World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The New Yorker Original article ›
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.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The global stocktake was set for 2023 at the 2015 Paris Climate Accords. This measures the progress towards limiting climate change warming to to 1.5 degrees rise in temperatures. The 2023 stocktake at COP28 Dubai shows the goal is elusive and the earth is at warming by 2.5 degrees Celsius, with the climate change action of industry and public participation flagging. The pandemic has worsened the financial ability of poorer countries to handle the transition to clean energy, even as it has caused serious floods and fires. The major oil companies are also not investing as needed.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Cost to reduce global warming to 1.5 degree centigrade goal set for climate change is estimated to cost $131 trillion. $116 trillion would be for electrification, new technologies, rebuilding electricity networks, efficiency. $24 trillion needs to be redirected quickly from fossil fuel investment to investment in reducing climate change by investing in other energy sources. 

The danger lies in 2.7 degree centigrade warming of the planet by the end of the century.

The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Guardian looks back at 2023 and covers the work of scientists from US, Germany and Brazil showing the damage. NASA scientist James Hansen tells The Guardian that with the current stage of politics and inaction on climate change young people in the world need to take over. Scientists at the Japan Meteorological Agency measured temperatures at 0.53 degrees centigrade higher than the global average 1990 -2021. This was higher than the previous high reached in 2016 of 0.35 degrees centigrade. Over the long term the world is considered to be 1.2 degrees hotter than preindustrial times, by experts. Included is the report "Hothouse Earth" by the Potsdam Institute of Climate research and other experts on the speed of the global warming.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
To limit global warming to increase in temperatures by 1.5 degree centigrade by 2030 requires 2019 global emissions of 52 billion metric tons to come down to 25 billion by 2030. If China continues to use coal the way it now does till 2030 as is expected today it will continue to have the 2019 carbon emissions of 14 million metric tons or more than half of global carbon emissions from about 27% today. Vice premier Han Zheng China's top climate and energy official has reversed course from his earlier admonition in September to "curb resolutely the blind development" of high emissions coal projects. After wide blackouts in Chinese cities and power cuts to factories in the past couple of weeks the new priority Zheng says is "increase coal supplies by any means necessary." Coal provides power to 56% of China's heavy industry. Chinese localities have 104 gigawatts of top priority coal power capacity planned more than what is installed in Japan and Russia. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Paris climate change agreement involved 195 countries. Agreed to on December 12, 2015 it was seen as a major step forward to limit global warming to 2 degrees celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Progress has been slow in taking action since then. Because of covid 19 the Glasgow conference was cancelled. Hope stems from the goals set for carbon neutral economy of Japan, the EU, UK, China, and the U.S. as it enters the agreement after withdrawing.  Much will depend on action taken as the pandemic has pushed economic goals of recovery to the forefront. As India has shown in renewable energy, particularly in solar energy targets and bold vision, there is a lot that can be done by each country acting on its own without the hype of the agreement. India now sees huge opportunities in solar energy because it is cheaper and pollutes less than coal. This is a game changer that comes from investing in new technologies and taking advantage of India's abundant access to sunny weather and the lower labor and other costs. ...
FRANCE 24 Original article ›
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. ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us