+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 42
Latest: eranda
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 9518
Total Topics: 234
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 0
Total: 0

Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 1024KB, maximum individual size 512KB
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 16, 2018, 05:50:13 pm »



Shipping’s Financiers Turning the Tide On Controversial Shipbreaking Practices

May 15, 2018 by Reuters

Workers carry a rope line to fasten a decommissioned ship at the Alang shipyard in Gujarat, India, in this March 27, 2015 file photo. REUTERS/Amit Dave/Files

By Jonathan Saul and Simon Jessop LONDON, May 15 (Reuters)

SNIPPET:

The shipping industry has long been criticized by campaigners for allowing vessels to be broken up on beaches, endangering workers and polluting the sea and sand.  >:(

Now, it is being called to account from a quarter that may have a bit more clout – its financial backers.

Norway’s $1 trillion Oil Fund, a leader in ethical investing, in February sold its stake in four firms because they scrap on the beach.

Three of the firms excluded by Norway’s fund – Taiwan’s Evergreen Marine, Precious Shipping and Thoresen Thai Agencies (TTA) of Thailand – say they have been unfairly singled out. The fourth, Korea Line, declined to comment.

Norwegian life insurer KLP soon followed, selling shares in the one of the four it owned and blacklisting the other three.

Further exclusions are likely, said KLP, the fund and its advisory Council on Ethics. The council’s chief adviser, Aslak Skancke, said the divestments had already effected wider change, including encouraging companies to seek cleaner scrapping.

The fund contacted several firms in its portfolio during its investigation, Skancke said, “and when we made them aware of the possibility of exclusion from the fund, they … decided to change their policy.” He declined to name the companies.

hree leading pensions funds – Caisse de Depot, CCP and OMERS – are reviewing their investments in shipping over ethical and green considerations, a finance source familiar with the matter said. OMERS declined to comment. Caisse de Depot and CCP did not respond to requests for comment.

The steps add to momentum on the issue from European Union regulators and courts, in particular pressure to measure up to standards for inclusion on the EU’s list of approved ship-breaking yards, which is due to be updated later this year.

It’s a revolution that has been a long time coming, environmental, labor and human rights activists say. But a transition won’t be easy, for owners or breakers.

More than 80 percent of aging commercial ships are broken up on the beaches of Bangladesh, Pakistan and India.

Industry leaders in South Asia say they cannot afford to upgrade their sites and remain competitive.

Full article with important details:

http://gcaptain.com/shippings-financiers-turning-the-tide-on-controversial-shipbreaking-practices/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 16, 2018, 05:34:03 pm »



Judges Rule Against Controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline Because Wildlife Matters

By Yessenia Funes

May 16, 2018 2:00pm Filed to: AND SO DO HUMAN LIVES

SNIPPET:

Three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals issued a decision that canceled a key permit for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a 600-mile long project that would travel from West Virginia to North Carolina. The panel found that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) didn’t set clear limits on how the Dominion Energy-owned pipeline would impact threatened or endangered species in the Biological Opinion required under the Endangered Species Act.

This opinion includes an Incidental Take Statement, which is the issue here. “Take” means “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect,” per the FWS. As plaintiffs argued—and the court agreed—the federal agency granted Dominion Energy this permit under “indeterminate” limits on the “take” of certain species, including a migratory shorebird called the piping plover, and sea turtles. The federal agency never clarified what percentage of threatened or endangered species are allowed to be killed during construction, reports the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Plaintiffs, which include the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, and the Virginia Wilderness Committee, filed this lawsuit (among others) against the Department of Interior and FWS back in January. The pipeline has met serious opposition from environmentalists throughout its proposed route—and not only for the ways it could harm wildlife.

Local advocates worry about air pollution from compression station sites concentrating near a black community in North Carolina. There’s also the Haliwa-Saponi Indian Tribe, which feels it wasn’t properly consulted.

“This fracked gas project has been proven to be perilous to our health, our communities, and wildlife, and now, thanks to tonight’s ruling, must be stopped,” said Sierra Club Attorney Nathan Matthews, in a press release.

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is set to be completed by the end of this year. This decision won’t halt all construction, so the project should stay on schedule for now. Earther contacted Dominion Energy for comment and will update upon a response.

read more:

https://earther.com/judges-rule-against-controversial-atlantic-coast-pipeli-1826078504

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 16, 2018, 05:26:13 pm »



Investors Worth $2.5 Trillion Don’t Want Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

By Yessenia Funes

May 15, 2018 Filed to: MONEY TALKS

SNIPPET:

Basically, the investors are saying this type of drilling doesn’t make sense anymore. It’s time to start thinking of more long-term ways to make money (like, uh, renewables).   On top of that, the American public is not down with tearing up ANWR. Investors gotta protect their reps.

Most important of all, however, is the way this drilling sacrifices human rights in the name of profit. The letter acknowledges the Gwich’in’s cultural ties to these lands, and how any drilling that causes the Porcupine caribou herd to suffer would in term harm this indigenous group.

The Gwich’in, for their part, have been actively fighting potential drilling in ANWR since at least the 1980s, when the idea first started gaining steam. They put out their own letter Monday alongside the investors’.

read more:

https://earther.com/investors-worth-2-5-trillion-don-t-want-drilling-in-th-1826046725
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 16, 2018, 05:07:54 pm »

EcoWatch

By Lorraine Chow

May. 16, 2018 07:39AM EST

1,400 Tons of Contaminated Soil Hauled From Montana Reservation Oil Spill Site

SNIPPET:

Quote
The wellhead has crac ked along the length of the pipe. It's believed the crack formed in December when the well was shut in over the winter. EPA

Trucks have removed more than 1,400 tons of contaminated soil following a large oil spill on the Fort Peck Reservation in Montana, The Billings Gazette reported.

Cleanup is still ongoing. So far, more than 50 large dump trucks full of soil have been removed with more to come, the publication noted.

An estimated 600 barrels of oil and 90,000 barrels of brine (production water) leaked from an Anadarko Minerals Inc. wellhead that was shut in and last inspected in December. It is believed that the wellhead might have frozen and crac ked over the winter, leading to the spill.

Read more:

https://www.ecowatch.com/oil-spill-montana-reservation-2569319391.html
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 10, 2018, 07:04:44 pm »

GLOBAL CITIZEN

mAY 10, 2018

Scientists Discovered a Dead Zone the Size of Florida 😨 in the Gulf of Oman

But the damage doesn’t have to be permanent.

SNIPPET:

Scientists recently identified a dead zone as large as Florida in the Gulf of Oman. The 65,755 square mile area is now devoid of marine life due, in large part, to climate change and human pollution.

The increasing size of dead zones in the ocean is threatening the animal populations in our oceans and leading to the destruction of underwater life. But scientists say the damage doesn’t have to be permanent. One study has called for further investigation of the Gulf of Oman to understand how to manage the fisheries and ecosystems of the Western Indian Ocean to prevent dead zones from widening.

Full article:

https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/scientists-discovered-a-dead-zone-the-size-of-flor/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 05, 2018, 02:57:41 pm »

CleanTechnica
Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.


410 PPM & Rising — CO2 Levels Reach Dangerous Levels 😨 😟

May 5th, 2018 by Steve Hanley

Carbon Dioxide & You — A Cautionary Tale



https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/05/410-ppm-rising-co2-levels-reach-dangerous-levels/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 05, 2018, 01:23:51 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: The following educational video with excellent graphics is rather optimistic. WHY? To begin with, the available carbon budget (the amount of GHG emissions we can still generate without exceeding the 2 degree celsius increase in temperature) is actually in the rear view mirror. IOW, we have already blown through that budget and are well on the way to a 4 degree C increase (with an accelerating RATE of increase, NOT a linear or slowing rate of increase) BEFORE the end of this century. Also, there is no discussion of the methane contribution. both from fracking activity and from the melting of the permafrost and the release of the vast (over a HUNDRED times 🔥🌡️ the current GHG emissions warming 🔥🌡️ effect) shallow arctic sea methane clathrates, all of which require the immediate banning of the burning of fossil fuels and a crash program to get the CO2 level back to 350 PPM (at least - 300 PPM would be ideal).

 


While the following graphics are correct in portraying the vast amount of fossil fuels that can still be extracted to be burned (which is irrefutable evidence that "peak" oil will NOT save us from Catastrophic Climate Change ), the claim that we can still burn SOME fossil fuels is not based on the reality of the Runaway Greenhouse Situation we are in.



A Brief History of CO2 Emissions


Potsdam Institute

Published on Sep 13, 2017

An animated short film on greenhouse gas emissions.

Together with the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), the Urban Complexity Lab of the University of Applied Sciences Potsdam (FHP) developed an animated short movie that visualizes the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of the past – and the possible future.

https://uclab.fh-potsdam.de/projects/co2

-----

Credits:
“A Brief History of CO2 Emissions”
A film by the University of Applied Sciences Potsdam (FHP) and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)

Design and Production: Julian Braun
Concept: Julian Braun, Jürgen Claus, Susanne Droege, Elmar Kriegler, Boris Müller und Mareike Schodder

Creative Lead: Boris Müller (FHP)
Scientific Lead: Elmar Kriegler (PIK)
Data Research: Lavinia Baumstark

Music: Leo Brunnsteiner
Voice: Andy Bramhill 
Sound Design: Manfred Bauche
Translation to Arabic: Ali Hydar

A project by the
Gesellschaft der Freunde & Förderer der Fachhochschule Potsdam e.V.

Supported by the Lottery Fund of the Ministry of Rural Development, Environment and Agriculture of the Federal State of Brandenburg (MRDEA)

Category Science & Technology

 



Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 03, 2018, 02:25:28 pm »

 

Eighteen U.S states are taking the EPA to court over weakening emission regulations

LAST UPDATED ON MAY 2ND, 2018 AT 10:29 PM BY ALEXANDRU MICU

A coalition of 18 U.S states is suing the current administration over “arbitrary and capricious” moves to weaken air quality regulations.

Eighteen states will take representatives of the Trump administration to court. In a move championed by the golden state of California, they will fight against the administration’s revisions of Obama-era car greenhouse gas emission rules — one of his most significant measures against climate change.

“Arbitrary and capricious”

New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, the District of Columbia, and California are suing the EPA and its Administrator Scott Pruitt.

Together, the states hold roughly 43% of the U.S.’s cars and are understandably angry at the EPA’s moves to weaken current car emission regulation. They aim to “set aside and hold unlawful” the newer (and weaker, compared to those adopted in 2012) fuel economy standards, which are slated to take effect in 2022.

According to The New York Times, the Trump administration said the standards were too stringent and began legal procedures to revise them. The EPA hasn’t offered any new standards, instead choosing to draft regulation that weakens existing ones post-2020. In other words, we’re not talking about a different take or a paradigm shift here — just a simple, old-fashioned cut.

The NYT explains that after executives from General Motors, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler visited the White House to request more lenient emissions rules, Trump’s administration began to try and roll back the standards. The Agency claims that the standards are “based on outdated information” and that new data suggests “the current standards may be too stringent.” For context, these standards aimed to raise efficiency requirements to about 50 miles per gallon by 2025.

The states, however, contend that the EPA acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” in changing these rules, in direct opposition to their citizens’ best interests. Furthermore, they hold that the EPA under Pruitt violated the Clean Air Act and didn’t follow its own regulations.

The lawsuit comes just days after learning that the Department of Transportation is planning to propose freezing fuel economy standards at model year 2020 levels, Politico adds.

“The federal standard the states are suing to protect is estimated to reduce carbon pollution equivalent to 134 coal power plants burning for a year, and save drivers $1,650 per vehicle,” the states said.

Which, you have to admit, sounds pretty sweet. There’s something for everybody, no matter if you care about the environment or your bottom line. No matter how this plays out, we’re likely to look at a protracted legal battle as both sides seem intent to see it through to the bitter end.

“My message to the EPA and Administrator Pruitt is simple: Do your job. Regulate carbon pollution from vehicles,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said at a press conference on Tuesday. “We are not looking to pick a fight with the Trump administration, but we are ready for one.”

“This is about health, it’s about life and death,” adds California Gov. Jerry Brown. “I’m going to fight it with everything I can.”

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

https://www.zmescience.com/science/epa-lawsuit-air-quality-8525323/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 30, 2018, 09:56:08 pm »

 

Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click here to subscribe.

Kingston Coal Ash Spill photo

April 30, 2018

Coal Ash Concerns Mount From Puerto Rico to DC

PBS NewsHour reported this weekend from Guayama, Puerto Rico, where the island's only coal-fired power plant and coal ash industrial facility may be contributing to the high incidences of cancer, respiratory problems and heart disease in surrounding neighborhoods.

Local concern is growing over how Hurricane Maria may have further compromised public health, after the plant's owner failed to cover ash piles during the storm and released a report last month showing "dramatic" increases in arsenic and chromium in groundwater in the months following Maria.

Polluters across the country could soon be held accountable: Politico Pro reports this morning on how green groups in DC are successfully suing utilities for coal ash contamination under the Clean Water Act.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 28, 2018, 08:17:22 pm »



NGO Shipbreaking Platform: 152 Ships Broken Up on South Asia’s Beaches in First Quarter of 2018

April 27, 2018 by gCaptain


Shipbreaking at Alang, India.

Of the 206 ships dismantled worldwide up in in the first quarter of 2018, a total 152 ships ended up on beaches in South Asia, according to a quarterly report from the NGO Shipbreaking Platform.

So far this year, 10 workers have lost their lives and 2 workers have been severely injured
when breaking ships in Chittagong, Bangladesh, the organization said their report. At least two workers also lost their lives due to a toxic gas leak at a shipbreaking yard in Alang, India in March, according to the report.

During the first quarter of 2018, 27 ships were also dismantled in Turkey, 7 in China, 11 in Europe and 9 in the rest of the world, the report showed.

“Ship owners continue to sell their ships to the beaching yards despite the well documented deplorable conditions. The prices offered for ships this first quarter have been high in South Asia, especially when compared to the figures of last year. Whilst a South Asian beaching yard can pay about USD 450/LDT, Turkish and Chinese yards are respectively currently paying USD 280/LDT and USD 210/LDT. This situation led to especially a significant decrease in number of vessels recycled in China, where only 7 vessels were scrapped this quarter,” the NGO Shipbreaking Platform said.

According to the NGO, South Korean and UAE ship owners sold the most ships to South Asian yards the first quarter of 2018 with 14 beached vessels each, followed by Greek and Russian owners. Shipping companies from the United States beached 5 vessels.

“South Korean Sinokor is, for now, the worst corporate dumper with seven vessels beached in South Asia in 2018. South Korean H-Line Shipping is a close runner-up, with five ships sold for dirty and dangerous scrapping on the beach. Following the ban on the import of tankers to Pakistan due to major explosions that occurred in 2016 and 2017, no tankers were sold to the Gadani yards this first quarter. However, Pakistan has re-opened to the import of tankers this week,” the organization said.

Meanwhile, only 3 ships had a European flag – Belgium, Italy and Norway – when they arrived on the beach.

“All ships sold to the beaching yards pass via the hands of scrap-dealers, also known as cash-buyers, that often re-register and re-flag the vessel on its last voyage,” the NGO Shipbreaking Platform said. “In this regard, flags of convenience, in particular those that are grey- and black-listed under the Paris MoU, are used by cash-buyers to send ships to the worst breaking locations. Almost half of the ships sold to South Asia this quarter changed flag to the grey- and black-listed registries of Comoros, Niue, Palau and St. Kitts and Nevis just weeks before hitting the beach. These flags are not typically used during the operational life of ships and offer ‘last voyage registration’ discounts. They are grey- and black-listed due to their poor implementation of international maritime law.”

According to 2017 data released by the NGO Shipbreaking Platform in February, of the 835 large ocean-going commercial ships that were sold for scrap in 2017, a total of 543 ships were intentionally run ashore and dismantled by hand at shipbreaking yards in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, where the controversial ‘beaching’ method continues to be the predominant means of disposal for end-of-life vessels.

The 543 ships represent just over 80% of the total tonnage scrapped worldwide last year, according to the organization.

http://gcaptain.com/ngo-shipbreaking-platform-152-ships-broken-up-on-south-asias-beaches-in-first-quarter-of-2018/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 23, 2018, 02:33:25 pm »

 
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click here to subscribe.

April 23, 2018



Pruitt is Wasting Your Money but the Real Scandal is How He’s Letting Polluters Sicken You  >:(

When embattled EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt appears in front of Congress next week, he’ll likely face tough questions about his illegal phone booth, his why his lobbyist/landlord resigned, his luxury travel, exorbitant pay raises and other scandals that have even the GOP expressing concern. That said, Pruitt’s made it a point to meet with tons of Koch and Mercer-funded climate denial organizations, and hardly any environmental groups, so he’s done a commendable job of shoring up support among those who value the “free market” over public well-being.

But while all the scandals over wasting taxpayer money are of course bad, wasting taxpayers’ lives is worse. And that’s what Pruitt’s “factory of bad ideas” is trying to do. Because not only is Pruitt actively rolling back public health protections, but what few new rules he is proposing are designed make things worse.

For example, one new policy is described by The Hill as “aimed specifically at helping polluters in the oil and gas industry” by letting them regulate themselves, in essence.

Another great new Pruitt idea, the Red Team attack on climate science, is also potentially back on the table, according to E&E. That’s because one of the main White House voices opposed to the effort was energy advisor Mike Catanzaro, who is being replaced by Francis Brooke,  a 28-year-old known as “the kid.” We know the Red Team exercise is just a trick meant to confuse Americans about climate science. In this case, let’s hope tricks aren’t for “the kid,” but we won’t know until Brooke takes over.

On the rollbacks, EPA air chief Bill Wehrum told an environmental law conference that the Trump administration is still pondering what to do with regulations to limit mercury emissions from coal plants. Apparently the costs are too high to keep the rule in place, because as we all know, mercury is a totally benign and not at all worrisome pollutant. After all, it’s not mercury poisoning makes you mad as a hatter, or anything.. Oh and also, mercury makes the skin of children who are exposed turn pink and peel off. But who cares about pink kids, we’ve got coal to burn!

Yet somehow, it gets worse. Because Pruitt’s pro-smoking, Lamar Smith-pushed and front-group-backed policy to disqualify broad swaths of public health studies is moving forward, the EPA sent the proposed guidance to the White House Office of Management and Budget last week for interagency review.

But it’s such a bad idea, even one of Pruitt’s own aides, former chemical lobbyist Nancy Beck, expressed concerns in emails FOIA’d by the Union of Concerned Scientists. But she 😈 wasn’t worried that it would eliminate peer-reviewed, independent science. No, her concern was quite the opposite: that it would bar the use of industry studies.

And we all know how much industry loves its studies to find its products to be a public health hazard…


Pruitt's Troubles Mount With Lobbyist Revelations & Shell Company Investigations

EPA chief Scott Pruitt held meetings with the lobbyist married to his DC landlord despite previous statements from the agency and the lobbying firm to the contrary. On Friday, The Hill reported that filings from lobbying firm Williams & Jensen revealed that the firm's principal, Kevin Hart, reached out to the EPA this year on behalf of client Smithfield Foods. Multiple outlets reported Saturday that Pruitt had taken meetings with Smithfield executives and Hart, whose wife rented Pruitt a condo on Capitol Hill on a $50-night basis, in July of 2017. Hart announced Saturday that he would step down as the chairman of Williams & Jensen, while the New York Times this weekend ran an extensive investigation into Pruitt's hidden potential conflicts of interest linking the EPA to Oklahoma, including Pruitt's use of a shell company to purchase a home from a lobbyist.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/22/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-lobbyist-condo-lease
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 20, 2018, 02:05:18 pm »



Shipping Industry Switch to LNG Bunker Fuel Not Enough to Meet Strict Carbon Regulations – Analyst

April 17, 2018 by Reuters


http://gcaptain.com/shipping-industry-switch-to-lng-bunker-fuel-not-enough-to-meet-strict-carbon-regulations-analyst/



Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 14, 2018, 05:05:37 pm »



Reactions to the IMO’s Initial Strategy to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships


April 13, 2018 by gCaptai

SNIPPET:
Quote

“In truth, there is widespread understanding that in the long-term the industry needs to be powered by carbon-free fuel, and that will almost certainly mean a mix of battery, hydrogen and other zero-carbon fuels.

Full article:

http://gcaptain.com/reactions-to-the-imos-initial-strategy-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-ships/

Aglbert NOTE It's a start but this action was sine qua non three decades ago!   What is needed now is a crash program to completely eliminate fossil fuel powered shipping. These incremental, glacially slow, measures to reduce polluting emissions will not stop, or even slow, the dangers to shipping, never mind the rest of the increasingly trashed biosphere, from Catastrophic Climate Change. Apparently they think they have the rest of this CENTURY to stop using fossil fuels to power ships.   That is magical thinking. Shipping will be severly affected within less than a decade. By the end of the century it will be almost impossible to navigate the routinely stormy oceans full of giant waves (read the linked article below for details). So it goes.





Here is the IMO’s Full Briefing on Its Strategy to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships

April 13, 2018 by gCaptain

The IMO today adopted what some are calling a historic agreement on a climate change strategy by significantly reducing CO2 emissions from ships. You can some of the reactions to the agreement here. Below is the IMO’s full Press Briefing on the agreement.

(International Maritime Organizations) – Nations meeting at the United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO) in London have adopted an initial strategy on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships, setting out a vision to reduce GHG emissions from international shipping and phase them out, as soon as possible in this century.

The vision confirms IMO’s commitment to reducing GHG emissions from international shipping and, as a matter of urgency, to phasing them out as soon as possible.



More specifically, under the identified “levels of ambition”, the initial strategy envisages for the first time a reduction in total GHG emissions from international shipping which, it says, should peak as soon as possible and to reduce the total annual GHG emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008, while, at the same time, pursuing efforts towards phasing them out entirely.

The strategy includes a specific reference to “a pathway of CO2 emissions reduction consistent with the Paris Agreement temperature goals”.

The initial strategy was adopted by IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), during its 72nd session at IMO Headquarters in London, United Kingdom. The meeting was attended by more than 100 IMO Member States.

The initial strategy represents a framework for Member States, setting out the future vision for international shipping, the levels of ambition to reduce GHG emissions and guiding principles; and includes candidate short-, mid- and long-term further measures with possible timelines and their impacts on States. The strategy also identifies barriers and supportive measures including capacity building, technical cooperation and research and development (R&D).

IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim said the adoption of the strategy was another successful illustration of the renowned IMO spirit of cooperation and would allow future IMO work on climate change to be rooted in a solid basis.

He told delegates, “I encourage you to continue your work through the newly adopted Initial GHG Strategy which is designed as a platform for future actions. I am confident in relying on your ability to relentlessly continue your efforts and develop further actions that will soon contribute to reducing GHG emissions from ships.”

According to the “Roadmap” approved by IMO Member States in 2016, the initial strategy is due to be revised by 2023.  ::)

Continuing the momentum of work on this issue, the Committee agreed to hold the fourth Intersessional meeting of the Working Group on Reduction of GHG emissions from ships later in the year. This working group will be tasked with developing a programme of follow-up actions to the Initial Strategy; further considering how to progress reduction of GHG emissions from ships in order to advise the committee; and reporting to the next session of the MEPC (MEPC 73), which meets 22-26 October 2018.

IMO has already adopted global mandatory measures to address the reduction in GHG emissions from ships. IMO is also executing global technical cooperation projects to support the capacity of States, particularly developing States to implement and support energy efficiency in the shipping sector.

****

Initial IMO strategy on the reduction of GHG emissions from ships

The initial strategy includes the following:

Vision:   


IMO remains committed to reducing GHG emissions from international shipping and, as a matter of urgency, aims to phase them out as soon as possible in this century.

Levels of ambition

The Initial Strategy identifies levels of ambition for the international shipping sector noting that technological innovation and the global introduction of alternative fuels and/or energy sources for international shipping will be integral to achieve the overall ambition. Reviews should take into account updated emission estimates, emissions reduction options for international shipping, and the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC ). Levels of ambition directing the Initial Strategy are as follows:

.1 carbon intensity of the ship to decline through implementation of further phases of the energy efficiency design index (EEDI) for new ships to review with the aim to strengthen the energy efficiency design requirements for ships with the percentage improvement for each phase to be determined for each ship type, as appropriate;

.2 carbon intensity of international shipping to decline to reduce CO2 emissions per transport work, as an average across international shipping, by at least 40% by 2030, pursuing efforts towards 70% by 2050, compared to 2008; and

.3 GHG emissions from international shipping to peak and decline to peak GHG emissions from international shipping as soon as possible and to reduce the total annual GHG emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008 whilst pursuing efforts towards phasing them out as called for in the Vision as a point on a pathway of CO2 emissions reduction consistent with the Paris Agreement temperature goals.

****
Note: The Paris Agreement on climate change was agreed in 2015 by Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and entered into force in 2016. The Paris Agreement central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The Paris Agreement does not include international shipping, but IMO, as the regulatory body for the industry, is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping.

______
Background on IMO’s contribution to the global efforts to address climate change

IMO’s contribution to the global efforts to address climate change features prominently in IMO’s Strategic Plan. 

In 2011, IMO became the first international body to adopt mandatory energy-efficiency measures for an entire industry sector with a suite of technical and operational requirements for new and existing vessels that entered into force in 2013. By 2025 new ships built will be 30% more energy efficient than those built in 2014.

The mandatory data collection system for fuel oil consumption of ships, which entered into force in March 2018, will provide robust data and information on which future decisions on additional measures, over and above those already adopted, can be made.

The mandatory data collection system is intended to be the first in a three-step approach in which analysis of the data collected will provide the basis for an objective, transparent and inclusive policy debate in the MEPC, under a roadmap (through to 2023) for developing a “Comprehensive IMO strategy on reduction of GHG emissions from ships”. The roadmap was agreed in 2016.

Support for implementation of IMO’s energy-efficiency measures is provided, in particular, through two major global projects executed by IMO:

• The Global Maritime Energy Efficiency Partnerships Project (GloMEEP Project) is aimed at supporting the uptake and implementation of energy efficiency measures for shipping, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions from shipping. The GloMEEP project was launched in 2015 in collaboration with the Global Environment Facility and the United Nations Development Programme. A “Global Industry Alliance to Support Low Carbon Shipping” (or GIA), launched in 2017 under the auspices of the GloMEEP Project, is identifying and developing solutions that can support overcoming barriers to the uptake of energy efficiency technologies and operational measures in the shipping sector. Website: http://glomeep.imo.org/

• The global maritime technology network (GMN) project, funded by the European Union, has established a network of five Maritime Technology Cooperation Centres (MTCCs) in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America and the Pacific. Through collaboration and outreach activities at regional level, the MTCCs will focus their efforts during 2018 and beyond to help countries develop national maritime energy-efficiency policies and measures, promote the uptake of low-carbon technologies and operations in maritime transport and establish voluntary pilot data-collection and reporting systems. Website: http://gmn.imo.org/

___________

 
IMO – the International Maritime Organization – is the United Nations specialized agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine pollution by ships.

Web site: www.imo.org

http://gcaptain.com/here-is-the-imos-full-briefing-on-its-strategy-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-ships/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 13, 2018, 05:58:16 pm »


Agelbert NOTE: The destruction of the arctic biome continues. The article describes the melting of the ice as an "opportunity for the shipping industry to expand", as if there isn't a brutal extinction cost 🚩 thousands of species will be forced to pay because of this profit over planet expansion. The effect of increased shipping in the arctic will be 💣 the accelerated degradation of the global biosphere. 😨🔫 So it goes.



Researchers Map Seven Years of Arctic Shipping

April 12, 2018 by gCaptain

By knyazev vasily / Shutterstock

The Arctic’s declining sea ice has meant more opportunities for the shipping industry to expand its use of the region that in decades past was unnavigable for the vast majority of the year.

The Northwest Passage through Canada and the Northern Sea Route, or Northeast Passage, north of Russia and Siberia, are both valued because they could significantly shorten ship transit times between Asia, Europe, and North America.

In August 2017, a newly designed LNG carrier with an ice-hardened hull became the first merchant ship to sail across the Arctic Ocean without the aid of an icebreaker. The vessel, the Christophe de Margerie, made the voyage in just 19 days, nearly a week faster than the traditional route through the Suez Canal.

In February, a similar tanker, the Eduard Atoll, completed its own unescorted trip through the region in the dead of winter, marking another historic first. During that voyage, the vessel sailed South Korea to Sabetta terminal in northern Russia, where it loaded LNG produced at a new $27 billion plant and transported it to France.

To illustrate this increase in ship activity in the Arctic, a team of scientists has banded together to analyze and map more than 120 million data points in order to track where ships are most using the region.

To make the map, the team, led by Paul Arthur Berkman, director of the science diplomacy center at Tufts University, and Greg Fiske, a geospatial analyst at the Woods Hole Research Center, used data compiled by SpaceQuest, a company designs microsatellites that can monitor the track Automatic Identification System (AIS) signals from ships.

Once the data was plotted, there were some interesting observations to be made.

This map shows unique ship visits to Arctic waters between September 1, 2009, and December 31, 2016. Credit: NASA Earth Observatory

Looking at the data, Berkman, Fiske, and their colleagues found that the mean center of shipping activity moved 300 kilometers north and eastcloser to the North Pole—over the 7-year span.

Notably, they were particularly surprised to find more small ships, such as fishing boats, wading farther into Arctic waters. The team also plotted the AIS ship tracks against sea ice data from NSIDC and found that ships are encountering ice more often and doing so farther north each year.

Despite the seemingly growing opportunities for shipping, the increasing number of ships in the region has given rise to serious concerns about pollution, oil spills, and disturbances to marine life, among other possible impacts.

Berkman is the coordinator and lead investigator of Pan-Arctic Options, which provides objective information that can guide the placement of infrastructure and the management of activities such as search and rescue and pollution response.

Now whether or not open Arctic waters will be long-term boon for shipping remains to be seen, but scientists agree that the melting trend does not bode well for the Arctic environment as we have known it.

“Arctic sea ice cover continues to be in a decreasing trend, and this is connected to the ongoing warming of the Arctic,” said Claire Parkinson, a climate scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “It’s a two-way street: the warming means less ice is going to form, and more ice is going to melt. But also, because there is less ice, less of the Sun’s radiation is reflected off of Earth, and this contributes to the warming.”

http://gcaptain.com/researchers-map-seven-years-of-arctic-shipping/


Profit over planet greed guarantees that humans will follow shortly after the polar bears into extinction.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 13, 2018, 05:18:41 pm »



Nasty Oil Spill Closes Mississippi River Near New Orleans After Cargo Ship Hits Pier 🤬

April 12, 2018 by Mike Schuler

MV Pac Antares. File Photo: MarineTraffic.com / Patrick Lawson

The U.S. Coast Guard and local agencies are responding to reports of an oil spill after a cargo ship struck a pier near mile marker 100 on the lower Mississippi River near New Orleans on Thursday.

The Coast Guard Sector New Orleans received a report at 10:30 a.m. that the Singapore-flagged ship Pac Antares had collided with a pier and was reportedly leaking diesel fuel into the river.

The spill was later estimated to be about 4,200 gallons of fuel oil.

The vessel is currently moored at Nashville Avenue Wharf and the leak has been plugged, the Coast Guard reported.

The Mississippi River is closed to vessel movement from mile marker 91 to mile marker 101.

Photos and video posted online showed globs of thick, black oil in the river in New Orleans’ downtown French District.  🏴‍

Photos:

Photo: Rex_da_Cajun via Twitter

Photo: Rex_da_Cajun via Twitter

No injuries have been reported and the cause of the incident is still under investigation.

The 27,659 dwt Pac Antares was built in 2003 and has a length of 178 meters.

AIS ship tracking data showed the vessel arrived in New Orleans on Thursday after sailing from Houston.

“First responders continue to work to minimize the environmental impacts and protect the public so the river can be opened to commercial traffic as soon as possible,” said Capt. Wayne Arguin, commander, Sector New Orleans.

http://gcaptain.com/nasty-oil-spill-closes-mississippi-river-near-new-orleans-after-cargo-ship-hits-pier/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 11, 2018, 08:47:00 pm »



April 11, 2018

Amid Scandals, Pruitt 😈 Puts the Brakes on Auto Regulation

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's spending habits and association with energy lobbyists are under scrutiny, but the bigger scandal is the rollback of more than 20 environmental protections, including Obama-era clean-car regulations. We speak to retired autoworker Frank Hammer, UC Berkeley's Climate Program Director Ethan Elkind, and Greenpeace USA's Natalie Nava



http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=21547

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 08, 2018, 01:39:34 pm »

EcoWatch

By Olivia Rosane

Apr. 05, 2018 12:22PM EST

Proposed Rule Change Would Be 'Death Sentence' for Nearly 300 Species 🤬, Activists Warn

In all the media attention gobbled by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head Scott Pruitt 🦖, it's important to remember that Trump's appointed Department of Interior (DOI) leader Ryan Zinke is also extremely dangerous for the environment.


Before being chosen to head the DOI, Zinke 🦀 was a Montana representative with a three percent environmental voting record who was especially hostile to the Endangered Species Act: He spearheaded efforts to remove protections for wolves, sage grouse and lynx, among other actions, according to Center for Biological Diversity executive director Kierán Suckling. 

Under his leadership, the DOI is continuing that hostile legacy. On Monday, the department sent a proposal to the White House that would remove essential protections for almost 300 threatened species, The Center for Biological Diversity reported Wednesday.

The proposal would reverse a rule made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in 1975 which grants threatened species the same protections under the Endangered Species Act as listed endangered species, unless the FWS determines those protections are unnecessary on a case-by-case basis.

"The Trump administration just issued a death sentence to nearly 300 threatened species," Center for Biological Diversity Endangered Species director Noah Greenwald said in a release.

The species left vulnerable by the rule change would include southern sea otters, northern spotted owls, piping plovers, red knots, Yosemite toads, delta smelt, Santa Catalina Island foxes, gopher tortoises and manatees, according to the Center for Biological Diversity and CNN.

FWS spokesman Gavin Shire told CNN that the Center for Biological Diversity's characterization of the proposal was not accurate and that it would not overturn blanket protections, but he also refused to explain exactly what the rule change would do or to provide CNN with a copy. He said it was a "draft" and that discussing it in detail would be "premature."

Greenwald told CNN that an overhaul of protections would benefit agribusiness interests and oil companies that would no longer have to worry about protecting the threatened species' habitats.

"If these critical protections for threatened species are eliminated, Trump will go down in history as the extinction president," said Greenwald in the Center for Biological Diversity release.

The proposal was filed within days of a American-Statesman report that Susan Combs, who resisted federal Endangered Species Act restrictions as Texas comptroller, would be named acting assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks, which oversees FWS. In Texas, Combs protested the listing of the dune sagebrush lizard, whose habitat coincides with Texas oil fields, and the federal government eventually heeded her request.

Combs' appointment is temporary while she awaits Senate confirmation for another DOI role as assistant secretary for policy, management and budget.

https://www.ecowatch.com/endangered-species-ryan-zinke-2556479220.html

Agelbert NOTE: One thing is for sure, the Trump 🦀 wrecking crew is destructively consistent (see below).  >:(

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 07, 2018, 07:16:46 pm »

EcoWatch

By Mongabay

Apr. 06, 2018 09:47AM EST

Oil Spill Now Larger Than Paris Ravages Indonesian Island, 5 Dead

By Basten Gokkon

SNIPPET:

An oil spill in Borneo that began over the past weekend has now spread across an area greater than the city of Paris and is heading out to the open ocean, the Indonesian government said.

The spill, first reported on March 31, stems from a pipeline operated by state-owned oil firm Pertamina in the city of Balikpapan, in East Kalimantan province. A report released April 4 by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry said the slick was spreading out from Balikpapan Bay and into the Strait of Makassar, covering some 130 square kilometers (50 square miles).

Pertamina 🦖, which for days had denied responsibility for the disaster, finally admitted on April 4 that one of its pipes used for transporting crude oil was the source of the slick.

Read more:

https://www.ecowatch.com/oil-pipeline-spill-indonesia-death-2556835512.html

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 06, 2018, 05:23:13 pm »



Photo: By Mr Nai / Shutterstock

Global Shipping Is Part of the Climate Problem, Too: Editorial

April 5, 2018 by Bloomberg

By James Gibney and Clive Crook (Bloomberg View)

SNIPPET 1:

Already, international shipping accounts for about as much carbon dioxide each year as Germany’s whole economy. On current trends, its share of the total will rise quickly. It could account for roughly 15 percent of the global carbon budget set by the Paris accord for 2050.

SNIPPET 2:

The main thing next week is to acknowledge that confronting climate change is too urgent a goal for any sector of the global economy to be given a pass.


Full article:
http://gcaptain.com/global-shipping-part-climate-problem-editorial/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 05, 2018, 06:08:54 pm »

Power Sector Carbon Index Highlights Falling Levels Of Carbon Pollution

April 5th, 2018 by Steve Hanley

SNIPPET:

In 2005, each megawatt hour of electricity was responsible for 1,321 pounds of carbon dioxide. Today, the number is down to 967 pounds per megawatt hour, a reduction of more than 25%. The Power Sector Carbon Index is a joint creation of Carnegie Mellon University and Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems (MHPS). Begun a year ago, it has recently been updated to permit regional analysis of the US market allowing for greater insight into the impact of regional trends on fuel types, usage, and emissions.

According to a recent press release, “[T]he index will begin to incorporate emissions data from other countries across North and South America. As the Index continues to expand, it will serve as a source of objective insight regarding emissions trends across the Americas for policy makers, regulators, utilities, industry analysts and the public.”

Full article:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/05/power-sector-carbon-index-highlights-falling-levels-of-carbon-pollution/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 26, 2018, 06:42:56 pm »

EcoWatch

Biodiversity hot spots of 80% of biosphere's species endangered by Global Warming Pollution


Biggest Biodiversity Study in a Decade Finds Current Biodiversity Loss Dangerous for Human Well-Being

By Olivia Rosane

March 26, 2018

According to a new report, more than 50 percent of African mammal and bird species could be extinct due to climate change by 2100.
Full article:


https://www.ecowatch.com/biodiversity-human-well-being-2553170130.html

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 26, 2018, 05:17:59 pm »

Global Ocean Phytoplankton in Severe Decline 😓
4,595 views


Paul Beckwith

Published on Feb 9, 2016

Phytoplankton are about half the global biomass, and they are the base of the ocean food chain, and produce the oxygen in every other breath you take.

In 2010 a landmark paper reported that from 1950 to 2010 the global oceans suffered a severe drop in phytoplankton of almost 1% per year (40% drop). What has happened since then; find out in this video. My only support for my work is you, so please consider a donation at paulbeckwith.net



Agreed.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 25, 2018, 10:43:47 pm »

Here’s where you’re most likely to die ☠️ from air pollution



SNIPPET:

In good news, areas painted in blue show where humanity has managed to lower its output of choking smog since the 1850s. These safer havens include spots in the middle of South America and the Southeastern United States, where the amount of agricultural burning has decreased since the mid-19th century.

This representation of our befouled atmosphere is based on the work of Jason West, an earth scientist at the University of North Carolina who’s investigating the health effects of bad air. According to computer models that West and his team constructed, an incredible 2.1 million deaths a year can be attributed to one type of pollution alone — fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, which are teensy specks that fly out of car-exhaust pipes, industrial smokestacks, and other things. (They’re also what the NASA map is referencing.)

Full article:

http://grist.org/climate-energy/heres-where-youre-most-likely-to-die-from-air-pollution[/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 25, 2018, 08:34:12 pm »

Global Ocean Phytoplankton in Severe Decline 😓
4,595 views


Paul Beckwith

Published on Feb 9, 2016

Phytoplankton are about half the global biomass, and they are the base of the ocean food chain, and produce the oxygen in every other breath you take.

In 2010 a landmark paper reported that from 1950 to 2010 the global oceans suffered a severe drop in phytoplankton of almost 1% per year (40% drop). What has happened since then; find out in this video. My only support for my work is you, so please consider a donation at paulbeckwith.net
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 25, 2018, 06:53:07 pm »

EcoWatch

🚩 Great Pacific Garbage Patch Is Now Twice the Size of Texas :(

By Lorraine Chow

Mar. 22, 2018 01:46PM EST

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch (GPGP) floating off the coast of California now measures 1.6 million square kilometers (about 1 million square miles), according to a startling new study. To put that into perspective, the clump of trash is about the size of three Frances, or twice the size of Texas.

Not only that, the analysis, published Thursday in the journal Scientific Reports, also revealed that the massive Pacific trash vortex contains up to 16 times more plastic than previous estimates—and could rapidly get worse.

The researchers estimated there are about 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic weighing 80,000 metric tons, the equivalent of 500 Jumbo Jets, are currently afloat in the area. That's largest accumulation zone for ocean plastics on Earth.


The Great Pacific Garbage Patch contains up to 16 times more plastic than previously estimated.

The Ocean Cleanup

The study is the result of a three-year mapping effort conducted by an international team of scientists affiliated with Dutch non-profit The Ocean Cleanup Foundation, six universities and an aerial sensor company.

According to a press release provided to EcoWatch, to analyze the full extent of the GPGP, the team conducted a comprehensive sampling effort by crossing the debris field with 30 vessels simultaneously, supplemented by two aircraft surveys. The fleet collected a total of 1.2 million plastic samples, while the aerial sensors scanned more than 300 square kilometers of ocean surface.


About 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic weighing 80,000 metric tons are currently afloat in the area.

The Ocean Cleanup

The results showed that 92 percent of the mass was represented by larger objects—such as discarded fishing nets several meters in size—and 8 percent consisted of microplastics smaller than 5 millimeters in size.

"We were surprised by the amount of large plastic objects we encountered," said Dr. Julia Reisser, chief scientist of the expeditions in a statement. "We used to think most of the debris consists of small fragments, but this new analysis shines a new light on the scope of the debris."

The team found that plastic pollution levels within the garbage patch have grown exponentially since measurements began in the 1970s.

"This plastic accumulation rate inside the GPGP, which was greater than in the surrounding waters, indicates that the inflow of plastic into the patch continues to exceed the outflow," said Laurent Lebreton, lead author of the study.

The Ocean Cleanup team is preparing to launch its highly anticipated cleanup system in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch this summer with the goal of collecting 50 percent of the trash in five years.

"To be able to solve a problem, we believe it is essential to first understand it," said Boyan Slat, founder of The Ocean Cleanup and co-author of the study. "These results provide us with key data to develop and test our cleanup technology, but it also underlines the urgency of dealing with the plastic pollution problem. Since the results indicate that the amount of hazardous microplastics is set to increase more than tenfold if left to fragment, the time to start is now."

Slat, who shot to fame five years ago with claims that his invention could clean up the seas, explains the methodology and results of the new study in the video below:


https://www.ecowatch.com/great-pacific-garbage-patch-texas-2551330463.html
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 23, 2018, 09:20:00 pm »


Oil Explorers 🦖 Push U.S. Drilling to Pace Last Seen in 2015 

By Baily Shutz

March 23, 2018, 1:03 PM EDT Updated on March 23, 2018, 1:37 PM EDT

SNIPPET:

Rig count in U.S. fields rises for eighth time in nine weeks

U.S. oil benchmark approaching 2018 high above $66 a barrel

Crude explorers boosted drilling activity in U.S. oil fields to levels not seen in three years amid rising confidence that worldwide demand will keep energy prices elevated.

Full article: 
https://www.bloomberg.com//news/articles/2018-03-23/oil-explorers-expand-u-s-work-for-eighth-time-in-nine-weeks

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 22, 2018, 03:04:26 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: The following is still more evidence that the world economy is in a BOOST phase, with no evidence of a "collapse" from "peak oil".

We are in deep environmental trouble. But, it is Catastrophic Climate Change trouble, not "peak oil causing a collapse" trouble. The continued world increase in energy demand makes a mockery of all the IPCC RCP scenarios, including the alleged "Business as Usual" RCP-8.5. "BUSINESS" as the NEW HIGHER WORLD ENERGY DEMAND "USUAL" 😨🔫 is now WORSE than the IPCC's overly conservative "Business as Usual" (see video after article).

Also, when you read the article, please keep in mind that the International Energy Agency (IEA) is infamous for happy talk about fossil fuel "resources" 😇. They are the last place you will find anything but overly conservative figures about biosphere harming/species killing emissions spewed 24/7 by the increased use of fossil fuels for energy. IOW, the IEA figure of 32.5 gigatonnes of Carbon Emissions is probably LESS (MUCH less!  >:() than what is actually being dumped on our biosphere, thereby accelerating us towards Catastrophic Climate Change Doom. 🤬


Global Energy Demand & Carbon Emissions Increase In 2017  >:(

March 22nd, 2018 by Joshua S Hill

Global energy demand increased by 2.1% in 2017 at more than twice the previous year’s rate at the same time that carbon emissions increased for the first time since 2014, jumping by 1.4%.

These are the two key messages from the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) newest resource, the Global Energy and CO2 Status Report, 2017, which was published on Thursday, providing what the IEA describes as “an up-to-date snapshot of recent trends and developments across all fuels.”

Cape Town South Africa Electricity“The robust global economy pushed up energy demand last year, which was mostly met by fossil fuels, while renewables made impressive strides,” explained Dr Fatih Birol, the IEA’s Executive Director. “The significant growth in global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in 2017 tells us that current efforts to combat climate change are far from sufficient. For example, there has been a dramatic slowdown in the rate of improvement in global energy efficiency as policymakers have put less focus in this area.”

According to the IEA, energy demand rose by 2.1% in 2017 thanks in large part to strong global economic growth. As Birol suggested, fossil fuels met most of the increase in demand for energy — accounting for 81% of total energy demand in 2017 — but the IEA did note that renewables were “seeing impressive gains.” Oil demand increased by 1.6% in 2017, more than twice the average annual rate seen over the past decade, and driven primarily by the transport sector and rising petrochemical demand. Natural gas consumption increased by 3%, the most of all the fossil fuels, with China accounting for nearly a third of this growth, and the buildings and industry sectors contributing 80% to the increase in global demand. Coal demand only increased by 1%, but this still nevertheless reversed the declines seen over the last two years.

Renewable electricity generation increased by 6.3%, the most of any fuel , and met a quarter of world energy demand growth, thanks to massive expansions to wind, solar, and hydropower. 


Average annual growth in energy demand by fuel

Emissions for 2017 increased for the first time since 2014, growing by 1.4% and an increase of 460 million tonnes (Mt), reaching an unfortunately historic high level of 32.5 gigatonnes. This followed three years of flat emissions and is a worrying sign in a world where emissions are needed to decline if we are to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.

According to the IEA, 2017’s increase in emissions was the equivalent of adding 170 million cars to the roads and was the result of “robust global economic growth of 3.7%, lower fossil-fuel prices, and weaker energy efficiency efforts” all of which also led to the aforementioned increase in energy demand.

Global energy-related CO2 emissions, 2000-2017

Thankfully, though there was an overall emissions increase, that does not mean there were not more regional emissions declines. While many major economies saw their emissions increase, there were declines in the United States, the UK, Mexico, and Japan. Surprisingly — if we consider the state of the world and the country — the United States actually posted the largest emissions decrease of 0.5%, or 25 Mt, down to 4,810 Mt.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/03/22/global-energy-demand-carbon-emissions-increase-2017/

Screenshot of RCP scenarios from Video below:

IPCC RCP 8.5 business as usual scenario is too conservative. ALL the climate models low ball global warming

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 21, 2018, 07:30:01 pm »

Are GBRMPA and David Attenborough and Palloy paid by FF industry?  Before you call them liars, you should PROVE the payments happen.  Why would they pay me, who has spent a lifetime attacking them?

It is pretty ludicrous to make the case you are a paid shill for the energy industry, just as it would be quite ludicrous to make the case I am a paid shill for Vlad the Impaler.   The only likely paid shill to grace these pages was MKing.  Everybody else simply has their own ideological POV.  These ideologies often come into conflict of course, which is why we have such lively arguments on the Diner!   
RE

RE, Palloy is using a fallacious debating technque called an apppeal to authority. He is trying to equate his position with that of respected individuals. That is simply more obfuscation. I answered him in my comment.

The bottom line here is NOT who gets paid to do what.

The bottom line here, which is the subject of this thread, is that: NO CLIMATE CHANGE, NO COTS (Crown-of-thorns starfish Acanthaster planci)  PROBLEM!

I am 100% CERTAIN that David Attenborough would agree.

Fallacious debating techniques are spurious and distracting bullshit.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 21, 2018, 07:29:11 pm »

The article clearly states that both climate change and CoT outbreaks are significant factors, and I agree, but you decide that CoT outbreaks are LIES and Climate Change is TRUTH because that fits your PoV.

Are GBRMPA and David Attenborough and Palloy paid by FF industry?  Before you call them liars, you should PROVE the payments happen.  Why would they pay me, who has spent a lifetime attacking them?

YOU are the one who has NEVER presented ANY "proof" that "you have spent a lifetime atttacking them". And you know what, that isn't the issue here.

The issue here is your CONSTANT attempts to resist the IRREFUTABLE causal link between Climate Change and the vast majority of biosophere degradation going on today.

The issue is NOT whether you have a solar panel on your roof and live frugally. If you do, then good for you and the planet. The issue is as stated above.

NOBODY is paying me to advocate for Renewable Energy. Nevertheless, there is no way I could prove I'm a not a "shill" for Renewable Energy.

All I have is facts and logic. YOU cherry pick and distort facts so much it is breathtaking.

The greatest threat to mankind is Climate Change, PERIOD. YOU REFUSE to say that! YOU have ZERO VALID REASON for denying that Climate Change is the greatest threat to our species.

Competing threats like asteroids and solar coronal discharges and nuclear war are ALL statistically less important. YOU KNOW THAT!

When you get of your God Damned High Horse and admit the REALITY of Climate Change being the GREATEST THREAT to mankind, then we can talk.

But until then, the FACT that you REFUSE TO ADMIT THAT means that YOU are defending the Fossil Fuel Profit over people and planet polluting status quo, whether ANYBODY IS PAYNG YOU TO DO THAT OR NOT!

NO CLIMATE CHANGE EQUALS NO COTS PROBLEM! WE MUST RETURN TO 350 PPM of CO2 or we are ALL DEAD! YOU REFUSE TO ADMIT THAT!

NINETY SEVEN PERCENT OF THE CLIMATE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY DISAGREES WITH YOU!

Have a nice day. 


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 21, 2018, 06:29:37 pm »

The Link Between Crown-of-thorns Starfish Reef Damage and Climate Change

Agelbert NOTE: The following well referenced article contains a statement that defenders of the polluting fossil fuel burning status quohave deliberately cherry picked a portion of in order to distort the intent of said statement. Why do these clever fossil fueler propagantists  play these mendacious word games? I'm glad you asked ;D. They engage in this type of MISLEADING baloney so that the MAIN cause of worldwide reef degradation in general, and the Great Barrier Reef off Australia in particular, appears conveniently 😇😈 to be the Crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS). Totally left out of the discussion, of course, is the contribution of fossil fuel based fertilizer land runoff to phytoplankton blooms which, in turn, favor a COTS population increase.

This positions fossil fuel pollution DIRECTLY causing massive coral bleaching death from increased water temperatures, AND other direct climate change stressors like increased acidity, conveniently in the "less of a problem" category. This is bullshit, of course. However, the fossil fuel propagandists never tire of spewing misleading information. They must continue to obfuscate the overwhelming importance of climate change in the degradation of our biosphere in order to defend the Fossil Fuel Crooks and Liars🦖 they work for. The truth would bankrupt the polluters. So, they 😈 LIE 24/7 on behalf of profit over people and planet. 😠

This is the statement:

Quote
However, anthropogenic and other stresses combined with more frequent COTS outbreaks can result in significant damage to reefs, and COTS are now considered a main source of coral mortality on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia.

This is the part a certain bullshitter that curses this forum cherry picked out of the above scientifically accurate statement:


Quote
... more frequent COTS outbreaks can result in significant damage to reefs, and COTS are now considered a main source of coral mortality on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia.

Do you see how this works? I certainly do. 🕵️

Enjoy the following article and please pass it on to your friends.  The next time some Fossil Fuel defending LIAR tries to tell you, "COTS feeding habits is a bigger problem than Climate Change" , kindly remind them that COTS wouldn't be able get out of hand, so to speak, if they weren't being fed all those fossil fuel based fertilizers from land runoff (that cause phytoplankton blooms the COTS pig out on) AND the reefs COTS also feed on were not stressed by CLIMATE CHANGE. Or, just tell them to push their lies somewhere else. 

MONEY QUOTES from the article:

Quote
Crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) (Acanthaster planci) naturally occur on coral reefs.  They are corallivores (i.e., they eat coral polyps).

Quote
Healthy reefs can recover from COTS outbreaks within 10 to 20 years, but degraded reefs facing a variety of stressors and climate change are less resilient and may not recover between outbreaks.


Crown-of-thorns starfish. Photo © Stacy Jupiter/Marine Photobank

Reefs and Resilience
Crown of Thorns Starfish


Crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) (Acanthaster planci) naturally occur on coral reefs. They are corallivores (i.e., they eat coral polyps). Covered in long poisonous spines, they range in color from purplish blue to reddish-gray to green. They are generally 25-35 cm in diameter, although they can be as large as 80 cm.

Crown-of-thorns starfish are found throughout the Indo-Pacific region, occurring from the Red Sea and coast of East Africa, across the Pacific and Indian Oceans, to the west coast of Central America. Predators of COTS include the giant triton snail, the stars and stripes pufferfish (Arothron hispidus), the titan triggerfish (Balistoides viridescens), and the humphead maori wrasse (Cheilinus undulates).

Crown-of-thorns starfish prey on nearly all corals, and their feeding preferences and behavior patterns vary with population density, water motion, and species composition. ref COTS typically prefer to feed on branching and table corals (e.g., Acropora), which are the same genera that are most vulnerable to bleaching. However, when branching coral cover is low due to overabundance of COTS or environmental conditions, COTS may eat other corals such as Porites or foliose corals (e.g. Montipora). In addition to hard corals, COTS may also eat sponges, soft corals, algae, and encrusting organisms.

COTS Outbreaks

Top: COTS on table Acropora. Old dead coral to right (gray), moving into algal covered (greenish-brown), to white newly dead coral. Bottom: COTS with white feeding scar on coral. Photos © The Nature Conservancy

Although COTS occur naturally in low numbers on coral reefs, they sometimes appear in high densities called “outbreaks”. The natural density of COTS is 6-20 km2 which is less than 1 per hectare. ref An outbreak is usually defined as 30 or more adult starfish per hectare on reefs, ref or when they reach densities such that the starfish are consuming coral tissue faster than the corals can grow. ref  COTS can consume live coral at a rate of 5-13 m2 per year. ref

Through occasional outbreaks, COTS can play a valuable role in reef ecosystems by helping to maintain coral species diversity. In some cases, the frequency of outbreaks and associated coral mortality is about the same as coral growth and recovery rates. ref COTS may help create space for slow-growing massive corals because COTS prefer to eat the faster-growing corals. However, anthropogenic and other stresses combined with more frequent COTS outbreaks can result in significant damage to reefs, and COTS are now considered a main source of coral mortality on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. ref Healthy reefs can recover from COTS outbreaks within 10 to 20 years, but degraded reefs facing a variety of stressors and climate change are less resilient and may not recover between outbreaks. ref

COTS outbreaks appear to be increasing in frequency over the last several decades, and they have caused widespread damage to coral reefs in the Indo-Pacific.ref  Dense aggregations of COTS can strip a reef of 90% of living coral tissue. ref In the 1970s on the northern Great Barrier Reef, a COTS outbreak occurred that lasted eight years. This outbreak peaked with about 1000 starfish per hectare, leaving 150 reefs devoid of coral, and 500 reefs damaged. ref  In the Togian Islands in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, over 80% of coral on a reef was destroyed by a COTS outbreak. ref Damage from COTS can indirectly affect fish populations that depend on coral reefs for habitat. On the Great Barrier Reef, two species of butterfly fish that eat coral and two species of plankton feeding fish dramatically declined following outbreaks of COTS. ref

What Causes COTS Outbreaks?

Scientists are not sure what causes outbreaks of COTS, but one of the most widely accepted hypothesis is that COTS outbreaks are predominantly controlled by phytoplankton availability.ref Nutrient enrichment from agricultural land runoff may lead to COTS outbreaks because elevated nutrient levels cause phytoplankton blooms which provide a necessary food source for COTS larvae. ref For example, in the Great Barrier Reef, doubled concentrations of large phytoplankton were linked to nearly a 10-fold increase in larval development, growth and survival of COTS. Other scientists believe that COTS outbreaks are linked to the timing of El Niño events ref or are driven by removal of COTS predators. ref

Control of COTS

A diver collects crown-of-thorns starfish as part of a Project AWARE underwater cleanup event held at Tenggol Island, Malaysia. Photo © 2010 Mohd Halimi Abdullah/Marine Photobank

Programs have been developed to control COTS. Methods for COTS control include taking starfish ashore and burying them, injecting them with compressed air, baking them in the sun, injecting them with toxic chemicals (e.g., formalin, ammonia, copper sulphate), and building underwater fences to control COTS movement. The recommended method on the Great Barrier Reef is to inject bile salts into the starfish which kills the starfish but does not harm the surrounding reef ecosystem. ref Mechanical methods for controlling COTS are expensive and labor intensive, thus may only be justified in small reefs that have high socioeconomic or biological significance, such as important spawning sites, tourist attractions, or areas with extremely high biodiversity. ref

Resources

Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS): Crown-of-Thorns Research

The AIMS Long Term Monitoring Program Surveys

Crown-of-Thorns Starfish on the Great Barrier Reef (pdf, 356k)

Case Study on Community-Based COTS Management in the Philippines (pdf, 2.8 )


http://www.reefresilience.org/coral-reefs/stressors/predator-outbreaks/crown-of-thorns-starfish/

+-Recent Topics

War Provocations and Peace Actions by AGelbert
Today at 05:38:09 pm

Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi by AGelbert
Today at 05:03:59 pm

Money by AGelbert
Today at 04:51:25 pm

Mechanisms of Prejudice: Hidden and Not Hidden by AGelbert
May 21, 2018, 07:31:22 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
May 21, 2018, 06:34:48 pm

Non-routine News by AGelbert
May 21, 2018, 02:53:40 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
May 20, 2018, 10:02:03 pm

End Times according to the Judeo Christian Bible by AGelbert
May 20, 2018, 07:08:42 pm

Genocide by AGelbert
May 19, 2018, 08:21:29 pm

Sustainable Farming by AGelbert
May 19, 2018, 07:29:35 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial