#oil and gas public investment strategies

[usenergyinvesting]

Energy Sector Funds | US Energy Investing

Unleash the power of US Energy Investing through our illuminating blog on energy sector funds. Ignite your understanding of renewables, oil, gas, and alternative energies. Our blog is your compass, guiding you through the complexities with data-driven insights, investment tactics, and sustainability perspectives. Read more at US Energy Investing.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Among all government institutions worldwide, the US and UK militaries bear some of the greatest responsibility for climate crisis. Despite this, emissions from military sources are not addressed in international climate agreements: as a result of US lobbying, overseas military emissions were made exempt from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and military emissions reporting remained optional in the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. Even if using opaque official data, the UK and US militaries have jointly emitted at least 430 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent since the year of the Paris Climate Agreement — more than the total greenhouse gas emissions produced in the UK in 2022. While several other militaries are also leading institutional emitters, this report focuses on the joint climate impact of the US and UK militaries for three reasons: first, their historic role in the development of the global fossil fuel economy; second, their current consumption of fossil fuels, associated greenhouse gas emissions and the environmental damage produced by their military infrastructure; third, the US and UK governments’ allocation of public investment towards carbon-intensive industrial sectors to supply their militaries when they could better prioritise green industrial policy. The US and UK governments and their militaries are important architects of the modern fossil fuel economy. Throughout the twentieth century, the strategies of both militaries were intimately tied to the supply of oil. In the wake of the First World War, for instance, the British empire’s division of former Ottoman regions was explicitly designed around plans for hydrocarbon pipelines. As data presented in this briefing demonstrates, the legacy of the US and UK militaries as architects of the fossil economy lives on through their present consumption of fossil fuels — in 2017, the Pentagon produced more emissions than the country of Portugal. Accounting for the social consequences of US and UK military emissions since 2015 — using even a conservative social cost of carbon calculation as detailed below — would entail an international climate finance package of approximately $111 billion to be paid to the nations most threatened by climate crisis, far above the US and UK’s current contributions through established climate finance channels. Beyond carbon emissions, the US and UK’s overseas presence shows the various modes through which military bases, activity and infrastructure produce environmental damage and toxic waste. 

[darkangel1791]

I’m an Environmentalist. That’s Why I Can’t Vote Green.

Award-winning filmmaker and director of Gasland Josh Fox on why he will never vote for Jill Stein.

November 1, 2024

The Nation

Milanville, Pennsylvania—Progressives can truly win in this election, even though we have a moderate Democrat on the ticket. And it’s not by voting for Jill Stein. But first, a little history…

Not long ago the entire upper Delaware River basin in Pennsylvania—one of the most beautiful areas in the country, in the watershed for New York City, southern New Jersey and Philadelphia—was on the chopping block for fracking.

A 75 mile stretch of the Delaware River could have become a toxic oil field. Fracking is an environmental apocalypse: millions of gallons of toxic fracking fluids, radioactive waste, underground water contamination, hundreds of thousands of truck trips, air pollution, land scarring, massive public health crises, and depleted water supply. Everything about the practice is toxic; it is inherently contaminating in the long and short term.

Our community was quick to understand the threat and organize and mobilize against it. Every little town along the Delaware across New York and Pennsylvania had a mom-and-pop anti-fracking group spring up. My film Gasland, on HBO, was part of this campaign, and our Gasland tours went from town to town, Johnny Appleseed–style, fostering our new movement.

Amazingly, we won. We banned fracking in the Delaware River basin and in New York State, saving the water supply for 16 million people. One of the greatest achievements of the environmental movement in this century.

We did this by convincing the Democratic governors of New York and Delaware and the president at the time—Barack Obama—to ban fracking here. These were all moderate Democrats. Not exactly Bernie Sanders, if you know what I mean.

I consider myself far to the left of Andrew Cuomo and Barack Obama. But I know that if those moderate Democrats hadn’t been in office, there’s no way we would have won.

Republicans would have just said no. This whole place would have been completely fracked to hell. We would have lost. And the whole gorgeous, life-giving national treasure of the Delaware River would have been a toxic fracking zone.

Our victory against fracking kept more carbon and methane in the ground than almost any other single environmental win in history—making it a huge win for the climate as well.

Here is the key point: I’m not in love with Kamala Harris’s positions on fracking. I find it utterly infuriating when moderate Democrats think that they need to pay lip service to a toxic destructive climate monster of an industry to win Pennsylvania. I don’t actually think that is true, because studies have shown that 70 percent of Pennsylvania residents want fracking either banned or much more tightly regulated.

But I don’t need to be in love. I need to be able to vote strategically.

Hundreds of thousands of people showed up to protect this place and to hold moderate Democrats accountable, and that was the key to victory here.

You know who didn’t show up for this place? Jill Stein. She doesn’t show up for these frontline battles. Ever.

Stein says she’s against fracking, but Stein has hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in the oil and gas industry. Did you know that? Did you know that she actually profits off of the oil and gas industry, that she has had investments in the Keystone XL pipeline and multiple fracking companies?

Did you know that she has investments in Raytheon, that she’s had investments in ExxonMobil? Did you know that she has investments in Home Depot—one of the most rapacious companies in the world, guilty of horrific deforestation throughout the world?

How is it that the Green Party candidate hasn’t divested her own personal fortune from fossil fuels? It’s sheer hypocrisy. And so is the strategy of running for president every four years but never showing up for battles like this.

In 2016, Stein defended these investments by saying they are mutual funds and indexed retirement funds.

But that, plainly speaking, is bunk.

Her claims are a slap in the face to the entire fossil fuel divestment movement. It is easier now than ever to have investments that are fossil free; doing so is a huge plank of the environmental cause. Hundreds of real activists were arrested this summer in New York City calling for Citibank to divest as part of the Summer of Heat campaign. For Stein to ignore all this and still attempt to call herself an activist is beyond hypocrisy, it is political malpractice. Shame on you, Dr. Stein! Shame on you for profiting from fracking and oil drilling.

I’m not in love with Kamala Harris’s positions—on fracking, and on some other issues. But I will tell you what I am in love with. I’m in love with our movements.

I’m in love with what we can do. The entire history of progressive progress in this country is of movements pushing moderate presidents. It happened with FDR and the labor movement. It happened with LBJ and the MLK and the civil rights movement. It happened with Obama and Biden and the movement for gay marriage. We organize and push them—and that’s how we get what we want. That’s our progressive history in America.

But in order for us progressives to do our jobs and fight effectively for a more just and equitable world as a movement, we need to have Harris in office. If we have Donald Trump in office, there’s no chance in hell that we’re actually going to advance an environmental agenda.

So I urge you to please believe in us as a movement. Love us. Believe in our power. We have done this before—and we can do it again with a moderate Democrat in office. Which is the only choice we’ve got right now.

If everyone in who voted for Stein in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan had voted for the Democrat instead, Trump would never have been the president.

We have the true power. It comes from the bottom up.

And I believe in us.

A vote for Harris is a vote for us, a vote for our movements to have a fighting chance for change. Progressive politics and advancing our agenda in this country is not something that happens every four years when you vote, or every four years when a toxic egomaniac like Stein (or Trump, for that matter) runs for president. It is a daily commitment. So vote for Kamala Harris. Join the movement—and I’ll see you on the front lines.

[batboyblog]

The Biden administration on Wednesday issued one of the most significant climate regulations in the nation’s history, a rule designed to ensure that the majority of new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the United States are all-electric or hybrids by 2032.

Cars and other forms of transportation are, together, the largest single source of carbon emissions generated by the United States, pollution that is driving climate change and that helped to make 2023 the hottest year in recorded history. Electric vehicles are central to President Biden’s strategy to confront global warming, which calls for cutting the nation’s emissions in half by the end of this decade. But E.V.s have also become politicized and are becoming an issue in the 2024 presidential campaign.

“Three years ago, I set an ambitious target: that half of all new cars and trucks sold in 2030 would be zero-emission,” said Mr. Biden in a statement. “Together, we’ve made historic progress. Hundreds of new expanded factories across the country. Hundreds of billions in private investment and thousands of good-paying union jobs. And we’ll meet my goal for 2030 and race forward in the years ahead.”

The rule increasingly limits the amount of pollution allowed from tailpipes over time so that, by 2032, more than half the new cars sold in the United States would most likely be zero-emissions vehicles in order for carmakers to meet the standards.

That would avoid more than seven billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions over the next 30 years, according to the E.P.A. That’s the equivalent of removing a year’s worth of all the greenhouse gases generated by the United States, the country that has historically pumped the most carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The regulation would provide nearly $100 billion in annual net benefits to society, according to the agency, including $13 billion of annual public health benefits thanks to improved air quality.

The standards would also save the average American driver about $6,000 in reduced fuel and maintenance over the life of a vehicle, the E.P.A. estimated.

The auto emissions rule is the most impactful of four major climate regulations from the Biden administration, including restrictions on emissions from power plants, trucks and methane leaks from oil and gas wells. The rules come on top of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the biggest climate law in the nation’s history, which is providing at least $370 billion in federal incentives to support clean energy, including tax credits to buyers of electric vehicles.

The policies are intended to help the country meet Mr. Biden’s target of cutting U.S. greenhouse emissions in half by 2030 and eliminating them by 2050. Climate scientists say all major economies must do the same if the world is to avert the most deadly and costly effects of climate change.

“These standards form what we see as a historic climate grand slam for the Biden administration,” said Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, a political action committee that aims to advance environmental causes.

Mr. Bapna’s group has calculated that the four regulations, combined with the Inflation Reduction Act, would reduce the nation’s greenhouse emissions 42 percent by 2030, getting the country most of the way to Mr. Biden’s 2030 target.

Get in Losers we're going to save the planet.

[notwiselybuttoowell]

Earthjustice is now bigger, stronger, and better prepared than in January 2017 when Trump first took office. With more than 200 attorneys across the country, we’re the legal backbone of the environmental movement. We held the line when the first Trump administration attacked protections for endangered species and public lands, slashed safeguards for clean air and water, rolled back regulations on poisonous chemicals, and undercut the independence of scientists. We’ve shown that we can take on the Trump administration’s worst ideas and win. And we know that no organization can succeed in this fight alone — we will work with our many partners to take on his extremist agenda.

We will fight the Trump administration on every front, including:

Ensuring freedom from deadly pollution. We know a top Trump administration priority is to gut regulations of toxic chemicals that cause illnesses like cancer and asthma. That’s why one of our top priorities will be protecting the Biden administration’s recently issued rules requiring the nation’s biggest chemical polluters to cut toxic emissions.

Protecting our investments in a new clean economy. We will fight to protect the Biden administration’s unprecedented investments in climate solutions, including the Inflation Reduction Act. And we’ll do it while challenging the Trump administration’s attempts to open up our public lands and waters to oil and gas drilling.

Using the power of the law to protect all species. The first Trump administration went after the Endangered Species Act (ESA), our best defense against the biodiversity crisis. Our successful litigation stopped habitat destruction and trophy hunts for key species and pushed the Biden administration to reverse some damaging changes to the ESA. We’re prepared to do it again to protect the web of life that sustains us all.

Reinforcing the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law. We have proven that we can win in front of the most hostile courts. But Trump will continue to try to stack the bench with judges who don’t believe the federal government has a role in protecting the environment — and we will continue to loudly push back. We will pursue a legal strategy that chooses cases and arguments carefully, while pushing for needed court reform to restore impartiality and fairness.

Trump’s return to the presidency is a challenge to our democratic principles and the laws that protect our planet and its people. But we’re ready for the fight, and we know how to win.

If you're interested in donating here's a matching fund that is running through December

[sourcreammachine]

LABOUR PARTY MANIFESTO 2024 SUMMARY ie, the agenda of the party that'll win

tldr: Milton Keynes, by which i mean it's keynesianism but really boring. it's the principle of keynes, but with its ambitions scaled so far back that it no longer even qualifies as social democracy

you’ve probably heard that they want to increase spending without increasing tax. the theory goes that state investments reap dividends — the deficits you run will grow the economy, so your dividends will go up, so debts will always be repaid. this how this manifesto can justify being so scant on revenue-raising, the existing sources of revenue should automatically reap more over time

but, keynesianism is very fundamentally sociodemocratic. state expenditure goes to big-ticket economic infrastructure to improve AND to public services, to improve health and wealth, which serves to grow the economy further – a slightly cold but contextually understandable framing for the fact that stamping out poverty and delivering vital public services is a moral imperative and a good thing

this wheezy manifesto fails in all that, fundamentally. there are spending plans for public services but they are tiny compared to the big-ticket economic investments. it's keynesian theory in liberal practice, and i say that derogatorily. it's the same neoliberal system with the smallest yank back towards un-neo liberalism to try to save it from itself

literally, in the Innsmouth debate last week starmer was asked why he wouldn't raise taxes on high-earners to fund the beleaguered public services that've been crushed and broken, and starmer gave a coward's answer, saying it wasn't the right thing to do, in the poorest town in the country, in front of an audience of fishpeople, not an audience of aristocrats and six-figure salarymen

which serves my point. this isn't a manifesto of enlightened, committed socioliberalism, far from it: this is a manifesto of cowardice. rumours suggested it could've been about 30 pages long, around a third of the typical length. and while it's not that short, it's been padded to hell and back with justifications, waffle, and masses of promises with no policy to make them so. even objectively non-economic policy is anaemic, with scant plans for reform, scant plans for social policy, and scant plans for anything

labour alleges it's plan is to decentralise power and end the autophagic hypercentralist leadership. but no, that couldn't be further from the truth. sir kid starver is running for president. he wants a blank cheque. he wants the right to make decisions. he "changed the labour party" to centralise power to override internal power controls, and not because he's an evil scheming autocrat, but because he has zero faith in democracy. they are the decisionmakers. they are the governors. participatory democracy is impossible, shut up and do your job: putting them in power

it’s also the only manifesto i’ve found a typo in, on page 125. naughty naughty

💷ECONOMY

LITERALLY NO TAX PROPOSALS

abolish nondoms and 'end the use of offshore trusts'

restore the industrial strategy council quango with legal authorities

make the independent minimum wage commission 'account for the cost of living', maybe raising it one maybe two bob idk, and abolish the age bands so everyone gets the adult wage

ban zerohour contracts, ban fire-rehire, strengthen rights to to sick pay, parental leave and protections from unfair dismissal

extend the oil/gas windfall tax for five more years, raise it by three percent, and close loopholes

"people who can work should work, and there will be consequences for those who do not fulfil their obligations"

reform the work capability assessment system, though based on above, it'll be to get more and quicker rejections

not increase the internationally tiny business tax for the entire parliament, letting the invisible hand wank everyone off

more registration/reportage requirements at HMRC, tactical focus on the tax avoidance of corporations and the rich [which like, aint that how it's supposed to be already?]

unify employment law / workers' protections authorities into a single enforcement body, "we will strengthen the collective voice of workers, including through their trade unions" [clarification needed]

programme to get under-21 neets into free training or work programmes with a focus on mental health

£7b centralised national wealth fund for economic investment including automotive gigafactories and steel

new state energy company, long an ephemeral promise of theirs, now confirmed to be backend-only, responsible for building and maintaining infrastructures, while the private companies remain responsible for selling the electricity to the people

remove planning restrictions on datacentres

strengthen Equality Act regulations for gender, racial and disability pay imbalances, increasing workers' ability to sue the pants off their employers

create a regulatory innovation office to coordinate new regulations for rapidly moving economic sectors, ie big tech, with a specific pledge to introduce 'binding regulation on the handful of companies developing the most powerful ai models”

aim to double the size of the cooperative/mutual sector

turn a blind eye to the City just like all other major parties

🏥PUBLIC SERVICES

free breakfasts in primary schools, but not lunches

put misogyny on the curriculum

i mean like. teaching about misogyny. that it's bad

reform royal mail 'so that workers and customers can have a stronger voice', implying preventing its privatisation to that czech billionaire

found the national care service

recruit 8500 mental health staff, reform the mental health acts

6500 more 'expert' teachers [citation needed]

double the number of CT and MRI machines

'end HIV cases by 2030'. they won't do it tho

mental health professionals in every school

build a boatload of new inhouse integrated features into the NHS app, with an inhouse appointment system, local service referrals, vaccination reminders and a pool of personal medical guidelines and treatment information

convert some colleges into specialist technical colleges

3,000 "new" nurseries glued onto primary school sites

finally end the "charity" status of for-profit private schools to make private parents pay their fair share

ok, here's the bulk of labour's trans policy, and the unfortunate reason why i've chosen to list it under public services: they've pledged to reform the Gender Recognition system, per them, "to remove indignities for trans people who deserve recognition and acceptance; whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a specialist doctor". they continue with an equally cowardly statement to 'support the implementation of single-sex exceptions'. this is a coward's position because the labour leadership is terrified of the commentariat and the terf cult it stands by. that's also why there's a fleeting line to "implement the expert recommendations of the cass review". lmao, they should call him wes fleeting. truth is, they have no plan to reform gender recognition. the abolition of the transmedicalist clause is the minimum amount of feasible and meaningful reform that could have any sort of political momentum, but that minimum is over the line for the terfs and will cause commentariat outrage. the labour right has no ability to change the situation of trans people by staying on the fence, they'd have to commit to supporting the struggle for freedom — and their choice is to stay on the fence

reintroduce the age-gated fag ban, maybe raising it from 2006 to like 2008

limit the number of branded items of uniform schools can require

replace ofsted headline grades with a 'report card system', 'bring multi-academy trusts into the inspection system' but not abolish the indefensible MAT system

🏠HOUSING

ban no-fault evictions, introduce more powers for renters to challenge rent increases

reintroduce mandatory housebuilding targets, national target to build 1.5M in five years

abolish leaseholds, ban flat leaseholds and replace them with commonholds

scramble and deploy more planning officers to local councils, which are to keep stronger housebuilding plans, and with combined authorities given full power (and requirement) to plan and housebuild with their funding

reform compulsory purchase compensation laws to force the price of appropriations down to actual value rather than speculative value

explicit threat to nimby councils: "we will ensure local communities continue to shape housebuilding in their area, but where necessary [we] will not be afraid to make full use of intervention powers to build the houses we need"

prioritise brownfield development [clarification needed] but release and build on 'grey belt', their neologism for shit green belt that nobody wants

ensure social housing is central to the building scheme

ban new developments being sold to international buyers before construction ends, ie, slowing the hypergentrification of luxury districts, though possibly not fixing these areas or even doing enough to stop the trend

new New Towns, which'll be 'part of a series of large-scale new communities' [clarification needed]

🚄TRANSPORT

simply wait for the franchise-concession system to lapse, established in 2020 when the private franchise system collapsed, then give british rail the contracts as a single island-wide renationalised train operator with a unified consumer frontend

return to local councils the ability to franchise their own bus networks (ie, not centrally fund their doing so) and let them create their own unified travel networks (like the bee in Manchester)

expand freightrail

devolve to mayors rail british rail planning for their areas

restore the 2030 ban of new petrol cars, build more ev chargers

👮FORCE

raise defence spending to 2.5% GDP

points-based immigration system and restrict visas, ban employers who break migrant labour laws from hiring any migrant again, intelligence border command 'hundreds of new' officers to stamp down on desperate people wanting a better life, new home office unit for mass deportations

recognise palestine… but no commitment to do it immediately or unambiguously, only “as part of the process” etc etc etc. “push” for an immediate ceasefire

'Respect Orders', ASBOs 2, with power to ban people from entering town centres

'force' fly-tippers and 'vandals' to 'clean up the mess they have created'

mandatory referral to reoffending programmes for young people caught with knives

end the sengoku period by enacting katanagari

SVU in every police force, 'using tactics normally reserved for terrorists and organised crime

upgrade any and all hate crimes to aggravated offences, though not actually amend the definition. Brianna Ghey's slaughter was, under the letter of the current law, not a hate crime, despite one of her killers openly admitting to targeting her due to her being transgender

ban conversion therapy including for trans people

make spiking a specific criminal offence

extend protection against domestic violence in marriages to cohabitees

reduce relations with china

'build on the online safety act', not ruling out the potential for a bad internet bill

massive building of new prisons

"labour is committed to reducing gambling-related harm. recognising the evolution of the gambling landscape since 2005, labour will reform gambling regulation, strengthening protections. we will continue to work with the industry on how to ensure responsible gambling" is the entire section on gambling. don't get me wrong, this is scandalous. the country's gambling laws are lax beyond words and an international laughing stock. The House have not hidden their infiltration of the labour party lobbies - their biggest catch is probably Tom Watson, former deputy leader-turned-gambling lobbyist, who waged civil war on corbyn, founded the major caucus against him, and so commands major respect from the labour right MPs who'll be in the new government. this pathetic paragraph means The House can continue to demolish lives for the next five years at least and the public health emergency will continue to burn. i fucking BEG prime minister starmer to remove all equivocation from the first two sentences of this paragraph, and throw the third in the bin. a punt on the game, a night in the bingo hall, the lottery are all brilliant and beloved, but The House being let loose to make money on people's lives makes it an enemy of public health.

continue to be the american empire’s prettiest bitch

🌱CLIMATE

zero-carbon electricity by 2030**: quadruple offshore wind, triple solar, double onshore wind, rollout Small Modular Reactors

**two asterisks: first to maintain a 'strategic reserve' of gas stations for energy security, and second "ensure a phased and responsible transition" to not Thatcher the communities that're employed in gas. idk, it seems like you can't do that in six short years without a radical plan

commitment to upgrading the Grid (a long-looming problem), which may well push through projects that annoy the nimbys

no new licenses for oil extraction, no new coal licenses, permaban on fracking

three new national forests, plant millions of trees, expand protected wetlands, woodlands and Pete Boggs, seed new woodland

LEAVE WATER PRIVATE despite the shit situation (shituation), but ban bonuses of dumping bosses and criminalise repeat dumping

introduce a land-use framework for economical usage of land, a policy shared by the liberals

end the badger cull, ban trailhunting, ban trophy imports, ban puppy farming

🗳️DEMOCRACY

votes at sixteen

immediately evict all 92 hereditary Filth, but keep the 25 bishops

immediately introduce an 80-year age limit for the Filth, with evictions occurring at the end of the parliament the Filth turns 80. also introduce minimum attendance requirements, and eviction for rulebreaking. 308 of the 709 filth who aren't hereditary or bishops are 75 or older right now

"Whilst this action to modernise the House of [Filth] will be an improvement, Labour is committed to replacing the House of [Filth] with an alternative second chamber that is more representative of the regions and nations. Labour will consult on proposals, seeking the input of the British public on how politics can best serve them." okay. look. i know you're intelligent enough to see that this paragraph is just a get-out-of-jail-free card. president starmer has no plans to replace the Filth with democracy, because the patronage spoils system is too useful for his closed-door regime. that's also why there's nothing about electoral reform, the dumb bad stupid system simply serves him and regime-minded political operators too well. democracy is for chumps. end of story. sorry peasants

keep the indefensible voter id system

new council of all first ministers and mayors for some reason

more combined authorities, with devolution of transport, adult education, housing, and 'employment support', give the new CAs 'strong governance arrangements' and renew those of the existing ones so the CA areas have better governments

create a commons modernisation committee to modernise the commons' useless old practises, with its purview including replacing the pairing system with proxying

ban on MP second jobs in advisory or consultancy roles, task the (above) committee in restricting other second jobs, 'enforcing restrictions on ministers lobbying for the companies they used to regulate' [clarification needed]

[submalevolentgrace]

"More than a decade ago, investment experts James Altucher and Douglas Sease wrote a book for the Wall Street Journal called Investing in the Apocalypse. They argued that the end of the world is a profitable opportunity for those who know how to “fade the fear”, as everyone else panics. They maintained that when disaster strikes, investors should approach it with the rationale that “no matter how bad things seem, they really aren’t that bad”.

Well before the COVID-19 pandemic, they advised investing in big pharmaceutical companies as a strategy to reap dividends from global pandemics. They also encouraged putting money into renewable energy systems while ramping up oil production.

Today, it seems many have followed Althucher and Sease’s advice. Under the guise of taking action on the pandemic, billions of dollars have been poured into big pharma, instead of public health and policies aimed at preventing another global outbreak. The supposed energy transition that has been undertaken has seen renewable energy production expanded, but there has been no indication that oil and gas are being substituted and ultimately phased out.

What is worse, governments and corporations have teamed up to turn the apocalypse into a money-making opportunity. They have rushed to put forward false solutions to the climate crisis: from the push to replace fuel-engine vehicles with electric ones, to so-called climate-smart agriculture, to protected areas for nature conservation and massive tree planting projects for carbon offsets.

All this trickery is called “greening” and it is designed to profit off of climate fears, not stop climate change. While guaranteeing high returns, this deception is tantamount to the genocide of the hundreds of millions of people who will perish from the effects of climate change within the next century because things are that bad."

[awesome-casuallyfamouscollector]

GM fires thousands as sales in China fall a staggering 55%

P.S. In 2017, GM and the other legacy automakers received a perfectly clear warning that electric car battery technologies were sufficiently advanced for Chinese automakers to produce cheap and affordable EVs in large volumes and start exporting them. What was the response of the legacy automakers - they hired corrupt journalists and "experts" who tried to tell the public how it was "impossible" to produce affordable mass market EVs..., released some poorly designed, overpriced and low volume compliance EVs, and continued to invest huge resources in manufacturing obsolete ICE vehicles...as if nothing had happened in the car market...

To the real experts, the collapse of GM car sales in China comes as no surprise…There is no demand for ICE vehicles in that market...

Other unintended consequences: China's electric car manufacturers will help defeat Russia, unwillingly, because electric cars significantly reduce the need to import oil... but as we all know, Putler finances his war by exporting oil, gas, coal and other resources...! Until Russia is cut off from its sources of war financing, the Western "strategy" is in fact complete bullshit

[beardedmrbean]

The United States will work with other governments to speed up efforts to make nuclear fusion a new source of carbon-free energy, U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry said Tuesday, the latest of many U.S. announcements the last week aimed at combatting climate change.

Nuclear fusion melds two hydrogen atoms together to produce a helium atom and a lot of energy—which could be used to power cars, heat and cool homes and other things that currently are often powered by fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas. That makes fusion a potentially major solution to climate change, which is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Still, fusion is a long way off, while other clean technologies like wind, solar and others are currently in use and could be increased.

“We are edging ever-closer to a fusion-powered reality. And at the same time, yes, significant scientific and engineering challenges exist,” Kerry said, in Dubai for U.N. climate talks. “Careful thought and thoughtful policy is going to be critical to navigate this.”

Researchers have been trying for decades to harness the reaction that powers the sun and other stars — an elusive goal because it requires such high temperatures and pressures that it easily fizzles out.

Kerry wants to speed that up in hopes of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) since pre-industrial times, a benchmark set by the international community. He urged nations to come together to “harness the power of fundamental physics and human ingenuity in response to a crisis.” The strategy lays out five areas for international partnerships: research, the supply chain and future marketplace, regulation, workforce issues and public engagement. Kerry spoke at the Atlantic Council Global Energy Forum.

The United States and United Kingdom announced a partnership in November to accelerate global fusion energy development, and the United States announced its own vision last year for research needed over the decade. In southern France, 35 nations are collaborating on an experimental machine to harness fusion energy, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, to prove the feasibility of fusion as a large-scale, carbon-free source of energy. That project has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. On Friday, Japan and Europe said they were launching the world's largest fusion reactor.

Both China and Russia are partners in ITER, and China in particular is moving aggressively to promote fusion research and development, said Andrew Holland, chief executive officer of the Fusion Industry Association.

"We're trying to build a global posse to get there before the Chinese so the Chinese don't dominate another new technology," he said.

Before he left for Dubai, Kerry put on a hardhat and toured Commonwealth Fusion Systems in Devens, Massachusetts, a company racing to design, build and deploy fusion power plants.

Until now, all nuclear power has come from nuclear fission reactors in which atoms are split — a process that produces both energy and radioactive waste. The global nuclear industry launched an initiative at COP28 for nations to pledge to triple this kind of nuclear energy by 2050. More than 20 have already signed on, including the United States and the host of this year's talks, the United Arab Emirates.

Fusion doesn’t produce the radioactive waste of nuclear fission. In a global race to make it a practical and possibly limitless power source, more than $6 billion has been invested to date, according to the Fusion Industry Association. There are more than 40 fusion companies globally now with over 80% of the investment in the United States. Thirteen of the companies emerged in just the past year and a half.

Commonwealth Fusion Systems has raised the most, more than $2 billion, according to the association.

Like the 35-nation effort, Commonwealth is trying to create fusion inside what's called a tokamak. The doughnut-shaped machine uses powerful magnets to confine and insulate a plasma so it's hot enough for the fusion reaction to occur and stays hot longer.

A year ago, in a major breakthrough that used a different technology at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, scientists for the first time were able to engineer a reaction that produced more power than was used to ignite it, called net energy gain. Their process uses lasers.

Physicists around the world view the doughnut-shaped machines as the most promising kind of magnetic fusion device.

Tokamaks have been getting bigger in size for better performance. Commonwealth Fusion was founded in 2018 by researchers and students from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Plasma Science and Fusion Center. Using breakthroughs in superconducting magnet technology combined with science from their own compact tokamak, the MIT group set out to build a magnet tolerant of high temperatures that could achieve really strong magnetic fields, using little electricity.

Their hope is to build a smaller, less expensive unit more rapidly, to make fusion commercially viable for the first time, said Professor Dennis Whyte, a co-founder of Commonwealth who leads the Plasma Science and Fusion Center.

“If fusion becomes economically competitive, we've solved energy for humanity forever, forever. It's like, of course you go after that," he said in an interview. “The compulsion that’s coming both from climate change and from energy security means it sure seems this is the right time to make the big push to get there.”

The company and the university collaborate closely. In 2021, they turned on their superconducting electromagnet and demonstrated a record-breaking magnetic field, making it the strongest fusion magnet of its kind. Whyte said he knew then fusion had changed forever.

But despite the hype, reliable and cheap nuclear fusion energy is still a pipe dream, said Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety for the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington. Fusion is far less likely than other alternatives to be commercialized on a timeframe that would allow it to help prevent the worst effects of climate change, he said. Lyman said the enormous price tag could also rob more promising alternatives, such as renewable energy, of resources they need to thrive,

Yet 19 fusion companies think they will deliver power to the grid before 2035, the Fusion Industry Association said in July.

Commonwealth is designing its first power plant, which it's calling “ARC,” to connect to the grid in the early 2030s.

ARC is intended to make roughly 460 megawatts of electricity. About 60 of those would be used to run the plant, for a net output of about 400 megawatts, enough to power tens of thousands of homes. It's projected to cost roughly $1 billion to $2 billion, according to the company, and fit on a space the size of a basketball court.

Before that, Commonwealth says it will build and test a prototype tokamak it calls SPARC, hoping to turn that on in late 2025 or early 2026.

CEO Bob Mumgaard said he thinks clean energy from fusion can decarbonize heavy industries that are big emitters of greenhouse gases.

“That’s our future play, it’s the really hard stuff, the stuff that gets you to zero," he said in an interview.

Along the walls at Commonwealth runs a pattern of white dots at hip level, one for each of the 10,000 fusion power plants they think the world will need by 2050. Mumgaard said it's a daily reminder the world uses a lot of energy, most of it from fossil fuels, and that has to change.

[theculturedmarxist]

“The war in Ukraine is also a battle for raw materials. The country has large deposits of iron, titanium and lithium, some of which are now controlled by Russia.” That’s what the federally owned German foreign trade agency Germany Trade and Invest (GTAI) reported on its website on January 16 under the title “Ukraine’s raw materials wealth at risk.”

There are trillions at stake. According to the GTAI, “raw material deposits worth $12.4 trillion” remain beyond the control of the Ukrainian army, “including 41 coal mines, 27 gas deposits, 9 oil fields and 6 iron ore deposits.” Ukraine has not only coal, gas, oil and wheat but also rare earths and metals—especially lithium, which has been called the “white gold” of the transition to new energy and transportation technologies. The country accounts for around one-third of Europe’s explored lithium deposits.

Only the ignorant could believe that this is irrelevant to NATO’s war aims. It would be the first major war in over 100 years that is not about mineral resources, markets and geostrategic interests. The World Socialist Web Site has pointed out in previous articles that deposits of critical raw materials in Russia and China, which are essential to the transition to electric mobility and renewable energy, are an important factor in the war calculus of NATO states.

Yet they go unmentioned in the media’s round-the-clock war propaganda. The media wish the public to believe that NATO is waging this war to defend “freedom” and “democracy”—and that after bombing Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria back into the Middle Ages under similar pretexts.

Relevant trade journals, industry magazines and think tanks, on the other hand, rave about Ukraine’s mineral wealth and discuss how best to capture it. It was to this end that German Economics Minister Robert Habeck (Green Party) even traveled to Ukraine at the beginning of April with a high-ranking business delegation.

According to the industry magazine Mining World, Ukraine has a total of around 20,000 raw material deposits, of which only 7,800 have been explored. Numerous other articles and strategy papers openly state that this is what the war is about.

On February 24, 2022, the day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the largest German business magazine, Capital, published an article stating that “Europe’s supply of raw materials” was “threatened” by the Russian occupation of eastern Ukraine. Ukraine was not only “the leading grain exporter” but also the largest EU supplier of iron ore pellets and “a linchpin for Europe’s energy security.” Among investors, the magazine said, there is “concern that the war will cut off exports of key raw materials.”

The GTAI article cited earlier reports that European steel mills were sourcing nearly one-fifth of their iron ore pellets from Ukraine in 2021. GTAI goes on to write that Ukraine is among the top ten producers of iron ore, manganese, zirconium, and graphite, and is “among the world leaders in titanium and kaolin.” In addition to “untapped oil and gas fields,” Ukraine’s lithium and titanium deposits, in particular, hold “enormous potential” for the European economy. In 2020, production volumes amounted to 1,681,000 tons of kaolin, 537,000 tons of titanium, 699,000 tons of manganese and 49,274,000 tons of iron ore.

Lithium for electromobility and energy storage

The price of lithium has increased more than eightfold in the last decade and is the subject of intense speculation. The metal is of strategic importance to the major imperialist powers because it is used in lithium-ion batteries installed in electric vehicles and off-grid renewable energy sources, and is also needed for lightweight aluminum alloys in the aerospace industry.

The largest lithium deposit in Europe is located in the Donetsk Oblast in the middle of the embattled Donbas region, only kilometers from the front lines. An article in the Tagesspiegel, published two months after the Russian invasion, points to untapped lithium reserves of 500,000 tons in Shevchenko near Potrovsk and at least two other Ukrainian deposits.

Western companies and Ukrainian oligarchs were already fighting bitterly for control of this “white gold” before the war. As the Tagesspiegel reports, “Ukrainian businessmen” (who stood close to the Ukrainian government of the time under the oligarch Petro Poroshenko) with connections to Western mining companies obtained mining licenses, without a tender process, for the lithium deposit in Shevchenko as early as 2018.

The company in question, Petro Consulting—which was renamed “European Lithium Ukraine” shortly before the war began—is expected to be bought out by the Australian-European mining company European Lithium once its access to Ukraine’s lithium reserves is secured.

In 2018, when the Ukrainian Geological Survey refused to issue a “special permit” for Ukraine’s second largest lithium deposit at Dobra, likewise bypassing the tender process, Petro Consulting went so far as to sue the agency. After the Ukrainian Procurator General’s Office eventually launched an investigation into the allegedly illegal special permits, Petro-Consulting had its Shevchenko mining license revoked by the courts in April 2020 until further notice.

However, a spokesman for European Lithium told Der Tagesspiegel that the company bears “no risk in connection with the Ukrainian deposits.” He expressed confidence that the projects would be “made production-ready” after the end of the war.

Titanium for the Western arms industry

In a September 2022 article titled “Ukraine’s Titanium Can Armor the West,” the transatlantic think tank Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) wrote: “Support for Ukraine has been driven by strategic concerns and moral-political values. But long-term Western help should also be based on solid material interests.”

“Ukraine’s substantial titanium deposits” are “a key resource critical to the West” because the metal is “integral to many defense systems,” such as aircraft components and missiles. Currently, the raw material for Airbus, Boeing and Co. is extracted “in an expensive and time-consuming six-step process” from titanium ore, which until then had been sourced to a considerable extent from Russia. This “dependence” on “strategic competitors and adversaries” is unacceptable from the West’s point of view and can be ended with the help of Ukrainian resources:

For example, Dnipro-based Velta, the largest private exporter of raw titanium in Europe, has developed a new production system that bypasses the intensive process of producing titanium sponge and could supply the US and European defense and aerospace industries with finished metal. Given there are only five countries in the world actively producing titanium sponge —China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Japan and Ukraine — Velta’s technology could be a game changer for the supply chain by cutting reliance on Russia and China.

CEPA is funded by US and European defense contractors and lists as members of its “scientific advisory board” Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor General H. R. McMaster, former German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt and publicists Anne Applebaum, Francis Fukuyama, and Timothy Garton Ash among others.

The CEPA article continues, “Reorienting titanium contracts to Ukraine would stimulate the country’s economy, even during wartime, not to mention during postwar reconstruction, and simultaneously strike another blow at Russia’s war machine.” The goal, it states, should be “cementing Ukraine’s integration into Europe.”

A January 28, 2023 report in Newsweek reports, “there is a nascent effort underway in the U.S. and allied nations to identify, develop, and utilize Ukraine’s vast resources of a key metal crucial for the development of the West’s most advanced military technology which will form the backbone of future deterrence against Russia and China.” The report adds, “If Ukraine wins, the U.S. and its allies will be in sole position to cultivate a new conduit of titanium.”

“Strategic raw materials partnership” between EU and Ukraine

The US and EU efforts to plunder Ukraine’s lithium and titanium deposits are part of the broader goal of tying Ukraine to the West as a strategic raw materials supplier. In particular, the EU is seeking to free itself from dependence on China—currently its most important raw materials supplier—against which the imperialist powers, especially the United States, are preparing to wage war.

On July 13, 2021, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal and Maroš Šefčovič, Vice President of the European Commission, signed a “Strategic Partnership on Raw Materials and Batteries” in Kiev to “integrate critical raw materials and battery value chains.” Ukraine’s inclusion in the European Raw Materials Alliance (ERMA) and the European Battery Alliance (EBA) serves to “bolster Europe’s resilience and open strategic autonomy in key technologies,” the EU Commission said.

Referring to the list of critical raw materials in the EU’s associated “action plan,” Šefčovič told the press, “21 of these critical raw materials are in Ukraine, which is also extracting 117 out of 120 globally used minerals.” He added: “We’re talking about lithium, cobalt, manganese, rare earths—all of them are in Ukraine.”

Following the signing, EU Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton, who is also responsible for the defense and space industries of EU countries, praised the “high potential of the critical raw material reserves in Ukraine” that could help in “addressing some of the strategic dependencies [of the EU].”

Speaking at Raw Materials Week in Brussels in November 2022, Prime Minister Shmyhal stressed that Ukraine is “among the top ten producers of titanium, iron ore, kaolin, manganese, zirconium and graphite” and renewed his pledge to make the country an “integral part of industrial supply chains in the EU.”

The EU’s “strategic dependencies” are by no means limited to Russia or China and certainly not to Ukraine. A global race for strategic sources of raw materials has long since begun, in the course of which the US and the leading EU powers are attempting to divide among themselves the mineral resources and other resources of the “weaker” states. Although they are jointly waging war against Russia in Ukraine, this inevitably exacerbates conflicts between themselves as well.

The escalation of the war in Ukraine shows that the ruling elites are willing to go to extremes to enforce their profit interests. Only the working class can put an end to permanent war and the prospect of devastating nuclear war by bringing the resources of the entire planet under its democratic control on the basis of a socialist program and holding war profiteers to account.

[baronmagikcarp]

Well this is just a cheerful opening to my morning.

"Well before the COVID-19 pandemic, they advised investing in big pharmaceutical companies as a strategy to reap dividends from global pandemics. They also encouraged putting money into renewable energy systems while ramping up oil production.

Today, it seems many have followed Althucher and Sease’s advice. Under the guise of taking action on the pandemic, billions of dollars have been poured into big pharma, instead of public health and policies aimed at preventing another global outbreak. The supposed energy transition that has been undertaken has seen renewable energy production expanded, but there has been no indication that oil and gas are being substituted and ultimately phased out."

[marketsndata]

Japan Clean Energy Market Report 2031

The adoption of clean energy has been driven by declining costs, technological advancements, supportive policies, and increasing public awareness. Individuals, businesses, and governments are adopting clean energy solutions to reduce carbon emissions and improve air quality. Total renewable energy capacity additions in 2022 were 8.99 GW.

Japan heavily depends on imported fossil fuels, such as liquefied natural gas (LNG), coal, and oil, to satisfy its energy needs. In the fiscal year 2022, Japan spent USD 54.9 billion to import Crude Petroleum, making it the fifth largest importer of this resource worldwide. Fossil fuels constituted 72.4% of the total electricity generated in the fiscal year 2023, while Renewable Energy accounted for 20.3% and nuclear power contributed 6.9% to Japan’s electricity generation. Consequently, the market is experiencing significant growth due to the country’s strong push towards cleaner energy sources, aiming to reduce its reliance on oil imports and improve energy security.

Net Zero Commitment Boosting the Demand for Clean Energy

The Paris Agreement, under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), sets the goal of restraining global warming to less than a 2-degree Celsius increase above pre-industrial levels, with additional efforts to limit the rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Hence, Japan is one of the 136 nations that has committed to reach net zero emission target by 2050 to limit this rise in temperature by switching to cleaner energy. The 6th Strategic Energy Plan launched in FY 2022 aims to achieve 46% reduction in GHG emissions and a share of renewables and nuclear in the power mix of approximately 36-38% and 20-22%, respectively by FY3031. Hence, strategic shift in clean energy transition is propelling demand for clean energy generation and thereby boosting the market growth.   

Technological Enhancements Improving Solar Panels Efficiency

Japan is making technological advancements to boost investments in large-scale renewable energy projects like rooftop solar installations, laying a strong foundation for reducing its reliance on fossil fuels. As available land for large-scale photovoltaic (PV) systems becomes limited, Japan’s PV policy is shifting its focus towards rooftop and commercial PV models. Therefore, leading domestic companies like Trina Solar and JinkoSolar are transitioning from conventional PERC (Passivated Emitter and Rear Cell) solar cells to the more advanced Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact (TOPCon) technology. This technological upgrade enhances module efficiency and enables improved power density from a given area, positioning it as the next-generation solution. DAS Solar, currently operating 30 GW of TOPCon cell capacity, has plans to expand its operations to 40 GW by the fiscal year 2024, further driving these advancements in the solar panel efficiency domain.   

Government Supporting Investments in Clean Energy

Government expenditure has played a pivotal role in driving the rapid expansion of clean energy investments. Recognizing this, the Japanese Cabinet embraced the green growth strategy in December of the fiscal year 2022. This industrial policy aims to foster a mutually beneficial cycle of economic growth and environmental protection, with the active involvement of the business community. As part of this strategy, a fund amounting to USD 16.87 billion has been established to promote ecological businesses and foster innovation in order to achieve the net-zero targets. Additionally, the implementation of a carbon tax is currently being deliberated.

Moreover, Japan’s Ministry of Energy (MoE) has made USD 151 billion in funding available for a range of renewable energy, energy storage, and decarbonization projects until 2030. In a further move, the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) has replaced feed-in tariffs (FiTs) for large solar PV projects (>250 kW) with a tendering program, which relieves consumers of surcharge burdens and attracts both foreign and domestic players. Consequently, the government’s support through investments and regulatory relaxations is facilitating the establishment of clean energy generation hubs, thereby positively impacting market growth.   

Impact of COVID-19

Despite being one of the world’s third largest economy Japan was heavily impacted by COVID-19. Some of the short-term impacts were severe and there was a slowdown in projects reaching commercial operation due to a combination of physical problems, delivery constraints and financial barriers. To mitigate and revamp the economic slowdown.

However, in April 2020, the Japanese government incorporated renewable energy as part of its USD 992 billion economic stimulus package. This initiative falls within the Development of Resilient Economic Structures category, with an allocation of nearly USD1 billion to encourage corporate power purchase agreements (PPAs) and promote the installation of onsite renewable energy sources. This is complemented by renewable and clean energy capacity addition to increase the share of renewables and nuclear energy in the power mix of 36-38% and 20-22%, respectively by FY 3031. Hence, COVID-19 pandemic resulted in influencing the government to invest heavily in clean energy space to enhance energy security and cut dependency on fossil fuels.

Impact of Russia-Ukraine War 

The global surge in energy prices due to Russia Ukraine war has dealt a particularly serious blow to Japan, which is reliant on imports for most of its energy resources. Japan imported 13.879 million mt of thermal coal from Russia in FY2022, the second highest after Australia, which sent 81.669 million mt of volumes last year. To alleviate the financial burden on households and businesses caused by high electricity bills, the Japanese government has put emphasis on Demand Response (DR) to incentivize energy conservation. Furthermore, the surge in price of crude oil led the government to pursue investment in renewables and clean energy generation to reduce dependency to meet energy demand. Hence, this geo-political conflict helped in driving the market growth.

Japan Clean Energy Market: Report Scope

Japan Clean Energy Market Assessment, Opportunities and Forecast, 2016-2030F”, is a comprehensive report by Markets & Data, providing in-depth analysis and qualitative & quantitative assessment of the current state of the clean energy market in Japan, industry dynamics and challenges. The report includes market size, segmental shares, growth trends, COVID-19 and Russia-Ukraine war impact, opportunities and forecast between 2023 and 2030. Additionally, the report profiles the leading players in the industry mentioning their respective market share, business model, competitive intelligence, etc. 

Click here for full report- https://www.marketsandata.com/industry-reports/japan-clean-energy-market

Latest reports-

Contact

Mr. Vivek Gupta 5741 Cleveland street, Suite 120, VA beach, VA, USA 23462 Tel: +1 (757) 343–3258 Email: info@marketsandata.com Website: https://www.marketsandata.com

[govindtbrc]

Capital Expenditure Market: Trends and Investment Strategies up to 2033

Market Definition

The Capital Expenditure (CapEx) Market involves the allocation of funds by companies and governments for acquiring, upgrading, and maintaining physical assets such as buildings, machinery, technology infrastructure, and equipment. These expenditures are critical for business expansion, technological advancement, infrastructure development, and overall economic growth. CapEx investments are long-term in nature and are essential for organizations to improve operational efficiency, increase production capacity, or launch new products and services.

To Know More @ https://www.globalinsightservices.com/reports/capital-expenditure-market

The global capital expenditure market is anticipated to expand from $1.9 trillion in 2023 to $3.1 trillion by 2033, with a CAGR of 4.9%.

Market Outlook

The Capital Expenditure Market is expected to experience steady growth, driven by increasing investments in infrastructure, industrial development, and technological advancements. The rise of smart cities and the push for improved public infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, energy grids, and water systems, are significant contributors to the expansion of the CapEx market. Governments across the globe are prioritizing infrastructure projects to boost economic recovery, especially in the wake of disruptions caused by global events.

In the private sector, companies are increasing capital investments to modernize facilities, adopt automation and digitalization, and transition to sustainable and energy-efficient operations. The manufacturing and industrial sectors are seeing a surge in CapEx as businesses invest in advanced machinery, robotics, and Industry 4.0 technologies to enhance productivity and competitiveness. Additionally, the rise of e-commerce and digital transformation initiatives are prompting major investments in data centers, cloud infrastructure, and logistics networks.

The energy sector is another significant driver, with substantial investments in renewable energy projects such as solar, wind, and hydrogen power. The shift towards cleaner energy sources, coupled with global efforts to reduce carbon emissions, is leading to increased CapEx in the development and deployment of sustainable energy infrastructure. The oil and gas industry is also seeing capital investments in exploration, production, and refining activities, despite the growing emphasis on renewable energy.

However, the Capital Expenditure Market faces challenges, such as economic uncertainty, fluctuating commodity prices, and regulatory hurdles that may impact investment decisions. Additionally, the high upfront costs and long payback periods associated with CapEx investments can be a barrier for companies, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Market volatility and changing geopolitical dynamics can also influence the timing and scale of capital expenditures.

Despite these challenges, the market outlook remains positive, with significant opportunities emerging from advancements in technology and the global focus on sustainability. As businesses and governments continue to prioritize investments that drive long-term value and operational efficiency, the Capital Expenditure Market is likely to witness sustained growth. The adoption of digital tools and data analytics to optimize CapEx planning and execution is also expected to become a key trend, helping organizations make more informed and strategic investment decisions.

Request the sample copy of report @ https://www.globalinsightservices.com/request-sample/GIS32210

[credenceresearchdotblog]

The Carbon Capture and Sequestration Market is projected to grow from USD 4202.5 million in 2024 to an estimated USD 18434.55 million by 2032, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 20.3% from 2024 to 2032. The Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) market is emerging as a cornerstone of global efforts to combat climate change by reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. CCS technology captures CO₂ from industrial and power generation sources and stores it underground, preventing it from entering the atmosphere. With increasing environmental concerns, stringent government regulations, and the growing need for sustainable energy solutions, the CCS market is poised for significant growth in the coming years.

Browse the full report https://www.credenceresearch.com/report/carbon-capture-and-sequestration-market

Market Overview

The CCS market comprises three key stages: capture, transportation, and sequestration. Carbon capture involves isolating CO₂ from industrial processes, power plants, or direct air capture systems. Transportation of captured CO₂ often relies on pipelines, ships, or tankers to reach storage sites. Finally, sequestration involves injecting CO₂ into deep geological formations, such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs or saline aquifers, where it is stored permanently.

In 2024, the CCS market is expected to witness robust investments from both public and private sectors. Countries around the globe are implementing aggressive carbon neutrality targets, making CCS an essential technology for industries that are hard to decarbonize, such as cement, steel, and chemical manufacturing.

Key Market Drivers

1. Stringent Regulatory Frameworks

Governments worldwide are imposing strict regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union's Green Deal and the United States' Inflation Reduction Act include provisions to promote CCS technology. Tax credits, grants, and incentives are making CCS projects more financially viable.

2. Corporate Net-Zero Commitments

Many multinational corporations are committing to net-zero emissions by 2050 or earlier. These commitments drive investments in CCS as part of comprehensive strategies to reduce operational and supply chain emissions.

3. Technological Advancements

Innovations in carbon capture technologies, such as solvent-based capture, solid sorbents, and direct air capture systems, are improving efficiency and reducing costs. The development of integrated hubs that serve multiple emitters is also boosting the scalability of CCS.

4. Rising Carbon Pricing

The increasing adoption of carbon pricing mechanisms, such as carbon taxes and emission trading systems, is incentivizing businesses to adopt CCS to mitigate financial penalties associated with high carbon emissions.

Challenges and Opportunities

While CCS has immense potential, challenges such as high costs, public opposition to CO₂ storage, and regulatory hurdles remain. However, the market is ripe with opportunities:

Development of CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage), which involves repurposing captured CO₂ for products like synthetic fuels and building materials.

Expansion of carbon credit trading to create additional revenue streams for CCS projects.

Collaboration among governments, industries, and NGOs to standardize regulations and build public trust.

Future Outlook

The CCS market is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12–15% from 2024 to 2032. As the world transitions toward a low-carbon future, CCS will play a critical role in decarbonizing hard-to-abate sectors and achieving global climate goals. With continued innovation, investment, and collaboration, the CCS market holds the promise of a sustainable and resilient future.

Key Player Analysis:

ADNOC Group (UAE)

Aker Solutions (Norway)

BP (U.K.)

Carbon Engineering Ltd (Canada)

Chevron (U.S.)

China National Petroleum Corporation (China)

Dakota Gasification Company (U.S.)

Equinor (Norway)

Exxonmobil (U.S.)

Fluor Corporation (U.S.)

Linde Plc (Ireland)

NRG Energy (U.S.)

Shell (Netherlands)

Total Energies (France)

Segmentation:

By Capture Source Analysis

Natural Gas Processing

Power Generation

Fertilizer’s Production

Chemicals

Others

By End-use

Dedicated Storage & Treatment

Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR)

By Region

North America

U.S.

Canada

Mexico

Europe

Germany

France

U.K.

Italy

Spain

Rest of Europe

Asia Pacific

China

Japan

India

South Korea

South-east Asia

Rest of Asia Pacific

Latin America

Brazil

Argentina

Rest of Latin America

Middle East & Africa

GCC Countries

South Africa

Rest of the Middle East and Africa

Browse the full report https://www.credenceresearch.com/report/carbon-capture-and-sequestration-market

Contact:

Credence Research

Please contact us at +91 6232 49 3207

Email: sales@credenceresearch.com

Website: www.credenceresearch.com

[oilgasenergymagazine]

Japan Aims for 50% Renewable Energy by 2040 in Revised Energy Policy

Source: downtoearth.org.in

Category: News

  

Japan’s Renewed Push for Clean Energy

Japan energy policy has set an ambitious target to make renewable energy account for 40-50% of its power supply by fiscal year 2040, according to a draft of its updated energy policy. The plan also outlines a significant role for nuclear energy, which is expected to provide around 20% of the country’s electricity. This clean energy push comes as Japan faces rising power demands and increasing global attention due to its reliance on imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) and Middle Eastern oil.

Currently, thermal power dominates Japan’s electricity mix, making up 68.6% in 2023. However, the draft policy projects a sharp decrease in the use of inefficient coal-fired plants, reducing thermal power’s share to 30-40% by 2040. While it does not specify the proportion of coal, gas, and oil, the document emphasizes the importance of LNG as a transitional power source. It highlights the need for long-term LNG contracts to mitigate supply risks and price fluctuations, which could arise due to geopolitical tensions.

Nuclear Power and Energy Security

Nuclear energy, once marginalized following the 2011 Fukushima disaster, is set for a revival under Japan’s new energy blueprint. The draft policy maintains the 2030 nuclear target of 20-22%, aligning it with 2040 projections. This marks a shift from earlier policies that prioritized reducing reliance on nuclear power. Instead, Japan now plans to invest in next-generation reactors to replace decommissioned plants, reflecting a renewed focus on nuclear technology.

Japan energy policy change comes amidst growing concerns over energy security, driven by global geopolitical events such as the Russia-Ukraine war. While the previous energy strategy centered on decarbonization, the new approach strikes a balance between clean energy goals and ensuring a stable power supply. Provisional forecasts predict electricity demand will rise by 12-22% from current levels by 2040, further necessitating a diversified energy mix.

Path to Net Zero and Future Challenges

Japan’s updated energy roadmap marks a critical step toward achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. However, unlike earlier plans, the revised policy omits specific targets for emerging fuels like hydrogen and ammonia. These fuels were initially projected to contribute about 1% of the energy mix by 2030, but their role in the updated policy remains unclear.

In addition to the energy draft, a joint strategy from Japan’s industry and environment ministries proposes cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2035 and 73% by 2040. These targets form part of a linear pathway to net-zero emissions by 2050. The finalized energy policy, expected in February, will provide more clarity and be submitted to the United Nations.

Japan energy policy reflects its balancing act between meeting environmental goals, ensuring energy security, and addressing rising power needs. While ambitious, the success of these targets will hinge on technological advancements, public acceptance of nuclear power, and global energy market stability.

[sourcreammachine]

LIBERAL MANIFESTO 2024 SUMMARY

tldr: tinkering reforms to existing structures and services without bothering to fix the overall problems or their causes. literally less ambitions than their previous manifestos. their whole campaign is mostly just getting u to like ed davey by making him look silly

their five basic points:

small business aid

public service investment

deal with the shitwater

as much bilateral eurointegration as possible

democratic reform

💷ECONOMY

reverse tax cuts on the banks and raise business tax to the international standard, raise the tax on digital businesses

balanced budget pledge, but when possible, cut income tax for the poor via raising the personal allowance

expand the british business bank and reestablish the ‘industrial strategy council’ quango (a policy shared by labour)

abolish the two-child benefits cap, bedroom tax and WASPI discrepancy

consumer-side investment for green energy and climate projects, ten-year plan to insulate and heatpump low-income houses, minimum price guarantee for selling home solar to the grid

windfall tax on oil and gas

increase parliamentary oversight of the department of trade

establish a workers’ protection enforcement authority

“independent review” into a living wage — less of a pledge than seen in labour’s policy programme

keep zerohour contracts, right to request a contact after twelve months (not a full right to a contract), employment strategy ‘fit for the age of the gig economy’ (ie embracing it)

expand the soft drinks levy to sugary juice and milkshakes

🏥PUBLIC SERVICES

8000 more GPs

reform dental contracts to prevent practises going private

remove the medical requirement for gender recognition and recognise nonbinary identities

free school meals — only for families in poverty

free personal care for everyone under a national care agency regulator, increased and expanded carers' allowance with paid respite leave

five more hours of free childcare — only for disadvantaged families

'guarantee' gp access within 24 hours, nhs dental access for urgent care, and access to talking therapy — though not fully enumerating this target

toothbrushing lessons in schools

eliminate the prescription charge for mental health prescriptions and 'review the entire schedule of exemptions' for the charge — not abolishing this indefensible illness tax

refom the mental health act to expand rights, self-determination and patient choice

free sign language lessons for parents of deaf children

free ‘acces to’ period products 'for anyone who needs it' [clarification needed]

various provisions for a focus on cancer care

rejoin erasmus+

freevote on the right to die

🏠HOUSING

local authorities can end right to buy in their area

abolish leaseholding — but cap ground rents not abolishing long leases

ten new "garden cities", the failed nothing plan that helped nothing

abolish the land compensation act, letting local governments buy land at current value rather than speculated potential value

use-it-or-lose-it planning permission laws for 'developers who refuse to build'

local authorities can hike council tax by 500% on second homes and surcharge stamp duty (homebuying tax) on overseas buyers

community asset laws to "protect pubs... and other vital infrastructure" [actual quote]

🚄TRANSPORT

reinstate 2030 ban on new petrol cars, build more chargers (including on-street points)

create a railway agency to manage rail systems rather than nationalising the international humiliation that is the private franchise system

build northern powerhouse rail, review the cancellation of HS2-north, ten-year plan for electrifications, open HS1 to new operators to increase international rail

strategy to expand freightrail as much as possible with keen targets to move freight from road to rail

transport ministry scheme to build local authority lightrail, trams and tramtrains

subject private and business-class flights to VAT and supertax private jets, ban domestic flights under 150 minutes (weird, because that's basically all of them, aberdeen to london included)

👮FORCE

expand the national crime agency and its remit

surge funding for armed forces

don't establish the Rwanda concentration scheme

firewall between all public agencies and the home office to prevent the HO gobbling up personal data

'end the hostile environment' [clarification needed]

end loopholes that allow kleptocratic money laundering, seize frozen russian assets and give the money to ukraine

animal welfare bill, ban foie gras and "crack down on puppy and kitten smuggling"

continue to be the american empire's prettiest bitch

🌱CLIMATE

land use framework to restore biodiversity and prevent environmental waste, 'wild belt' to protect environments

sewage tax on water companies, prevent dumping in protected waters... by 2030

legal requirement for landlords to increase energy efficiency of their lorded properties

fully reinstate ban on fracking, ban new coal mines, eliminate fossil fuel subsidies

deposit return scheme for bottles and food containers

seed more seagrass meadows

🗳️DEMOCRACY

SINGLE TRANSFERABLE VOTE for parliament and for all councils

abolish the lords

make parliament elect the prime minister rather than buckingham palace, repeal the reinstatement of the prime minister's indefensible dictatorial ability to dissolve parliament at will

votes at 16 and abolish voter ID

constitutional convention to draft a new Federal Constitution

let european citizens vote, just like citizens of the so-called commonwealth can

cap donations to parties

make the ministerial code a legalised thing that can be enforced with actual consequences, mandate all ministers' instant messages about government business be archived

abolish police commissioners and end new combined authorities, give such powers directly to existing authorities

regulate tv debates under ofcom

an overseas constituency for overseas voters

🎲OTHER STUFF

recognise Palestine and demand immediate ceasefire, proscribe the IRG

disengage many partnerships with china

ban single use vapes

junk food telly adverts banned pre-watershed

make carer status and care leaver status protected characteristics under the equality act

post offices become community government and banking hubs, if u can still trust them

raise subtitle mandate to 80% of telly

levy gambling companies to 'fund research', rather than actually do anything about the international humiliation that is this country's ultra-lax gambling laws and gambling addiction epidemic

rewrite wedding laws, though not necessarily marriage laws