Saturday, September 11, 2021

Strict caps must be set on fossil fuel extraction to meet climate goals, study finds

By Nicoletta Lanese 
A large excavator loads a truck with oil sands in a mine in Alberta Province, Canada in October 2009. (Image credit: Getty / MARK RALSTON / AFP)

Nearly 60% of the world's oil and methane gas reserves and 90% of its coal reserves must remain in the ground by 2050 in order to meet the climate goals set by the Paris Agreement, a new study finds.

Leaving these fossil fuel reserves untouched would give the world a 50% chance of limiting the increase in global average temperatures to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above preindustrial levels, according to the study, published Wednesday (Sept. 8) in the journal Nature.

"If we want a higher chance of staying below 1.5 C, then we have to, of course, keep more carbon in the ground, more fossil fuels in the ground," study co-author James Price, a research associate at the University College London (UCL) Energy Institute, told reporters at a news conference Tuesday (Sept. 7).


Related: The reality of climate change: 10 myths busted

"I think this is a very important study" in that the work lays out, in concrete terms, what it really would take to meet goals set by the Paris Agreement, said Maisa Rojas, a co-author of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report and a climate scientist at the University of Chile, who was not involved in the new study.

"This is what it means — that there is a lot of fossil fuel that we cannot extract," Rojas said.

In 2015, parties to the Paris Agreement pledged to limit the increase in global average temperatures to well below 3.6 F (2 C) above preindustrial levels. Ideally, they aim to limit the increase to less than 2.7 F; limiting warming to this degree would slow, or even stop, some of the impacts of climate change that we're already seeing unfold, Live Science previously reported.

But to meet these goals, models suggest that the world should ideally reach net-zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2050. That means major changes need to be made right away, according to a report the IPCC released last month. In the first installment of its Sixth Assessment Report, the IPCC concluded that if average global temperatures continue to rise at current rates, we'll soon surpass an 2.7 F increase and hit 3.6 F of warming above preindustrial levels by 2050.

"Achieving global net zero CO2 emissions is a requirement for stabilizing CO2-induced global surface temperature increase," the IPCC report authors wrote. How do we reach net zero? The new Nature study highlights a critical step: We must cut the amount of fossil fuels we pull from the ground.

"We believe our new paper adds further weight to recent research that indicates the global oil and fossil methane gas production needs to peak now," first author Dan Welsby, an energy and environment researcher at UCL, said during the news conference. Specifically, the authors found that global oil and gas production needs to decline at an average annual rate of around 3% through 2050.

"For oil, this is a significant increase [from what] was found by a previous UCL study," published in 2015 in the journal Nature, Welsby noted. That study found that, to prevent global average temperatures from rising by more than 3.6 F, about a third of oil reserves, 50% of gas reserves and more than 80% of coal reserves would need to remain in the ground.

The new study also suggests that, "for coal, all regions need to have already reached peak production," Welsby said. On a somewhat promising note, studies suggest that global coal production already peaked in 2013, the authors noted. To meet the targets set forth in their paper, current coal production rates would need to fall by around 6% per year through 2050, Welsby said.

Related: 10 signs that Earth's climate is off the rails

These estimates come with a degree of uncertainty, Price noted at the news conference. For example, as temperatures rise, carbon released from melting permafrost could cause ripple effects in the carbon cycle, the process by which carbon atoms move between reservoirs on Earth. These kinds of shifts can make plants less efficient at pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere through photosynthesis, meaning efforts to limit fossil fuel production may need to ramp up in order to compensate, Rojas said.

RELATED CONTENT


Top 10 surprising results of global warming

In photos: Devastating wildfires in California

Photographic proof of climate change: Time-lapse images of retreating glaciers

In addition, the authors' climate model assumes that, each year, a certain amount of carbon will be sucked out of the atmosphere by carbon dioxide removal technologies. "However, there is substantial uncertainty as to whether these largely unproven technologies can be deployed as quickly, and at the scale required," Price said. The world's largest CO2-sucking plant opened in Iceland just this week, but in general, experts agree that these pricey technologies are not a viable replacement for cutting CO2 emissions on the front end, Gizmodo reported.

Given these uncertainties in the model, "the bleak picture painted by our scenarios for the global fossil fuel industry is very probably an underestimate of what is required," the authors wrote in the Nature study. "As a result, production would need to be curtailed even faster" than predicted.

But given the IPCC's latest report, can fossil fuel production and demand be curtailed dramatically enough that we avoid a global temperature increase of 2.7 F by 2050?

In reality, "it may well be the case that we'll surpass 1.5 degrees globally, around midcentury," Price said. But in anticipation of the third installment of the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report, which will address strategies to mitigate warming, "much of the modeling that goes on there will assume some overshoot above 1.5 degrees, and then we'll return to 1.5 degrees at some stage in the second half of the century," he said. In other words, even if the warming were to exceed 2.7 F at some point, efforts to rein in fossil fuel extraction now would still pay off in the long run.

"Really, what the future will look like will depend … on our decisions today," Rojas told Live Science. "This will all really depend on policies." These policies should include initiatives that both restrict fossil fuel production and reduce demand on the consumer side, study co-author Steve Pye, an associate professor of energy systems at the UCL Energy Institute, said at the news conference. For instance, moratoriums on production and bans on new exploration could curb fossil fuel extraction, while steep carbon pricing could target the consumer side, the authors wrote.
Advertisement

In this vein, Denmark and Costa Rica recently entered an agreement to phase out their domestic oil and gas production, and international agreements like theirs could be key to success on a global scale, Pye said. Of course, countries whose economies rely heavily on fossil fuel production will face the greatest challenges in decarbonizing, and ideally, international partners would help to support them through the transition, he said.

Originally published on Live Science.

Oil and gas reserves need to be left unburnt to hit Paris Climate Agreement goals: study
By Drew Costley The Associated Press
Posted September 10, 2021 


WATCH: Is there a 'just transition' away from fossil fuels? – Sep 2, 2021


Researchers who estimate how much of the world’s coaloil and natural gas reserves should be left unburned to slow the increase in climate-changing gases in the atmosphere say even more of these fossil fuels should be left in the ground.

The researchers, from University College London, say earlier estimates, published in 2015, had to be updated.

They now calculate that nearly 60% of the world’s oil and gas reserves and 90% of the coal reserves need to stay in the ground by 2050 to meet climate goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.

Those limits would give the world a 50-50 chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to pre-industrial times, according to their study Wednesday in the journal Nature.

“We believe on new paper adds further weight to recent research that indicates the global oil and fossil methane gas production needs to peak now,” Dan Welsby, lead author and an energy and environment researcher at the University College London, told a news conference Tuesday. “We found that global production needs decline at an average annual rate of around 3 percent (through) 2050.”

READ MORE: Despite political promises, plastic continues to fill Canada’s lakes, rivers and oceans

It’s been long known that emissions from burning fuels for electricity, transportation and other uses are the chief driver of climate change, pulling long-buried carbon in fossil fuels out of the ground and depositing that carbon into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Scientists say such heat-trapping gases are causing sea-level rise and extreme weather events around the world.

The last study like this was several months before world leaders drafted the 2015 Paris accord and pledged to reduce warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), but preferably to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius.



Oil industry looks for federal funding to decarbonize oilsands – Aug 31, 2021



That study, also conducted by University College London scientists, looked at how much countries would have to limit fossil fuel emissions to hold warming to 2 degrees Celsius. They found that a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and 80% of coal reserves would need to stay in the ground.

Emissions reductions proposed in this latest study dramatically increase the amount of fossil fuels that would need to stay in the ground to meet Paris targets.

The study comes less than a month after the International Panel on Climate Change reported that the world will likely cross the 1.5-degree-Celsius warming threshold in the 2030s under five scenarios of emissions reduction. Scientific consensus is that any warming past 1.5 degrees Celsius could result in catastrophic impacts, such as loss of species.

While acknowledging the IPCC report’s grim outlook, Welsby said he wanted to model a scenario that would limit the worst impacts of climate change.


READ MORE: Tree planting efforts can’t keep up with wildfire destruction, evidence shows

Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, editor-in-chief of the Annals of Global Health, said the the paper underscores how important government and corporate policy are in limiting warming. “The nations and corporate entities need to readjust their targets and leave oil, gas and coal in the ground if we’re ever going to get there,” Landrigan said.

His journal was one of over 200 health and medical publications that co-published an editorial on Sunday calling on world leaders to take emergency action to halt global warming.

In the editorial, medical and public health professionals highlighted the health impacts already wrought by our changing climate.




Canada election: Where do political parties stand on reducing gas emissions? – Aug 30, 2021



Dr. Renee Salas, who works in the emergency department of Massachusetts General Hospital, said she’s seen patients come in with health conditions that have been created or exacerbated by the climate change impacts, such as heat stroke and respiratory problems.

While everyone is at risk for adverse health impacts from climate change, Salas said, children, the elderly, the poor and racial minorities are disproportionately bearing the brunt.

A report last week by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found that poor people and people of color will be impacted disproportionately by severe heat, flooding and air pollution caused by our changing climate.


READ MORE: Why Canada could be burning coal well beyond the 2030 deadline set by the Liberals

Katharine Egland of Gulfport, Mississippi saw her house nearly destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The busy hurricane and storm season of 2020 cost her an additional $12,000 in damages. And she spent most of her vacation this past week helping Gulf Coast residents survive and recover from Hurricane Ida.

As chair of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s Environmental and Climate Justice Committee, she’s seen firsthand how poor and minority residents of the region suffer from the impacts of climate change the most.

While she welcomed the fossil fuels findings of the new climate studies, Egland said she is frustrated world leaders haven’t taken more action to reduce warming.

“Usually when these reports come out, … frontline communities are like, ‘Okay, we pretty much knew that,’” she said. “And we advocate to keep it all in the ground. And we keep listening to reasons why that can’t be done, but we know it has to be done.”

No comments: