Global Climate Change Science News

[Brian Peacock]

[Brian Peacock]

Climate expert ‘sacked’ after refusing flight to Germany over carbon emissions.

[JimC]

More international scientific and business conferences need to go virtual...

[Brian Peacock]

He was doing fieldwork with island communities impacted by sea level rise. The return flight would have emitted more carbon that a member of the community would use in a year. This highlights how thise most affected by climate change are generally the least responsible for it, as well as the innate sense of privilege inherent in even academic institutions studying climate change and global heating.

[Brian Peacock]

More than £2bn of UK foreign climate aid channelled through consultancies since 2010

More than £2bn of UK foreign aid aimed at helping poorer countries cope with the escalating climate crisis has been channelled through private consultancies since 2010, according to an analysis.

The investigation by Carbon Brief found that more than 10% of UK foreign aid spent on climate-related projects had gone through consultants like KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and Adam Smith International.

The findings have raised concerns among those on the frontline of the climate crisis who say climate funding works best when it is invested directly in local communities rather than through international corporations.

Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate Change and Development in Bangladesh, said: “There is a long history of sending international consultants to developing countries to assist in tackling climate change, which have not resulted in any real benefits after the international consultants leave the country.”

The analysis found that at least £2.11bn had been handed to dozens of management consultancies such as KPMG, PwC and Adam Smith International since 2010. They have provided guidance on everything from hydropower dam construction in Nepal to farm diversification in Ethiopia.

Alongside private consultancies, the UK’s climate finance is also spent via large international bodies such as the World Bank, UN agencies, development banks and NGOs....

[pErvinalia]

KPMG and PwC are in hot water here (Australia). Jim might explain.

[Brian Peacock]

IMF should give poor countries $300bn a year to fight climate crisis, says Joseph Stiglitz

Poor countries should be provided with $300bn (£246bn) a year from the International Monetary Fund to finance their fight against the climate crisis, the Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said.

Speaking to the Guardian at the IMF’s annual meeting in Marrakech, Stiglitz said developing nations needed their equivalent of the US Inflation Reduction Act – a package of grants and subsidies designed to promote green growth and jobs.

Stiglitz said the battle against global heating would only be won if poor countries were onboard but there was no hope of them coming up with their equivalent of the act, which he said was expensive and flawed but working.

Instead, he said rich countries should support the creation of $300bn of IMF special drawing rights (SDRs) each year to finance a global green transition.

The US economist admitted it would be impossible to get his plan through the US Congress in its current deadlocked state but said he would continue to campaign for it.

“As the scale of climate change impresses itself more and more on us, we are going to need bolder things. When the time comes and we are frying and somebody says: ‘How do we get out of the frying pan?’, this [annual SDR allocations] is one way of doing so.”

The need for extra money to help poorer countries cope with the effects of global heating and decarbonise their economies has been high on the agenda at the annual meeting of the IMF and its sister organisation, the World Bank, in Morocco this week.

Stiglitz, a former World Bank chief economist, said he welcomed plans to provide the bank with more capital to lend for green projects but said a far more ambitious approach was needed.

Surely the consultants can't say no to that?

[aufbahrung]

Better for the planet to let them starve away and so reduce consumer demand for polluting products?

[Brian Peacock]

After you.

[Svartalf]

IMF should give poor countries $300bn a year to fight climate crisis, says Joseph Stiglitz

Poor countries should be provided with $300bn (£246bn) a year from the International Monetary Fund to finance their fight against the climate crisis, the Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said.

Speaking to the Guardian at the IMF’s annual meeting in Marrakech, Stiglitz said developing nations needed their equivalent of the US Inflation Reduction Act – a package of grants and subsidies designed to promote green growth and jobs.

Stiglitz said the battle against global heating would only be won if poor countries were onboard but there was no hope of them coming up with their equivalent of the act, which he said was expensive and flawed but working.

Instead, he said rich countries should support the creation of $300bn of IMF special drawing rights (SDRs) each year to finance a global green transition.

The US economist admitted it would be impossible to get his plan through the US Congress in its current deadlocked state but said he would continue to campaign for it.

“As the scale of climate change impresses itself more and more on us, we are going to need bolder things. When the time comes and we are frying and somebody says: ‘How do we get out of the frying pan?’, this [annual SDR allocations] is one way of doing so.”

The need for extra money to help poorer countries cope with the effects of global heating and decarbonise their economies has been high on the agenda at the annual meeting of the IMF and its sister organisation, the World Bank, in Morocco this week.

Stiglitz, a former World Bank chief economist, said he welcomed plans to provide the bank with more capital to lend for green projects but said a far more ambitious approach was needed.

Surely the consultants can't say no to that?

consultants are known to nix any option that goes againts their grain and/or fails to line their pocketbook

[Svartalf]

Better for the planet to let them starve away and so reduce consumer demand for polluting products?

If you are having children, I've got a modest proposal for you.

[aufbahrung]

Better for the planet to let them starve away and so reduce consumer demand for polluting products?

If you are having children, I've got a modest proposal for you.

I'm only trying to make a positive contribution. Seems most people are happy about driving their petrol driven cars around and don't want to give that up. So to compensate the deaths of those they don't know shouldn't be a big deal.

Not like I'm suggesting a pact with the devil here. Straight down the line science to keep the numbers in the earth simulator on track for stability.

[Sean Hayden]

Most of us drive because we don’t have a realistic alternative. As for poorer nations suffering more, no shit, and it has fuck all to do with any real differences between people —a point that’s sure to be lost on the left as a whole.

[aufbahrung]

Electric cars. Every year they improve further. Soon they'll have a greater range than petrol driven vehicles. Or let the poor starve. I know which I'd choose.

[Brian Peacock]

Independent body says converting the gas network to hydrogen is a non starter. Government and fossil fuel sector say "Nah, it's fine bro."

Hydrogen boiler push to continue despite verdict of UK watchdog

The government and sections of UK industry will continue to back the prospect of using hydrogen for home heating, despite a clear verdict against the technology from the UK’s infrastructure watchdog.

The National Infrastructure Commission advised this week, after an exhaustive investigation of the technology, that hydrogen was not suitable for heating homes. The report was unambiguous: “The Commission’s analysis demonstrates that there is no public policy case for hydrogen to be used to heat individual buildings. It should be ruled out as an option to enable an exclusive focus on switching to electrified heat.”

However, the government indicated to the Guardian that it would continue to push hydrogen for home heating, and the body that represents most of the heating industry also vowed to continue to pursue it.

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero takes the view that the gas network “will always be part of our energy system”, and told the Guardian it would continue to work with the heating industry to explore the potential for hydrogen in home heating.

Mike Foster, the chief executive of the Energy and Utilities Alliance (EUA), which counts boiler manufacturers and gas companies among its members, also sees a future for hydrogen in the home, despite the NIC’s advice, and takes comfort from ministerial assurances. “It’s disappointing to see the NIC wedded to outdated thinking but not a surprise as they have been saying the same thing for years,” he said...