradigm changer, since the world with no further delay must initiate a direct GHG removal and implement a sustainable energy system based on CCR — atmospheric Carbon Capture and Recycling technology. Tree replanting initiatives are heart-felt as children often are involved therein. But they will come into the picture only when the trees are substantially grown (provided sufficient irrigation) — which takes a couple of decades — and once replanting numbers have reached the 1 trillion (1000 billion, 1 million million) mark (as compared to tops 10 million added a year currently), from that mark, year by year, replanting must match the projected continued annual atmosperic GHG level increase.
Carbon dioxide must be removed from the atmosphere to avoid extreme climate change, say scientists
One of the first scientists to warn of the dangers of climate change, Professor Jim Hansen, warns the ‘s*** is hitting the fan’
Video slides text: ➽
Reducing Greenhouse-gas emissions is not enough to limit global warming to a level that wouldn’t risk young people’s future.
A new Earth System Dynamics study reveals we need negative emissions, i.e. removal of CO2 from the atmosphere.
If rapid phase-down of fossil fuels starts soon, measures such as reforestation and improving soils could achieve the needed CO2 extraction at low cost.
The researchers estimate that today’s young people would have to spend up to 500 trillion Euros on extraction technologies, if high emissions continue.
“Continued high fossil fuel emissions would* saddle young people with a massive, expensive cleanup problem and growing deleterious climate impacts … which should provide incentive and obligation for governments to alter energy policies without further delay.” — Jim Hansen, professor of Columbia University and lead author of the ESD study
➽ Humans must start removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as soon as possible to avoid saddling future generations with a choice between extreme climate change or spending hundreds of trillions of dollars to avoid it, according to new research.
An international team of researchers – led by Professor Jim Hansen, Nasa’s former climate science chief – said their conclusion that the world had already overshot targets to limit global warming to within acceptable levels was “sufficiently grim” to force them to urge “rapid emission reductions”.
But they warned this would not be enough and efforts would need to be made to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by about 12.5 per cent.
This, the scientists argued, could be mostly achieved by agricultural measures such as planting trees and improving soil fertility, a relatively low-cost way to remove carbon from the air.
Other more expensive methods, such as burning biomass in power plants fitted with carbon-capture-and-storage or devices that can remove carbon from the air directly, might also be necessary and would become increasingly needed if steps were not taken soon.
An academic paper in the journal Earth System Dynamics estimated such industrial processes could cost up to $535 trillion this century and “also have large risks and uncertain feasibility”.
“Continued high fossil fuel emissions unarguably sentences young people to either a massive, implausible clean-up or growing deleterious climate impacts or both,” said the paper.
“We conclude that the world has already overshot appropriate targets for greenhouse gas amount and global temperature, and we thus infer an urgent need for rapid phasedown of fossil fuel emissions [and] actions that draw down atmospheric carbon dioxide”.
“These tasks are formidable and … they are not being pursued globally”.
Cuts to emissions of greenhouse gases such as methane, nitrous oxide and ozone would also be required.
The study is to be used as part of a ground-breaking lawsuit brought against the US Government by 21 children in which the plaintiffs claim their constitutional right to have a health climate in which to live in is being violated by federal policies.
If the case succeeds, environmentalists believe it could force the Trump administration to reduce greenhouse gases and take other measures to prevent global warming.
The paper pointed out that the last time temperatures were this high, during the Eemian period, global sea levels were about six to nine metres higher than they are today, suggesting significant rises are still to occur.
The paper said that the Paris Agreement, the tumbling price of renewable energy and the recent slowdown in the increase of fossil fuel emissions had led to a sense of optimism around the world.
But, speaking to The Independent, Professor Hansen said he believed this optimism was misplaced.
“The narrative that’s out there now … is that we’ve turned the corner,” he said.
“On the contrary, what we show is the rate of growth of climate forcing caused by increased methane [and other gases] is actually accelerating. That’s why it’s urgent.”
Asked to assess the world’s current progress in fighting climate change, he said the “s*** is hitting the fan”.
Professor Hansen, now a scientist at the Columbia University Earth Institute in the US, said he believed the court case had a chance of winning.
A court would not be able to tell the Government what to do, he admitted, but would be able to say that failing to deal with the problem was unconstitutional and require politicians to produce an effective plan.
The paper said the need for “prompt action implied by these realities [of climate change] may not be a surprise to the relevant scientific community” because of the available evidence.
“However, effective communication with the public of the urgency to stem human-caused climate change is hampered by the inertia of the climate system, especially the ocean and the ice sheets, which respond rather slowly to climate forcings, thus allowing future consequences to build up before broad public concern awakens,” it said.
“All amplifying feedbacks, including atmospheric water vapor, sea ice cover, soil carbon release and ice sheet melt could be reduced by rapid emissions phasedown.
“This would reduce the risk of climate change running out of humanity’s control and provide time to assess the climate response, develop relevant technologies, and consider further purposeful actions to limit and/or adapt to climate change.”
It warned that sea level rise of up to a metre “may be inevitable even if emissions decline” and would have “dire consequences”.
Sea level rise of several metres would result in “humanitarian and economic disasters”.
“Given the increasing proportion of global population living in coastal areas, there is potential for forced migrations of hundreds of millions of people, dwarfing prior refugee humanitarian crises, challenging global governance and security,” the paper said.
About 65 per cent of the power produced by the massive Drax power plant in North Yorkshire comes from burning biomass, making it the largest single renewable electricity generator in the UK, although some dispute how green the process is.
If it was to be fitted with carbon-capture-and-storage (CCS), it would create the type of negative emissions system envisaged in the paper. Drax was involved in the White Rose project to build a £1bn CCS plant but pulled out after cuts to renewable energy subsidies by the Government.
It insisted that biomass with CCS could make a major difference to the fight against climate change.
A Drax spokesperson said: “We are confident the technology we developed as part of the White Rose project has real potential in terms of delivering dramatic reductions to carbon emissions produced by power stations and heavy industry.
“However, the current regulatory environment means any such project isn’t viable at the present time. We are also awaiting the Government’s response to Lord Oxburgh’s review into CCS.”
➽ The next-below six-paneled graph (click here to enlarge) exhibits great progress on paramount aspects of humanity living conditions delivered by Our World In Data, an online publication produced at the University of Oxford. Source-critical as always (just as we’d like to anticipate all humans always to be), we do not deem them to go about somebody’s business or meet someone’s agenda.
Albeit the world imminently would need to see a corresponding amelioration in the field of climate change related measurements, no signs of progress is yet to be discerned. Yes, China has bagged a number of new coal plants and go for developing solar voltaics, and yes, intentions in terms of wind mill parks and solar voltaic parks and research on solar and wind power battery (and some other) storage packs seem to escalate globally. But so do extraction from present and newly found fossil subterranean and suboceanic oil deposits, shale gas layers and tar sand fields — fossil production is picking up faster than renewable energy does, whereby the 3 to 4 % renewables (including hydro power) of the total energy production in the world is prognosticated to stay at 4 to 5 % even future-wise. And since energy production is expected to have picked up by 50 % by year 2050 (graph just below exhibiting 1990 – 2040 developments), predominantly from fossil fuels, this implies we’ll get a tremendous atmospheric greenhouse gas addon to cope with. Which no way would we be able to — naturally — ever so much worse than what we can cope with today, as this would be.
➽ 1990 – 2040 historic + projected future Global Energy consumption by fuel type (N.B.: ‘Liquids‘ in the graph implies OIL, whereas ‘Renewables‘ include Hydro power)
➽ Let’s therefore earnestly hope that humanity as a race and its societies can withstand individual greed and flip 180 degrees over the hostile climate change development graphs of our era. With the help of us at AES our without it. Having achieved such formidable grandeur as shown by the graphs below, makes at least ourselves hopeful of mankind once more succeeding. HOWEVER, this will necessitate very decisive resolve induced by a market demand forcefully based on a unanimous agreement by all of us Earthlings in order to achieve a fossil to renewables — and as We at AES see necessary, specifically a fossil to CCR fuels — transition.
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Here are all our posts in this blog:
Water. and Air. – – – – – – – – (2016 Nov 27)Facts. non-Alternative. – – – – – (2017 Feb 20) News. Terrifying. – – – – – – – (2017 Mar 29) Zero options? Never. – – – – – – (2016 Dec 05)Scenarios. and Implications. – – – – (2017 Jan 02)Gates Notes. on Climate-Energy. – – (2017 Jan 24)CCR – APS processes – – – – – – (2016 Dec 14)APS/e3 concept outlines – – – – – (2016 Dec 14)CatELab-APS/e3 research software – – (2016 Dec 14)CatELab & APS/e3 integrated processes – (2016 Dec 14)
Here is our corporate website & our funding campaign:
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __