LyrArc Article Gist
The Environmental Protection Agency moved to assume authority over 14,000 coal burning plants, refineries and industrial complexes that emit more than 25,000 tons ( or emissions from burning 131 railcars) of of greenhouse gas emisssions, and are the source of 70% of the U.S.'s greenhouse gas emissions. The bill exempts the smaller facilities, "every cow and Dunkin Donuts," as Lisa Jackson EPA administrator put it. It exempts millions of other sources like bakeries, dry cleaners and hospitals, and focusses on the 400 largest facilities that do most of the environmental damage. These facilities will be required to obtain construction permits and prove that the best available technology has been applied. Lisa Jackson said we are not going to go ahead with business as usual, and it will give President Obama something to show at the Copenhagen talks. Senators Kerry and Boxer are introducing legislation that will be fought by the power plants, and this move by the EPA will be challenged by the power companies....

LyrArc Article Gist
Report on Climate Science put out by the US Energy Department in 2025 questioning the severity and impending nature of climate change effects. It is challenged by scientists who believe in the severity and impending nature of climate change, quite the opposite. Koonin, a Fellow at the Hoover Instituion at Stanford describes the work and its conclusions. He says the research is peer reviewed and looks at 200 years of climate research. Some of the conclusions- That climate change models claiming catastrophic situations are ultra sensitive and lead to extreme scenarios.  It talks about climate variability, and model deficiencies, data limitations. And says data for climate over continental US show no long term trends for extreme weather events. Global sea level rise of 8 inches since 1800 is not disputed but it says US tide gauge data shows no long term acceleration in warming globe.  On one point there has been agreement even in the Biden administration- what the US does to cut emissions will little effect the global changes in warming- because of coal use by China and India defended as needed for electricity for two billion people, an essential need. Thus the desire for a calculated tradeoff which lets the US take advantage of its abundance of oil and gas to reduce the cost of living for ordinary Americans, also an essential need. Because of the declining cost of natural gas vs coal, coal is in gradual phase out, and declining cost of solar means Germany, China, India are making the shift to solar, and nuclear energy provides another option. The difference is that the DJT administration is taking government out of the effort and letting the private sector work out building of renewable sources. Government is not always the answer as electric cars are likely to make more gains in 2026 than under the Biden administration because of VW, Mercedes, BYD, Ford and GM coming up with cars that can do close to 500 miles on one charge and the cost of an EV down to about $30,000 to $40,000. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Strategic siting in renewable rich areas (Dallas center the largest is in renewable rich area) and fair cost allocation to not burden small businesses and households are major issues in Data Center building. Data centers for AI -rows and rows of servers 5000 in hyperscale data centers- used 4% of the US total electricity use in 2024. This is growing rapidly. By 2030 this is expected to grow by more than double, by 133%. About 60% of this to power the servers and 30% for cooling the servers. About a third of these servers are located in Virginia, Texas and California. How will this affect Cost of Living concerns, affect electricity prices? Carnegie Mellon working with North Carolina State University did the modeling on the energy and emissions implications of data center buildup in the US in their Open Outlook Initiative. A 8% annual increase in electricity prices is expected on average and as high as 25% in Virginia by 2030.  Total of about 40% increase over 5 years. Between 2014 and 2024 10 year period average cost for a home electricity use went up 25% from $114 a month to $142. This would now go up by 40% to about $200 by 2030 in just 5 years significantly impacting cost of living in the US. In which states will it strain electricity grids? In 2023 data centers consumed 26% of the total electricity supply in Virginia. In North Dakota 15%, Nebraska 12%, Iowa 11%, Oregon 11% according to Electric Power Research Institute. What are the energy types used? Natural gas is used for 40% of the data center electricity, wind and solar 25%, nuclear 20% and coal 15%.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How China's coal gasification projects can contribute to global warming by the co2 emissions that they create. China is fast tracking a lot of coal gasification plants but not much effort or attention is being given to the carbon dixide that it will generate . And technologies to capture and store the carbon dioxide emissions are nowhere near being a reality. China will soon pass the U.S. as the largest source of greenhouse gases in the world.

LyrArc Article Gist
After the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Agreement, China and the European Union sought to fill the leadership on this issue. Yet the reality now looks to be different. China decreased coal consumption between 2014-2016. Now China is ramping up coal generation as it needs to provide stimulus to a slowing economy as trade relations with the U.S. worsening.  In 2017 the trend reversed with state backed loans to help economic growth and surge in provincial permits.  China is now moving forward with plans to add coal fired power equal to almost the total U.S. capacity, according to Coalswarm, which tracks power plants worldwide for coal use. This would push coal fired production to above the cap of 1,100 gigawatts China has set and its current cap. Its current production is already about half of the world's total coal fired generation and quadruple that of the U.S. In 2017 China made up one fourth of total CO2 productions.  Canada is missing its emissions targets and is not likely to meet 2020 targets say experts. In the EU members reliant on coal power energy oppose EU parliament efforts to end subsidies to the most polluting plants by 2025, seeking delay of one decade. At the climate change talks in Katowice, Poland, these changes are facing opposition. As a sign of how the situation is changing since the 2015 Paris Accords, the protests in France by yellow vest protestors started in opposition to a carbon tax intended to meet France's climate change targets. That tax increase is being withdrawn by president Macron. Families struggling financially had a different perception of the increase in the fuel tax and even young people who support meeting emissions reduction joined the protests, as reported in the New York Times and The Times. This tells a lot about how the issue of climate change has changed in the public perception in three years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With the 15% mandated cuts to energy use in the European Union countries and the shutoff of Russian gas supplies, three remaining German nuclear plants can be run for an extended period to take off some of the strain on the German economy. Sentiment for nuclear power is changing in Germany. A Spiegel opinion poll is cited in this WSJ editorial that shows 78% of Germans favor keeping the three remaining nuclear plants operating till summer 2023, and 67% say it is a good idea to keep them running for 5 years.  The issues of nuclear vs solar, or coal and gas vs solar is not a yes or no proposition anymore as shown in the negotiated measures to allow some coal and gas operations in the US in the Biden Climate Change bill that passed the US Senate on August 7, 2022. This is not merely a concession to a fossil fuel dependent state (West Virginia) and Senator Manchin, this is a realization that the transition can be better managed economically and the same results for renewable energy and climate change emissions goals can be met with a carefully planned  strategy that allows for LNG exports to Europe, and fossil fuel production flexibility in the face of the embargo on Russian fossil fuel supplies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT's Brad Plumer looks at the assessment of a report from REPEAT (Princeton), MIT, and Rhodium on how well the Biden Climate laws are building renewable energy- how well this is working to tackle climate change goals. The goal set by BIden was a 40% reduction over 2005 greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Electric car sales are moving at a pace that is consistent with the goals but renewable energy instead of being at an average of 46 gigawatts of carbon free electricity for 2023 and 2024 is falling short as it was at 32 gigawatts carbon free electricity for the US in 2023.

LyrArc Article Gist
Has the world missed opportunities for progress in renewables? The 2022 Global Renewable Report by REN21 international policy network answers this question. The renewables accounted for 20% of world's energy use in 2011. In 2021 it advanced only 8 percentage points to 28% over 10 years. This is important because use of coal, oil and gas increased by 4% and carbon emissions by 6% in 2021 with the end of lockdowns from the pandemic and increased energy consumption, according to International Energy Agency.

Something is wrong also in the capital going into subsidies to reduce prices of oil and gas which are $18 trillion for 2018 to 2020, $5.9 trillion in 2020 alone. Compare this with the $366 billion invested in renewables in 2021 and one can see the huge dimensions of the problem facing the world, this planet Earth that we live in.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump announces withdrawal from the Paris climate change accords, saying the U.S. will consider re-entering the agreement  or coming up with a new deal. He said "I was elected to represent Pittsburgh, not Paris." Trump said he was concerned about the environment, and avoided saying climate change scientific evidence was not correct. He based his concerns on the idea that China and India were getting an unfair financial advantage over the U.S. The U.S. had pledged under the Paris accords to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 28% from 2005 levels by 2025. The WSJ's Stokols and Ballhaus point out that president Trump had the option because of the nonbinding agreements committing nations to a broader goal of reducing emissions to combat temperature change of of 3.6 degrees F, to have modified emissions targets and still remained in the Paris accords. For Trump the motivation may have rested more on politics to shore up support in the Republican party which has largely opposed climate change targets.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
State and local governments in the US with private industry can cut US carbon emissions by about 60% in 10 years by 2035. This goal will formally be submitted by the US to the United Nations to cut emissions by 59% by 2035. It means the federal government is not the deciding factor when it comes to cutting emissions as the new DJT administration does not support active effort on climate change till 2028.

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial says the climate change accords the U.S. reached with China in 2014 amount to little in the way of what China is required to do. China will be allowed to let its carbon emissions increase till 2030, two decades from now, and have the emissions decline afterward. This says the WSJ is what is expected to happen in China anyway because of demographic and urbanization trends. China will also have 20% of its energy come from non-coal polluting sources by 2030, something China plans to do anyway because of the high costs of pollution from coal plants. The U.S. commits to reducing its carbon emissions by 28% below 2005 levels by 2025, in place of the 17% currently set in 2009. This would increase costs of energy in the U.S., says WSJ, without any serious effort to cut emissions further in the developing countries.

LyrArc Article Gist
The rapidly changing situation in energy is shown by the $15 billion German government rescue of Uniper, which contains the legacy fossil fuel assets of Germany's E.ON electricity maker. The war in Ukraine has made energy security a priority, leaving fossil fuel assets at risk of getting stranded. This is what happened at Uniper as Germany moves quickly to develop renewable sources to replace Russian fossil fuels. Clean energy investment is increasing rapidly as many green energy options are cost effective. Two thirds of electricity is generated in countries where it is cheaper to build new solar or onshore wind facilities than to run existing gas or coal powered facilities. Offshore wind with newer technologies will soon be cheaper also. Higher fuel and emissions prices, the cost of running older facilities in extreme weather, also increase risk of stranded assets.   To understand how quickly the situation is changing and can lead to stranded assets - solar energy is now half the cost of energy from coal or natural gas at today's prices as shown in the graphs in this WSJ article. Large investment in research and new technology will only decrease the cost of solar and wind energy to 2025 and 2030, increasing the investments in renewable energy and speeding up the curve for transition to renewable sources, with the added impetus of government support to achieve COP26 targets. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Stranded assets is likely to become a major issue for automobile companies switching to electric vehicles, power companies switching away from coal, and oil and gas companies that are moving to renewables. Close to $20 trillion such assets now face writedowns, as shown in this report in the WSJ. These are assets that are retired early or assets that can no longer be used because of high carbon emissions and the switch to new technologies. A recent US Congressional session with oil company executives showed the heads of BP, Shell, Exxon, and Chevron, answering questions on how quickly they were preparing for the switch to renewable energy. The COP26 Glasgow conference has created new urgency at companies such as BP and Shell in Europe.

LyrArc Article Gist
Less noticed climate change action is coming from Brazil. The Amazon deforestation has been slowed since the new administration of Lula took office in Brazil in 2022. Forest loss has dropped by a third in Brazil and half in Colombia says this report in DW.com. One of the big pledges at the Glasgow Climate Summit said to cut deforestation. Tjink of the impact- a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions from transportation come from deforestation and most of it from the Amazon (two thirds from Brazil, Indonesia and the Congo DRC alone). Ending forest loss by 2030 the goal of Glasgow would lead to 18.9 million megatonnes of carbon being removed from the atmosphere (GtCO2e) says the World Resources Institute.

LyrArc Article Gist
Plans of the incoming administration of president Lopez Obrador to increase renewable energy from wind, solar and other sources, in Mexico. Mexico's potential is for 8 times the current levels for wind energy and 75 times current levels for solar. Solar energy has not received much attention as Mexico increased reliance on coal and oil for energy. Mexico's supply of renewable energy is only 25% of total installed power capacity compared to 50% for other countries in Latin America.

The Obrador administration plans to cut Mexico's emissions by 6.8% a year. Solar energy in particular has high potential in Mexico.

LyrArc Article Gist
The $369 billion climate and tax package that is coming out of a deal arranged by Schumer in the US Senate could be a path breaking action. It would enable president Biden to get close to the climate goals he promised last year of cutting US carbon emissions by 50% by 2030 over 2005 levels to combat effects of climate change. The $369 billion package would get the US to reduce carbon emissions by 40% in 2030 over 2005 levels.  Severe effects of climate change with fires and floods in the US, Europe, and Asia have brought a new spotlight to the issues facing the world and the fact that something needs to be done quickly with the US leading the way. Senator Manchin a holdout because he comes from a coal mining state was a holdout. He was persuaded to join as the new legislation provides for support for transmission lines and other investment during a transition period so that it does not affect the economy in his state. The transition period is now accepted as Europe now looks at gas and coal as a temporary resource following the cutoff of Russian supplies and the US will be shipping more LNG to Europe during this period. The vote for this legislation is planned under reconciliation so that the vice president MS. Harris can cast the deciding vote for Democrats in a 50-50 split Senate. Republicans oppose the legislation. Manchin now says it will reduce inflation. Briefly it will give $7500 to every buyer of an electric vehicle EV, and $4000 for a used EV. It would give rebates for heat pumps that increase home energy efficiency. Billions of dollars would be spent for clean energy industries, and for solar, wind, geothermal, other renewable energy projects. Democrats want to get the legislation through the Senate quickly by next week, and so secret were Schumer's negotiations that most Democrats did not know about it. Coming on the heels of the $280 billion CHIPS and Science bill for $280 billion investment in US semiconductor industry, this will be a big win for president Biden and shows the persistence and patience of Mr. Biden is paying off.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial Board opinion piece in the WSJ gives exceptional insights into major issues facing Germany, the cost of electricity generated from renewables, failure to meet climate change emissions targets set by the government, and the difficulty of forming a new coalition government with conflicting goals of the Greens vs the CDU and the FDP.  By one estimate it cost households and business about $125 billion extra in higher electricity bills for 2000-2015 to subsidize renewable energy from solar and wind. Utilities are required to buy renewable at above market rates, especially since the energy revolution called Energiewende was launched by chancellor Merkel in 2010. German electricity prices are about 36 cents per kilowatt hour compared to 13 cents in America. The 2011 decision following the Fukushima disaster to phase out nuclear power by 2022 made the effort to meet renewables targets of 40% by 2020 compared to 1990 -exceeding the 20% for the EU- even harder. Germany sees a 30% target for 2020 as reachable.   Even though renewables can generate 50% of required energy supplies, only 30% of the supplies are utilized as the renewables are generated mostly in the north of the country and there is a lack of transmission lines to bring it to the industrial south. The dirty secret says the WSJ editorial board for the renewable story in Germany is that a lot of coal is used in dirty coal plants to meet electricity needs when wind and solar energy are not available. Cheaper coal not natural gas is preferred for such generation as daytime peak use that recoups more expensive gas cost is managed with renewables. Leading to the situation that Germany generates only 9% of energy from natural gas compared to 30% in the U.S.. The further Germany has gone in renewables has also led to the paradox of increased dependence on coal. Getting to the new Jamaica coalition being planned between the CDU and the FDP and the Greens. The problem is that the Greens want to see the 20 most polluting coal plants closed, the CDU and the FDP are willing to close only ten coal polluting plants. The WSJ's opinion is that voters chose the AfD right wing party with 13% of the vote because of the platform promise to shut down Merkel's Energiewende policy.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration announces new climate change policy which could lead to retiring about one third of the U.S. coal fired plants. Existing power plants generate about one third of greenhouse-gas emissions in the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ghosn of Renault-Nissan used to be a skeptic about electric cars. Now he is on board. Nissan plans to sell an electric car in the US and Japn by 2010. It will be only hundreds of vehicles at first so it will take more time to take it to mass market, but the goal is to go for mass market. By 2012 Nissan will plan for a lineup of electric vehicles, so it will extend beyond small cars to small minivans and small commercial vehicles and small crossovers. 100% electric cars also are described as zero emission vehicles. But Nissan won't be the only company doing this. Mercedes is moving "very fast" in the direction of emission free vehicles, see the the interview with Daimler's Zetsche. Mitsubishi Motors and Fuji Heavy Industries are testing versions of electric cars. And GM plans to introduce the Chevy Volt in 2010. Toyota plans to have a plug in hybrid about this time. Mercedes will be the first to bring a lithium oin battery in its S400 coming out later this year which will be a hybrid. It is the cooling of lithium ion batteries that has been a major hurdle to development of electric cars and Daimler's Zetsche says they have solved this problem, have 24 patents, and developed a cooling system that works inside the car. Nissan has an electric car project that it is working on with California based Project better Place to produce electric cars for the Israeli and Danish markets. Ghosn has grasped the idea that the market is signalling a major and irreversible change towards smaller emissions and regulators are way behind on this curve. He says that if one is to sensibly participate in the growth of emerging markets which Nissan is doing in North Africa and India and Eastern Europe then one has to think in terms of sustainability and lower emissions, as putting tens of millions of more cars on the road around the world can damage the environment. And the only way this can be done to meet the aspirations of people in emerging markets is to lower emissions and to set this as the overriding goal. One gets the same sense from the Germans, see Zetsche, Daimler....

LyrArc Article Gist
As unemployment rises and industrial production drops Democrats in the states with dependence on heavy manufacturing and use of coal are going to have to make the difficult tradeoffs between their support for controlling emissions and favoring the environment versus their interest in keeping industry. According to the Department of Energy, in 2005 the state of Ohio derived 86% of its electricity from coal compared to California which derived 20.7% of its electricity from coal, 40% from hydroelectric power and renewable sources. Other Great Lakes and Plains states are similar to Ohio. Yet the key committees in Congress and the Senate are controlled by Ms. Boxer, Mr Waxman, and have the backing of Speaker Pelosi.

LyrArc Article Gist
Entergy is one of the largest energy companies. Its CEO for nine years, Wayne Leonard, talks to Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal. Its the No.2 generator of nuclear power in the USA, and uses coal for only 7% of its energy. He has made his name in nuclear energy, and here he talks about the government's cap and trade program and nuclear energy. He points to today's technology as far superior to the technology that was used in the Failed Three Mile plant, that put back nuclear energy plants in the USA for decades. He believes that price signals are needed for CO2, and the cap and trade program helps to do this, so he supports the cap and trade program. He admits that self interest colors perception of Entergy, compared to coal using utility producers like Duke Energy and American Electric Power. With coal only 7% in its portfolio of plants, and big in nuclear energy, it stands to gains from a cap and trade program, whereby Congress will set a ceiling on emissions, then allows businesses to sell any of its extra allowances that stand for the right to make emissions. And in doing so creating the largest commodity market, in carbon backed securiites. He and the government agree on the point that the allowances should be auctioned off, rather than given away as the companies with many coal plants believe. And the billions in new revenue from these allowances would be returned to the public. He understands that the view of companies like Duke and AEP, that use coal and would have to increase rates, and face the anger of ratepayers as they pay more for the allowances. He also thinks the bill should be written with a fine pen, so that if Congress mandates 20% of energy come from renewables. That it should specify replacing coal not natural gas as what this replaces, to get rid of the most polluting sources. He points to the real need for looking at things globally, as doing things locally, even to show responsible leadership in the world community, can lead to no progress in the global picture. The reason is that China is going ahead with the rapid construction of conventional coal plants. It has surpassed USA coal capacity, and is on track to double it sometime in the next decade. If the USA closed down every single coal plant, and all the time new coal plants are going up in China and India, then we would have ruined our economy, and it was'nt making much difference globally. And he says, if we just say lets lead and people will follow us, "its silly", because China isn't going to follow us, especially when they have $2 trillion invested in their coal plants, and they still aren't feeding feeding all their people. So how to deal with this? Develop the new technology for carbon capture for existing conventional coal plants, and help the Chinese with retrofit technology to curb emissions in a realistic manner. At this time most current funding is devoted to technology for second generation systems, that are still 10-20 years away....

LyrArc Article Gist
This analysis of coal use using graphs shows a clear move away from coal in the world, except for two growth markets China and India which account for 60% of the increase in coal use since 2008. India has gone black in its shift to increasing use of coal. China has begun the shift away from coal to address the smog over large urban areas, poor air quality and health impact of coal use. Because China used five times the coal used by India in 2017, the overall impact in China and India is showing a shift away from coal to hydropower, other renewables including solar energy. It is likely that India will make the shift following China's example in the future. 

The trend is clear when one looks at the incremental terawatt hour and where it comes from. The shift is clear to renewables, hydropower, and non fossil uses in the rest of the World and China which account for most of the coal use in the world.

 

LyrArc Article Gist
Italy is converting most of its power plants from natrual gas to coal. Germany which also has banned nuclear power plants is also moving to coal plants. The will be clean coal plants except that when it comes to carbon dioxide emissions the technology still is not available for these plants. So experts say the global warming issues are going to get worse before they get better.

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's executive order reversing parts of the Clean Power Plan of president Obama may extend the life of older coal powered plants, but overall it is unlikely to change the shift away from coal for the U.S. utility industry. It will do little to reverse the market forces that are leading to a shift to natural gas for the utility industry with the increasing availability of natural gas. In this WSJ report Cassandra Sweet cites Duke Energy Corp. CEO Lynn Good, who says natural gas for Duke will be the leading fuel followed by coal by 2026, and natural gas now makes up 28% of its mix with coal at 34%. He says a $11 billion ten year investment in natural gas and renewable energy will go through regardless of what the Trump administration does because of the economics- the declining price of renewables, the competitive price of natural gas. Companies are loath to base their long term plans on changes in administration as they see the economics dictated by advances in technology, and the general sense that cleaner energy is here to stay for the long run. Already in the U.S. 34% of total power supplies are from natural gas and 30% from coal for 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Department. This may change slightly as coal is used where it is economical and makes sense without the carbon rules, yet the long term trend is clearly towards natural gas. ...