G7 Target 2035 – shut down coal

An article in Reuters called “G7 reaches deal to exit from coal by 2035” by  Francesca Landini caught my eye. Here are the first two paragraphs.

“TURIN, April 29 (Reuters) – Energy ministers from the Group of Seven (G7) wealthy countries reached a deal to shut down their coal-fired power plants by 2035 at the latest, in a significant step towards the transition away from fossil fuels.

‘We have an agreement to stop using coal in the first half of 2030’s… it is an historical agreement,’ Britain’s minister for Energy Security and Net Zero Andrew Bowie told Class CNBC according to a video posted on X.”

Coal has been on the demise for awhile. The cost of competitive and cleaner energy sources have fallen to levels that take away a distant advantage for the production of coal. Truth be told, when all costs are factored in – litigation, retrieval, transport, production, maintenance, healthcare – coal is even more expensive.

I read a few years ago, building a new coal plant will become obsolete before it is finished. That is a powerful observation. Yet, one thing to know, the two last major spills of coal ash came from plants that were no longer burning coal. So coal is the gift that keeps giving even after production stops.

Faith leaders fighting for climate action

An article called “The faith leaders fighting for the climate: ‘we have a moral obligation’” is yet another clarion call to do something more about climate change. The subtitle speaks of these leaders coming together – “Climate action in New Orleans has found support from faith leaders working across historic divides.”

A few paragraphs highlight their concerns:

“It has been another catastrophic climate year: record-breaking wildfires across Canada scorched an area the size North Dakota, unprecedented rainfall in Libya left thousands dead and displaced, while heat deaths surged in Arizona and severe drought in the Amazon is threatening Indigenous communities and ecosystems.

The science is clear: we must phase out fossil fuels – fast. But time is running out, and as the climate crisis, biodiversity loss and environmental degradation worsen, there is mounting recognition that our political and industry leaders are failing us.

If the science isn’t enough, what role could – or should – faith leaders play in tackling the climate crisis? After all, it is also a spiritual and moral crisis that threatens God’s creation, according to many religious teachings.

Globally, 6 billion people – about 80% of the world’s population – identify with a faith or religion, while half of all schools and 40% of health facilities in some countries are owned or operated by faith groups. In addition, faith-related institutions own almost 8% of the total habitable land surface – and constitute the world’s third largest group of financial investors.”

I have been to two separate interfaith conferences where various religious leaders – Baptist, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim and Hindi – offer up scripture to guide us to be better stewards of the environment. The first was with the Sierra Club and the second was an Interfaith Council.

Even Pope Francis prepared an Encyclical about doing more about climate change. Being a trained chemist, I appreciate the concern of the Pope even more. I amusingly recall fossil fuel funded politicians saying the pope should stay away from this subject. They, of course, are being paid to stay away from the subject.

It should be noted the fossil fuel industry has stepped up its role to naysay climate change and take cherry picked pot shots at renewable energy alternatives. With an industry that has so much money, it can easily afford disinformation campaigns dating back to the 1990s.

These faith leaders don’t have near the same level of financial considerations. We should give them a listen moreso than politicians with dirty money in their pockets and especially an industry who had such an invested stake in the outcome.

We parents have let corporate interests and their puppets harm our children

It happens so insidiously. At the heart of all of this is corporations who are profitable are addicted to being profitable. So, they contribute to politicians to gain influence and a return on their investment. Quite often, our children are the ones harmed in this profit pursuit. This is especially true if the profits are on the pocket book desires of children.

Take the case of the cigarette brand icon Joe Camel. Tobacco companies swear Joe Camel was not designed to market their products to teens and adolescents. That is absolute “camel manure.” Of course, the icon was designed to market cigarettes to under-age users. We should not forget that a panel of tobacco CEOs lied in succession to a Congressional committee saying nicotine was not addictive when they knew that it was for about thirty years. Lying is modus operandi.

The reason for this post today is I read a story about US betting companies lobbying against more rules and regulations governing their marketing to children. Betting companies make money off people who feel they know what they are doing. It is that simple. Take fantasy sports leagues – the significant majority of bettors lose a lot, while a very of small percentage of bettors using multi-variable statistical regression models make money off them. So, more children betting means more money for the company.

Yet, this marketing to children is not new. Retailers make money selling to children. Clothiers make money designing the hot new fashion to kids, often recycled fashion from the past. And, even drug dealers have a profit model of hooking adolescents on their products.

But, it goes beyond direct sales to this audience. Fossil fuel companies represent the most subsidized industry by far. They make so much money they can afford to fund various disinformation campaigns and politicians to parrot what they want them too. There is a great movie called “Merchants of Doubt” which speaks to the ongoing disinformation campaign. Just to make a quick observation of their influence, the industry PR people did not like the term “global warming,” so they made us use the softer “climate change.” The people most impacted by their disinformation are our kids, who will inherit a world of trouble.

Finally, in the US, we have spineless politicians who aren’t courageous enough to deal with our spiraling US debt. This lack of courage is on both sides of the aisle. We must have spending cuts and tax increases both to solve our problem. Our kids will otherwise inherit a national budget where interest cost will exceed all other spending – military and social insurance programs.

If I were a teen, I would be increasingly vocal about the future. We need more outspoken folks like Greta Thunberg is on the global warming front. And, parents need to join in and help make better stewardship decisions to support a better world.

Fossil fuel industry increases the fight to keep their revenue stream

The fossil fuel has upped the fighting with a vengeance. Losing a history of subsidized revenue does that to people. In an article on Politico called “Anti-green backlash hovers over COP climate talks” by Karl Mathieson, Charlie Cooper and Zach Coleman, the effort to water down climate change fighting objectives is discussed.

The subtitle provides the forewarning – “War, a fossil fuel boom and populist revolts are sapping the optimism from the fight against climate change. And then there’s Trump.”

Here are the first two paragraphs.

“LONDON — World leaders will touch down in Dubai next week for a climate change conference they’re billing yet again as the final off-ramp before catastrophe. But war, money squabbles and political headaches back home are already crowding the fate of the planet from the agenda.

The breakdown of the Earth’s climate has for decades been the most important yet somehow least urgent of global crises, shoved to one side the moment politicians face a seemingly more acute problem. Even in 2023 — almost certainly the most scorching year in recorded history, with temperatures spawning catastrophic floods, wildfires and heat waves across the globe — the climate effort faces a bewildering array of distractions, headwinds and dismal prospects.”

A few logical truths should be mentioned and heeded:

The fossil fuel folks don’t donate to politicians for their health. The ROI on buying influence is huge. Just a few thoughts:

– an industry that makes money off environmentally polluting plastics gets a law (to stop the use of more plastics) changed to grease the skids for more plastics and money, *

-an industry that makes money off people driving motor vehicles prevents where possible expanding mass transit to sell more petrol,

-an industry that was found guilty (many years too late) of collusion with the tire and car industries of getting rid of electric trolley systems across the US to make more money selling petrol, and

-an industry who allegedly colluded (at a minimum influenced the mission) with then California Gov. Schwarzenegger to get GM to pull its electric car pilot in California as it retrieved all of its leased EV-1s and shredded them. Even GM’s Board questioned management on this as they instead made gas guzzling Hummers until people stopped buying the less-than-ten-mpg vehicles.

Fossil fuel. They have been the most subsidized industry in history. The industry gets its well-funded puppet politicians to complain about government picking winners and losers when it funds renewable energy, has hugely benefited from government picking them to fund. It is OK to pick winners and losers if you win. The problem is in the end, we lose.

*****
Note: Per the Conservative Law Review:

“Plastics and fossil fuels are two sides of the same polluting coin. This connection becomes more apparent as the momentum for clean energy depletes Big Oil and Gas’ profits. Now that we’re calling for the end of climate-damaging emissions, the very industries at the root of our climate crisis have their backs against the wall. These corporate polluters now find themselves losing money to electric vehicles, heat pumps, solar, wind and other clean and electrified climate solutions.

But unsurprisingly, the fossil fuel industry values cash over human health. So, in a desperate attempt to maintain (and of course, grow) profits in the face of our strengthening climate movement, these greedy, corporate polluters have found a new opportunity: plastics.

Looking at how companies create plastics, this isn’t that surprising. Plastics are part of a sector called “petrochemicals,” or products made from fossil fuels like oil, coal, and gas. That’s right, corporations make plastic using dirty fossil fuels. So instead of directly selling climate-damaging fossil fuels – products rapidly losing value for energy production – companies like Exxon use their fossil fuels to pump out plastics.

Offsetting the loss of profits by switching to another polluting source? Sounds like “business as usual” to me. A scenario where Big Oil and Gas keep us addicted to plastics and fossil fuels.”

Pope continues his fight for climate change preventative action

In a piece by Fiona Harvey, the Environment editor for The Guardian, called “Pope urges rich world to make profound changes to tackle climate crisis,” the Pope continues his advocacy that we must deal with climate change. The subtitle adds the reason for its timing – “Francis also defends climate protesters and calls on governments to make Cop28 in Dubai a turning point.”

A few paragraphs give the gist of the article:

“Pope Francis has said the rich world must make profound changes to tackle the climate crisis, while defending climate protesters and urging governments to make the forthcoming Cop28 climate summit a turning point.

He called for ‘a decisive acceleration of energy transition’ from fossil fuels to renewables, but cautioned against relying on new technology such as carbon capture and storage, which he said was ‘like pushing a snowball down a hill’.

Without decisive action, the world would face ‘the point of no return’, he said. ‘Our responses have not been adequate, while the world in which we live is collapsing and may be nearing the breaking point.’

The pope’s comments came in a ‘papal exhortation’ published by the Vatican on Wednesday morning, a call primarily to Catholics but intended for the world. Called Laudate Deum, which translates as Praise God, the 10-page document is his first big intervention on the climate crisis for eight years.

His previous encyclical, Laudato Si, was published in 2015, shortly before the landmark Cop21 climate summit at which the Paris agreement was signed. The pope has taken a keen interest in the climate, convening oil companies and activists, and warning of a ‘climate emergency’, though he missed the 2021 Cop26 summit in Glasgow, which he had been expected to attend.”

I applaud the Pope for his leadership on this. As a trained chemist, he brings a scientific mind and perspective to the table. When he has been criticized by well-funded elected officials to stay in his lane, it should be noted in numerous religious texts of various religions, that the supreme being has asked us to take care of our environment for future generations.

I have attended two separate panel discussions, one at the Sierra Club and one an interfaith organization where leaders of various sects and religions spoke of scripture asking us to be good stewards of the land. A Jewish proverb speaks of planting a tree that will benefit your grandchildren, not you. Even in oil rich Saudi Arabia, water is so dear that the Islamic leadership has allowed folks to pray with sand rather than water. Our global water concerns have only worsened with the impact of climate change.

I also appreciate his focus on the richer countries to do more to diminish fossil fuel energy use and increase actions to improve renewable energy use. These countries dwarf the poorer countries in contributing to the climate change problem, so they can make more of a dent in helping address it. Yet, the poorer countries suffer even more with environmental issues as they have fewer choices.

So, kudos to Pope Francis for speaking needed truths. We need leaders speaking out on issues like this.

Kids are demanding change

A very encouraging article by Maanji Singh appeared in The Guardian this week called “‘Whatever it takes’: students at 50 US high schools launch climate initiative.” The subtitle adds more color, pun intended – “Green New Deal for Schools demands districts teach climate justice, update buildings and plan for extreme weather.”

A few paragraphs tell more of the story:

“Students at more than 50 high schools across the US are proposing a Green New Deal for Schools, demanding that their districts teach climate justice, create pathways to green jobs after graduation and plan for climate disasters, among other policies.

The campaign, coordinated by the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led climate justice collective, is a reaction to rightwing efforts to ban or suppress climate education and activism at schools. The national effort could include teach-ins and walkouts, as well as targeted petitions to school boards and districts in the coming weeks, organizers with Sunrise told the Guardian, ahead of the Monday launch.”

I applaud these young people for speaking out en masse. We have made some progress in moving forward renewable energy efforts, but the effort to combat this has been increased recently by the fossil fuel companies who heavily fund right wing politicians, as referenced above, as well as a level of smaller funding to the left to play both ends against the middle.

While the current Florida governor is antagonistic to renewable energy, his predecessor, who is now a Senator, had an edict that state officials could not write or speak the words “climate change” or “global warming.” Really? This follows the effort of George W. Bush, whose Vice President Dick Cheney came from the oil industry and led an effort to remove all references in print to climate change and global warming , not to mention writing the 2005 Energy Act giving frackers impunity from the Clean Air Act and Safe Drinking Water Act. In other words, Cheney gave frackers a get-out-of-jail free card to poison the environment.

We should also not forget Donald Trump announced the US was leaving the Paris Climate Change Accord, ironically the day after Exxon Mobil shareholders voted that management must annually report their progress on dealing with climate change. Fortunately, Trump was ousted before we actually left and Joe Biden kept us in.

So, with Republicans following the marching orders of their funders, it is great to see these kids taking the bull by the horns and acting responsibly. Quite simply, I encourage people not to vote for any politician who is promoting client change denial.

Republican activist – Republicans deserves to lose if they do not address climate crisis

A much needed article by Oliver Milman appeared in The Guardian after the US Republican candidates debates called ”Republican activist says party ‘deserves to lose’ if it fails to address climate crisis.” The subtitle is “Benji Backer, executive chairman of conservative climate group, calls question on crisis in debate ‘historic’ but laments answers.”

A few paragraphs tell much of the story: “Republicans ‘deserve to lose’ electorally if they can’t show they care about the climate crisis, according to the head of a conservative climate organization that put forward a rare question on the issue to GOP candidates in Wednesday’s televised debate.

The Republican presidential hopefuls, minus Donald Trump, were asked at the Fox News debate what they would do to improve the party’s standing on climate policy by Alexander Diaz, a young conservative who is part of the American Conservation Coalition (ACC), a youth conservative group that pushes for action on the climate crisis.

Republican hopefuls shrug when asked about climate crisis during debate. Asked by the moderators for a show of hands over whether climate change is real, none of the candidates did so, with one, Vivek Ramaswamy, the far-right businessman, declaring that the ‘climate agenda is a hoax.” Two other candidates, Tim Scott and Nikki Haley, accepted the well-established scientific reality of global heating but looked to shift the blame to other major carbon polluters, such as China, and even, in Scott’s case, to Africa, which is responsible for about 3% of the world’s emissions.

Benji Backer, founder and executive chairman of ACC, said the question on climate was ‘historic’ and highlighted the desire among young Republicans for their leaders to take the threat of global heating seriously.”

This stance is similar to the one in 2008 when I left the Republican Party citing this failure as one of my three key reasons in so doing. The party has more aggressively returned to this stance after varying degrees of acceptance in the intervening years due to more actions finally being taken with respect to renewable energy.

To me, there are many reasons not to vote Republican these days, but this issue, by itself, is one that Americans should heed. I agree with Mr. Backer that they must speak to this issue. The bus has left the station and we are seeing the byproduct of climate change now. My strong advice is do not vote for any candidate who promotes the hoax concept. There is an old saying about change – get people on the bus who see the need for change. Per Mr. Backer, the Republican candidates have a choice to make.

Hotter than Hades and walk-in freezers

Two days ago, I was at a high school reunion at a restaurant in Florida. The AC was on the fritz, so several of us repeatedly walked into their beer freezer to cool down (with permission). One time, we scared the “you-know-what” out of a waitress who opened the door to find four of us. We apologized profusely.

By the way, my Florida friends said it does seem hotter than it used to be. It wasn’t just us saying that. It was hotter than Hades. But, they should be comforted that the autocratic bent governor says global warming is all in Democrats’ heads and has sanctioned a propaganda video for schools to criticize renewable energy.

I did not take a poll, but I am quite certain Republicans, Democrats and independents alike were all sweating and miserable, not just the Democrats. I should add North Carolina seems more like north Florida, humid and hot. I hate to break it to the Florida governor, but global warming is here now and will get worse, so we better do something more about it. Naysaying videos will not stop it and certainly won’t address Florida’s excessive property insurance cost problem.

He tried to warn us (and still is)

Let’s keep this simple. Scientist James Hansen first warned us about global warming in 1988. It would turn out his concerns echoed what scientists for both Exxon and Shell Oil were finding, until they decided to follow the PR strategy of denial, shelving their science.

Today, Hansen has provided a more dire warning per The Guardian. “The world is shifting towards a superheated climate not seen in the past 1m years, prior to human existence, because ‘we are damned fools’ for not acting upon warnings over the climate crisis, according to James Hansen, the US scientist who alerted the world to the greenhouse effect in the 1980s.

Hansen, whose testimony to the US Senate in 1988 is cited as the first high-profile revelation of global heating, warned in a statement with two other scientists that the world was moving towards a “new climate frontier” with temperatures higher than at any point over the past million years, bringing impacts such as stronger storms, heatwaves and droughts.”

We must heed the words of people in the know and pay less attention to politicians, especially those whose campaigns are well funded by the fossil fuel industry. We are beyond overdue on significant action to address climate change.

We are Farmers, but this won’t show up on one of their commercials

A very informed friend forwarded me this update on the Farmers Insurance Group in reply to my note about the climate change hammered insurance business in Florida. Seven companies have pulled out of the state and homeowners premiums are through the roof, pun intended.

“Farmers Insurance Group has announced that it will not renew home, auto, and other policies for people in Florida. The company cited increasing risks of severe weather in deciding to leave nearly 100,000 policyholders stranded.

Farmers had already limited policies in California, as have other major insurers like Allstate and State Farm….Here’s the thing:

Farmers has invested massively in fossil fuels. And its affiliated company, Zurich Insurance Group in Switzerland, is a major insurer of the oil and gas industries — the very industries that have brought us to the brink of climate catastrophe in the first place!

Zurich, by the way, has a market value of $71 billion. That’s more than the combined gross domestic products of the world’s 42 poorest countries — the citizens of which will suffer far more from climate chaos than will corporate executives lounging about in lodges in the Swiss Alps.

A message for Farmers Insurance executives:

Farmers Insurance says it can no longer afford to insure Americans’ homes and automobiles because of increasing risks of hurricanes, wildfires, and other climate-related events. But Farmers and Zurich are still financing and insuring the fossil fuel industry that is the reason humanity is facing a climate crisis in the first place. Your myopic pursuit of short-term profits by propping up dirty energy is actually undermining your own market — not to mention putting all of humanity and our entire planet in peril.

Thanks for taking action.

For progress,

Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen
Public Citizen | 1600 20th Street NW | Washington DC 20009 |”

Note, investing in companies that will hasten your own demise, seems unwise. At best, it is very short-sighted.