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."

33 of 399 comments (clear)

  1. WTF USA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can understand under-developed countries like China and India, which are still in their growing years, but the USA 2.5%? There we have the real environmental criminals.

    You have all the nuclear, solar, and wind, and policies, and programs, and abilities to stear the environmental situation, but you just keep burning gas and blowing fumes like nothing.

    1. Re: WTF USA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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

    2. Re: WTF USA? by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      I definitely don't agree with him on that the wealth of those owning fossil resources is worth more than the earth itself.

      I'd like to think their wealth will decrease when the truth finally hits but of course it won't. It'll be the taxpayer picking up the bill (as usual).

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:WTF USA? by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The energy coming from my $10,000 solar panels on my $900,000 suburban home which feeds my $6000 EV charger which fuels my $60,000 Tesla is free! It comes from the sun.

    4. Re: WTF USA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      A Chinese apologist. China is adding more than 250 GW of new coal plants in China, and another 250 GW in other nations before 2021. And yet, you point to America as being horrible. America has been declining for the last 10 years. A 2.5 on 14% is much smaller than a 4.7 rise on 33%.

    5. Re:WTF USA? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cheapest energy also emits CO2.

      That's not true. Even if you ignore the externalized costs (e.g. healthcare) from coal and gas, on-shore wind is now cheaper than coal and going to overtake gas in the next few years.

      The real problem is that powerful people are invested in dirty generation and don't want to see their assets become worthless. Plus nuclear is a massive welfare programme for energy companies and they will cling to it for as long as they can.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:WTF USA? by gtall · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unless the global warming alarm is well-placed. You seem willing to bet the future of the planet on a view that over 95% of climate scientists say is wrong. Errmmm...what have you got on your side to counter the scientists...other than you do not wish to believe them?

    7. Re:WTF USA? by rally2xs · · Score: 2

      Love it!

      My $30K geothermal heat/cool system is saving me a pile of money!!! Maybe. Payments for the initial cost are in a 30 year loan about $180 a month, and the electricity to run the entire place including heating and cooling ranges from about $85 to $160 / month for 1700 sq. ft. where, in Virginia, winters are moderate. Add the 2, and the entire cost of energy for the place runs around $400 / month. However, I now don't have to worry about getting a heating oil bill for exactly 1 month of $630. Added to the typical $85 electric bill, that's >$700. Am I saving money? Maybe, maybe not, but I definitely don't get a monthly shock of $630 for fuel.

    8. Re: WTF USA? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't about us necessarily being an asshole, but conditions in our lives that direct us to make such decisions.
      US/CAD we have strict rules when we are late for work. Normally within 5 minutes of the prescribed time, if we are late a lot, our living income can be cut, because you would get fired.
      So we rush to work, Grabbing prepared fast food along the way, or picking up something from your fridge, while on the run you will need energy, so we have coffee at hand.
      The 9:00 to 5:00 has became 8:30 - 5:30 with that 1/2 hour lunch break only being a loophole for the lazy who doesn't want to do work.

      In America our way of life and our place in society is based on your job and what you do. When meting someone new, it is common for a person to ask what is their job is. (Or in college what their major is, so we can figure what their job will be) We do this to try to figure out the persons status in America. In other countries this is taboo or just rude, but they will use other criteria to figure out the persons class, such as where they live, who is their family, your religion...

      This cultural normal, which was once just part of our culture, is now causing environmental impact, to change that would be very difficult. It isn't about just being jerks, we may care deeply for the environment, but we are stuck in a culture where to prosper you will need to make choices that may not be environmental.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    9. Re:WTF USA? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Yeah but the sun is nuclear power. ... and it causes cancer.

    10. Re:WTF USA? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Cheaper is not the same thing as more profitable. In fact it's quite often the exact opposite.

      There is a lot of money sunk into generating CO2. Mines, wells, refineries, transport, storage, power stations... And they are all quickly becoming worthless thanks to cheaper renewables. Battery storage is making peaker plants uneconomical too.

      The absolute worst thing for them is that renewables are democratizing energy production. Instead of being the preserve of big businesses with hundreds of millions to invest now individuals can generate their own power. Communities can get together and buy a turbine or a battery pack. Farmers can install some panels on the craggy land they can't grow on, or in an unused field.

      This happens every time there is a big disruption to an industry.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:WTF USA? by Chas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      China and India are in their "growing years" so I can understand.

      Oi vey. You DO understand that you can't simply "forgive" carbon emissions simply based on "they're growing/modernizing" right?

      Shit like this is why global compacts simply won't work. Because you'll get countries like China/India who will sign on, and then simply continue outputting whatever the hell they feel like.

      And any "carbon trading" system will simply be gamed.

      Now, I'm not saying the US's results are in any way "desirable". They're not.

      The main problem is the activist/regulatory environment here.
      Due to poliicies enacted because of the positively PSYCHOTIC "no nuclear" lobby, the chances of implementing nuclear power in the US is virtually zero.
      We quite simply CANNOT implement enough solar or wind power. Nor could we build lesser capacities and back it with batteries. The quantities required simply aren't feasible.

      You also need to understand that it's not because the US is being deliberately "dirtier".
      It's that total ACTIVITY for carbon production has been on the rise since the economy heated up.
      So nobody's pulling filtration units off, or deliberately choosing dirtier options.

      And it's very EASY to sit back in a country like Germany (with a total area of 138K square miles) and preach about "what ought to be done" in a country like the US (with a total area of 3.7 MILLION square miles). Because hey, logistics is EASY, right? EVERY country on the planet has had a couple millennia to evenly distribute it's population throughout its' borders, right?

      Now, if YOU can come up with a REAL solution that the no-nuke crazies will accept, that DOESN'T involve CRASHING OUR ECONOMY or killing off 90% of the populace and forcing the remainder to live in caves and eat grass, knock yourself out!

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    12. Re: WTF USA? by Chas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hey, if you work someplace that doesn't give a shit when you wander in the door, more power to you.

      Just don't bitch when you're replaced by automation, because it's more reliable.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    13. Re:WTF USA? by rastos1 · · Score: 2

      And it's very EASY to sit back in a country like Germany (with a total area of 138K square miles) and preach about "what ought to be done" in a country like the US (with a total area of 3.7 MILLION square miles). Because hey, logistics is EASY, right?

      But nobody is expecting US to cover all 3.7E6 square miles. How about you cover 13 most densely populated states. The is going to cover area of size of Germany with more population than has Germany. Deal?

    14. Re: WTF USA? by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 2

      But... life isn't different in other countries. In most countries you can't be late to work without facing consequences, and you work the same hours, and you also need to eat and have coffee. None of that requires an SUV, disposable coffee cups, plastic bottles for yogurt, etc. And the importance of a job on your social status is pretty universal as well (especially in Asian countries).

      The difference is just... money, mostly. You could wake up earlier, make your own coffee and breakfast (which would be cheaper), and drive a smaller car. You choose not to, because you can afford not to. You can exchange money for convenience. Let's face it, people don't really care about the environment, not if it demands them to make different, inconvenient choices. Why do you think China's emissions are going up? Because they're getting richer, producing more, consuming more. That's all. Chinese people used to recycle paper and aluminium 50 years ago, before it was a thing in the West. Why? Because they could sell old newspapers by the pound to a guy that would sell it to a facility that would produce "new" paper cheaper with the old newspapers. Now, there's actually less recycling, because that amount of money is inconsequential. The US and Canada are just way past that... a minority of people choose to actively care and modify their behavior for the environment; most people don't, and yes that's because we're all assholes (not just in the US or Canada) and we can afford to.

    15. Re:WTF USA? by Chas · · Score: 2

      We already have solar farms larger than that. The largest solar farm on the planet is currently over 13,000 acres (53 square kilometers).
      And it's nameplate output is 2GW.

      The world's largest multi-reactor nuclear plant is above 8GW. And it provides that in just over 1000 acres.
      The US grid needs around 1000 GW total capacity to maintain a stable service environment at absolute peak demand.

      Solar PV farms weigh in at about $750,000-1,000,000 per MW.

      That's without any sort of storage whatsoever. And, even with storage, you can't directly compare it to a baseload setup. Because solar doesn't generate 24x7. Meaning, if you have storage (batteries, pumped hydro storage, flywheels, etc, you still need 2-4x as much total capacity for coverage.

      So. Assume a mean of 3x.

      3000GW
      3 TRILLION dollars for a zero-storage solar PV input that could, conceivably, handle the US grid.

      And, in 30 years or so, another few trillion to expand the site as the older panels age out.
      Assuming zero breakage for the entire period.

      Now, where's the BEST place to implement things like this? What? The American Southwest? Lotsa sun, seldom snows, few rainy days?
      Now, how do you get all that power to the rest of the country?
      Oh. The grid. But, ramping it up to be able to push power from one end of the country to the other? You get big conversion losses and big transmission losses.
      This is why it's more economical to build generation closer to the points of consumption.
      How do you deal with that? MORE CAPACITY! Tack 50% more on to cover that stuff.

      Now we get to re-engineer all the geographic grids into a true national grid!
      Who pays for that?

      And sure, the renegade little fantasy of everyone having their own solar setup on their home is cute.
      But we know there are people who can't afford that.
      And we know that grid providers can't survive/provide service on nothing but connection fees and backhaul fees.
      So how does industry get by? Mom & pop businesses?

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
  2. Global Stupidity by prefec2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Global stupidity seems a constant factor on this planet. In some social groups denial of reality is most prominent, because reality challenges their believe and there behavior.

    1. Re:Global Stupidity by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Global stupidity seems a constant factor on this planet. In some social groups denial of reality is most prominent, because reality challenges their believe and there behavior.

      This is an example: https://www.greenpeace.org/usa...

      So after a brief pause gained from a move from coal to gas in major countries, the upward march of carbon resumes.

    2. Re:Global Stupidity by tsa · · Score: 2

      We have one or two gas powered electricity plants here in the Netherlands that are switched off because coal is cheaper. And we recently (5 years ago or so) switched on a brand new coal powered one.
      Our government keeps telling us that we are the greenest country in Europe and soon we will be world-leading, but reality tells us we do worse than the US.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    3. Re:Global Stupidity by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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
    4. Re: Global Stupidity by WindBourne · · Score: 2

      Well, there are different causes in different locations. For example, America continues to drop coal and move to wind/Nat ga, in spite of trump. But our buying lower mpg cars is an issue. Thankfully, that is coming to a close as EVs sales rise.
      Then you have China and India. Both of these continue to lots of coal, but the real problem is that as they switch to EVs, they will use loads more coal to power them.
      Until society is willing to say no more fossil fuel electric plants, we will continue to get worse.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re: Global Stupidity by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      China hit peak coal years ago and has been in decline ever since:

      http://ieefa.org/ieefa-update-...
      https://www.brookings.edu/2018...

      The "new" capacity is replacing old plants with more efficient, cleaner ones. Same thing happened in Germany.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. Blaming others. by stooo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everybody blames the next guy.
    We are all responsible.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  4. Re:I feel it in my gut that this is a hoax by sidetrack · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If you have sufficient qualifications to be a climate scientist, there are PLENTY of better paid jobs out there.

    Also, that definitely wouldn't explain Exxon's internal science team predicting a 2C warming by 2060 back in 1982?

    Do you think those involved in that internal study thought that would help them keep their jobs at Exxon?

  5. Re:We Need To Stop Trying... by sidetrack · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  6. Re:We Need To Stop Trying... by sidetrack · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  7. Quick summary by bradley13 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you look at their data (download the PDF - it has the overview graphs), it's what you expect: CO2 emissions from fossil fuels in the West are declining. China, following massive rises, has plateaued at a high level - on a per capita basis, the same as the EU (shocking, given the number of Chinese living essentially pre-industrial lives).

    On a per capita basis, the US is still far higher than anyone else. However, this has been declining at an impressive pace, and there is no obvious basis for the claim that US consumption will increase in 2018. In fact, that would be a huge trend reversal, and (imho) is likely a politically motivated claim.

    Meanwhile, emissions from India and other Asian countries are increasing rapidly. In fact, they are driving *all* of the global increase, plus compensating for declining emissions everywhere else.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  8. Re:Stop effing flying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

  9. standard of living must fall by DogDude · · Score: 2

    The standard of living must fall in the US. I know people lose their fucking minds about this fact ("Freedom!"), but it's a fact. 10 billion people cannot live on the planet, all driving giant gas burning cars and eating everything wrapped in plastic. They can't.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re: standard of living must fall by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      That pain you were feeling when you wrote that? That's what cognitive dissonance feels like. You'd be better off taking a step back and figuring out a more logical approach, rather than calling people names.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  10. Conservative Fiscal Responsibility is a Deception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The tragedy of the commons is real, and has come up again, and again and again in economics. This time it is the atmosphere, and those who prosper most from the commons are responding to calls from the people for taxing the commons with "be REASONABLE!"

    Basic. Fucking. Economics.

  11. China does not buy cleaner cars by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Even China buys cleaner cars....

    Stop accepting the bullshit statistics China feeds you and try visiting sometime. China DOES NOT have cleaner cars, as you can tell from the cars themselves, but especially from the hellacious pollution they have in many cities, even worse than LA in the heyday.

    I find it amusing you also believe them about percentage of electricity from coal.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  12. Re:Thanks, Trump! by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 2

    Problem is that people have been saying that for decades... and the oceans have risen a few CM.

    Sea levels were much lower 10,000-20,000 years ago when 2 miles of ICE covered most of north america.

    Good thing the ocean levels rose and the temperatures rose then or you would not be here complaining.

    Humans were not involved in that great melting ... so there are obviously forces you do not understand affecting climate.

     

    --
    5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy