Slashdot Mirror
Global Carbon Emissions Jump To All-Time High in 2018 (theguardian.com)
Global carbon emissions will jump to a record high in 2018, according to a report, dashing hopes a plateau of recent years would be maintained. It means emissions are heading in the opposite direction to the deep cuts urgently needed, say scientists, to fight climate change. From a report: The rise is due to the growing number of cars on the roads and a renaissance of coal use and means the world remains on the track to catastrophic global warming. However, the report's authors said the emissions trend can still be turned around by 2020, if cuts are made in transport, industry and farming emissions. The research by the Global Carbon Project was launched at the UN climate summit in Katowice, Poland, where almost 200 nations are working to turn the vision of tackling climate change agreed in Paris in 2015
into action. The report estimates CO2 emissions will rise by 2.7% in 2018, sharply up on the plateau from 2014-16 and 1.6% rise in 2017.
Almost all countries are contributing to the rise, with emissions in China up 4.7%, in the US by 2.5% and in India by 6.3% in 2018. The EU's emissions are near flat, but this follows a decade of strong falls. "The global rise in carbon emissions is worrying, because to deal with climate change they have to turn around and go to zero eventually," said Prof Corinne Le Quere, at the University of East Anglia,who led the research published in the journal Nature. "We are not seeing action in the way we really need to. This needs to change quickly."
Almost all countries are contributing to the rise, with emissions in China up 4.7%, in the US by 2.5% and in India by 6.3% in 2018. The EU's emissions are near flat, but this follows a decade of strong falls. "The global rise in carbon emissions is worrying, because to deal with climate change they have to turn around and go to zero eventually," said Prof Corinne Le Quere, at the University of East Anglia,who led the research published in the journal Nature. "We are not seeing action in the way we really need to. This needs to change quickly."
If the learning for various low-carbon alternatives hadn't fallen drastically in the past few years, then I'd say you were correct, but as it is, this rise is just lag in the system I think...
Wind and solar generation LCOE are now lower than fossil energy generation in much of the world, and their prices are still falling. Fossil generation plant commissioning has dropped dramatically (see GE's profits forecast for their fossil turbine division - for example). TCO of a new electric car is now lower than that of fossil fuelled cars. TCO of heat pumps is lower than gas heating in many parts of the world too.
See also Lazard's annual analysis of costs for power generation 2018 and check out the graph on page 7. Coal and gas peaker plants aren't coming back from those sort of price drops, and solar costs are still dropping. Yes, I know this isn't dispatchable generation, but demand-response, and long-distance transmission, will largely get you around that...
You don't really start needing a lot of storage until renewables are over 50% of the generation mix, and costs are falling for storage rapidly, so that there's a reasonable chance that solar + storage will be the cheapest form of generation by the time we get to 50% renewables (by just replacing generation plant on the usual replacement cycles i.e. without added cost) too.
It is not about Trump, it is about every asshole in US\CAD driving SUV because it is "Safer" than driving small car... It is about every asshole eating MCdonald that comes with pile of garbage with every meal. It is about every asshole eating 75ml of vegan yogurt packed in individual plastic bottle. It is about every asshole drinking coffee in double cups because it is hot....That is what is all about, not Trump, Obama, Macron or other pupets
Actually no, it's not due to a lack of nuclear power. Coal use isn't even increasing, it's decreasing because gas and renewables are cheaper. Even Japan didn't jump up that much after the force 100% nuclear shutdown, only around 10%: https://ycharts.com/indicators...
The reason we are seeing this increase now is twofold.
1. Some countries are still on the upward part of the curve, e.g. China. Expecting them to immediately start reductions would be insane, it would destroy their economy. But they are on track for their Paris target, which is aggressive to say the least.
2. Many developed countries are finally recovered from the 2008 financial crash that caused an exceptional fall in emissions due to reduced economic activity. I'm sure someone will start screaming about European emissions increasing any moment now, but in reality they are falling as planned if it were not for that artificial depression.
The problem with nuclear is that it's way too expensive for what it provides. There is simply no way to justify spending money on it would be much better spent on renewables. Spending on renewables will have a much greater effect on emissions per Euro/Dollar/Yuan spent, and will lessen the economic impact of making the change.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It is a non-negligible part, yes. Airplanes have lower CO2 emissions per person and mile than cars, but people fly long distances. One trip from the US to Europe causes roughly a quarter of the CO2 emissions that a car emits in a year of average driving.