02/06/2017

French President To U.S. Scientists: Come Work With Us On Climate Change

Huffington PostCarla Herreria

Emmanuel Macron wants to "make the planet great again" with the help of American citizens.

President Macron makes his disapproval clear, saying "the Paris agreement remains irreversible and will be implemented."

After President Donald Trump dealt a blow to the global community by pulling the United States out of the Paris agreement to fight climate change, the president of France turned to another American ally: the American citizen.
In an official statement released Thursday evening, French President Emmanuel Macron said he respected Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris accord but called the move "an actual mistake." He then called on American scientists and citizens to sidestep Trump by working directly with France and European researchers on solving the global issue of climate change.
"To all scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, responsible citizens who were disappointed by the decision of the president of the United States, I want to say that they will find in France a second homeland," Macron said in a video posted to Facebook.
"I call on them, come and work here with us to work together on concrete solutions for our planet, our environment. I can assure you France will not give up the fight."

President Donald Trump announced on Thursday plans for the U.S. to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change

Leaders from Italy and Germany joined the French president in a separate statement released Thursday, saying they regret Trump's decision and noting that the Paris climate agreement could not be renegotiated.
When Macron was still a presidential candidate in February, he also asked climate scientists, researchers and entrepreneurs in the U.S. to seek refuge from Trump's climate change skepticism and join French efforts.
"Please, come to France. Your are welcome, it's your nation," Macron said in a video published earlier this year. "We want innovative people. We want people working on climate change, energy, renewables and new technologies."
Trump's decision to withdraw from the historic deal makes the U.S. one of only three countries in the world not participating in the international agreement to curb global warming. The other two countries are Syria, which is in the midst of a civil war, and Nicaragua, whose leaders argued that the agreement wasn't strong enough.
Macron concluded his statement on Thursday with one of Trump's familiar refrains, only this time, it was edited to fit the Paris agreement's main purpose: "Make our planet great again. Thank you."

Links

Trump Announces U.S. Will Exit Paris Climate Deal

Washington PostPhilip Rucker | Jenna Johnson


President Trump has decided to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement. Here's what you need to know. (Daron Taylor/The Washington Post)

President Trump announced Thursday afternoon that he is withdrawing the United States from the landmark Paris climate agreement, a move to honor a campaign pledge that dismayed America’s allies and thwarted the global effort to address the warming planet.
Trump’s decision alarmed leaders around the world, drawing swift and sharp condemnation from foreign officials as well as top U.S. environmentalists and corporate titans, who decried the U.S. exit from the Paris accord as an irresponsible abdication of American leadership.
But Trump cast his decision as a “reassertion of America’s sovereignty,” arguing that the climate pact as negotiated under President Obama was grossly unfair to the U.S. workers he had vowed to protect with his populist “America First” campaign platform.
“I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” Trump proclaimed in a forceful, lengthy and at times rambling speech from the Rose Garden of the White House.
The United States now joins only two countries — Nicaragua and Syria — in opposing a climate agreement reached by all other nations in 2015. A signature diplomatic achievement for President Obama, the Paris accord was celebrated at the time as a universal response to the global warming crisis.

President Trump announced his decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement on June 1, after saying he would "cancel" the deal while on the campaign trail. (Reuters)

Trump argued Thursday that the deal had negative ramifications for domestic manufacturing and other industries, and put the United States at a “permanent disadvantage” with China, India and other rising powers. He said the agreement’s restrictions on future greenhouse gas emissions would be tantamount to putting America’s vast energy resources “under lock and key.”
The U.S. withdrawal of the Paris agreement cannot actually be finalized until near the end of Trump’s term. In a gesture to those who had encouraged him to remain in the accord, Trump said he was open to negotiating a new climate deal that, in his assessment, would be more fair to U.S. interests.
“In order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris accord or an entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers,” Trump said.
“We’re getting out,” he added, “but we will start to negotiate and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. If we can, that’s great. If we can’t, that’s fine.”
The leaders of France, Germany and Italy issued a joint statement voicing “regret” about Trump’s move, promising to redouble their efforts to implement the Paris agreement and asserting it cannot be renegotiated.
“We deem the momentum generated in Paris in December 2015 irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated, since it is a vital instrument for our planet, societies and economies,” read the statement from French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni.
Following Trump’s speech, Macron spoke with the president by phone for five minutes and “indicated that nothing was renegotiable in the Paris Accords,” according to a French official briefed on the conversation.
All but two countries are in the Paris climate agreement. The U.S. could be the third. View Graphic

“The United States and France will continue to work together, but not on the subject of the climate,” the official added.
Erik Solheim, executive director of the United Nations Environment Program, said in an interview that “the biggest losers will be the American people.”
“It’s obviously regrettable,” he said. “The world needs American leadership. However, the impact is less than most people would believe, because China, India and Europe will provide leadership.”
Central to Trump’s rationale was his feeling that the United States had been taken advantage of. He argued that the Paris agreement would “punish” Americans and stymie economic growth. The president claimed that meeting the accord’s greenhouse gas emission standards would cost the United States close to $3 trillion in lost gross domestic product and 6.5 million industrial jobs.
Trump argued the Paris accord was so unfavorable to U.S. interests that other countries were laughing at America.
“The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris agreement,” Trump said. “They went wild. They were so happy. For the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of America, which we all love, at a very, very big economic disadvantage.”
The president, who recently returned from his maiden foreign trip, added, “We want fair treatment for its citizens and we want fair treatment for our taxpayers. We don’t want other leaders and other countries laughing at us anymore — and they won’t be.”
Obama strongly defended the Paris agreement as a measure to “protect the world we leave to our children.” In a statement released Thursday, he said it was the product of “steady, principled American leadership on the world stage,” pointing out that it had broad support from the private sector because the accord “opened the floodgates” for high-tech, low-carbon investment and innovation.
“I believe the United States of America should be at the front of the pack,” Obama said. “But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this Administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future generations the one planet we’ve got.”
Gina McCarthy, Obama’s EPA administrator when the Paris agreement was negotiated, said in a statement: “It’s a disappointing and embarrassing day for the United States.”
The atmosphere in the Rose Garden was celebratory, with a military band performing “Summertime” and other jazz hits as Cabinet members, White House staffers, conservative activists and other Trump supporters took their seats in the garden under a bright sun.
The scene was a reflection of the deep divide within the Trump administration over Paris. The president took much of the spring to make up his mind amid an intense campaign by both sides to influence his decision.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and adviser, are among those who urged him to stay in the deal, arguing it would be beneficial to the United States to remain part of negotiations and meetings surrounding the agreement as a matter of leverage and influence. Neither was in attendance for Thursday’s ceremony.
White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt pushed for a withdrawal. When Trump announced that he would pull out, there was a burst of applause and some whoops from the assembled crowd in the Rose Garden — and Bannon held his hands up in the air, clapping enthusiastically.
Introducing Trump, Vice President Pence said the climate decision was an example of the president putting what he sees as the interests of the United States above all else.
“Our president is choosing to put American jobs and American consumers first,” Pence said. “Our president is choosing to put American energy and American industry first. And by his action today, President Trump is choosing to put the forgotten men and women first.”
Pruitt later commended Trump for his “fortitude, courage and steadfastness” to exit the Paris accord and fulfill a campaign promise.
“You’re fighting for the forgotten men and women across this country,” Pruitt said of his boss. “This is an historic restoration of American economic independence.”
Condemnations of Trump’s decision were immediate and strongly-worded.
Former vice president Al Gore, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work raising awareness about global warming, said the president’s decision was “reckless and indefensible.”
“It undermines America’s standing in the world and threatens to damage humanity’s ability to solve the climate crisis in time,” Gore, who called Trump last month to try to persuade him to keep the United States in the Paris agreement, said in a statement.
Jeff Immelt, the chief executive of General Electric, tweeted: “Disappointed with today’s decision on the Paris Agreement. Climate change is real. Industry must now lead and not depend on government.”
In Europe, the top climate official at the European Union, Miguel Arias Canete, decried the U.S. action.
“A sad day for the global community, as the US turns its back on the fight against climate change. EU deeply regrets this unilateral decision,” Canete wrote on Twitter. “The EU will strengthen existing partnerships and seek new alliances from the world’s largest economies to the most vulnerable island states.”
A top German politician slammed Trump’s decision to pull out from the agreement, mocking him for his brusque brush-aside of a Balkan leader last week at a NATO meeting in Brussels.
“You can withdraw from a climate agreement but not from climate change, Mr. Trump,” Social Democratic leader Martin Schulz wrote on Twitter. “Reality isn’t just another statesman you shove away.”
On Capitol Hill, Democrats were fierce in their criticism. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who regularly speaks from the Senate floor about the perils of global warming, said Trump was “betraying the country.”
“Ignoring reality and leaving the Paris Agreement could go down as one of the worst foreign policy blunders in our nation’s history,” Whitehouse said in a statement. “Trump is betraying the country, in the service of Breitbart fake news, the shameless fossil fuel industry, and the Koch brothers’ climate denial operation. It’s sad.”
But Republican congressional leaders praised Trump’s move.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a statement, “I applaud President Trump and his administration for dealing yet another significant blow to the Obama Administration’s assault on domestic energy production and jobs.”
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) said, “The Paris climate agreement was simply a raw deal for America … I commend President Trump for fulfilling his commitment to the American people and withdrawing from this bad deal.”
More than 190 nations agreed to the accord in December 2015 in Paris, and 147 have since formally ratified or otherwise joined it, including the United States — representing more than 80 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.
It’s also heavily backed by U.S. and global corporations, including oil giants Royal Dutch Shell, ExxonMobil and BP. Large corporations, especially those operating in international markets, have had years to get used to the idea that there are likely to be reductions on carbon emissions, and they have been adapting their businesses accordingly for some time.
Withdrawing the United States from the agreement could take years due to the accord’s legal structure and language, but such a move would weaken its goals almost immediately. The United States is the world’s second-largest greenhouse gas emitter and would otherwise have accounted for 21 percent of the total emissions reductions achieved by the accord through 2030.

Links

Key Greenhouse Gases Higher Than Any Time Over Last 800,000 Years

Melbourne University |  |  | 
 |   | 

Worldwide compilation of data reveals the most complete picture ever showing the 43 greenhouse gases driving global warming
Greenhouse gases began with the onset of the industrial era around 1750. Picture: Pixabay
The most comprehensive collection of atmospheric greenhouse gas measurements, confirms the relentless rise of many of the most important greenhouse gases.
The data shows that today's aggregate warming effect of carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄) nitrous oxide (N₂O) is higher than at any time over the last 800,000 years, according to the ice core records going back that far. Building on half a century of atmospheric measurements by the international research community, the data was compiled and analysed by a group of international scientists led by Malte Meinshausen, from the University of Melbourne, with colleagues there and at CSIRO.
Together, the data provides the most compelling evidence of the unprecedented perturbation of the Earth's atmosphere. The data clearly shows that the growth of greenhouse gases began with the onset of the industrial era around 1750, took a sharp turn upwards in the 1950s, and still continues today.
Research has demonstrated that this observed growth in greenhouse gases is caused by human activities, leading to warming of the climate – and in fact more than the observed warming, because part of their effect is currently masked by atmospheric pollution (aerosols).
The new collection of records comes from measurements of current and archived air samples, air trapped in bubbles in ice cores, and firn (compacted snow). The data covers the past 2,000 years without gaps and are the result of a compilation of measurements analysed by dozens of laboratories around the world including CSIRO, The Bureau of Meteorology Cape Grim Stations, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment, and Scripts Institution of Oceanography, among others.
This data includes 43 different greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere from dozens of human activities and industrial processes. While CO2, CH4 and N2O are on the rise, some other greenhouse gases such as dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12) are slowly starting to decline as a result of policies to ban their use.

The greenhouse gases
Most of us know about CO₂, CH₄ and N₂O as being among the principal causes of human-induced climate change. They are found in the atmosphere in the absence of human activity, but the rise in their concentrations are due to human activities such as burning fossil fuels, deforestation and agriculture (livestock, rice paddies and the use of nitrogen-based fertilisers). They are all from biological or fossil fuel sources.
But there is much more when it comes to greenhouse gases. Our analysis features a further 40 greenhouse gases (among hundreds that exist), many of them emitted in very small quantities. Although many might play a small role, dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12) and trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11) are the third and fifth most important greenhouse gas in terms of their overall contribution to global warming.
Most of these gases are emitted exclusively by humans, the so-called synthetic greenhouse gases, and have been used variously as aerosol spray propellants, refrigerants, fire-extinguishing agents, and in the production of semiconductors, among other industrial applications.
Synthetic greenhouse gases include chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and others. Several, most famously CFCs, also deplete the ozone layer, and are regulated under the Montreal Protocol. Others, such as HFCs, were actually first produced in large quantities to replace the ozone depleting substances, but unfortunately turned out to be potent greenhouse gases too.
Importantly, all 43 greenhouse gases offer opportunities to tackle climate change, either by reducing their emissions or, in the case of synthetic gases, finding non-greenhouse alternatives.

Not all greenhouse gases are the same
How much a greenhouse gas contributes to warming depends on three factors.
First, how much mass of a gas is emitted. Second, how effective any kilogram of gas in the atmosphere is in warming the planet. And third, how long the gas remains in the atmosphere.
The last 2000 years of greenhouse gas concentrations. Picture: Supplied
CO₂ is the most important greenhouse gas in warming the planet despite, per unit of mass, the fact it's greenhouse gas with the weakest warming potential. Its contribution to warming comes from the sheer scale of emissions 40 billion tonnes emitted each year, and the fact that a large part effectively hangs around in the atmosphere for hundreds or thousands of years after emission. The resulting concentration makes CO₂ responsible for about 65 per cent of all warming due to greenhouse gas emissions from human activities.
This makes CO₂ the most important factor in determining future global warming.
Unless we can cut CO₂ emissions to zero by the second half of this century, primarily by finding alternatives to fossil fuels, the world will continue to warm beyond the 2°C or the aspirational 1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement.
Methane (CH₄) is the next most important greenhouse gas, with current concentration contributing about 15 per cent of overall human-induced warming.
Most synthetic greenhouse gases have very high global warming potentials. The one with the highest current emissions is the refrigerant HFC-134a, which is 1300 times more potent than CO2 (per mass unit emitted). Other synthetic greenhouse gases have even more extraordinary warming potentials with PFCs (from the aluminium and semiconductor industries) and SF6 (from industrial electricity transformers) being 6500 (CF4) and 23400 (SF6) times more potent than CO₂.
Ice cracks in the Arctic allowing methane in the top layers of the sea to escape into the atmosphere. Picture: NASA
Chlorofluorocarbon-12 (CFC-12), a former refrigerant, is both a potent ozone depleting substance and a powerful greenhouse gas. Although its emissions and atmospheric concentrations are now declining thanks to global compliance with the Montreal Protocol, it is still the third most important greenhouse gas and responsible for 6-7 per cent of all warming since the beginning of the industrial era.

What is this data good for?
Our new compilation of greenhouse gas data is the most complete and robust picture to date showing the main drivers of climate change, and how we humans are altering the Earth's atmosphere. Global temperature is now about 1℃ warmer on average than the pre-industrial temperatures.
The new database also serves as an accurate measure of greenhouse gas concentrations resulting from past human and natural emissions, which will in turn help to improve the performance of climate models.
Building trust and confidence in climate projections starts by testing and running models with real data during historical periods. The new climate projections will feed in the next major report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, due to be released in 2021.
Continued greenhouse gas monitoring, including significant contributions by Australia, is crucial to understand how the planet reacts to human interference, and to better plan for adaptation to a changing climate.
Global and regional greenhouse data can help nations to track the long-term global targets under the Paris Agreement, and to inform actions needed to stabilise the climate.
New climate spiral. The global-mean CO2 concentrations since 1850.
Links

Renewables Grow To 17% Of Electricity Mix As Sector Calls For Certainty

The Guardian

Solar panels are seen at the Williamsdale solar farm outside Canberra. A Clean Energy Council report notes a ‘signature’ trend of recent years has been the falling cost of large-scale solar power. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP

Renewable energy comprised 17% of Australia’s electricity generation in 2016, up from 14% the year before, but the industry is warning it needs policy certainty and support beyond 2020 if the growth trend is to continue.
A new report by the Clean Energy Council says 2016 was a year of recovery for the Australian renewables sector after the sustained policy uncertainty generated by the Abbott government’s review of the federal renewable energy target (RET) cost jobs and investment.
The report, to be released in Canberra on Tuesday, says the increased market share for renewables in 2016 was delivered by a 26% increase in hydro generation, which reflects improved rainfall in Tasmania and the snowy region.
While it says the current level of activity means Australia is well on track to deliver the 2020 RET, the industry needs policy certainty to go on delivering the transformation.
“Australia is realising the significant benefits of backing the renewable energy industry,” the new report says. “For these economic benefits to continue, clear policy direction and support is required beyond 2020.”
The report draws attention to the falling costs of renewable energy, noting one of the “signature” trends of recent years has been the falling cost of large-scale solar power.
It notes the ACT government’s reverse auction scheme also “led to the cheapest wind power ever contracted in Australia, for $73 a megawatt-hour (MWh) at Stage 3 of Neoen’s Hornsdale windfarm in South Australia”.
“AGL appears set to go one better, with electricity from the Silverton windfarm reported to be as low as $65/MWh.”
It quotes data from Bloomberg New Energy Finance, which has the levelised cost of energy at $61-$118 per MWh, combined-cycle gas generation at A$74-90/MWh, solar generation at A$78-140/MWh and ultra-supercritical coal fired generation at A$134-203/MWh.
It points out a new coal-fired power station using carbon capture and storage, by comparison, has a levelised cost of energy of approximately A$352/ MWh.
The Clean Energy Council chief executive, Kane Thornton, said large-scale solar power is now playing a major role in meeting the RET.
He said investments are scheduled to accelerate in 2017. “While total investment in large-scale renewable energy was $2.56bn last year, $5.20bn worth of projects have secured finance in just the first five months of 2017 and have either started construction or will begin this year.”
Thornton said current employment figures for the industry reflect the fact renewables is still emerging from the Abbott government-induced doldrums.
“While the latest available employment figures show an industry contraction to 11,150 direct jobs in the 2015-16 financial year, these figures cover a low point for the sector following the Abbott government’s RET review,” he said.
“Employment figures are likely to increase substantially in 2017 with over 35 large-scale projects already under construction or starting this year, adding up to more than $7.5bn in investment and more than 4,100 additional direct jobs.”
The Turnbull government has signalled its current review of the Direct Action climate policy could see an overhaul of the federal RET.
There is also a widespread expectation among industry stakeholders that the chief scientist, Alan Finkel, will use his final report into the national electricity market on 9 June to float a new low-emissions target along the lines John Howard proposed back in 2007.
Such a scheme would work in practice as a technology-neutral renewable energy target.
The Howard proposal required that a percentage of electricity be generated annually from “low-emissions” sources, which was defined in 2007 as emitting fewer than 200kg of greenhouse gas per megawatt of electricity generated.
Separately to the Finkel process, the government has flagged changing the investment rules of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to allow it to invest in more technologies, including high-efficiency, lower emissions (HELE) coal-fired plants.

Links