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."

11 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: 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%.

    2. 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
    3. 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?

    4. 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.
  2. Blaming others. by stooo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everybody blames the next guy.
    We are all responsible.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. 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.
  6. 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
  7. 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.