Activity


  • By Justin Gillis
    With Donald J. Trump about to take control of the White House, it would seem a dark time for the renewable energy industry. After all, Mr. Trump has mocked the science of global warming as a […]

    • Most of the smart money moved out of fossil fuel based investments a few years ago.
      Dinosaur Trump is trying to return to the fossil era. I suspect it’s partly because he’s still upset they built a wind farm right next to his golf course in Scotland.
      Looks like he’s out of touch, out of date and is just trying to regress into history. So long as he doesn’t take the rest of the USA or the world with him, that’s fine by me.

    • The fossil fuel era is far from over. Trump has every intention of maximizing the use of fossil fuels and ending environmental regulations. India and Pakistan (both nuclear) might go to war over water, and conditions will worsen as Trump continues on this destructive path. Of course it will affect the world, and the rest of the USA. How could it not?

      This is the most dangerous time in human history. Never before have we been this close to a major, if not final, catastrophe – environmental and nuclear.—The two converge, as Chomsky said.

      “Just keeping to South Asia, temperatures which are already intolerable for the poor are going to continue to rise as the Himalayan glaciers melt, also destroying the water supply for South Asia. In India already, 300 million people are reported to lack water to drink. And it will continue both for India and Pakistan. And at this point, the two major threats to survival begin to converge. One is environmental catastrophe. The other is nuclear war, another threat that is increasing right before our eyes. India and Pakistan are nuclear states, nuclear—states with nuclear weapons. They were already almost at war. Any kind of real war would immediately turn into a nuclear war. That might happen very easily over water—over struggles over diminishing water supplies. A nuclear war would not only devastate the region, but might actually be terminal for the species, if indeed it leads to nuclear winter and global famine, as many scientists predict.” —Chomsky

    • “The intrinsically weak federal role was a source of frustration for Mr. Obama and his aides, but now it will work to the benefit of environmental advocates” Typical NY Times BS. Obama’s problem was that he had a Congress that obstructed everything he tried to do. Trump won’t have that problem. Even many Democrats are what are called “Blue Dogs” — very close to Republicans on many issues. The Congress makes the laws and they can pretty much grant the president any power they want. God the world is so fucked.

    • Global anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions have stabilized for the past three years. Tentative hopes are running high that these steady rates relative to growing population and economies at last signal a partial decoupling from GDP. Longitudinal decoupling, however, implies a year-on-year rate of decline measured against a base. The Kyoto Protocols set a base for global reductions to 1990 levels. Unfortunately, CO2 emissions have increased 60% since 1990. In 2014 emissions increased only .05% and “stalled” at about 1% annual increase for the 3-year period 2013 through 2015 dropping markedly from the 4% annual increases of previous years. It is unclear how much a role the growing portion of renewable energy for electricity generation worldwide is playing in this volatile brief trend relative to other structural changes in national energy economies. Among the other factors are shifts to cleaner burning cheap natural gas-fired electricity plants that cut comparable coal-fired plant emissions by 50%. China has planned and (promised) significant cutbacks on coal-fired energy becoming the paradoxical kingpin in global reductions because of its outsized annual burning of half the world’s coal.

      The Trump administration promises to revitalize the coal mining industry ostensibly to compensate for recent setbacks blamed on onerous regulations The U. S. eia projects an absolute increase for coal consumption through 2040 at slower rates of growth. The unknown variables will include how rapidly China will turn around its huge coal battleship; how rapidly India and other nations will turn to coal-fired energy to develop their economies and supply domestic demand for electricity; and/or alternatively how rapidly developing (and developed) will dismantle the global fossil fuel infrasturcture in exchange for carbon-neutral alternatives (e.g. wind and solar).

      The bottom line is that CO2 emissions will have to decline at an average compound rate of 1.5% year-on-year for the next 33 years until 2050 to descend to the base emissions level of 1990. A daunting challenge so far unacknowledged by the media and politicians and largely obfuscated by a welter of ambiguous reports.