At the 26th United Nations Conference on Climate Change, ambassadors wrote, for the first time, that the group should expedite the reduction of coal and oil prices in order to achieve their climate change goals. preparation information was released Wednesday.
Countries can continue to use coal for now or reduce future temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) depending on the Paris climate agreement. It is impossible to do all this. But these scientific facts have been the talk of the town for years – to this day.
“It’s important,” said Helen Mountford, vice president of the World Resources Institute, he told reporters. “We’ve never had a text message like that before.”
However, this new proclamation is timeless, timeless, and comes with some false promises about the world. These coal disagreements create tensions over climate negotiations in Glasgow: clear gaps between what countries need to do to address climate change, what countries say they will do in the future, and what they really are. I do now.
“We’ll see if the text still works,” Mountford said later. “We hope so. It is a very important and practical thing that countries can do to achieve their promises. ”
Outside of climate change talks, protesters demanded that the language not continue. According to the Washington Post. he sang: “’Oil fields’ in this paper” and “Keep that in mind.”
Although UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed frustration with the talks Thursday, saying world-level “Promises do not last as long as the oil industry is still receiving trillions, as the IMF estimates. Or while countries are still building coal plants.”
With current climate patterns, the earth is preparing for temperatures above 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) in this century compared to the previous ones. Although a more recent The present climate forecast has brought the earth to a temperature of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit[1.8 ° C]. This means that even if all countries achieve their ambitious aspirations – as big as – we will still be able to keep Paris’ main target of 0.3 degrees. This may seem like a small difference, but science clearly shows that every tenth degree is dangerous to humans: more frequent and hotter storms, droughts, hurricanes, and wildfires; quantity of seawater; and, finally, much suffering.
Science also proves that coal is dangerous for the weather. Coal is the most powerful source of carbon, which is responsible for it about 40% carbon emissions are linked to global oil consumption
That is why government officials say that removing coal is one of the most important steps in tackling climate change. For example, last week Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven Guilbeault said in Glasgow: “Eliminating coal-fired power is one of the most important steps we must take to achieve the Paris climate agreement goal of 1.5 degrees.”
Consequences of climate comparison published last month The International Energy Agency indicates that there is no way to reduce global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, even to 1.5 degrees Celsius, without reducing the current use of coal.
The IEA’s aggressive air-conditioning system provides a map of how to reduce temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius and detect “net-zero” emissions (when air into the atmosphere is similar to emissions, using carbon dioxide, plant life, and more. discounts). The so-called Net Zero Emissions by 2050 or NZE events, include the suspension of the new coal industry and the reduction of emissions from the nearly 2,100 gigawatts currently operating worldwide.
“It’s from the electrical sector,” IEA artist Daniel Crow said of the coal at the event. Eternal coal is gone.
Very little coal is left, probably relying on modern recording and storage technology to produce carbon dioxide.
IEA chief executive Fatih Birol took the message to Glasgow at an event organized by the Powering Past Coal Alliance, an organization set up in 2017 dedicated to ending coal use. To date, 165 countries, states, cities, and businesses have done so signed. This includes 28 new members who were announced at the next regular meeting.
In most cases, the participating countries have set a deadline: Ukraine has committed itself to eliminating coal use by 2035, Croatia has set a deadline for 2033, and Estonia has already been without coal.
“For our part in the UK, we have reduced our use of coal to reduce electricity consumption by less than 2%,” said Greg Hands, co-chair of the coalition and the UK prime minister, at the event. “And it will come out of our strong mix by 2024.”
But in light of the ongoing political crisis, a separate but cohesive coalition to end coal was established on the same day in Glasgow. The second group has signed a new contract “Worldwide Coal Cleansing Power Transmission Information, ”Promises, among other things,“ to eliminate the cost of coal-fired power plants locally and globally ”and“ to eliminate the coal-economy power of the 2030s in the Great Depression and the 2040s. all around the world.”
Catherine McKenna, a former Canadian environment minister who co-founded the Powering Past Coal Alliance, called for a second coalition to reduce climate change: Empowering Old Coal Requirements. everything states to eliminate coal by 2040.
One of the signatories to this new term was Poland, a country that relies heavily on coal. Poland boasted one of the 25 largest GDPs in 2020. This led many to recognize Poland, the largest economy, seeking to ban the use of coal in the 2030’s. late 2049.
South Korea, a major coal buyer, re-signed the statement last week, apparently committed to clearing coal at the end of the next decade. The Minister of Commerce has stopped volunteering, to utter the word“We are helping to accelerate the transition to clean electricity, but we have not yet agreed on a change date from coal.”
Neither the US nor China, two of the world’s leading coal producers, have signed any agreement. As members of the Group of 20, or G20, these countries had already agreed this year to stop supporting coal projects overseas.
Then, this week, John Kerry, US President’s special envoy for climate change, told Bloomberg in an interview: “By 2030, the United States will no longer have coal.” The next day he, on behalf of the US, declared with China that both countries were allied with him agreed to achieve their climate goals and to repeat the promise they made to stop supporting global coal projects. When China agreed to “intensify efforts to speed up” the coal sector, no date was given. The future of coal in the US is not mentioned at all.
Although many politicians are beginning to speculate about the future of coal in the tropics, the removal of crude oil is already under way.
Take the US. According to the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign, about 348 coal plants in the US he has already retired or announced his retirement ten years ago. That leaves about 182 working in the country.
“It’s the best in 10 years,” Cherelle Blazer, head of the Sierra Club, told BuzzFeed News. “As far as I know, there are no plans to build new coal.”
Seth Feaster, a renewable energy researcher at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, presented a detailed account of America’s departure from coal. “Just 10 years ago it was at the peak of the amount of energy we could generate from coal,” he said. “In other words, between 2011 and 2020, we retired about one-third of all coal-fired power.”
A third is expected to retire in the next decade, Feaster added, leaving the US with about two-thirds of its coal-fired power by 2030 – and he expects the sharp decline to continue.
All of this came about even after the election of Donald Trump, who ran for the US president promising to end the “coal war” and whose supervisors violently overturned coal laws.
So does this make Kerry’s recent goal of coal-free US by 2030 a reality? Yeah, not really. Even Feaster said it was “a matter of waiting.”
What made it even more difficult was the fact that US President Joe Biden introduced climate change laws between them. Make the Best Plan. Only one person who hinders the discovery of new weather information at the end is Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who personal wealth it is built on coal. There are now discussions as a tax incentive that they are pushing for integration with technologies that record carbon pollution will keep coal plants running longer.
The closure of coal-fired factories across the US has caused the country’s air quality to plummet. But thanks to coal, natural gas helped to bridge the gap. So as coal-fired emissions decreased, gas emissions increased. Such electrical changes will not solve the climate problem.
“These countries, which are planning to move out of coal, must be very careful not to get into the trap of emissions by converting other fuels – gas – and looking to turn these into renewable energy sources,” he said. he warned María José de Villafranca, a climate analyst at the NewClimate Institute, this week.