LyrArc Article Gist
Climate policy changes lead to $1.3 trillion savings according to analysis from DJT administration and EPA's Zeldin, with $1.1 trillion in savings from lower vehicle prices which addresses unaffordability of cars. Using the average price of a new basic Toyota Corolla the price in 2020 was $19,000 which has gone up to $23,000 a price increase of 21% by 2025 over a 5 year period. The cost in 2026 of operating a Gas powered vehicle is on average about $2500, for EV car about $1000 with $1500 in savings per year for EV's that need to be figured into the equation at gas prices that prevailed in 2024 of $4-$5 per gallon . At prices of $3 per gallon the gas costs come down to $1200 when driven 12,000 miles at 30 mpg for 400 gallons of gasoline consumed. This makes the difference between gas and EV yearly savings on gasoline costs down to about $200 from $1500. This makes gasoline powered cars attractive as car companies can reduce EV investments and pass on some of these savings in lower car prices in 2027 in exchange for favorable rules on emissions and EV transition dates.  Are there losses through the emissions and climate change? The DJT/Zeldin EPA analysis points to global climate emissions from China and India (the coal powered plants) continuing at a pace that would determine the overall change in climate for 2026-2027. In this kind of approach the goal is to make cars affordable over a 2-3 year period for US and European carmakers who would be expected to cut prices. It is about flexibility in fighting the Cost of Cars a big component in the Cost of living with housing as the next large component. It is not a long term strategy, simply one that offers a flexible approach. Will the US, Europe and Japan fall behind in EV's technology? Hybrids a focus of Japanese cars will continue to advance that technology which is becoming a preference where it is affordable for customers. Toyota for instance will have a wide lead in hybrids technology by 2030. Much of the Chinese market will have EV's and the EV's technology will advance in China in 2026-2027, and tariffs will be needed to protect European and American carmakers for 2026-2028. It is a strategy tradeoff to deal with the cost of living crisis in US, Europe and Japan answering call for a flexible approach that was also heeded by the Biden administration in relaxing carbon emissions rule changes. It will require automakers to step up and cut prices for gasoline models for buyers at the entry and lower range for affordability by 2026-2027. What about climate action? The strategy is based on the idea that climate action requires India and China (coal powered plants) on board to make a real difference so that over 2-3 years to 2027 the US, Europe and Japan need to address affordability for the lower end entry cars. There is an element of denial of climate change in parts of the DJT administration in the US but not in Europe and Japan. It is also true that leading DJT administration officials Secretary Bessent see the problem of climate as real and one that needs to be addressed yet leaving room for flexibility to tackle affordability crisis for ordinary workers with low incomes struggling to make a living. Bessent and others in the DJT administration are calling for using all of the resources to address needs of people struggling to make a living, and for a strategy for the US to get back its manufacturing capacity from China and for rebuilding the US economy after deindustrialization (caused by Clinton's huge US economy shattering failure to provide safeguards for abuse of the trading system by China in signing a poorly drafted agreement for China's entry into WTO at the end of his term in 1999-2000 just when he had fought impeachment.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This 40 minute IMF Video looks indepth into how far the Paris Agreement on Climate Change of 2015 has moved the world to address 1.5 degree change in climate? What is the situation in 2023 as we move towards 2030? NIcholas Stern of LSE says the peak of emissions will be reached by 2024 however the curve will not be pretty as the drop in the curve will be a small dip in emissions not steep drop that we need. Action is needed to accelerate.. Pilita Clark of the Financial Times conducts a discussion with Nicholas Stern of the Grantham Institute at London School of Economics, Bo Li Deputy Managing Director of IMF, and Zhou Xiaochuan who heads China's Boao Forum and formerly was Governor of the Bank of China.

LyrArc Article Gist
The prime minister of India gives 5 commitments to the world at the COP26 summit. This includes building 500 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2030. He also called on developed countries to provide $1 trillion in financing for climate change efforts in the rest of the world. He said India has delivered on its commitments to the Paris Climate Change Agreement and will do so again.

LyrArc Article Gist
Climate Reset Berlin, a coalition of climate change action groups, has introduced a referendum that brings forward climate change action goals put off till 2045. The referendum makes 2030 the new target date for 95% reduction in carbon emissions consistent with the 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement. Berlin is 80% dependent on fossil fuels for energy needs in 2023. Proponents say there is great potential for wind and solar energy. Opponents say that it is too costly and will take up funds now allocated for childcare and education. The outgoing Greens SPD government of Berlin opposes it, as does the new expected CDU government. The Green senator for Berlin supports it, as do other private groups. Buildings need to be renovated and private transport curbed.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the New Yorker provides a good glimpse at the problems of global warming and limiting climate change goal of 1.5 degrees centigrade. Sally Ann Ranney co-founder of the American Renewable Energy Institute answers questions from the New Yorker magazine. Limiting climate change warming of the planet to 1.5 degrees centigrade by 2100 is a goal enshrined in the Paris Agreement. In the absence of this the global warming would be 2.7 degrees centigrade by 2100. For this 1.5 degrees centigrade goal to be reached fossil fuel use and carbon emissions have to be cut by 50% by 2030 and 100% by 2050. 

The ice pack in the Arctic is part of a planetary cooling system and its accelerated melting is a good sign of the danger the planet faces. Ranney answers a number of these questions.

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
Climate Reset Berlin, a coalition of climate change action groups, has introduced a referendum that brings forward climate change action goals put off till 2045. The referendum makes 2030 the new target date for 95% reduction in carbon emissions consistent with the 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement. Berlin is 80% dependent on fossil fuels for energy needs in 2023. Proponents say there is great potential for wind and solar energy. Opponents say that it is too costly and will take up funds now allocated for childcare and education. The outgoing Greens SPD government of Berlin opposes it, as does the new expected CDU government. The Green senator for Berlin supports it, as do other private groups. Buildings need to be renovated and private transport curbed which would cost billions of dollars. Opponents say this would bankrupt Berlin. Supporters say not enough is being done. If approved it goes into effect immediately. Supporters include the Sustainability Group at Humboldt University, Germany's national cyclists association. They say Berlin has 52 acres of available land in Brandenburg that could be used for wind energy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One negative effect of the trade war with the U.S. is an increased emphasis on energy security and increased use of coal in China. After China committed to goals for climate change coal use declined in 2014, after reaching a high in 2013. The attack on Saudi oil facilities showed risk in its reliance on Saudi oil. China's import dependency for oil reached an all time high of 72% in 2018, according to BP 2019 Statistical Review. Gradually the commitment to climate change and lower use of coal has changed since 2016 with the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Initially after the U.S. withdrawal under president Trump China made bold commitment to lead the fight against climate change but has since wavered. In an October 2019 speech Premier Li Kequiang called for the development of the coal industry to ensure energy security.  As China's economy slowed in 2019 in the face of U.S. tariffs and a trade war with the U.S. efforts are being made to increase infrastructure investment which has driven coal use higher. China's steel output reached a record of 750 million metric tons in 2019. The amount of coal fired capacity under construction in China now exceeds the rest of the world combined, much of it from plants permitted before 2017, according to Global Energy Monitor. China is also expected to become the world's largest importer of natural gas by 2020. Even the Russian gas fields from Siberia supply only a fifth of China's energy demands in 2020.  China has made large strides in renewable energy helping it meet its Paris Agreement targets. Renewable energy is about 10% of China's energy mix, but its use showed growth of 29% in 2018, making up half of the world's growth. China's use of coal in the energy mix has dropped to 58% in 2018 from 72% in 2008, according to BP 2019 Statistical Review, as a result of renewable energy investments. At the Madrid Climate Conference China renewed its commitment to the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Now it is a balancing act keeping in mind energy security and economic growth along with the need for clear skies and better air quality. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com's Aditya Sharma takes a deeper look at India's efforts to tackle climate change before the COP26 Glasgow Summit. Mr. Modi will attend the global summit in Glasgow, Scotland, COP26. Chinese president Xi Jinping is not expected to attend. India is the only major country to be on track to achieve its targets set in the Paris Climate change Agreement, according to the UN Environment Program's Emission Gap Report.  This report in DW.com says India plans to reduce the emissions intensity of GDP- volume of emissions for every unit of GDP- by around 35% by 2030 from 2005 levels. India is also nearing its goal under 2015 Paris Agreement for achieving about 40% share of non fossil fuel based electricity generating capacity, which the government expects will be achieved by 2023, 7 years ahead of schedule. Behind this are ambitious goals for solar energy generation set by prime minister Modi, after his first experiments with new solar energy technologies when he was running the state government in Gujarat state. Modi sees new technologies of the future playing a big role in making it possible to achieve ambitious goals way ahead of schedule. This is the unique approach India is adopting of pushing ahead with newer and newer technologies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump is to announce U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 Paris climate change agreement. The process of withdrawing is one that takes 4 years to complete, putting off a final decision till after the presidential election of 2020.

LyrArc Article Gist
Achieving net zero emissions by 2050 will require huge amounts of capital. One estimate is $131 trillion. Where will it come from. The UN Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero says financial groups with assets of $130 trillion have committed to its program to cut emissions. This WSJ report says that is enough scale to generate $100 trillion through 2050 to fund the investments needed for new technologies and provide the finance for companies to restructure themselves in a new world.  The question is how much of this is real as banks, insurers, pension funds and private investor groups are only now taking on the task of restructuring the finance industry. It was not even addressed during the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change talks. For this to be truly transformative and the transformative changes to take place governments have a critical role in requiring a common standard for reporting and measuring climate change progress. Government regulatory action and oversight is essential for timely and rapid action to take place. Financial regulators, including the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England have agreed to add their own oversight through reviews and disclosure standards. The problem is that private sector plans are not concrete. Data is non existent or inconsistent and measurement is not taking place across all of the financial sector on key parameters. The UN has limited power to enforce rules. Who will act to ensure decisions are taken, progress measured after standards are set, transparency set, and how can governments deliver on each step through 2030 ensuring the transformation of the financial sector so that the decisions are taken according to a master plan for climate change in the US, UK, European Union, and India.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump signs an executive order on March 28, 2017, reversing the American commitment to the Paris climate change agreement. The executive order also lifts a moratorium on the sale of coalmining leases on federal lands. The Obama administration 2015 clean power plan was designed to restrict greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. It was blocked by courts in 2016. Trump says he is reversing president Obama's war on coal. Earlier he approved the Keystone pipeline for bringing oil from oil sands in Canada to the U.S.. Under the Paris agreement the U.S. agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions 26-28% by 2025 from 2005 levels. Market changes including the availability of cheap natural gas from technology advances fracking and hydraulic fracturing is leading a shift away from coal, apart from Obama administration regulations. Another factor is the long term trend towards cleaner energy, with large energy producers such as American Electric Power and other companies planning for the long term which is likely to be in the direction of cleaner energy. These companies see the Trump administration changes as a situation that may not be for the long term. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. government's National Climate Assessment report in November 2017 says observational evidence proves that human action is the main driver for climate change. It warns of sea levels rise as high as 8 feet by the year 2100. It shows damage from climate change that is already happening from a rise in the U.S. by 1.8 degree Fahrenheit of global warming since 1900. Trump has announced withdrawal by the U.S. from the Paris Climate Change Agreement that would cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels. The Trump administration is relaxing rules by the EPA that would have contributed to the goals of the Paris Agreement.

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
Robert Stavins of the environmental economics program at Harvard is cited in this NYT article by Coral Davenport. Stavin says that even with the change in policy favoring fossil under Trump administration the trend is towards using less fossil fuel and this trend is unlikely to change. This makes the claims of Trump that half a million jobs can be created with less regulation of the coal industry and shale oil industry, less likely. Industry is shifting away from coal for economic reasons and investors preferences, say experts. At the same time the progress away from fossil fuels is likely to be inadequate to avoid the worst effects of global warming, says Stavins. The change by industry is reflected in the decisions made by executives such as Nicholas Akins at American Electric Power, Ohio based electric power company. Akins tells NYT that he is making decisions for power generation 20, 30 and 40 years from now, and this assumes some form of carbon control. He says no question but that industry will move forward with cleaner energy and that means closing large coal facilities. The incoming Trump administration does not affect his policy. Another factor away from coal is dictated by economics- the availability of cheap natural gas from hydraulic fracturing. Incentives for renewable sources such as wind, solar, are not likely to change either say experts, because the solar panels and wind turbines are made in Republican and Democratic favoring districts and have support of Republicans in places like Arizona, Texas and Kansas. ...

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
Prakash and Ghosh in the Hindusthan Times remind readers that even though India has ambitious plans for renewable energy much remains to be done in shifting to clean coal technologies. An estimated 80% of India's coal plants use obsolete technologies, making this an obvious area for improvement. India plans to make solar the source of 100GW of 175GW it plans to generate in renewable energy by 2022. Yet it must not be forgotten that coal is a dominant source for the foreseeable future and shifting to clean coal technologies is an area that should get top priority from the government. Today India is the third largest in terms of carbon emissions after the U.S and China.