A record hurricane season is ending. 

 What does climate change have to do with it?

Nov 21, 2020 
By —PBS NewsHour

Hurricane Iota made landfall in Central America earlier this week as a Category 4 storm. It's the 30th storm this Hurricane season, surpassing 2005 as the year with the most hurricanes ever. With this record Atlantic Hurricane season officially ending this month, Hari Sreenivasan speaks with Kevin Reed, a professor at Stony Brook University and director of the Climate Extremes Modeling Group about the connection between climate change and hurricanes.
Read the Full Transcript


Hari Sreenivasan:

Tens of thousands of Hondurans have been left homeless after flooding and damage caused by Hurricane Iota.

The storm struck Honduras earlier this week as a Category 4 hurricane with sustained winds of 155 miles per hour. Rain from the storm flooded neighborhoods and swelled rivers.

Iota was the second Category 4 hurricane to hit this part of Central America in two weeks.

Hurricane Eta caused more than 130 deaths and triggered mudslides as it made its way across the region.

Iota is the 30th named storm of the Atlantic Hurricane season, topping off a record year that resulted in the national hurricane center resorting to the Greek alphabet for letters.

As this record hurricane season officially comes to a close at the end of this month, we wanted to understand more about what's been discovered about the connection between climate change and extreme weather events like hurricanes.

I recently spoke with Kevin Reed, an associate professor at Stony Brook University who leads the school's Climate Extremes Modeling Group. I began by asking him how scientists are teasing out the effect of climate change on individual storms.


Kevin Reed:

When storms make landfall, they make an impact. They have hazards. And those hazards come through things like storm surge, high wind speeds and rainfall, right? Because extreme rainfall can cause flooding.

And so, one of the things we can do is we can use state-of-the-art models that are used for forecasting storms, and we can run these under different conditions that have climate change to-date in the signal, or removed. And so we basically come up with two sets of reality.


Hari Sreenivasan:

So you're taking a forecast like we would see on the Weather Channel and you're saying, what are the impacts that climate change could have on this storm. And then we take a look at kind of two outcomes with the rain and without the rain that's attributable to climate change?


Kevin Reed:

Yes. And so another way to put it is we run a forecast just like we typically would, the difference is then we also run a forecast in which we've removed the climate signal to-date, right?

So in the North Atlantic, that's approaching over one to two degrees Fahrenheit. The sea surface has increased in temperature over the last 150-plus years due to human-induced climate change. And we can remove that signal and we can rerun the forecasts. And so, we basically have two sets of forecasts. One we call the actual forecast, right? The kind of the real forecast, as well as the one in which we have this counterfactual, which we've removed warming.


Hari Sreenivasan:

When you look at a storm, say, for example, like Hurricane Laura now, what does this type of modeling tell us?


Kevin Reed:

Yes, so this type of modeling tells us that what we call the maximum accumulated rainfall amount, right, which is just the fancy way of saying how much rain fell during the lifetime of the storm. We're seeing increases of 5 to 10 percent. Meaning that if an example of Hurricane Laura, we had about 12 inches of rainfall in some regions. And so, that's an increase of about an inch in some cases of rainfall. So we're attributing how much rainfall in an individual hurricane is due to climate change.


Hari Sreenivasan:

When you are looking out into the future. Are we likely to see more storms or more intense storms or both?


Kevin Reed:

Yeah, so that's to some extent an open question still. And the consensus is that there will be a decrease or the number of hurricanes, for example, globally will remain about the same or decrease.

What that means for individual basins like the North Atlantic is a little bit harder to understand, in part because there are things like natural variability from year to year, right? But we do know our models do tell us that the storms are becoming more intense, both in terms of the the maximum wind speed, but also in the amount of rainfall.

We expect about a 5 to 7 percent increase in rainfall within tropical cyclones, within hurricanes for every degree Celsius of warming that we have. And so if you see in the North Atlantic, right, if we were to flash forward 50 years in the North Atlantic is you know two or three degrees warmer than it is now, then you could start to expect upwards of over 10, maybe approaching 20 percent increase in tropical cyclone rainfall.


Hari Sreenivasan:

What are the data sets that you're looking at now that you hope will help refine the way that you model things, the way that people can prepare going forward? I mean, is there a way that we could look at hurricane forecasts when we're watching TV before the storm sets in and realize that this is going to be worse each time because of all of these other factors of sea level rise and ocean temperatures warming?


Kevin Reed:

Yeah, these type of analysis in which we're able to kind of quantify the impact of climate change on things like hurricanes as well as other extreme weather events has definitely increased in sophistication, meaning each time we do these type of things, like most things in life, we're getting better at analyzing the data, we're getting quicker turnaround in terms of running simulations. And I think that in the future we could have a system in which we're doing that real time. Not only are we exploring the impact of climate change on the storm that occurred to date, but also providing some future, a peek into the future.

What would the storm look like under one or two or three additional degrees of warming? And I think that that would help both inform decision making, right? To see, OK, this storm was was really impactful, how much worse would this storm be in the future? But also, it allows us to communicate that the impacts of climate change are not one hundred years off.

The impacts of climate change are here now. They are changing the weather around us and they are having a real impact on society through that.


Hari Sreenivasan:

All right. Kevin Reed, associate professor at Stony Brook University, thanks so much for joining us.


Kevin Reed:

Great. Thanks for having me.

Here's How Pfizer's And Moderna's Breakthrough COVID-19 Vaccines Work

(Images By Tang Ming Tung/DigitalVision/Getty Images)
HEALTH

SANJAY MISHRA, THE CONVERSATION
22 NOVEMBER 2020

As the weather cools, the number of infections of the COVID-19 pandemic are rising sharply. Hamstrung by pandemic fatigue, economic constraints, and political discord, public health officials have struggled to control the surging pandemic.

But now, a rush of interim analyses from pharmaceutical companies Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech have spurred optimism that a novel type of vaccine made from messenger RNA, known as mRNA, can offer high levels of protection by preventing COVID-19 among people who are vaccinated.

Although unpublished, these preliminary reports have exceeded the expectations of many vaccine experts, including mine. Until early this year, I worked on developing vaccine candidates against Zika and dengue.

Now I am coordinating an international effort to collect reports on adult patients with current or previous cancers who have also been diagnosed with COVID-19.
Promising preliminary results

Moderna reported that during the phase 3 study of its vaccine candidate mRNA-1273, which enrolled 30,000 adult US participants, just five of the 95 COVID-19 cases occurred among the vaccinated, while 90 infections were identified in the placebo group.

This corresponds to an efficacy of 94.5 percent. None of the infected patients who received the vaccine developed severe COVID-19, while 11 (12 percent) of those who received the placebo did.

Similarly, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine candidate, BNT162b2, was 90 percent effective in preventing infection during the phase 3 clinical trial, which enrolled 43,538 participants, with 30 percent in US and 42 percent abroad.

How does mRNA vaccine work?

Vaccines train the immune system to recognize the disease-causing part of a virus. Vaccines traditionally contain either weakened viruses or purified signature proteins of the virus.

But an mRNA vaccine is different, because rather than having the viral protein injected, a person receives genetic material – mRNA – that encodes the viral protein.

When these genetic instructions are injected into the upper arm, the muscle cells translate them to make the viral protein directly in the body.

This approach mimics what the SARS-CoV-2 does in nature – but the vaccine mRNA codes only for the critical fragment of the viral protein. This gives the immune system a preview of what the real virus looks like without causing disease.

This preview gives the immune system time to design powerful antibodies that can neutralize the real virus if the individual is ever infected.

While this synthetic mRNA is genetic material, it cannot be transmitted to the next generation. After an mRNA injection, this molecule guides the protein production inside the muscle cells, which reaches peak levels for 24 to 48 hours and can last for a few more days.

Why is making an mRNA vaccine so fast?

Traditional vaccine development, although well studied, is very time-consuming and cannot respond instantaneously against novel pandemics such as COVID-19.

For example, for seasonal flu, it takes roughly six months from identification of the circulating influenza virus strain to produce a vaccine. The candidate flu vaccine virus is grown for about three weeks to produce a hybrid virus, which is less dangerous and better able to grow in hens' eggs.

The hybrid virus is then injected into a lot of fertilized eggs and incubated for several days to make more copies. Then the fluid containing the virus is harvested from eggs, the vaccine viruses are killed, and the viral proteins are purified over several days.

The mRNA vaccines can leapfrog the hurdles of developing traditional vaccines, such as producing non-infectious viruses, or producing viral proteins at medically demanding levels of purity.

MRNA vaccines eliminate much of the manufacturing process because rather than having viral proteins injected, the human body uses the instructions to manufacture viral proteins itself.

Also, mRNA molecules are far simpler than proteins. For vaccines, mRNA is manufactured by chemical rather than biological synthesis, so it is much quicker than conventional vaccines to be redesigned, scaled up, and mass-produced.

In fact, within days of the genetic code of the SARS-CoV-2 virus becoming available, the mRNA code for a candidate vaccine testing was ready. What's most attractive is that once the mRNA vaccine tools become viable, mRNA can be quickly tailored for other future pandemics.

What are problems with mRNA?

MRNA technology isn't new. It was shown a while back that when synthetic mRNA is injected into an animal, the cells can produce a desired protein. But the progress remained slow.

That's because mRNA is not only notoriously unstable and easy to degrade into smaller components, it is also easily destroyed by the human body's immune defenses, which make delivering it to the target very inefficient.

But beginning in 2005, researchers figured out how to stabilize mRNA and package it into small particles to deliver it as a vaccine. The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are expected to be the first using this technology to be approved by the FDA.

After a decade of work, the mRNA vaccines are now ready for evaluation. Physicians will be watching for unintended immune reactions, which can be both helpful and detrimental.

Why keep mRNA supercold?

The most important challenge for development of an mRNA vaccine remains its inherent instability because it is more likely to break apart above freezing temperatures.

Modification of the mRNA building blocks and development of the particles that can cocoon it relatively safely have helped the mRNA vaccine candidates. But this new class of vaccine still requires unprecedented freezer conditions for distribution and administration.
What are the refrigeration requirements?

The Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine will need to be optimally stored at minus 94 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 70 degrees Celsius) and will degrade in around five days at normal refrigeration temperatures of slightly above freezing.

In contrast, Moderna claims its vaccine can be maintained at most home or medical freezer temperatures for up to six months for shipping and longer-term storage.

Moderna also claims its vaccine can remain stable at standard refrigerated conditions, of 36 to 46 degrees Fahrenheit (2 to 8 degrees Celsius), for up to 30 days after thawing, within the six-month shelf life.

Not surprisingly, Pfizer is also developing shipping containers using dry ice to address shipping constraints.

Sanjay Mishra, Project Coordinator & Staff Scientist, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Medieval soldier found with sword and knives at the bottom of a Lithuanian lake

By Mindy Weisberger - Senior Writer 4 days ago

The submerged remains were discovered with weapons nearby.


The skeleton and artifacts were surprisingly well-preserved.
(Image: © Photo by A. Matiukas)

More than 500 years ago, a medieval soldier's dead body settled at the bottom of a Lithuanian lake, and for centuries it lay hidden beneath the mud. Now, those submerged remains have finally been found.

The skeleton was discovered during an underwater inspection of the old Dubingiai bridge in eastern Lithuania's Lake Asveja. Though the skeleton lay under a layer of sand and silt, the scene was not a burial, said archaeologist Elena Pranckėnaitė, a researcher with Klaipėda University in Klaipėda, Lithuania, according to the Baltic News Service (BNS). Rather, water currents likely deposited sediments that covered the remains over time.

Scientists with the Faculty of Medicine at Vilnius University in Vilnius, Lithuania, examined the body and reported that the person was male and that he died in the 16th century, though they don't yet know why he died, according to BNS. Weapons and other items recovered from the lake bottom near the body hinted at the dead man's military status, Pranckėnaitė told Live Science in an email.

Related: Photos: Medieval skeletons unearthed near saint's tomb in England

Human burials linked to warfare have previously been excavated across the region, but this is the first time that a medieval soldier has been discovered underwater in Lithuania, Pranckėnaitė said.

Dubingiai Bridge, one of the longest wooden bridges still in use in Lithuania, was built in 1934, and its deteriorating beams are currently being replaced with metal poles, representatives of TEC Infrastructure, the company supervising the repair project under the Lithuanian Ministry of Transport and Communications, said in a statement. Archaeologists collaborated with amateur divers to perform the survey, and divers located the remains at a depth of 30 feet (9 meters) while inspecting the wooden bridge's support system, according to the statement.

A previous survey in 1998 had revealed that another bridge once stood in the same place, dating to the 16th or 17th century — around the time that the medieval soldier died, Pranckėnaitė added.

"For now, we assume that those discovered human remains could be linked with the former bridge leading to Dubingiai castle, which was situated on the hilltop on the shore of Asveja Lake," she said.

Finding the soldier's remains was a big surprise, but equally astonishing was the remarkable preservation of the skeleton and artifacts. The divers recovered a pair of leather boots with spurs; a leather belt with a buckle; an iron sword; "and two knives with wooden handles," Pranckėnaitė wrote in the email. A team of archaeologists, anthropologists and historians at the National Museum of Lithuania are now working to conserve and interpret the objects.

This discovery and data "are really 'fresh' and still need to be carefully analyzed," Pranckėnaitė said. "We hope to 'tell the story' of this soldier at least in a year."

Originally published on Live Science.

Tiny owl found hiding in the Rockefeller Christmas tree isn't going home. Here's why.

He's a northern saw-whet owl, one of the smallest owls in the U.S.

By Laura Geggel - Associate Editor 3 days ago

Rockefeller, the stowaway owl found in the Norway Spruce taken to Rockefeller Center, all wrapped up in a sweater.
(Image: © Ravensbeard Wildlife Center)

This season's new Christmas hero — a tiny owl stowaway that survived the long drive from upstate New York to Rockefeller Center in Manhattan on a Norway spruce — won't be taken back to his former home to be released back into the wild.

So, will he be OK?

"There's been a lot of controversy over the release site," said Ellen Kalish, director and founder of Ravensbeard Wildlife Center, a nonprofit in Saugerties, New York, where the owl, named Rockefeller after the Christmas tree where he was found, is recovering. "[But] saw-whet owls by nature are nomadic. They basically don't have a home base unless they're raising a family, in which case they both help to feed the babies and then they're off to their solo life."

This nomadic lifestyle works in Rockefeller's favor. Rather than "stress him out" on a two-hour journey to his old home in Oneonta, New York, Kalish is planning to release him from the wildlife center into the surrounding woods this Saturday (Nov. 21).

"It's called a soft release where we're going to put food out on the platform in case he's hungry and doesn't have a successful night of hunting," Kalish told Live Science. "We believe that he's going to go where he wants to go."

In the end, this unexpected adventure will be "just a little detour" for the nocturnal predator, she said.

Image 2 of 4


A man who helped transport and secure the Rockefeller Christmas tree found the tiny stowaway. (Image credit: Ravensbeard Wildlife Center)



Northern saw-whet owls are forest birds; they often sleep in pine tree cavities during the day to avoid predators, and then hunt at night. (Image credit: Ravensbeard Wildlife Center)



Rockefeller is set to be released this Saturday (Nov. 21). (Image credit: Ravensbeard Wildlife Center)

Ellen Kalish, director and founder of Ravensbeard Wildlife Center, holds Rockefeller, who got a clean bill a health from the vet. (Image credit: Ravensbeard Wildlife Center)

Kalish learned about the vagabond bird earlier this week, when the wife of a worker who helped transport and secure the 75-foot-long (23 meters) Norway spruce called to ask whether the center rehabilitated owls. The woman's husband had found what he thought was a baby owl in the famed Christmas tree, but the little fluff was a long way from home.

Kalish agreed to take the owl. "Initially, when I opened the box and I looked at him, I was so grateful that he was alert and bright-eyed and not in a little heap at the bottom of the box," she said.

She immediately realized it wasn't an owlet, but a full-grown northern saw-whet owl (Aegolius acadicus); at 2.5 ounces (70 grams), it's one of the smallest owl species in the United States. (The smallest owl in the world, the appropriately-named elf owl, lives in parts of the American Southwest and Mexico.) Saw-whet owls are named for a call they make, which sounds like a saw being sharpened against a whetting stone, according to The Cornell Lab of Ornithology.

Back at Ravensbeard, Kalish has fed Rockefeller plenty of mice, but "we didn't watch [him eat] because we don't want him to associate humans with food," she said. It's likely that Rockefeller hadn't dined or drunk anything for three days, so "we're just giving him a buffet of all-you-can-eat mice and fattening him up, because he was very thin."

Northern saw-whet owls have a catlike face, oversized head and bright yellow eyes, according to the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. (Image credit: Ravensbeard Wildlife Center)

Otherwise, Rockefeller is doing great. X-rays showed that he didn't have any fractures and his muscle condition looks good, a vet told Kalish.

As for how Rockefeller became a Christmas tree hitchhiker, he isn't spilling the beans.

"It's anybody's guess; he's the only one who knows his true story," Kalish said. "We suspect that he was trapped or stunned. He could even be in a tree cavity and no one noticed, because [saw-whet owls] are so camouflaged."

Rockefeller isn't the only unexpected owl "ornament" on record. Last year, a Georgia family was stunned to find an Eastern screech owl in their Christmas tree, according to Fox4 News.

Originally published on Live Science.


RELATED CONTENT

Whooo knew? 10 superb facts about owls

—Photos: Salmon-eating owls revealed in stunning images

—Whooo's in there? Images of amazing owls

—Giant owls and painted snails: Incredible creatures from Cuba, in photos

Astronomers detect millions of signals from an intelligent civilization: Us


By Michelle Starr - ScienceAlert 

The powerful 330-foot (100 meters) radio telescope at Green Bank, West Virginia.
(Image: © mike zorger via Getty Images)

The Universe seems like a lonely place.

We know - we're proof of it - that intelligent civilizations (yes, civilizations) are possible. Finding signs of other civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy is not such a simple matter, but we do have tools at our disposal. Based on our own technological capabilities, we can extrapolate what signals alien technology might emit, and search for those.

These signs are called technosignatures, and our efforts in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) revolve around them, particularly in radio wavelengths.

"One of the great advantages of the search for technosignatures at radio wavelengths is that we are sensitive to signals emitted from thousands of light years away, and it does not take that much power," astronomer Jean-Luc Margot of the University of California Los Angeles told ScienceAlert.

"For instance, our search can detect the Arecibo Planetary Radar at distances of over 400 light years. And it can detect a transmitter that is only 1,000 times more powerful than Arecibo - a trivial improvement for an advanced civilization - all the way to the centre of the galaxy. The volume of the galaxy that can be sampled with a radio search for technosignatures is immense."

Margot and his team recently conducted a search for technosignatures using the Green Bank Telescope, a powerful radio telescope in West Virginia.

In April of 2018 and 2019, for a total observing time of four hours, they homed in on 31 Sun-like stars around the galactic plane, detecting a total of 26,631,913 candidate technosignatures.

A closer analysis of the data revealed that every single one of those candidate technosignatures was generated right here on Earth.

But the methods used to process those data are a significant step forward in identifying possible alien technosignatures, teasing them out from the background humming and pinging of anthropogenic radio noise - what we call radio-frequency interference, or RFI. Navigation technology, satellite technology, mobile phones, microwave ovens, aircraft, communications; we're constantly bathing our surroundings in radio-frequency radiation.

"RFI could potentially obscure an extraterrestrial signal," Margot said. "RFI makes our job more difficult because we detect tens of millions of signals per hour of telescope time, and we need to make a determination about every single signal: is it anthropogenic or is it extraterrestrial?

"It would be a lot easier if we detected only a few signals. Fortunately, our algorithms allow us to automatically classify over 99.8 percent of the signals."

The team made several improvements to their data processing pipeline, refining the sensitivity and signal detection rate, as well as the filter used to automatically classify RFI signals in the data, and thus rule them out as alien technosignatures.

As Margot noted, these filters correctly flagged 26,588,893 (99.84 percent) of the signals as anthropogenic RFI. When you're dealing with numbers that large, that still leaves a lot of data to process; in this case, it was 43,020 signals.

The majority of these remaining signals fell within the range of known RFI, and were classified accordingly. That left 4,539 signals as the most promising alien technosignature candidates. These had to be carefully visually inspected - and every single one was also ultimately determined to be anthropogenic in origin.

"If a signal is detected in multiple directions on the sky, we can be extremely confident that it's anthropogenic," Margot said. "An extraterrestrial signal from an emitter at interstellar distances would be detected in only one direction."

The result isn't unexpected. A search earlier this year of a much larger stellar sample, 10 million stars, also turned up no signs of alien technology. But that wasn't really the point; or at least, not the only point.

Firstly, Margot uses SETI data processing as a tool for training students at UCLA.

"We conduct the search as part of a SETI course that I have taught at UCLA annually since 2016. This course appears to be unique in the US and perhaps worldwide," he explained.

"Students collect terabytes of data from known or suspected planetary systems, write a data-processing pipeline collaboratively, search for technosignatures in the data, and publish the results. It is most satisfying to witness the students acquire important skills .. all in the context of this important search."

The team's refined pipeline also revealed some issues with previous attempts to process SETI data; more specifically, attempts to quantify how many transmitting civilisations there might be in the Milky Way galaxy. Their results show that these estimates may be too low by up to a factor of 15, partially because the data-processing pipelines "fail to detect some of the signals that they are designed to detect," Margot noted.

"We implemented a signal injection and recovery analysis tool that allows us to quantify the efficiency of data-processing pipelines. This efficiency must be taken into account when attempting to place bounds on the number of transmitting civilisations."

There are some limitations to the team's pipeline. Where two signals intersect, the algorithm only picks up the one with the highest signal-to-noise ratio; faint signals against a high level of background noise can be missed, too. This means that regions of high signal density can result in a reduction of the signal recovery rate.

Overcoming these limitations could be the focus of future work. But it's work worth doing. RFI isn't just a problem for SETI but for all radio astronomers, so much so that some measurements can no longer be made from Earth. Hence scientists are eyeing the far side of the Moon for a radio telescope. The Moon acts as a natural buffer against anthropogenic radio interference.

And, of course, there's the possibility - slight, but non-zero - that we might detect something.

"The search may answer one of the most profound scientific questions of our time: Are we alone?" Margot told ScienceAlert.

"All life on Earth is related to a common ancestor, and the discovery of other forms of life will revolutionise our understanding of living systems. On a more philosophical level, it will transform our perception of humanity's place in the cosmos."

The research has been accepted into The Astronomical Journal, and is available on arXiv.

This article was originally published by ScienceAlert. Read the original article here.

Could we ever pull enough carbon out of the atmosphere to stop climate change?

Planting trees helps, but what are other ways?

By Donavyn Coffey - Live Science Contributor 

Planting 1 trillion trees is one way to store unwanted carbon.
(Image: © Shutterstock)

Nature has equipped Earth with several giant "sponges," or carbon sinks, that can help humans battle climate change. These natural sponges, as well as human-made ones, can sop up carbon, effectively removing it from the atmosphere.

But what does this sci-fi-like act really entail? And how much will it actually take — and cost — to make a difference and slow climate change?

Sabine Fuss has been looking for these answers for the last two years. An economist in Berlin, Fuss leads a research group at the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change and was part of the original Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — established by the United Nations to assess the science, risks and impacts of global warming. After the panel’s 2018 report and the new Paris Agreement goal to keep global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) or less, Fuss was tasked with finding out which carbon removal strategies were most promising and feasible.

Related: What is a carbon sink

Afforestation and reforestation — planting or replanting of forests, respectively — are well known natural carbon sinks. Vast numbers of trees can sequester the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere for photosynthesis, a chemical reaction that uses the sun's energy to turn carbon dioxide and water into sugar and oxygen. According to a 2019 study in the journal Science, planting 1 trillion trees could store about 225 billion tons (205 billion metric tons) of carbon, or about two-thirds of the carbon released by humans into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution began.

Agriculture land management is another natural carbon removal approach that's relatively low risk and already being tested out, according to Jane Zelikova, terrestrial ecologist and chief scientist at Carbon180, a nonprofit that advocates for carbon removal strategies in the U.S. Practices such as rotational grazing, reduced tilling and crop rotation increase carbon intake by photosynthesis, and that carbon is eventually stored in root tissues that decompose in the soil. The National Academy of Sciences found that carbon storage in soil was enough to offset as much as 10% of U.S. annual net emissions — or about 632 million tons (574 million metric tons) of CO2 — at a low cost.

But nature-based carbon removal, like planting and replanting forests, can conflict with other policy goals, like food production, Fuss said. Scaled up, these strategies require a lot of land, oftentimes land that's already in use.

This is why more tech-based approaches to carbon removal are crucial, they say. With direct air capture and carbon storage, for instance, a chemical process takes carbon dioxide out of the air and binds it to filters. When the filter is heated, the CO2 can be captured and then injected underground. There are currently 15 direct air capture plants worldwide, according to the International Energy Agency. There's also bioenergy with carbon capture. With this method, plants and trees are grown, creating a carbon sink, and then the organic material is burned to produce heat or fuel known as bioenergy. During combustion, the carbon emissions are captured and stored underground. Another carbon capture trick involves mineralization; in this process, rocks get ground up to increase the surfaces available to chemically react with, and crystallize, CO2. Afterward, the mineralized CO2 is stored underground.

However, none of these technologies have been implemented on a large scale. They're extremely expensive, with estimates as high as $400 per ton of CO2 removed, and each still requires a lot of research and support before being deployed. But the U.S. is a good example of how a mix of carbon removal solutions could work together, Zelikova said: Land management could be used in the agricultural Midwest; basalt rocks in the Pacific Northwest are great for mineralization; and the oil fields in the Southwest are already primed with the right technology and skilled workers for underground carbon storage, she said.

Related: Why does the Earth rotate?

Ultimately, every country will have to put together its own unique portfolio of CO2 removal strategies because no single intervention will be successful on its own. "If we scaled up any of them exclusively, it would be a disaster," Fuss said. "It would use a lot of land or be prohibitively expensive." Her research has shown that afforestation and reforestation will be most productive in tropical regions, whereas solar radiation differences in the more northern latitudes with more albedo (reflection of light back into space) mean those countries will likely have better luck investing in the more technological interventions, such as carbon capture and biomass extraction.

The need to deploy these solutions is imminent. The global carbon budget, the amount of CO2 humans can emit before the global temperature rises 2.7 F (1.5 C) above preindustrial levels, is about 300 gigatons of CO2, Fuss said.

"In recent years, we've emitted 40 gigatons," she said. Put another way, only a few years are left in that budget. A recent study in the journal Scientific Reports suggests that waiting even a few years from now may be too late if we are to meet the goal set in the Paris Agreement. Based on their climate model, the authors predict that even if we stop emitting greenhouse gases entirely, "global temperatures will be 3 C [5.4 F] warmer and sea levels 3 meters [10 feet] higher by 2500 than they were in 1850." To reverse climate change's effects, 33 gigatons of existing greenhouse gases must be removed this year and every year moving forward, the researchers said.

The reality, however, is these approaches are not ready and there's not a consensus on how to pay for them. There is a consensus among scientists on the next step: We need to stop further emissions immediately. But, "since emissions are embedded in our daily lives and infrastructure," Fuss said, "[carbon] removal comes more to the forefront."

Originally published on Live Science.

 GREEN CAPITALI$M

Mubadala joins One Planet Sovereign Wealth Funds to drive positive change on climate issues

ABU DHABI, 22nd November, 2020 (WAM) -- Mubadala Investment Company today announced that it has officially become a member of the One Planet Sovereign Wealth Funds, OPSWF, initiative, an international coalition of SWFs established to integrate climate change considerations into their decision making and support global climate action.

Through the new membership, Mubadala will leverage its scale and global presence to drive positive change through the endorsement of the OPSWF Framework to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, mitigate the effects of climate change and create sustainable market outcomes.

Mubadala’s membership was announced during the virtual 3rd OPSWF CEO Summit, which was attended by SWF members in the presence of French President Emmanuel Macron.

Mubadala has also become a full member of the International Forum of Sovereign Wealth Funds, IFSWF. The Funds is a voluntary organisation of global sovereign wealth funds committed to working together to strengthen the sovereign wealth fund community through defining best practices, dialogue, research, and self-assessment.

IFSWF represents a group of almost 40 members from around the world with a variety of mandates. The IFSWF encourages all members to adhere to and uphold the Santiago Principles , which consist of 24 generally accepted principles and practices designed to promote a more open dialogue and deeper understanding of SWF activities.

Ahmed Saeed Al Calily, Chief Strategy and Risk Officer, Mubadala Investment Company, said, "As a responsible investor managing a global portfolio, our membership with both the OPSWF and the IFSWF demonstrates our commitment to integrating environmental, social and governance considerations when making investment decisions and as part of the overall management of our portfolio. It is also an opportunity for us to collaborate and align with other sovereign wealth funds and reinforce our commitment to climate change, good governance, accountability and transparency."

Mubadala, along with asset companies such as Masdar, continues to invest in sustainable energy. Today, Masdar has active investments in over 30 countries and US $19.9 billion deployed in global projects including wind and solar.

WAM/Esraa Ismail/Tariq alfaham

Shell process to make blue hydrogen production affordable

, 1 hours, 41 minutes ago

Shell Catalysts and Technologies is launching the Shell Blue Hydrogen Process, which integrates proven technologies to increase significantly the affordability of greenfield projects for “blue” hydrogen production from natural gas along with carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS).

 

Affordable blue hydrogen enables the decarbonisation of hard-to-abate heavy industries while creating value for refiners and resource holders. Shell’s new process can reduce the levellised cost of hydrogen by 22 per cent compared with the best the market has to offer today.

 

Without low-carbon hydrogen, the net-zero goals announced by governments and companies will be difficult to achieve. Currently, hydrogen production is nearly all “grey” (from hydrocarbons without CCUS). If hydrogen is to contribute to carbon neutrality, it must be produced on a much larger scale and with far lower emission levels.

 

Blue hydrogen production can be relatively easily scaled up to meet demand. With carbon dioxide (CO2) costing $25–35/t, blue hydrogen becomes competitive against grey, even with its higher capital costs. And green hydrogen, produced from the renewable-energy powered electrolysis of water, may still be more than double the price of blue hydrogen by 2030 and not achieve cost parity until about 2045.

 

Advantages

 

This analysis is based on conventional steam methane reforming (SMR) and autothermal reforming (ATR) technologies. The availability of the Shell Blue Hydrogen Process, which integrates proprietary Shell gas partial oxidation (SGP) technology with ADIP ULTRA solvent technology, further improves blue hydrogen economics.

 

A key advantage of SGP technology over ATR is that the partial oxidation reaction does not require steam. Instead, high-pressure steam is generated, which satisfies the steam demands of the process and some other power consumers. There is also no need for feed gas pretreatment, which simples the process line-up. And SGP gives refiners greater feed flexibility, as it is more robust against feed contaminants and can thus accommodate a large range of natural gas qualities.

 

Compared with ATR, SGP technology gives a 22 per cent lower levellised cost of hydrogen from:

 

• 17 per cent lower capital expenditure (higher operating pressure giving smaller hydrogen compressor and CO2 capture and compressor units).

 

• 34 per cent lower operating expenditure (excluding the natural gas feedstock price) from reduced compression duties and more steam generation.

 

Modelling shows that, compared with an ATR unit, a Shell Blue Hydrogen Process line-up producing 500 t/d of pure hydrogen would have:

 

• $30 million per year lower operating expenditure.

 

• More than 99 per cent CO2 capture.

 

• 10–25 per cent lower levellised cost of hydrogen.

 

UNICEF appoints young Zimbabwean as climate advocate

November 21, 2020 Staff Reporter

 

Nkosilathi Nyathi

---

UNICEF Zimbabwe this week announced the appointment of Nkosilathi Nyathi (17) as a UNICEF Youth Climate Advocate to advance the climate and environment agenda in Zimbabwe.

His role will also include mobilising other young people to join the fight against climate change.

The appointment comes as UNICEF commemorated World Children’s Day yesterday, November 20, under the theme “Reimagining a greener more sustainable future, for every child”.

Nyathi, who is from Victoria Falls, has been an advocate for climate change and environmental issues since he was 10 years old when he actively participated in his school’s environmental club. Since 2015, he has been engaged with UNICEF as well as Greenline Africa advocating for climate action in many fora and events and giving a voice of young people about climate change in Zimbabwe and Africa.

“This appointment gives me a greater opportunity to lend a voice for the youth around climate change because we are the future,” says Nyathi.

“I am excited and ready to work with others in saving our planet and protecting children from the impact of climate change and environmental degradation.

“I live it, my family and friends live it too. I stand in solidarity with countless young people who want their voices to be heard and acted upon for climate action. We are becoming more certain that we will be heard and those in power will listen.”

Over the years, Nyathi’s passion for climate change issues, which stem from the continued environmental degradation he has witnessed in his hometown, has motivated him to participate in important climate change initiatives around the world.

He travelled to the COP25 Climate Summit in Spain last year (2019). Nyathi joined the voices of children and young people from around the world who called on world leaders to urgently address the climate and biodiversity challenges facing the world today. In February this year (2020), Nyathi participated in the Sixth Session of the African Regional Summit on Sustainable Development in Victoria Falls, making a passionate opening speech in the presence of world leaders including the United Nations Deputy Secretary General, Amina Mohammed, and President Emmerson Mnangagwa.

“UNICEF has worked with and supported Nkosi in his climate activism for some years and we are proud to be part of his journey and excited to formalize his appointment as a UNICEF Youth Climate Advocate,” UNICEF Zimbabwe Representative, Laylee Moshiri said.

“Climate Change is a child rights issue, and it is very important that awareness is raised among young people, by young people to drive hope for a better future — one with a safe and secure environment.”

World Children’s Day is UNICEF’s global day of action for children, by children, marking the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on November 20, 1989.

On this day, UNICEF advocates and raises awareness for the most pressing issues facing children. This year, World Children’s Day is taking place during one of the most unique and challenging moments in our history as the Covid-19 pandemic, and the related political, social and economic upheavals impact the lives of children everywhere. UNICEF remains on the front line, delivering for every child.

EXPLAINER
Does Trudeau’s net-zero emissions legislation go far enough? Here’s what you need to know

Bill C-12 would make net-zero emissions by 2050 law and require government to legislate climate targets every five years starting in 2030 — but experts are concerned about its shortfall

The federal government has released new legally-binding legislation that commits Canada to reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. However, experts are raising questions about the government's short-term goals and what accountability measures will be implemented. 

Photo: Justin Trudeau / Flickr

Ainslie Cruickshank Nov 20, 2020 THE NARWHAL

Environmental groups welcomed the introduction of climate accountability legislation in the House of Commons Thursday but warned the bill as written doesn’t have the teeth needed to ensure Canada meets its climate targets.

Bill C-12 requires the Minister of the Environment to set five-year emissions reductions targets starting in 2030 in order to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 and to develop plans for meeting each goal.
Get The Narwhal in your inbox!


People always tell us they love our newsletter. Find out yourself with a weekly dose of our ad‑free, independent journalism
Your emailYour emailSUBSCRIBE


But if the government fails to meet one of its legislated targets, the minister is only required to explain why and describe the actions the government is taking or will take to meet it.

While the public reporting requirements could add pressure on the government to take needed climate action, “to be truly accountable, the bill needs to go one step further and actually require the minister to ensure that those plans will meet the specific targets,” said Anna Johnston, a staff lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law.
Lawyer wants legal requirement to meet targets made clear in legislation

Canada has so far failed to meet its international climate targets and the federal government’s own data shows the country is currently on track to miss its 2030 target as well.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reiterated his commitment Thursday that Canada would not only meet, but exceed its existing 2030 emissions reductions targets and said “ultimately the accountability for government’s actions or inaction is from Canadians themselves.”

Currently, Canada has failed to meet its international emissions target, and also appears to be on track to miss its 2030 target. In response to the federal government’s new net-zero emissions legislation, experts are calling for more near-term targets and accountability measures. Photo: Garth Lenz / The Narwhal

Johnston, however, said “Canadians shouldn’t bear the burden of making sure their elected representatives do what they say they will do.”

Accountability for establishing targets and meeting them should be enshrined in the legislation so the government can be held to account in the courts, she said.

As it stands, the proposed bill doesn’t quite meet the standards set by the United Kingdom’s climate accountability legislation, which, according to Johnston, sets clearer requirements for the government to follow expert advice, establish carbon budgets and achieve targeted emissions reductions.

“It is a good first step,” Johnston said, but she and others hope the legislation will be strengthened before it becomes law.

Environmental groups call for 2025 climate target

Catherine Abreu, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, was among those who called for the government to add a 2025 emissions reduction target to the bill and to set a more ambitious target for 2030.

“If this piece of legislation is going to drive climate ambition — and that’s what we need it to do — it needs to do that in the near-term, not just in the long-term,” she said.

If the bill passes as written, the federal government will have up to nine months after the legislation is enshrined to establish a 2030 target and to develop a plan to meet that goal.

But the Trudeau government would not have to report on its own progress toward meeting that goal during its current term, as the first progress report would only be required by the beginning of 2028.

The government’s plans to meet its emissions reductions goals will have to include a description of the key measures the government will undertake to reduce emissions and a description of relevant sector-specific strategies.

The bill also requires the government to report publicly on its progress towards each five-year target and further requires the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to assess and report on the government’s progress at least once every five years.

The legislation will also establish an expert advisory body to advise the minister on measures to reach net zero emissions.

While Abreu is happy to see the creation of an expert committee included in the bill, she noted that expert advice is needed to inform the establishment of interim targets and development of plans to reach those targets as well as the government’s ultimate 2050 net-zero emissions goal.

Dale Marshall, national climate program manager at Environmental Defence, also raised concerns that the bill doesn’t require regular assessment of the government’s progress by independent experts.

“The climate accountability legislation introduced today unfortunately has major deficiencies that will, at best, hold future federal governments accountable for Canada’s climate commitments,” Marshall said in a statement. 

Meeting Canada’s climate targets requires support from provinces, territories

Experts say there is an urgent need to address the role provinces and territories have to play in meeting Canada’s legislated climate targets.

“That’s a big barrier to progress on climate change in this country and something that we are going to need to confront,” Abreu said.

She noted there’s a “huge variation” in the climate ambition of different provinces.

“Figuring out how we balance the level of effort fairly across the country is not an easy conversation to have but it is a conversation we are going to have to have if Canada is going to be a good global player,” she said.

But shifts in the global economy could make the prospect of major emissions reductions more palatable across the country.

According to the United Nations, 120 countries, more than 1,000 businesses and 45 of the largest investors have so far committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

Sara Hastings-Simon, a research fellow at the University of Calgary’s school of public policy, said that reality could shift the tone of the conversation in Canada.

“If the world is net-zero in 2050, then it’s not a burden to have an economy that is aligned with that net-zero world,” she said.

“It’s really a requirement in order to have a successful, vibrant and prosperous economy.”

Gas flaring in Alberta. The new legislation would require support from all provinces and territories. However, there is currently a lot of variation between each jurisdiction’s climate ambitions. For instance, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario have long opposed the federal carbon tax. Photo: Jasonwoodhead23 / Flickr

In Alberta for instance, which accounts for the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions amongst the provinces, the conversation may shift from the need to reduce oil production to meet Canada’s climate targets because demand for the product may decline naturally as the world moves towards its 2050 target, Hastings-Simon explained.

Alberta, along with Saskatchewan and Ontario, have long resisted the federal carbon tax, one of Trudeau’s key climate measures. The provinces challenged the constitutionality of the tax in a legal battle that reached the Supreme Court of Canada in September. The court has yet to issue a ruling on the matter.

But Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has also recognized that climate action is becoming more important for oil and gas companies to access capital, The Western Producer and CBC reported in October.
Climate accountability legislation provides certainty for businesses

Canada’s climate accountability legislation will provide certainty for businesses that greenhouse gas emissions reductions will remain on the agenda in Ottawa regardless of a change in government, some observers said.

Isabelle Turcotte, the federal policy director at the Pembina Institute, said Bill C-12 will enable businesses “to confidently make investments needed today to create jobs in the competitive economy of tomorrow.”

“Nations are racing to attract billions of dollars in global capital that are being mobilized to generate a safe, low-carbon economy,” she said. “ [The] bill ensures that Canada will have a place at the starting line by eliminating business concern that policies put in place by a government today might be scrapped tomorrow.”

Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem warned this week that Canada needs to move quickly to both minimize the threat climate change poses and to take hold of the business opportunities it presents.

Ainslie Cruickshank is a Vancouver-based journalist focused on stories about the environment. She has written for the the Toronto Star