#50% target by 2030

[reasonsforhope]

Here's the top 2 stories from each of Fix The News's six categories:

1. A game-changing HIV drug was the biggest story of 2024

In what Science called the 'breakthrough of the year', researchers revealed in June that a twice-yearly drug called lenacapavir reduced HIV infections in a trial in Africa to zero—an astonishing 100% efficacy, and the closest thing to a vaccine in four decades of research. Things moved quick; by October, the maker of the drug, Gilead, had agreed to produce an affordable version for 120 resource-limited countries, and by December trials were underway for a version that could prevent infection with just a single shot per year. 'I got cold shivers. After all our years of sadness, particularly over vaccines, this truly is surreal.'

2. Another incredible year for disease elimination

Jordan became the first country to eliminate leprosy, Chad eliminated sleeping sickness, Guinea eliminated maternal and neonatal tetanus, Belize, Jamaica, and Saint Vincent & the Grenadines eliminated mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis, India achieved the WHO target for eliminating black fever, India, Viet Nam and Pakistan eliminated trachoma, the world’s leading infectious cause of blindness, and Brazil and Timor Leste eliminated elephantiasis.

15. The EU passed a landmark nature restoration law

When countries pass environmental legislation, it’s big news; when an entire continent mandates the protection of nature, it signals a profound shift. Under the new law, which passed on a knife-edge vote in June 2024, all 27 member states are legally required to restore at least 20% of land and sea by 2030, and degraded ecosystems by 2050. This is one of the world’s most ambitious pieces of legislation and it didn’t come easy; but the payoff will be huge - from tackling biodiversity loss and climate change to enhancing food security.

16. Deforestation in the Amazon halved in two years

Brazil’s space agency, INPE, confirmed a second consecutive year of declining deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. That means deforestation rates have roughly halved under Lula, and are now approaching all time lows. In Colombia, deforestation dropped by 36%, hitting a 23-year low. Bolivia created four new protected areas, a huge new new state park was created in Pará to protect some of the oldest and tallest tree species in the tropical Americas and a new study revealed that more of the Amazon is protected than we originally thought, with 62.4% of the rainforest now under some form of conservation management.

39. Millions more children got an education

Staggering statistics incoming: between 2000 and 2023, the number of children and adolescents not attending school fell by nearly 40%, and Eastern and Southern Africa, achieved gender parity in primary education, with 25 million more girls are enrolled in primary school today than in the early 2000s. Since 2015, an additional 110 million children have entered school worldwide, and 40 million more young people are completing secondary school.

40. We fed around a quarter of the world's kids at school

Around 480 million students are now getting fed at school, up from 319 million before the pandemic, and 104 countries have joined a global coalition to promote school meals, School feeding policies are now in place in 48 countries in Africa, and this year Nigeria announced plans to expand school meals to 20 million children by 2025, Kenya committed to expanding its program from two million to ten million children by the end of the decade, and Indonesia pledged to provide lunches to all 78 million of its students, in what will be the world's largest free school meals program.

50. Solar installations shattered all records

Global solar installations look set to reach an unprecedented 660GW in 2024, up 50% from 2023's previous record. The pace of deployment has become almost unfathomable - in 2010, it took a month to install a gigawatt, by 2016, a week, and in 2024, just 12 hours. Solar has become not just the cheapest form of new electricity in history, but the fastest-growing energy technology ever deployed, and the International Energy Agency said that the pace of deployment is now ahead of the trajectory required for net zero by 2050.  

51. Battery storage transformed the economics of renewables

Global battery storage capacity surged 76% in 2024, making investments in solar and wind energy much more attractive, and vice-versa. As with solar, the pace of change stunned even the most cynical observers. Price wars between the big Chinese manufacturers pushed battery costs to record lows, and global battery manufacturing capacity increased by 42%, setting the stage for future growth in both grid storage and electric vehicles - crucial for the clean flexibility required by a renewables-dominated electricity system. The world's first large-scale grid battery installation only went online seven years ago; by next year, global battery storage capacity will exceed that of pumped hydro.

65. Democracy proved remarkably resilient in a record year of elections

More than two billion people went to the polls this year, and democracy fared far better than most people expected, with solid voter turnout, limited election manipulation, and evidence of incumbent governments being tamed. It wasn't all good news, but Indonesia saw the world's biggest one day election, Indian voters rejected authoritarianism, South Korea's democratic institutions did the same, Bangladesh promised free and fair elections following a 'people's victory', Senegal, Sri Lanka and Botswana saw peaceful transfers of power to new leaders after decades of single party rule, and Syria saw the end of one of the world's most horrific authoritarian regimes.

66. Global leaders committed to ending violence against children

In early November, while the eyes of the world were on the US election, an event took place that may prove to be a far more consequential for humanity. Five countries pledged to end corporal punishment in all settings, two more pledged to end it in schools, and another 12, including Bangladesh and Nigeria, accepted recommendations earlier in the year to end corporal punishment of children in all settings. In total, in 2024 more than 100 countries made some kind of commitment to ending violence against children. Together, these countries are home to hundreds of millions of children, with the WHO calling the move a 'fundamental shift.'

73. Space exploration hit new milestones

NASA’s Europa Clipper began a 2.9 billion kilometre voyage to Jupiter to investigate a moon that may have conditions for life; astronomers identified an ice world with a possible atmosphere in the habitable zone; and the James Webb Telescope found the farthest known galaxy. Closer to Earth, China landed on the far side of the moon, the Polaris Dawn crew made a historic trip to orbit, and Starship moved closer to operational use – and maybe one day, to travel to Mars. 

74. Next-generation materials advanced

A mind-boggling year for material science. Artificial intelligence helped identify a solid-state electrolyte that could slash lithium use in batteries by 70%, and an Apple supplier announced a battery material that can deliver around 100 times better energy density. Researchers created an insulating synthetic sapphire material 1.25 nanometers thick, plus the world’s thinnest lens, just three atoms across. The world’s first functioning graphene-based semiconductor was unveiled (the long-awaited ‘wonder material’ may finally be coming of age!) and a team at Berkeley invented a fluffy yellow powder that could be a game changer for removing carbon from the atmosphere.

-via Fix The News, December 19, 2024

[fellshish]

Good news?

Looks like there might be a ceasefire and hostage release coming soon in Israel/Gaza.

That's nice, right? Sort of?

uh, what else..

The first round of NEA (National Endowment of the Arts) grants for 2025 were announced the other day. $36,790,500 for 1,474 arts projects across the 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico.

MacKenzie Scott gave a (rare) third big donation to Undue Medical Debt a few weeks ago. Another $50million. Enough for them to wipe out potentially as much as five BILLION dollars of medical debt.

apparently the UK might actually be on track to meet its 2030 climate targets. last year it became the first G7 country to end coal burning for power. nearly 60% of the UKs energy was generated by renewables (wind and solar) in 2024. also electric vehicle sales increased every month in the UK in 2024 while petrol (gas) powered car sales dropped to record lows.

that old fascist in France (Jean-Marie Le Pen) finally died last week.

Portugal's government announced a new plan to help make the national diet more plant-based. they're becoming world leaders in vegan food and climate action.

a summer camp for HIV positive kids in Minnesota recently shut down.. because there aren't enough kids with HIV anymore (thanks to antiretroviral medications perinatal transmission (in utero transmission from mother to baby) has fallen to below 1%. globally the number of new HIV infections among under 14s has declined 38% in the past ten years.

#goodnews

thank you so much i wish all news bulletins were like this forever

[katacala]

1.20.25 • Today the United States Climate Alliance delivered a letter to UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell, making it clear to the global community that our climate work will continue regardless of federal action or inaction.

If you're not familiar with the U.S. Climate Alliance, they are a bipartisan climate action coalition of 24 governors representing approximately 55% of the U.S. population and 60% of the U.S. economy.

To read their letter, read more here or explore their press release on their website. Onward!

•••

Mr. Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

P.O. Box 260124

D-53153 Bonn, Germany

January 20, 2025

Dear Executive Secretary Stiell,

We write as co-chairs of the United States Climate Alliance, a bipartisan coalition of two dozen governors representing nearly 60 percent of the U.S. economy and 55 percent of the U.S. population, to make it clear to you, and the rest of the world, that we will continue America’s work to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement and slash climate pollution.

As you know, this is not the first time we’ve responded to this challenge in the U.S. Our coalition was launched after the President’s decision to withdraw our country from the Paris Agreement back in 2017. Since then, our reach, resolve, and impact have only grown.

In fact, our states and territories are now on track to meet our near-term climate target by reducing collective net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 26 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. Our recent progress reflects a wave of ambitious state policies and federal funding enacted over the last few years – and it builds on our coalition’s 15-year trend of cutting emissions while simultaneously growing our economies. We have continued to ramp up our longer-term commitments as well, pledging to reduce GHG emissions at least 50-52 percent by 2030 and 61-66 percent by 2035, below 2005 levels, in alignment with the U.S. Nationally Determined Contribution. Most importantly, this action is bringing better health, cleaner air, good-paying jobs, new economic development, and lower costs to our communities.

Our states and territories continue to have broad authority under the U.S. Constitution to protect our progress and advance the climate solutions we need. This does not change with a shift in federal administration. States across our coalition are implementing a suite of policies and programs to secure our net-zero future, including statewide and regional carbon markets, 100 percent clean energy standards, and methane reduction programs for the oil and gas, waste, and agricultural sectors, among many others. We are also deploying billions of dollars to eliminate pollution in our communities and sustain our country’s clean energy boom.

It’s critical for the international community to know that climate action will continue in the U.S. The Alliance will bring this message to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Brazil (COP30) later this year – just as we have at every COP since our coalition’s founding – as we work to implement our climate goals. We are also committed to tracking and reporting on our progress and look forward to working with you and the global community to identify the most impactful ways to do so. The Alliance is proud to publish an annual report each year on our latest action, and we are enclosing here our most recent report for your reference.

We will not turn our back on America’s commitments. For our health and our future, we will press forward.

Sincerely,

Governor Kathy Hochul, Co-Chair

State of New York

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, Co-Chair

State of New Mexico

[spacetimewithstuartgary]

Journey to a Water World: NASA’s Europa Clipper Is Ready to Launch

Find details about the launch sequences for the orbiter, which is targeting an Oct. 14 liftoff on its mission to search for ingredients of life at Jupiter’s moon Europa.

In less than 24 hours, NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft is slated to launch from the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida aboard a Falcon Heavy rocket. Its sights are set on Jupiter’s ice-encased moon Europa, which the spacecraft will fly by 49 times, coming as close as 16 miles (25 kilometers) from the surface as it searches for ingredients of life.

Launch is set for 12:06 p.m. EDT on Monday, Oct. 14, with additional opportunities through Nov 6. Each opportunity is instantaneous, meaning there is only one exact time per day when launch can occur. Plans to launch Europa Clipper on Oct. 10 were delayed due to impacts of Hurricane Milton.

With its massive solar arrays extended, Europa Clipper could span a basketball court (100 feet, or 30.5 meters, tip to tip). In fact, it’s the largest spacecraft NASA has ever built for a planetary mission. The journey to Jupiter is a long one — 1.8 billion miles (2.9 billion kilometers) — and rather than taking a straight path there, Europa Clipper will loop around Mars and then Earth, gaining speed as it swings past.

The spacecraft will begin orbiting Jupiter in April 2030, and in 2031 it will start making those 49 science-focused flybys of Europa while looping around the gas giant. The orbit is designed to maximize the science Europa Clipper can conduct and minimize exposure to Jupiter’s notoriously intense radiation.

But, of course, before any of that can happen, the spacecraft has to leave Earth behind. The orbiter’s solar arrays are folded and stowed for launch. Testing is complete on the spacecraft’s various systems and its payload of nine science instruments and a gravity science investigation. Loaded with over 6,060 pounds (2,750 kilograms) of the propellant that will get Europa Clipper to Jupiter, the spacecraft has been encapsulated in the protective nose cone, or payload fairing, atop a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket, which is poised for takeoff from historic Launch Complex 39A.

Launch Sequences

The Falcon Heavy has two stages and two side boosters. After the side boosters separate, the core stage will be expended into the Atlantic Ocean. Then the second stage of the rocket, which will help Europa Clipper escape Earth’s gravity, will fire its engine.

Once the rocket is out of Earth’s atmosphere, about 50 minutes after launch, the payload fairing will separate from its ride, split into two halves, and fall safely back to Earth, where it will be recovered and reused. The spacecraft will then separate from the upper stage about an hour after launch. Stable communication with the spacecraft is expected by about 19 minutes after separation from the rocket, but it could take somewhat longer.

About three hours after launch, Europa Clipper will deploy its pair of massive solar arrays, one at a time, and direct them at the Sun.

Mission controllers will then begin to reconfigure the spacecraft into its planned operating mode. The ensuing three months of initial checkout include a commissioning phase to confirm that all hardware and software is operating as expected.

While Europa Clipper is not a life-detection mission, it will tell us whether Europa is a promising place to pursue an answer to the fundamental question about our solar system and beyond: Are we alone?

Scientists suspect that the ingredients for life — water, chemistry, and energy — could exist at the moon Europa right now. Previous missions have found strong evidence of an ocean beneath the moon’s thick icy crust, potentially with twice as much liquid water as all of Earth’s oceans combined. Europa may be home to organic compounds, which are essential chemical building blocks for life. Europa Clipper will help scientists confirm whether organics are there, and also help them look for evidence of energy sources under the moon’s surface.

More About Europa Clipper

Europa Clipper’s three main science objectives are to determine the thickness of the moon’s icy shell and its interactions with the ocean below, to investigate its composition, and to characterize its geology. The mission’s detailed exploration of Europa will help scientists better understand the astrobiological potential for habitable worlds beyond our planet.

Managed by Caltech in Pasadena, California, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory leads the development of the Europa Clipper mission in partnership with the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington. APL designed the main spacecraft body in collaboration with JPL and NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland; NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama; and NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. The Planetary Missions Program Office at Marshall executes program management of the Europa Clipper mission.

NASA’s Launch Services Program, based at Kennedy, manages the launch service for the Europa Clipper spacecraft, which will launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket from Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy.

TOP IMAGE: Technicians encapsulated NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft inside payload fairings on Wednesday, Oct. 2, at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The fairings will protect the spacecraft during launch as it begins its journey to explore Jupiter’s icy... Credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

CENTRE IMAGE: A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket with the Europa Clipper spacecraft aboard is seen at Launch Complex 39A as preparations continue for the mission, Sunday, Oct. 13, at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Credit: NASA

LOWER IMAGE: This artist’s concept depicts NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft in orbit at Jupiter as it passes over the gas giant’s icy moon Europa (lower right). Scheduled to arrive at Jupiter in April 2030, the mission will be the first to specifically target Europa for detailed science investigation. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

[mariacallous]

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) promised billions in investments towards clean energy and climate-related projects. While the implementation and delivery of the IRA is ongoing, it has also faced persistent efforts to roll it back from many Republican lawmakers since its enactment.

With the impending shift to a Republican-controlled White House and Congress, the fate of the IRA and its estimated $1.045 trillion worth of climate and energy provisions is uncertain. In this explainer, we examine the possible trajectories of the IRA under a Republican White House, Senate, and House.

What is the IRA?

The IRA focuses on clean energy technology, manufacturing, and innovation, with $370 billion in investments aimed at incentivizing private investments in clean energy, supply chains, job creation, and to reduce energy costs. The Biden administration intended for the IRA to support its climate goals, which included achieving 100% carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035; a 50-52% reduction of economy-wide net greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution from 2005 levels in 2030; and net-zero emissions economy-wide by 2050.

Findings from a comparison of nine models projecting the IRA’s impact on U.S. GHG emissions suggest that the maximum additional emissions reductions from the IRA (relative to a business-as-usual scenario without the IRA) could be up to 15 percentage points by 2030 as compared to 2005 emissions levels.1

On the cost side, the clean energy and climate portions of the IRA were estimated to cost $392 billion between 2022 and 2031, with tax credits estimated to cost $271 billion and direct spending estimated to cost $121 billion. Most of the tax credits are not capped, which means that the fiscal cost of the tax credits remains uncertain, as it depends on the behavior of firms and households (or more precisely, how many tax credits they claim). In April 2023, the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School updated their budget estimate of the IRA on climate and energy provisions, from $384.9 billion between 2022-2031 to $1,045 billion for the same period.

Republican lawmakers have cited the cost of the IRA as one of the reasons to roll it back—for example, the House Committee on Ways and Means has highlighted the “exploding” cost of “green corporate welfare” under the IRA. The cost of IRA’s “green subsidies” was a part of the justification for introducing the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, that sought to cut billions in funding from climate, environmental justice, and clean energy tax incentives from the IRA.

The IRA under the incoming Republican White House and Congress

Former President Trump, his campaign officials and advisors have expressed an intent to cut IRA spending and to roll back President Biden’s climate and energy policies. Republicans have voted 53 times in the House and once in the Senate, to repeal parts of the IRA as of October 15, 2024. The House has passed 20 bills that have attempted to repeal or constrain the IRA.

IRA provisions likely to be rolled back

Previous House attempts to roll back the IRA may provide an indication of the specific provisions that could be targeted under a Republican White House and Congress. According to Climate Power’s IRA repeal votes tracker, as of October 15, 2024, the attempts to roll back the IRA have repeatedly focused on preventing funding for Executive Order 14082 (which helps implement the IRA), repealing sections related to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and repealing sections related to the Methane Emissions Reduction Program. Figure 1 illustrates the climate-related provisions of the IRA that have faced at least two attempts to repeal:

Republican constituents are likely to benefit from the IRA

While it is easier for the IRA to be repealed under a Republican trifecta, it may be difficult to build a sufficiently large coalition in Congress to repeal the full IRA, as Republican lawmakers may prefer to retain certain IRA incentives that benefit their constituents. In August 2024, 18 Republican House Representatives signed a letter to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) that asked for the IRA’s energy tax credits to be “spared” from attempts to repeal the IRA. A Senior Tax Policy Advisor on the Senate Finance Committee also noted that a full repeal of clean energy tax incentives is unlikely regardless of the election results, as some parts of the IRA received bipartisan support before its enactment, which was expected to continue.

Republican-held areas have benefitted from the IRA since its enactment, as more than half of announced clean energy and vehicle projects are located in Republican congressional districts. According to the Rhodium Group and MIT’s Clean Investment Monitor, Nevada and Wyoming had the highest level of actual clean investment as a percent of GDP between September 2023 and September 2024 – with 2.65% and 4.11% respectively. Nevada, Kentucky, and Georgia had the highest levels of actual clean manufacturing investment as a percent of GDP over the same period, with 1.1% for Georgia and Kentucky, and 1.2% for Nevada. In terms of federal investments, the most populous states, such as California and Texas, received the most dollars. However, Nevada and Wyoming received the most federal investments per capita, as well as relative to the size of their GDP. This includes federal tax credits, grants, and fiscal cost of loans and loan guarantees.

The Political Economy Research Institute (University of Massachusetts Amherst) projected that the IRA could have an employment impact of creating 848,728 jobs annually, across industries. Clean Jobs America estimated that there has been an increase of 14% in clean energy workers since the enactment of the IRA in August 2022,2 with 3.5 million workers in clean energy. Many of these jobs are in California (544,604 jobs), Texas (268,035 jobs), and New York (173,731 jobs).

While it is true that the IRA does not appear to be well known by American voters—in July 2023, 71% of Americans said they have heard little or nothing about the IRA—industry players and investors who are direct beneficiaries of the IRA energy provisions may play an important role in influencing lawmakers to protect certain provisions of the IRA.

How might the IRA be repealed or restricted?

With a Republican President, an executive order could be used to hinder the implementation of the IRA, while a sufficiently large coalition in Congress could restrict the IRA through reversals of implementing regulations or repeal the IRA through legislative action.

Executive action

A President could make the implementation of the IRA more difficult via executive action that tightens limits on tax credits, by holding back some of its loans and grants, or by revising rules that have not yet been finalized. President Biden’s Executive Order 14082, which implements the IRA, could be reversed by a new executive order as well. This would dismantle the White House Office on Clean Energy Innovation and Implementation, which coordinates the implementation of the IRA.

A presidential administration could also direct agencies to refrain from publishing proposed or final rules or to delay the effective dates of finalized rules that have not yet taken effect. For example, the Biden administration issued a memorandum on January 20, 2021, which directed agencies to consider postponing the effective dates of rules that have been published but not yet in effect by 60 days. It also called for consideration of a 30-day comment period during the postponement, plus additional days beyond the 60-day period to review questions and comments, if needed. This delay may also apply to guidance documents, as evidenced by the Trump administration’s January 20, 2017 memorandum that directed a “regulatory freeze” which included guidance documents.

Legislative repeal of the IRA

Congress could partially or fully repeal the IRA through legislation. Congress may also look to repeal the IRA tax credits to help pay for a renewal of the 2017 tax cuts under President Trump. While a repeal could be achieved explicitly or implicitly,3 courts are generally reluctant to construe implicit repeals of legislation—so it is likely that any legislation purporting to repeal the IRA would need to be clear and explicit about the provisions being repealed. The IRA was passed under a Budget Resolution, which means that only a simple majority vote in the House and Senate are needed to repeal it, with no opportunities for a filibuster to prevent the repeal.

Since a sufficiently large congressional coalition across the House and Senate is needed to partially or fully repeal the IRA, the composition of Congress matters. With many Republican districts benefitting from investments that are incentivized by the IRA, a slim congressional majority is likely to present a challenge to a full repeal of the IRA, and only specific parts of the IRA may be targeted under this approach. Republicans are expected to hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and as of December 19, 2024, are also expected to hold a 220-215 majority in the House, further narrowed to 217-215 for some time due to President-elect Trump’s appointments.

What elements of the IRA might survive?

A letter to Speaker Mike Johnson in August 2024, signed by 18 Republican House Representatives, highlighted the dangers of “prematurely repealing energy tax credits” that industry and constituents have relied on to make investments and create jobs. The Representatives who signed the letter represented districts from 13 states, including Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia—the states with the highest (2.4%), third highest (1.8%), and sixth highest (1.4%) amount of actual clean investment as a percentage of the state’s GDP from the enactment of the IRA to June 2024.

The parts of the IRA that are likely to be targeted for a repeal, based on previous attempts by House Republicans, include the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, Methane Emissions Reduction Program, and the energy efficiency rebate (Figure 1). The effectiveness of repealing the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund is unclear, as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has already announced that it has awarded $27 billion from the Fund in August 2024, and that award recipients can begin accessing these funds. The Methane Emissions Reduction Program is likely to be at a higher risk of repeal: While it includes $1.36 billion in financial and technical assistance for methane reduction, it is unpopular in the oil industry as it would also levy a Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) on oil and gas facilities, beginning with methane emitted in 2024. The final rule for WEC was published in November 2024 to be effective from January 17, 2025, which means that this rule could be vulnerable to a Congressional Review Act (CRA) review, as well. Elements of the energy efficiency rebates, such as the home energy rebates, may survive as all states except South Dakota are participating as of November 26, 2024. Eleven out of the 18 Republican signatories of the August 2024 letter to Speaker Mike Johnson represent districts in states that have been approved to roll out the home energy rebates; the remaining Representatives represent districts in states that are preparing or have submitted applications to offer these rebates. 

While a full repeal of the IRA may be unlikely given political incentives, some scholars have called for a bipartisan full repeal of the IRA. While they acknowledge that this would be opposed by many, they see the IRA as an avenue for rent-seekers and argue that a complete repeal is preferable, as a partial repeal could leave room for a future Congress to build on the IRA.

An additional consideration is the cost of repealing the IRA. The initial cost estimates of the IRA by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have been updated by the CBO in their 2024-2034 Budget and Economic Outlook, published in February 2024:4 While the initial cost estimates assumed that the clean vehicle credits had no effect on outlays and reduced tax revenues, in the 2024-2034 Outlook, the CBO increased the estimated outlay portion of the clean vehicle and energy-related tax credits by $124 billion over 2024-2033. The CBO also increased the estimated outlays for energy-related tax credits by $51 billion, to reflect the “increase in projected investment in battery manufacturing.” The February 2024 estimate for the cumulative deficit arising from the IRA’s energy-related tax credits were further revised in June 2024, as the CBO increased its 2025-2034 projection by $12 billion relative to the February 2024 projection. Similarly, Bistline, Mehrotra, and Wolfram (2022) estimate the total fiscal cost of the IRA’s climate provisions to be $901 billion through 2031, with IRA tax credits estimated to cost over $780 billion by 2031—a figure that the authors note is nearly three times that of CBO’s initial estimate in 2022. These updated cost estimates suggest that a bill to repeal the IRA could have a budget score with a larger magnitude compared to the IRA’s budget estimate in 2022. While the bill may reduce government expenditures, the IRA’s impact on the economy may make the cost of the bill more “expensive”—although this depends on how the CBO scores the bill.

Restricting funding

A Republican-controlled House could facilitate budget cuts for the EPA and other relevant agencies, which is likely to slow down or restrict the implementation of the IRA.

The House has also attempted 17 times (as of October 15, 2024) to prevent funds from being used for President Biden’s Executive Order 14082, which helps implement the IRA.

Reversing regulations

The IRA relies on regulations for implementation. As of November 29, 2024, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) currently lists 20 Notices of Proposed Rules and as of December 6, 2024, 11 final regulations that relate to the implementation of the IRA, and other agencies have published at least four final rules, one interim rule, and one proposed rule on the Federal Register.5 The final regulations are on clean vehicle credits, transfer of certain credits, advanced manufacturing investment credit, and elective payment of applicable credits.

If a rule has not been finalized, a President can prevent the rule from being issued by imposing moratoriums on regulations or withdrawing the rule. If a rule has been finalized, then a President must go through the rulemaking process set forth in the Administrative Procedures Act to repeal the finalized rule. This involves:

Agencies publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking, allowing for public comment, and publishing a final rule; or

Congressional action under the Congressional Review Act.

Former President Trump’s previous administration was successful at preventing proposed rules from being finalized and overturning finalized rules through both the rulemaking process and the Congressional Review Act.

Congressional Review Act

A Republican controlled White House and Congress could use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to review and potentially overturn regulations issued by federal agencies. The CRA applies to the broadest definition of “rules,” including final rules and may include agency actions that are not subject to traditional notice-and-comment rulemaking, such as guidance and policy memoranda. The CRA was used under the previous Trump administration to overturn regulations: There were 16 successful CRA resolutions in 2017, the year former President Trump first took office.6

If a CRA joint resolution passes and is signed by the President, then the rule would be deemed ineffective. The CRA allows Congress to pass a joint resolution of disapproval for a rule up to 60 days after the final rule is published by the agency in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress.7 Notably, for rules submitted within the last 60 days of congress, the CRA includes a “lookback” mechanism that resets the 60-day window near the start of the next yearly legislative session. When administrations change, this allows the next Congress and President to expediently overturn previous administration’s rules that were submitted near the end of the previous President’s term. The Congressional Research Service estimates that Biden administration rules that were published in the Federal Register on or after August 1, 2024 are likely to qualify for CRA reviews by the new 119th Congress in 2025—although this depends on when the final session of the 118th Congress is adjourned. If the current Congress were to adjourn on the same day as the last eight sessions, its last session may end on January 3, 2025.8

The limitations of reversing a rule through the CRA include:

The CRA only allows Congress to invalidate final rules in their entirety.

The CRA does not allow reissuance of any rule that is “substantially the same form” or a “new rule that is substantially the same” as the invalidated rule, unless the reissued or new rule is “specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the joint resolution”.

The CRA prevents judicial reviews of any “determination, finding, action, or omission” made under the CRA, which means that the courts cannot check if Congress followed its rules. There is also uncertainty around whether this also precludes the courts from reviewing “whether a new rule is substantially similar to a disapproved rule”. This uncertainty could result in legal challenges that might delay implementation.

Which IRA regulations are at risk?

Proposed regulation

As of December 23, 2024, there are 23 proposed rules to implement the climate-related provisions of the IRA according to the IRA tracker by the Environmental Defense Fund and Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Since a President is able to reverse rules that have not been finalized, the notable IRA-related climate regulations that are at risk of reversals by the President include:

Rules for manufacturers and taxpayers related to the energy efficient home improvement credit.

Federal income tax credit for costs related to alternative fuel refueling property in a low-income community or non-urban census tract.

Bonus credit amounts for investors in clean electricity in low-income communities.

Clean electricity production credit and the clean electricity investment credit, including eligibility.

Rules for clean hydrogen production credit.

Definitions and requirements for the low-income communities bonus energy investment credit program, which allows for increased energy investment credit for certain clean energy investments.

Finalized regulation

As noted above, executive action could direct agencies to delay the effective dates of rules or guidance documents that are finalized but not yet in effect. While many of the recently finalized rules have effective dates before January 20, 2025, proposed rules—such as those listed in the previous section—may be at risk of delays if they are finalized.

Rules that were finalized after August 1, 2024 may be at risk of reversal through the CRA. If this cut-off date is confirmed, notable climate-related IRA rules at risk of reversal include:

Implementation of the Methane Emissions Reduction Program (finalized on November 18, 2024).

Rules to implement the advanced manufacturing production credit (finalized on October 28, 2024).

Rules related to the energy credit, including eligibility (finalized December 12, 2024).

Conclusion

With a Republican-controlled White House and Congress, the future of the IRA is uncertain. Recent attempts by Republican lawmakers to partially repeal or hinder the implementation of the IRA suggest that there may be specific sections of the IRA that are particularly vulnerable under the next administration. The slimness of majorities in the Senate and House could present challenges for Republican lawmakers in creating a coalition for a full repeal of the IRA, as incentives in the IRA have benefitted Republican constituents.  However, the IRA remains vulnerable as congressional coalitions are not needed for executive action that challenge the implementation of the IRA.

[beardedmrbean]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Even as she promoted her efforts to boost clean energy, Vice President Kamala Harris said in Tuesday's debate that the Biden-Harris administration has overseen “the largest increase in domestic oil production in history because of an approach that recognizes that we cannot over rely on foreign oil.″

The comment by Harris, a longtime climate hawk who backed the original Green New Deal, surprised supporters and opponents alike — and conflicted with frequent boasts by Harris and President Joe Biden that they are champions in the fight to slow global warming.

After former President Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Biden-Harris administration reentered the global pact aimed at reducing emissions. The administration also set a target to slash U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030 and moved to accelerate renewable energy projects and shift away from fossil fuels.

Liam Donovan, a Republican strategist, said it was notable that at a debate in energy-rich Pennsylvania, Harris chose to “brag about something that President Biden has barely acknowledged — that domestic fossil fuel production under the Biden administration is at an all-time high.″ Crude production averaged 12.9 million barrels a day last year, eclipsing a previous record set in 2019 under Trump, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The statement was “another sign of Harris’ sprint to the middle″ on energy policy and other issues, said Donovan, who works with energy industry clients at the Bracewell law and lobbying firm.

Harris went one step further, rebranding the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act — the administration's signature climate law — as a boon to fracking and other drilling, thanks to lease-sale requirements inserted into the bill by independent West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a key swing vote in the Senate and a strong supporter of the fossil fuel industry.

Harris's comments disappointed some in the environmental community.

“Harris missed a critical opportunity to lay out a stark contrast with Trump and show young voters that she will stand up to Big Oil and stop the climate crisis,'' said Stevie O’Hanlon, a spokesperson for the Sunrise Movement, one of the groups behind the Green New Deal.

“Harris spent more time promoting fracking than laying out a bold vision for a clean energy future,'' O'Hanlon said. “Young voters want more from Harris'' on climate change, she added. “We want to see a real plan that meets the scale and urgency of this crisis.''

Her group is working to turn out young voters, “but we hear people asking every day, ‘What are Democrats going to do for us?’” O'Hanlon said. “To win, Harris needs to show young people she will fight for us.”

Other environmental groups were less critical, citing the looming threat to climate action posed by Trump, who rolled back more than 100 environmental protections during his term as president.

“There is only one presidential candidate who is a champion for climate action and that is Kamala Harris,'' said Alex Glass, speaking for Climate Power, a liberal advocacy group. Harris "laid out a clear vision to invest in clean energy jobs and lower costs for working families,'' Glass said.

By comparison, she said, Trump "will do the bidding of his Big Oil donors.''

Glass cited the conservative Project 2025, written by Trump allies, saying it will put millions of clean-energy jobs at risk and let oil companies "profiteer and pollute.'' Trump has denied a direct connection to Project 2025 but has endorsed some of its key ideas.

Mike Sommers, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry's top lobbying group, said Harris' comment in support of fracking reflected political reality in the closely contested election. “You have to be for fracking to be elected president in 2024,'' he said. “That's good news for our industry and great news for American consumers.''

Asked why he was so confident about the need to support fracking, Sommers offered a one-word answer: “Pennsylvania.”

Not only is it a key swing state in the election, Pennsylvania also “is the beating heart of the natural gas industry in this country,” Sommers said, second only to Texas in total production.

"You don't win Pennsylvania without supporting fracking, and you don't win the presidency without Pennsylvania,'' Sommers said.

In the debate, Trump disputed Harris's claim that she will not try to ban fracking, but Sommers said he takes Harris at her word and welcomes her support for fracking and oil drilling more generally.

Asked if he was concerned about Harris' past actions suing oil companies, Sommers said no. The oil and gas industry supports 11 million jobs, he said, and the price of gasoline “is determined by economics — supply and demand. There is no man behind the curtain” rigging prices.

As California attorney general, Harris “won tens of millions in settlements against Big Oil and held polluters accountable,'' her campaign says. Her platform includes a promise to ”hold polluters accountable to secure clean air and water for all.''

Trump, meanwhile, has vowed to rescind unspent funds from the climate law and other programs, and said he will target offshore wind projects. He said Harris would move to restrict onshore oil and gas production if elected.

“They’ll go back to destroying our country, and oil will be dead, fossil fuel will be dead,” Trump said.

A president’s power to restrict fracking, even on federal lands, is limited, and barring the practice on private land would require an act of Congress.

[allthecanadianpolitics]

Nearly five years after the City of Vancouver declared a climate emergency, projections show the municipality falling short of its climate target. The update came in an annual report on the city’s efforts to tackle climate change presented to council on Wednesday. “It’s obviously not a problem Vancouver is going to be solving alone, it’s a global problem that demands a global solution, but we do have an important role in that,” said Matt Horne, the city’s manager of climate mitigation.

Continue Reading

Tagging @politicsofcanada

[saddayfordemocracy]

August 2 is Earth overshoot day 2023 !

Earth Overshoot Day (EOD) marks when humanity’s demand for ecological resources and services in a given year exceeds what Earth can regenerate during that year. 

Today is Earth Overshoot Day 2023, the Earth Overshoot Day calculated every year by Global Footprint Network using data from National Footprint and Biocapacity Accountswhich indicates the official depletion of renewable resources that the planet is able to offer within a year.

This means that today, August 2, humanity has already “finished” all the resources that Nature produces in an entire year and is starting to go into debt. Humanity, with its over 8 billion inhabitants, consumes in excessive quantities, beyond the natural regeneration (and reabsorption) capacities of the planet.

In 1973 Overshoot Day fell on December 3: we were just a few days over our annual budget. In 2003, September 12, in 2013, August 3. The date has always been getting ahead and our ecological debt has grown.

Globally we are consuming the equivalent of 1.7 Planets a year, an ominous figure that is expected to rise to two planets by 2030, based on current trends. In the last 5 years the trend seems to have stabilized, but it is difficult to establish whether this is due to the slowdown of the economy or to decarbonisation efforts. However, the reduction of our “debt” to the planet is still too slow. To achieve the United Nations IPCC goal of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by 43% by 2030 (compared to 2010) it would be necessary to move Earth Overshoot Day forward by 19 days per year for next seven years.

According to the WWF there are many solutions that can be adopted at the community level or individually to have a significant impact on the type of future we invest in: for example if we used energy from 75% renewable sources we could move the Overshhot day by 26 days ; halving food waste would save 13 days.

“If up until the 1960s humanity was more or less in balance, the date has moved from year to year up the calendar, to arrive today at the beginning of August. This means that humanity has been in ecological overshoot for over 50 years and the debt we have accumulated amounts to 19 years of planetary production, i.e. what Earth’s ecosystems can regenerate in 19 years. The burden of this debt, which is set to increase, is starting to reduce economic options. The loss of biodiversity, the growing unpredictability of the weather and the depletion of groundwater are just a few symptoms. But overcoming itself is not inevitable. Constantly living beyond the physical possibilities of our planet is a limited possibility in time, we risk an ecological disaster: the goods and services that are the basis of our societies and economies are all produced by functioning and healthy ecosystems. We now have many targeted solutions to reverse the overexploitation of resources and support the regeneration of the biosphere in which we live”.

[reasonsforhope]

"India’s announcement that it aims to reach net zero emissions by 2070 and to meet fifty percent of its electricity requirements from renewable energy sources by 2030 is a hugely significant moment for the global fight against climate change. India is pioneering a new model of economic development that could avoid the carbon-intensive approaches that many countries have pursued in the past – and provide a blueprint for other developing economies.

The scale of transformation in India is stunning. Its economic growth has been among the highest in the world over the past two decades, lifting of millions of people out of poverty. Every year, India adds a city the size of London to its urban population, involving vast construction of new buildings, factories and transportation networks. Coal and oil have so far served as bedrocks of India’s industrial growth and modernisation, giving a rising number of Indian people access to modern energy services. This includes adding new electricity connections for 50 million citizens each year over the past decade. 

The rapid growth in fossil energy consumption has also meant India’s annual CO2 emissions have risen to become the third highest in the world. However, India’s CO2 emissions per person put it near the bottom of the world’s emitters, and they are lower still if you consider historical emissions per person. The same is true of energy consumption: the average household in India consumes a tenth as much electricity as the average household in the United States.  

India’s sheer size and its huge scope for growth means that its energy demand is set to grow by more than that of any other country in the coming decades. In a pathway to net zero emissions by 2070, we estimate that most of the growth in energy demand this decade would already have to be met with low-carbon energy sources. It therefore makes sense that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has announced more ambitious targets for 2030, including installing 500 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity, reducing the emissions intensity of its economy by 45%, and reducing a billion tonnes of CO2. 

These targets are formidable, but the good news is that the clean energy transition in India is already well underway. It has overachieved its commitment made at COP 21- Paris Summit [a.k.a. 2015, at the same conference that produced the Paris Agreement] by already meeting 40% of its power capacity from non-fossil fuels- almost nine years ahead of its commitment, and the share of solar and wind in India’s energy mix have grown phenomenally. Owing to technological developments, steady policy support, and a vibrant private sector, solar power plants are cheaper to build than coal ones. Renewable electricity is growing at a faster rate in India than any other major economy, with new capacity additions on track to double by 2026...

Subsidies for petrol and diesel were removed in the early 2010s, and subsidies for electric vehicles were introduced in 2019. India’s robust energy efficiency programme has been successful in reducing energy use and emissions from buildings, transport and major industries. Government efforts to provide millions of households with fuel gas for cooking and heating are enabling a steady transition away from the use of traditional biomass such as burning wood. India is also laying the groundwork to scale up important emerging technologies such as hydrogen, battery storage, and low-carbon steel, cement and fertilisers..."

-via IEA (International Energy Agency), January 10, 2022

Note: And since that's a little old, here's an update to show that progress is still going strong:

-via Economic Times: EnergyWorld, March 10, 2023

[rjzimmerman]

Notes: The electricity generation trajectories for wind and solar PV indicate potential generation, including current curtailment rates. However, they do not project future wind and solar PV curtailment, which may be significant in some countries by 2028.

Excerpt from this story from EcoWatch:

With solar leading the way, renewables are on track to generate nearly 50 percent of global electricity this decade. But green energy is still predicted to fall short of the United Nations target of tripling capacity, according to Renewables 2024: Analysis and forecast to 2030, a report from the International Energy Agency (IEA).

More than 5,500 gigawatts (GW) of global renewable capacity is set to be added between now and 2030, which is nearly three times the growth from 2017 to 2023, the report said.

“Renewables are moving faster than national governments can set targets for,” said Fatih Birol, IEA’s executive director, as Reuters reported. “This is mainly driven not just by efforts to lower emissions or boost energy security: it’s increasingly because renewables today offer the cheapest option to add new power plants in almost all countries around the world.”

Based on today’s governmental policy settings and current market trends, of the world’s renewable capacity installed between 2024 and 2030, almost 60 percent will come from China, a press release from IEA said.

That would mean nearly half the total global renewable power capacity would be in China by 2030, up from a third in 2010.

“Due to supportive policies and favourable economics, the world’s renewable power capacity is expected to surge over the rest of this decade, with global additions on course to roughly equal the current power capacity of China, the European Union, India and the United States combined,” the press release said.

This decade, solar PV is projected to account for 80 percent of worldwide renewable capacity growth. This is due to the construction of large solar plants and an increase in installations of rooftop solar by households and companies.

The expansion of wind is forecast to double between now and the end of the decade, compared with the period 2017 to 2023.

In nearly every country in the world, solar PV and wind are the least expensive options for adding new electricity generation.

Because of these trends, almost 70 countries that together make up 80 percent of renewable capacity around the world are set to meet or exceed their current renewable goals for 2030.

“The growth is not fully in line with the goal set by nearly 200 governments at the COP28 climate change conference in December 2023 to triple the world’s renewable capacity this decade – the report forecasts global capacity will reach 2.7 times its 2022 level by 2030,” the press release said. “But IEA analysis indicates that fully meeting the tripling target is entirely possible if governments take near-term opportunities for action.”

[darkmaga-returns]

Totally Wasted Wind Power

Bloomberg reports UK Is Paying £1 Billion to Waste a Record Amount of Wind Power

Burgeoning capacity and blustery weather should have driven huge growth in output in 2024. But the grid can’t cope, forcing the operator to pay wind farms to turn off, a cost ultimately borne by consumers. It’s a situation that puts at risk plans to decarbonize the network by 2030 and makes it harder to cut bills. Crucial to the net zero grid target is a massive build-out of renewable power, particularly from wind. Britain has boosted its offshore fleet by 50% in the past five years and is set to double it in the next five, Bloomberg data show. But the grid hasn’t expanded at the same pace. As a result, the operator is increasingly paying wind farms, particularly those in Scotland, not to run. So far this year, the UK has spent more than £1 billion ($1.3 billion) in “congestion costs” to turn off plants that can’t deliver electricity because of grid constraints, and switch on others. Last month for example, when Storm Bert swept across the UK, some of its newest and biggest wind parks were still. Scotland’s £3 billion Seagreen project, owned by SSE Plc and TotalEnergies SE, was shut off. SSE’s Viking development on the Shetland Islands was also closed. Wind vs Gas UK generators usually sell output in advance on the wholesale market. But those transactions don’t take into account the physical limitations of balancing supply and demand in real time. To keep the lights on, the operator steps in, paying some plants to turn off and others that are closer to demand centers to fire up. Often, this means shutting off a far-flung wind farm and starting up a gas-fed plant that’s closer to a city.

[usafphantom2]

Finland acquires JDAM and SDB I weapon systems for its F-35 fighters

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 03/01/2024 - 13:00 in Military

The Patria and the Finnish Defense Forces signed a service agreement to develop the capabilities of Finland's F-35 program, specifically purchases of JDAM and SDB I ammunition.

Major General Jari Mikkonen, Head of the Logistics Command of the Finnish Defense Forces (FDFLOGCOM) signed the contract for the acquisition of JDAM and SDB I ammunition for the F-35 multifunctional fighters on February 29, 2024. The Finnish Minister of Defense authorized the Logistics of the Defence Forces Command to conduct the acquisition.

The object of the acquisition is the JDAM and SDB I systems with related equipment and services in the years 2024–2030. The acquisition is referred to as the Total Package Approach (TPA), which means that, in addition to the JDAM and SDB I pumps, the acquisition includes transport sets of BRU-61 ammunition, training material, manuals, spare parts, accessories, transport services and manufacturer instructions, as well as training services and supplier support. Contains spare parts and support services for manufacturers and suppliers by 2030.

The acquisition contract is in dollars and its indexed maximum price is US$ 96.1 million. Purchase payments will take place during the years 2024-2030.

The acquisition will be carried out in accordance with the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) procedure between the authorities of the USA and Finland, in which the Defense Forces Logistics Command will conclude the acquisition contract with the United States administration.

The JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) is a modular guidance kit for 500, 1,000 or 2,000 pound bombs of the Mark 80 series. In addition to a guidance kit, a fuse or sensor is installed in the pump, depending on the intended use. A bomb equipped with JDAM can perform precision attacks on fixed or mobile targets at short range.

The SDB I (Small Diameter Bomb I) is a glider pump capable of accurately hitting medium-range targets. Thanks to the relatively small size of the pump, a fighter is able to carry a larger number of SDB I bombs at a time.

Guided bombs and glider bombs are part of the weapons acquisition package that allows the Finnish Air Force to have the ability to support other Forces in combat activities. The weapons of the F-35 fighters from Finland will be acquired in stages until the year 2035. The phased implementation of the acquisition of weapons will make it possible to optimize the composition of weapons as the Finnish F-35 program progresses.

"Some of the types of weapons to be purchased can also be used with our current fleet of F/A-18 Hornet. Therefore, when we make the transition to the F-35, we will be able to profit from the skills and experience in systems acquired so far," said the Director of the F-35 Program, Colonel (retired), Henrik Elo.

Tags: Military AviationF-35 Lightning IIIlmavoimat/Finnland Air Force

Sharing

tweet

Fernando Valduga

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, he has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has works published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. He uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.

Related news

The U.S. Navy award includes 14 new P-8s for Canada, three for Germany.

MILITARY

Boeing receives contract for 17 P-8A Poseidon aircraft, for Canada and Germany

01/03/2024 - 11:00

MILITARY

Czech Republic will modernize its JAS39 Gripen fighters

01/03/2024 - 09:00

INCIDENTS

German frigate fires missiles by mistake at USAF's Reaper drone in the Red Sea

01/03/2024 - 08:00

MILITARY

Ukraine shoots down 13 military jets in 11 days, bringing the Russian Air Force closer to the deadly organizational spiral

01/03/2024 - 00:39

MILITARY

Russia intends to restore the production of A-50 AWACS aircraft

29/02/2024 - 21:22

A U.S. Marine Corps XQ-58A Valkyrie, a highly autonomous and low-cost tactical unmanned aerial vehicle, conducts its second test flight with two U.S. Air Force F-35A Lightning II aircraft designated for the 33ª Fighter Wing, 96ª Test Wing at Eglin Air Base, Florida, on February 23, 2023. (Photo: U.S. Air Force / Master Sgt. John McRell)

MILITARY

USMC Valkyrie completes second test flight

29/02/2024 - 19:28

O

[warcrimecryptid]

The ConocoPhillips’ Willow Project will deter the Biden Administration from achieving their environmental targets. This means that it will be next to impossible for the United States to achieve 50% of emission reductions by 2030 if the ConocoPhillips’ Willow Project is to be approved.

The Arctic area is warming at a significantly faster rate than anywhere else in the world. The arctic is home to many animals, some of which are already endangered and at severe risk of going extinct. So let me paint a picture for you:

Polar bears. The coco cola mascot. A roided out freak of nature. Due to global warming and other issues, they are becoming increasingly more familiar with humans. Humans are now entering the food chain of these starving animals. There have been numerous attacks in recent years and studies show that polar bears are starting to seek humans out in predation. Polar bears are not deterred by bear mace or electric bear fences. In colder, Arctic climates, people are told not to go out hiking in small groups. Why? Think about it. Polar bears kill sea lions and other large animals. Do you really think that two people are going to intimidate an animal that hunts other 1,000 pound animals? No. And if you do think that, then you’re stupid. Now, Is this the polar bears fault? No. It’s our fault. We are killing these animals and taking away their homes and food sources. They had to pick other options in order to survive. Do you want to keep the polar bears far away from you?

Then stop the Willow project. Fight back. Unionize, March, and petition against these issues. Do not be complicit in the destruction of our only earth. Your silence makes you complicit. Do everything you can. Fight and fight dirty. Am I calling for a complete insurrection? Yes. Am I calling for a coup? Also yes. Am I a little unhinged? Absolutely. But I’m not silent. Your silence is cowardice. Do not complain about the state of the world when you’ve done nothing to contribute to changing it. Silence is surrender. If you must go, go loudly.

Sign the petition at Change.org.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

Brazil launches global anti-hunger alliance before G20 summit

Brazil launched the Global Alliance for Hunger and Poverty on Friday at the G20 Summit in Rio, a Brazilian government official said, with an initial 41 participating members pledging to lift 500 million people out of poverty through cash transfers and social protection systems.

The initiative brings together developed nations, NGOs, and financial institutions to donate money and expertise to countries in need. The intention is to remove all nations from the Food and Agriculture Organization's (FAO) hunger map by 2030.

Leaders of the G20 group of largest economies meet in Rio de Janeiro on Monday and Tuesday for their annual summit hosted by Brazil, whose government has made fighting world hunger a priority along with climate change and reforming multilateral governance.

Brazilian Minister of Social Development Wellington Dias told Reuters on Thursday that the alliance is likely to reach its 100-country target in the coming months, with more than 50 nations currently preparing plans to join.

Continue reading.

[mariacallous]

In the next few months, Chinese President Xi Jinping will announce his country’s new climate targets. His decision could make or break the Paris Agreement, the landmark treaty—ratified by nearly every country in the world—that aims to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. If the world breaches this critical threshold, it will see major falls in food production, a severe hit to global GDP, and a rise in deadly weather events.

All participating governments are due to submit their 2035 climate targets to the United Nations by next February. The most important will come from the three largest emitters today, which collectively account for more than 50 percent of global emissions: the United States, European Union, and China.

The United States and EU have not reduced emissions fast enough to align with the Paris goals, but they still delivered two-thirds of the 13 percent reduction in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s carbon emissions over the past decade. China, meanwhile, is responsible for more than 90 percent of the growth in carbon dioxide emissions since the Paris Agreement was negotiated in 2015.

The 1.5-degree target has been in danger for a while, but China’s scale and role in driving emissions put the country in the unique position of being able to single-handedly limit warming so that it stays as close to that target as possible. Global emissions need to peak urgently, and that is simply not realistic without China changing course.

Despite this, China appears to be gravitating toward a weak, conservative set of near-term targets. Although Xi has previously pledged that China will become carbon neutral before 2060, recent policy trends indicate that Beijing’s new targets are likely to fall short of what’s needed to realize that 2060 climate vision—and stave off the worst of global warming.

Chinese diplomats often boast about their country’s record of overachieving on climate and energy targets. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has put it, China’s strategy on climate is “to under-promise and over-deliver.” For example, China far exceeded its 2020 commitment to reduce carbon intensity as well as its wind and solar power capacity targets for 2015 and 2020.

But now, China is looking increasingly likely to miss the 2025 targets that it named in its Paris commitments and elsewhere. These include plans to “strictly limit” coal consumption growth, “strictly control” new coal power projects, and reduce carbon intensity (carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP) by 18 percent compared with 2020—all by next year. China’s emissions would need to fall between now and the end of 2025 for the country to reach that target. Yet the carbon intensity target set by China’s Environment Ministry for 2024 leaves room for emissions to rise this year, suggesting that the ministry is not seriously pursuing the 2025 target.

Meanwhile, a flurry of high-level policy documents published in recent months indicates that Beijing is likely to pursue conservative near-term climate goals. The State Council’s plan for controlling carbon emissions only expects them to peak just before 2030, and the Central Committee of the Communist Party only aims for China’s emissions to show a “falling trend” by 2035. Due to the lack of ambition in the medium term, Climate Action Tracker—an independent research group—has determined that China’s policies and targets are “highly insufficient” despite the country’s long-term carbon neutrality target.

Furthermore, China’s National Energy Administration has dropped hints that it is erring on the side of caution when it comes to the climate. Top agency officials have dismissed evidence that emissions could peak several years ahead of the “before 2030” deadline—China’s official target—and proposed energy installation targets that would slow down clean energy deployment. They have also advocated for fossil fuels meeting 30 percent of energy demand growth through 2030.

One reason that regulators tend to be conservative is that bureaucrats’ prospects in climbing the ladder of the Communist Party hinge upon the achievement of policy goals, making lower targets desirable. Ministries are also constrained by the level of climate ambition set from the top; bureaucrats have no control over economic policy priorities, which can have a major impact on emissions, especially when China’s leadership considers an energy-intensive sector the growth driver of the day. For example, Beijing’s favorable treatment toward the petrochemical industry has been a major driver of the sharp rise in coal consumption in recent years.

Yet Chinese policymakers’ unwillingness to take more progressive positions on climate is seemingly at odds with their country’s booming clean energy industry and other promising domestic trends. China’s solar and wind installations nearly doubled in 2023 compared with the year before and have continued to accelerate this year. The nuclear power sector, another important source of low-carbon electricity, is also growing, with 20 new reactors approved for construction from 2022 to 2023, and another 11 so far this year.

At its current rate, the growth in clean energy is sufficient to cover all additional electricity demand at the rate forecasted by the China Electricity Council for the second half of this year. If China continues to add renewable energy at the rate that it did in 2023, it could be on track to triple its renewable energy capacity from 2022 to 2030, in line with the target to triple renewables globally agreed upon at last year’s U.N. climate summit in Dubai.

Driven by clean energy expansion, China’s carbon emissions reportedly started declining in March and have continued to fall since then. Meanwhile, energy planners appear to be slamming the brakes on fossil fuels. Beijing approved hundreds of new coal power plants and coal-based steel plants after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, but permits for new coal plants fell by about 80 percent in the first half of 2024 compared with the previous year. In August, Beijing introduced a ban on new steelmaking projects, and no coal-based steel plants have been approved since the start of this year.

Research suggests that China needs to cut emissions by at least 30 percent by 2035, compared with 2023 levels, to limit warming to 1.5 degrees. China can achieve meaningful emission reductions by 2035 if it maintains its rate of clean energy deployment. However, policy inertia and conservative thinking risk preventing China from capitalizing on progress that has already been achieved in the real world.

Despite these roadblocks, it is in China’s own interest to make ambitious climate targets. The clean energy sector contributed a record $1.6 trillion to China’s economy in 2023, accounting for 9 percent of the country’s GDP and 40 percent of economic growth. In addition, a weak climate goal from Beijing would affect trade policy; it would increase tensions by undermining China’s domestic market for clean tech, further inviting the ire of countries that are concerned about China’s manufacturing overcapacity and low-cost exports of electric vehicles, solar panels, and other green technology.

A lowball target would also upset Beijing’s diplomatic alliances in climate negotiations. So far, China has been the de facto leader of the developing country bloc in international climate discussions. This has allowed it to resist calls to set climate targets on par with those of richer countries. But that position is increasingly untenable. China is on the cusp of becoming a high-income country and is on track to overtake the EU’s historical carbon dioxide emissions in the next few years to become the second-largest historic emitter after the United States.

In recent U.N. climate talks, the Maldives and Antigua and Barbuda—developing island nations that are part of China’s negotiating bloc and are among the most vulnerable countries to climate impacts—openly voiced their disquiet about China’s lack of commitment to addressing climate change. China’s next target, if not sufficiently ambitious, could lead more countries to break ranks with Beijing’s negotiating alliance, flying in the face of its efforts to portray itself as a “doer in global climate governance.”

To continue to make progress on climate, Xi cannot rely on his bureaucrats to put forward meaningful targets—he must do it himself. Xi and the rest of China’s top leadership will have to balance the growth of their country’s clean energy industry against short-term economic considerations related to fossil fuels. Weak targets that allow the expansion of the fossil-fuel industry would pull the rug out from under the clean energy sectors that have been China’s star economic performers of the past couple years.

China’s leaders are almost certain to wait until the results of the U.S. presidential election to announce their targets, and they will likely feel more pressure in the case of a victory by Democratic candidate and current Vice President Kamala Harris. The other question is whether China’s other important partners—including the EU, United Kingdom, and other G-20 members—will hold Beijing to a high standard. This will be especially important if former President Donald Trump wins the election.

Until then, the message to China has to be clear: Lip service to multilateralism and global climate action isn’t enough; Paris-aligned climate targets are essential. After Trump was elected in 2016, China vowed to defend the Paris agreement. Now, the country is increasingly at risk of failing to do so. As a recent strategy document for China’s own cabinet reads, “Major countries should focus more on the future of the earth and humanity and act in a responsible manner … thus fulfilling the responsibilities commensurate with their status.”