At the 26th United Nations Conference on Climate Change, ambassadors wrote, for the first time, that the group should expedite the reduction of coal and oil prices in order to achieve their climate change goals. preparation information was released Wednesday.
Countries can continue to use current coal or reduce future temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) according to the Paris agreement. It is impossible to do all this. But these scientific facts have been the talk of the town for hundreds of years – until now.
“It’s important,” said Helen Mountford, vice president of the World Resources Institute, he told reporters. “We’ve never had a text message like that before.”
However, this new proclamation is timeless, timeless, and in line with international promises. This coalition is a reflection of the differences that exist between climate change in Glasgow: the obvious gaps between what nations need to do to address climate change, what nations say they will do in the future, and what they really are. I do now.
“We’ll see if the text goes on,” Mountford said later. “We hope so. It is a very important and practical thing that countries can do to achieve their promises. ”
Outside of climate change talks, protesters demanded that the language not continue. According to the Washington Post. he sang: “’Oil fields’ in this paper” and “Keep that in mind.”
Although UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed frustration with the talks Thursday, saying world-level “Promises do not last as long as the oil industry is still receiving trillions, as the IMF estimates. Or while countries are still building coal plants.”
With current climate patterns, the earth is preparing for temperatures above 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) in this century compared to what it already has. Although a more recent Current promises for the future have given the earth a temperature of 1.8 degrees Celsius. This means that even if all countries achieve their ambitious aspirations – as big as – we will continue to achieve Paris’ main target of 0.3 degrees. This may seem like a small difference, but science clearly shows that every tenth degree is dangerous to humans: more frequent and hotter storms, droughts, hurricanes, and wildfires; quantity of seawater; and, finally, much suffering.
Science also proves that coal is dangerous for the weather. Coal is the most powerful source of carbon, which is responsible for it about 40% carbon emissions are linked to global oil consumption.
That is why government officials say that removing coal is one of the most important steps in tackling climate change. For example, last week, Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven Guilbeault said in Glasgow: “Eliminating coal-fired power is one of the most important steps we must take to achieve the Paris degree of 1.5 degree.”
Consequences of climate comparison published last month The International Energy Agency indicates that there is no way to reduce global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, even to 1.5 degrees Celsius, without reducing the current use of coal.
The IEA’s aggressive air-conditioning system provides a map of how you can reduce temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius and detect “net-zero” emissions (when airborne emissions are similar to emissions, through air capture, plant life, and other exceptions). The so-called Net Zero Emissions by 2050 or NZE events, include the suspension of the new coal industry and reducing emissions from the nearly 2,100 gigawatts currently operating worldwide.
“It’s from the electrical sector,” IEA artist Daniel Crow said of the coal at the event. Eternal coal is gone.
Very little coal would be left, probably relying on modern technology to capture and store carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
IEA chief executive Fatih Birol took the message to Glasgow at an event organized by the Powering Past Coal Alliance, an organization set up in 2017 dedicated to ending coal use. To date, 165 countries, states, cities, and businesses have done so signed. This includes 28 new members who were announced at the next regular meeting.
In most cases, the participating countries have set a deadline: Ukraine has committed itself to eliminating coal by 2035, Croatia has set a deadline for 2033, and Estonia has already been without coal.
“For us in the UK, we have reduced the use of coal to reduce electricity consumption by less than 2%,” said Greg Hands, co-chair of the coalition and the UK prime minister, at the event. “And it will come out of our strong mix by 2024.”
But in recognition of the growing political turmoil, a separate but cohesive coalition to end coal was established on the same day in Glasgow. The second group has signed a new contract “Worldwide Coal Cleansing Power Transmission Information, ”Promises, among other things,“ to eliminate all domestic and international coal-fired power investments ”and“ to reduce the potential of the coal-economy economy by the 2030’s and 2030’s major economies and by 2040 all over the world. ”
Catherine McKenna, a former Canadian environment minister who co-founded the Powering Past Coal Alliance, called for a second coalition to reduce climate change: Empowering Old Coal Requires everything countries to eliminate coal before 2040.
One of the signatories to this new term was Poland, a country that relies heavily on coal. Poland boasted one of the 25 largest GDPs in 2020. This led many to recognize Poland, the largest economy, seeking to ban the use of coal in the 2030’s. until 2049.
South Korea, a major coal buyer, re-signed the statement last week, apparently committed to clearing coal at the end of the next decade. The Minister of Commerce has stopped volunteering, to utter the word“We are helping to accelerate the transition to clean electricity, but we have not yet agreed on a change date from coal.”
Neither the US nor China, two of the world’s leading coal producers, have signed any agreement. As members of the Group of 20, or G20, these countries had already agreed this year to stop supporting coal projects overseas.
Then, this week, John Kerry, US President’s special envoy for climate change, told Bloomberg in an interview: “By 2030, the United States will no longer have coal.” The next day he, on behalf of the US, declared with China that both countries were allied with him agreed to achieve their climate goals and to repeat the promise they made to stop supporting global coal projects. When China agreed to “intensify efforts to speed up” the coal sector, no date was given. The future of coal in the US is not mentioned at all.
Although many politicians have begun to speculate about the future of coal in the tropics, drastic changes are being made.
Take the US. According to the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign, about 348 coal plants in the US he has already retired or announced his retirement ten years ago. This leaves about 182 houses operating in the country.
“It’s the best in 10 years,” Cherelle Blazer, head of the Sierra Club, told BuzzFeed News. “As far as I know, there are no plans to build new coal.”
Seth Feaster, a renewable energy analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, provided more and more information on America’s departure from coal. “Just 10 years ago it was at the peak of the power we could generate from coal,” he said. “In other words, between 2011 and 2020, we retired about one-third of all coal-fired power.”
A third is expected to retire in the next decade, Feaster added, leaving the US with a third of its coal-fired power by 2030 – and he expects the sharp decline to continue.
All of this came even after the election of Donald Trump, who ran for US president promising to end the “coal war” and his superiors violently overturned coal laws.
So does this make Kerry’s recent goal of coal-free US by 2030 a reality? Yeah, not really. Even Feaster said it was “a matter of waiting.”
What made it even more difficult was the fact that US President Joe Biden introduced climate change laws between them. Make the Best Plan. Only one person who hinders the discovery of new weather information at the end is Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who personal wealth it is built on coal. There are now discussions as a tax incentive that they are pushing for integration with technologies that record carbon pollution will keep coal plants running longer.
The closure of coal-fired factories across the US has caused the country’s air quality to plummet. But thanks to coal, natural gas helped to bridge the gap. So as the carbon footprint decreased, the gas volume increased. Such electrical changes will not solve the climate problem.
“These countries, which are planning to move out of coal, must be very careful not to get into the trap of emissions by converting other fuels – gas – and looking to turn these into renewable energy sources,” he said. he warned María José de Villafranca, a climate analyst at the NewClimate Institute, this week.
Nov. 12, 2021, 17:17 PM
Correction: The US is expected to own one-third of its coal-fired power by 2030; A previous article did not misinterpret this number.
Original Article reposted fromSource link
Disclaimer: The website autopost contents from credible news sources and we are not the original creators. If we Have added some content that belongs to you or your organization by mistake, We are sorry for that. We apologize for that and assure you that this won’t be repeated in future. If you are the rightful owner of the content used in our Website, please mail us with your Name, Organization Name, Contact Details, Copyright infringing URL and Copyright Proof (URL or Legal Document) aT spacksdigital @ gmail.com
I assure you that, I will remove the infringing content Within 48 Hours.