maugendre, to Energy
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

Carbon is being sent into the air. The throughputs are stable. Who delivers?

I am offering previews to my upcoming paper. Would you like:

  • a chart of the results by sectors?
  • explanations on the datasets?
    Please choose and send me a private message with your email address.

@climate

maugendre, to tech
@maugendre@mas.to avatar
KimPerales, (edited ) to climate
@KimPerales@toad.social avatar

Carbon capture is overhyped. Will this work? Harm nearby residents?

Surviving energy transition:

The audacious initiative isn't w/o critics. Many residents of the Latino comms. near the oil field where the carbon will be stored *concerned about the safety of stashing such huge volumes of the #GHG underground a few miles from their homes. Some CA #climate activists are skeptical that the potential benefits of #carboncapture are worth extending a lifeline to the oil f-.

https://grist.org/energy/taft-california-kern-county-carbon-capture/

Bellingen, to climate
@Bellingen@mastodon.au avatar

"Australia is unique in that its roads are so heavily dominated by “gas guzzling” SUVs and 4x4s".

"Passenger cars and light commercial vehicles are responsible for 60% of Australia’s transport emissions and more than 10% of Australia’s total emissions...Alongside their environmental impacts, SUVs have been criticised for their dangers to other road users."
>>
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/15/car-companies-spending-up-on-ads-for-suvs-despite-australias-new-fuel-efficiency-standards
#climate #FossilFuels #pollution #GHG #cars #vehicles #harm #pedestrians

_noelamac_, to Energy Spanish
@_noelamac_@spore.social avatar

Words matter…

“• Americans have strong positive feelings for the term “natural gas”.

• Americans have negative views of the alternative terms “methane” and “methane gas”.

• They associate natural gas with “clean” and methane gas with “pollution”.

• The alternative terms “fossil gas” and “fracked gas” are politically polarized.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494421001249

Bellingen, to climate
@Bellingen@mastodon.au avatar

Environmentally sustainable plant-based dishes in restaurants and cafes?

"Occasionally ordering a plant-based meal instead of a meat dish can greatly reduce the environmental footprint of the global food system. Animal agriculture accounts for 56% of food-related greenhouse gas emissions but produces only 18% of calories and 37% of protein."

"This means a family of four ordering plant-based meat burgers instead of beef patties saves carbon emissions equal to driving from Brisbane to the Gold Coast."

Check out the meat heavy menus in your local eatery in NSW!
Ways restaurants can promote plant-based meat dishes.
>>
https://theconversation.com/what-kind-of-diner-are-you-6-types-of-diners-who-avoid-plant-based-meat-dishes-226234

andybrwn, to random
@andybrwn@sfba.social avatar

PG&E touting their energy mix. I think they get to this because of some good & average hydro years, easier summer in 2023, and their renewable and storage purchases. We will see how 2024 pans out.

PG&E Corporation - PG&E Customers' Electricity 100% Greenhouse Gas-Free in 2023 https://investor.pgecorp.com/news-events/press-releases/press-release-details/2024/PGE-Customers-Electricity-100-Greenhouse-Gas-Free-in-2023/default.aspx

anatole, to Europe
@anatole@mapstodon.space avatar
maugendre, to climate
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

is a database of historic production data from 122 of the world’s largest oil, gas, coal, and cement producers.

• Investor-owned companies account for 31% of emissions, with Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP the three largest contributors.
• State-owned companies are linked to 33%, with Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, and the National Iranian Oil Company being the largest contributors.
• Nation-states account for the remaining 36%.

Launch report: https://influencemap.org/briefing/The-Carbon-Majors-Database-26913 @climate

maugendre,
@maugendre@hachyderm.io avatar

“The database makes it dramatically easier to document, calculate, and visually demonstrate the growing chasm between the urgent demands of climate reality and the continued reckless and intentional growth of oil and gas production,” said Carroll Muffet, President and CEO of the Center for International Environmental Law .

https://nordsip.com/2024/04/04/time-for-climate-action-57/ @datadon @data

maugendre, to climate
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

is a database of historic production data from 122 of the world’s largest oil, gas, coal, and cement producers.

• Investor-owned companies account for 31% of emissions, with Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP the three largest contributors.
• State-owned companies are linked to 33%, with Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, and the National Iranian Oil Company being the largest contributors.
• Nation-states account for the remaining 36%.

Launch report: https://influencemap.org/briefing/The-Carbon-Majors-Database-26913 @climate

maugendre, to climate
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

@anthropocene @climate
@food @climate

"Microbial-mediated enteric fermentative processes in ruminant livestock produce about 30 percent of the total anthropogenic methane emissions"

… in a Summary from UN FAO: https://www.fao.org/3/cc7777en/cc7777en.pdf

maugendre,
@maugendre@mas.to avatar
maugendre,
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

New study examines the corporate engagement activities of ten large companies and five industry associations towards European Union (EU) policymakers working on regulations aimed at reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the food and agriculture sector.

Richard Tyszkiewicz: https://nordsip.com/2024/05/30/eu-climate-action-hindered-by-meat-lobby/ @climate @food @eu

maugendre,
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

New study examines the corporate engagement activities of ten large companies and five industry associations towards European Union (EU) policymakers working on regulations aimed at reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the food and agriculture sector.

Richard Tyszkiewicz: https://nordsip.com/2024/05/30/eu-climate-action-hindered-by-meat-lobby/ @climate @food @eu

maugendre, to Energy
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

Intensity of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

-equivalent emissions per total supply (tCO2/TJ):
Brazil: 32.4 [deforestation does not count]
Canada: 42.8
Finland: 26.9
France: 28.6
Gabon: 12.3
Great Britain: 47
Ireland: 57.8
Japan: 61.4
Kenya: 13.2
Nepal: 19.2
Nigeria: 13.3
Norway: 30.5
other Africa: 12
Rwanda: 6.3
Singapore: 32.5
Switzerland: 34.2
Taiwan: not listed

… according to in 2020: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-energy-data-explorer @climate

maugendre,
@maugendre@mas.to avatar
quinn, to random
@quinn@social.circl.lu avatar

All the cows burning down in Texas as they get weather and climate warnings over and over again and some of you still don't think real life is a literary work.

xdydx,
@xdydx@mastodon.social avatar

@quinn
I like you. You're Smart, so I don't often disagree with you, and you're spikey (with good reason!), so the rest of the time I don't even want to disagree with you, but I'll cut out "carbon-intensive" meat, when these 100 companies cut their share of emissions production from 71% to 7.1%.

https://www.activesustainability.com/climate-change/100-companies-responsible-71-ghg-emissions/

I promise. But until then them poor cows can keep producing.

maugendre, to Energy
@maugendre@mas.to avatar

"There is already more than enough LNG export capacity to meet global demand for the fuel, if countries meet national and international climate goals."

https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-what-does-bidens-lng-pause-mean-for-global-emissions/ @climate

maugendre, to climate
@maugendre@mas.to avatar
judeswae, to climate
@judeswae@toot.thoughtworks.com avatar

: Greenhouse Effect
https://xkcd.com/2889/

Spot on, as always. And such a good reflection on our humanity.

markhburton, to climate
@markhburton@mstdn.social avatar

What is the carbon impact of the fashion industry?
The figure of 10% of global carbon emissions has been cited in multiple secondary sources, e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/13/your-outfit-is-killing-the-planet-the-company-putting-a-label-on-fashions-climate-impact
https://carbonliteracy.com/fast-fashions-carbon-footprint/
and the UN cites between 2 & 8% https://unece.org/forestry/press/un-alliance-aims-put-fashion-path-sustainability
But when I tried to track the source down, it looks more like it's between 1 and 3% see https://files.wri.org/d8/s3fs-public/2021-11/roadmap-net-zero-delivering-science-based-targets-apparel-sector.pdf
I suspect an error in some secondary source has been perpetuated.
1-3% seems more reasonable really.

GottaLaff, to random
@GottaLaff@mastodon.social avatar

Aramco Abruptly Drops Plans to Expand Production - “The decision probably reflects a view that the world does not need as much Saudi oil as was previously expected,” said Neil Beveridge, an analyst at Bernstein, a research firm.

The government may want to free up money to spend on Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s ambitious development plans, as well as on alternative sources of energy like natural gas and hydrogen” https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/30/business/saudi-aramco-oil-production.html

HistoPol, (edited )
@HistoPol@mastodon.social avatar

@GottaLaff

(2/2)

...generation scenarios outperform [even] generation 👈and can contribute to even greater [ ] savings."

However, while the has a president who understands aspects:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-cites-climate-pause-liquified-natural-gas/story?id=106686922

...the timing of the press release begs the question whether the see just a way to increase market share as a major competitor is having second thoughts and reducing climate-unfriendly exports.

//

veganpizza69, to climate
@veganpizza69@veganism.social avatar

"How meat and milk companies are racing to ease your climate guilt."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/01/22/meat-climate-impact-tyson-hopdoddys/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzA1ODk5NjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzA3MjgxOTk5LCJpYXQiOjE3MDU4OTk2MDAsImp0aSI6ImRlNGNjNjNlLTJjOWYtNDg0OC04OWEzLTFkYzM0MGM1NDE0MSIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9jbGltYXRlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LzIwMjQvMDEvMjIvbWVhdC1jbGltYXRlLWltcGFjdC10eXNvbi1ob3Bkb2RkeXMvIn0.wFGmMWYI80_RG13Ir1UzTK7fsNIpm7kbSwtUvtFqBKs

WaPo finally posted a modest critique of meat industry greenwashing.

<💬>
Under another new California law, companies also must disclose the emissions created throughout their supply chains, and the Securities and Exchange Commission is working on a similar requirement.

It all has big food companies rushing to show progress in cutting emissions, particularly after so many of them promised to zero out their net release of greenhouse gases — known as going “carbon neutral” — by 2050 or earlier, in alignment with the Paris agreement on global warming. In the backdrop is a contentious debate over how those companies should calculate their carbon footprints.

The fight has shifted to an obscure independent organization called the GHG Protocol, a group made up of corporations, scientists and environmental groups that writes accounting rules for greenhouse gas emissions that will guide what climate claims companies can make under new state laws.

Among the companies involved in determining when and how farming and harvesting methods can be used to erase the emissions impact of products like hamburgers and dairy are McDonald’s, Nestlé and the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, to which meat giants Tyson Foods and Cargill belong.

The deliberations of the GHG Protocol, which is managed by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, are kept confidential. But discord spilled into public in the fall, following its publication of draft guidelines for farm and forestry emissions. Dozens of environmental groups and academics say the rules as proposed would allow companies to declare climate-unfriendly products such as lumber, paper, beef and milk carbon neutral — or even carbon negative — by making modest land use adjustments that don’t truly mitigate the emissions of those products.
</💬>

There's certainly going to be more and more tension due to these corporations trying to find better greenwashing, better methods of faking data, more sophisticated bullshit.

It's going to get a lot worse before they lose.

joe8Zeta7, to Futurology Italian
@joe8Zeta7@mastodon.social avatar

2023 in @Nature finds switching to lab-produced has enormous potential to reduce emissions, , water use. Reducing the climate impact of over coming decades @palmoildetectives https://wp.me/pcFhgU-77c

KimPerales, (edited ) to climate
@KimPerales@toad.social avatar

LNG execs are lying: Some terminals will employ only a few 100 ppl +cos: using prefabricated components avoiding hiring local contractors. US gas: save Europe from its dependence on RU *already meeting their energy demands. If the IDU were to have all of its proposed projects approved >than entire EU. , flaring, wetland erosion +destruction of fisheries near gas export terminals -caused reported health problems & fishers/shrimpers to close.

https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/4411007-lng-execs-claim-theyre-investing-in-america-in-reality-theyre-taking-far-more-than-they-give/

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • Leos
  • GTA5RPClips
  • osvaldo12
  • thenastyranch
  • DreamBathrooms
  • khanakhh
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • mdbf
  • love
  • kavyap
  • rosin
  • megavids
  • everett
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • Durango
  • ngwrru68w68
  • tacticalgear
  • modclub
  • cisconetworking
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines