INDUSTRY ACTS ON CLIMATE CHANGE

A review of renewable energy resources in Nigeria for climate change mitigation

Major US electric utility climate pledges have the potential to collectively reduce power sector emissions by one-third

Norwegian energy company SN Power recently agreed to temporarily suspend activities on its hydroelectric project due to the vocal opposition from local Indigenous groups (… ) During a seminar in Oslo, Norway, last month Mr. Antimilla suggested that the project would constitute an intervention in Mapuche territories, interfere with Mapuche-operated tourism, and threaten the surrounding environment.

Global production patterns: Understanding the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions, agriculture greening and climate variability

Imposing versus Enacting Commitments for the Long‐Term Energy Transition: Perspectives from the Firm

Comprehensive analysis of greenhouse gases emissions and microbial dynamics in glacier-fed lakes across various ablation stages.

The impact of the climate and environmental problems experienced in the world with the Industrial Revolution has prominently begun to be felt today, and the consequences of climate change on the environment and public health have now become visible. The increase in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities, which is the main cause of global climate change, caused the global surface temperature to be 1.1 °C higher between 2011 and 2020 compared to 1850–1900. In parallel with this global problem, the transition to clean energy has increased significantly with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, more aggressive energy and climate policies, technological developments, and increasing concerns about energy security. In this study, global climate change indicators, including land and sea surface air temperatures, sea level rise, sea ice extent, ocean heat content, surface humidity, and total column water vapor, are reviewed and updated in parallel with a comprehensive analysis of the progress in renewable energy. The results showed that if no measures are taken to reduce human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, the global average temperature will increase further in the coming years and the negative effects of other climate parameters will be felt even more. It has been emphasized that limiting human-induced global warming requires renewable and sustainable energy sources and net zero CO2 emissions and that the simultaneous adoption of emission reduction and adaptation strategies will be the most effective economic and technical solution to the global warming problem.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am very pleased to have been invited to open this conference. Increasingly, renewable energy – mainly in the guise of wind farms – is becoming a mainstream issue with both the media and the public. This is to be welcomed. Renewable energy has a key role in a sustainable energy policy that is needed to help tackle climate change. But a truly sustainable energy policy needs to consider and address other concerns, for example the possible impacts on biodiversity of wind farms. I would like to thank the British Ornithologists Union for arranging this conference and Chris Perrins (BOU President) for his welcome. Climate change is a grave and present problem. Caused largely by the burning of fossil fuels for energy, it is an unintended consequence of our drive towards a modern economy. In our need for heat and light, for power to travel and for business, we have unwittingly caused climate change. And it will not go away. We need to deal with it. Now. In our 2003 Energy White Paper (DTI 2003), we signalled a new direction for energy policy. It sets out four objectives for our energy policy: To put ourselves on a path to cut the UK's carbon dioxide emissions – the main contributor to global warming – by some 60% by about 2050 with real progress by 2020; To maintain the reliability of energy supplies; To promote competitive markets in the UK and beyond, helping to raise the rate of sustainable economic growth and to improve our productivity; and To ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated. In brief, the first of these objectives equates to more renewables and a redoubling of our efforts in improving our energy efficiency. You will all be aware of the Government's Kyoto commitments and our additional efforts to achieve 60% reductions in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. In addition to achieving better energy efficiency, in homes and industry, it is imperative that energy production is cleaner and more efficient. The 2003 White Paper, and legislation and support measures introduced since, are establishing a process to achieve cleaner production incorporating challenging targets for renewable energy levels, and I am sure you will be discussing and debating those here at this conference. I announced last week that the UK was on target to meet its Kyoto commitments. As part of our review of the Government's climate change programme it is estimated that our CO2 emissions will be about 13% below 1990 levels in 2010 and that emissions of all greenhouse gases will be around 20% below. However, we cannot afford to be complacent. The figures also showed there has been a 2.2% increase in carbon dioxide emissions between 2002 and 2003. This is disappointing. It underlines the scale of the challenge we have set ourselves of delivering a 20% cut in carbon dioxide emissions by 2010. Increased sourcing of energy from renewable sources will be an integral and essential part of achieving those figures. That is why we have set a target of achieving 10% of the supply of renewables by 2010 and a goal of doubling this by 2020. It also addresses the UK's obligations under the European Renewables Directive to adopt national targets for renewables that are consistent with reaching the overall EU target of 12% of energy (22.1% of electricity) from renewables by 2010. The Government's renewables obligation on all electricity suppliers in Great Britain to supply a specific proportion of electricity from eligible renewables is a key strand to expand the sector and to achieving these targets. The level of the obligation is 4.9% for 2004/05, and is set to increase to 10.4% by 2010/11. Changes to the renewables obligation, (introduced on 1 April 2005) include increasing the level of the obligation in stages to 15.4% in 2015/16. Indications are that the obligation is working well and encouraging investment − 2004 was a record year for wind farm construction with 240 MW of new capacity constructed, and industry estimates suggest that 600 MW will be built this year [BWEA figures; http://www.bwea.com]. In 2003, 2.7% of electricity was supplied from all renewables so we are starting from a low base. From the construction figures it can be seen that capacity is now being built at a rapidly increasing rate but we still have a long way to go. Wind power is widely recognized as the most cost effective renewable technology with scope for significant expansion. We therefore expect wind to make the main contribution towards our renewables targets and this will only be achieved by both onshore and offshore generation. The Government is not, however, blinkered in its approach to developing renewables. To achieve all our millenium goals and achieve sustainable development we must also address the protection of biodiversity. We must ensure that in meeting our renewable energy targets the quality and diversity of wildlife and natural features are protected. To that end, DEFRA (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs) has undertaken a number of initiatives to ensure that wind farms, and other sources of renewable energy, are not harmful to our biodiversity. We are in the final stages of a 1-year ‘horizon scanning’ project reviewing the potential impacts of future energy policy on UK biodiversity. The project is being undertaken by a consortium led by ADAS, and supported by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Acorus, National Energy Foundation and the University of Plymouth Marine Studies. The project was established in order to review and assess the potential direct and indirect impacts on UK biodiversity (terrestrial and marine) of future energy polices. It will summarize current knowledge, identify gaps and make prioritized recommendations for further research and suggested policy and practical responses. A stakeholder workshop has been held and the final draft project report is currently under peer review. I hope it will be finalized for publication around the end of April or early May. The project has focused on the following energy sources: onshore wind; offshore wind; marine current and tidal energy sources; biomass crops (including agricultural residues, forestry residues and energy crops); small scale hydro (< 5 MW); and novel technologies (solar water heating, ground source heat pumps, photovoltaic and hydrogen fuel cells). The review confirms that wind energy is likely to provide the largest proportion of the renewable energy target by 2020, but there remain some fundamental gaps in knowledge of the impacts on biodiversity and the effectiveness of some mitigation proposals. The land take required for sufficient production of biomass fuels in the UK means that it is unlikely to make up more than 5–20% of the 2020 target, unless large quantities of fuel are imported, the impacts of which will need to be researched and understood. A better solution would be the increased production and use of existing biomass sources in the UK, though best practice guidelines will be needed to ensure minimal impact on UK biodiversity. Of the other technologies, photovoltaics seem to be the renewable energy technology that provides least impact upon biodiversity, provided that manufacturing and mining are subject to stringent environmental requirements. However their rate of development even in a best-case assessment, suggest that this technology is unlikely to provide a significant contribution to the renewables target by 2020. Hence it is unlikely to significantly reduce the input required by the leading renewable energy technologies of onshore and offshore wind and biomass. Solar water heating and ground source heat pumps (GSHP) may provide a means to reduce electricity demand both through the provision of heat and, for GSHP, cooling, but further effort is needed to encourage significant uptake of these technology types. In view of the generally small area of UK land or seabed that is estimated to be required by the scale of each technology considered in the scenarios, it is anticipated that the scenarios formulated for the review for energy generation in 2020 will be met with minimal impacts on biodiversity. To achieve this, however, it will be necessary for renewable energy developments to avoid, wherever possible, sites of high biodiversity interest. Where this is not possible mitigation can often be put in place to address the potential impacts. Legislative and policy measures are available to mitigate and remove many of the biodiversity impacts identified. All schemes require an environmental impact assessment, and where Natura 2000 site are likely to be affected, additional assessments are needed. However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms in achieving biodiversity protection depends on people and industry understanding them and on their effective implementation. In relation to the development of wind farms offshore I am pleased to say that consents have been granted for 12 of the round 1 proposals. Whilst biodiversity objections were raised initially in relation to many of the proposals, these have largely been overcome through cooperation and dialogue between developers, stakeholders and the government's statutory nature conservation agency, English Nature. As a result, the first offshore wind farm at North Hoyle, North Wales, was completed in November 2003 and the second at Scroby Sands, Norfolk, UK, was commissioned in December 2004. Further developments will be constructed in 2005. UK Developers are now pressing ahead with their planning for round 2 offshore wind farms and both the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and DEFRA are supporting work to survey the Irish Sea, The Wash and Greater Thames areas to ensure that any areas of importance to bird populations are identified. In parallel with that work we are developing guidance (DEFRA, 2005) for the industry to help it better understand the potential impacts on biodiversity, and in particular species and habitats protected under the European Wild Birds and Habitats Directives. Whilst currently still under development, that guidance sets out both the potential impacts and steps that can and should be taken to address those. It recognizes that the potential impacts of offshore wind farms on birds can be divided into five categories: (1) habitat loss; (2) loss of food resources; (3) displacement; (4) barrier effects; and (5) collision mortality. Habitat loss refers to the direct loss of seabed resulting from the placement of the turbine foundations and any scour protection, along with any associated losses or changes to benthos due to scour or smothering. Loss of food resources (i.e. fish stocks or invertebrates) can result from damage, disturbance, or scouring of the sites during the development's construction or maintenance phases. Displacement is used here to describe the potential for birds to avoid turbines, or the entire area of a wind farm, due to their reluctance to feed adjacent to large structures because of a perception of threat. This is likely to vary greatly depending on species, and perhaps also on issues such as the size and spacing of turbines and noise caused by the rotors, and lighting. Displacement is likely to be increased by maintenance activities requiring the use of boats and helicopters. Barrier effects result from birds changing their flight lines in response to the perceived barrier presented by a row of turbines. This relates to regular local movements, for example between feeding and roosting areas, as well as to migratory flight paths. The barrier effect could result in birds undertaking longer flights to avoid wind farms, thus resulting in increased energy expenditure and reduced time for other essential activities. If birds are prevented from reaching feeding grounds because of the barrier caused by the turbines, sterilization of the feeding grounds could result. Collision mortality as a result of birds striking turbine towers, nacelles or rotors may be a significant issue where large numbers of birds make regular flights through the wind farm area, especially during conditions of poor visibility or when birds panic in response to disturbance. All of these potential impacts are likely to be more significant and have a greater effect on populations where several wind farms are proposed in the same area. It will be therefore important to undertake assessments of the potential cumulative effects of all proposed wind farms where they are likely to affect the same species or populations of birds. We hope that the guidance will assist developers to take steps to avoid any potential harmful effects at the earliest opportunity, minimizing costs to them and helping to ensure that projects proceed in a sustainable fashion to meet our renewable targets. In addition to being sent, on 23 March 2005, to industry organizations and conservation groups such as the RSPB, a copy of the draft guidance will be placed on the DEFRA website and I would welcome comments on it. Despite the attention focused on offshore wind developments, onshore projects continue to come forward. While there is greater knowledge of wind farm impacts in an onshore environment, the onus is still on developers to come forward with carefully thought out projects that have been considered against a wide range of interests, including any impacts on birds. There is no escaping from the reality of climate change and the effects that it will have not just on mankind, but also our biodiversity. It is already clear that sea-level rise will result in coastal squeeze, landward erosion and displacement of coastal habitats and many migratory bird populations. If we do not address climate change many of these species will suffer and possibly be lost. We must therefore, reduce emissions and usage. But we must also ensure that our solutions – such as onshore and offshore wind farms – also have minimal impacts on our biodiversity. I believe that we have in place a system that will ensure that this is indeed the case. We have set out objectives to do so that recognize this need and we are committed to their implementation. I wish you a successful conference and I look forward to hearing your conclusions.

The Kyoto Protocol places the responsibility of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions only with developed countries (i.e., Annex I countries) as if they were the only countries guilty of causing climate change, when in fact the whole world is collectively responsible for this. In the early 1990s, developed countries decided to “take the lead in combating climate change.” Twenty years later, the climate change situation has changed. Instead of asking only Annex I countries to reduce GHG emissions, it is argued in this paper that a more effective (and presumably fairer) way to tackle climate change today is by bringing on board the major GHG emitters, irrespective of their GDP, and asking them to reduce their GHG emissions in an equitable manner without ignoring the historic responsibilities on the part of developed countries. Why? Because the Kyoto Protocol’s stipulation that only Annex I countries reduce their GHG emissions does not reflect today’s or tomorrow’s climate change reality, nor is it acting fast enough to reduce GHG emissions at the agreed levels. Given the transnational nature of climate change, the current situation is similar to a diagnosis of cancer with metastasis. It is therefore not enough to ask only Annex I countries to reduce their GHG emissions if the aim is to solve the climate change issue. This means the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) are part of the solution to climate change mitigation. Climate change will have a significant impact on the BRICS. Conversely, the expected impact of the BRICS on climate change is considerable. The size and rate of growth of the BRICS’s economies, of their energy demand, of their energy imports (for instance, in the case of China and India), and of their atmospheric emissions of various types make these countries essential major partners in any regional or global discussions relating to climate change or the production and consumption of energy.

In recent years, energy consumption and associated Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and their potential effects on the global climate change have been increasing. Climate change and global warming has been the subject of intensive investigation provincially, nationally, and internationally for a number of years. While the complexity of the global climate change remains difficult to predict, it is important to develop a system to measure the amount of GHG released into the environment. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate how several methods can accurately estimate the true GHG emission reduction potential from renewable technologies and help achieve the goals set out by the Kyoto Protocol reducing fuel consumption and related GHG emissions, promoting decentralization of electricity supply, and encouraging the use of renewable energy technologies. There are several methods in estimating emission factors from facilities: direct measurement, mass balance, and engineering estimates. Direct measurement involves continuous emission monitoring throughout a given period. Mass balance methods involve the application of conservation equations to a facility, process, or piece of equipment. Emissions are determined from input/output differences as well as from the accumulation and depletion of substances. The engineering method involves the use of engineering principles and knowledge of chemical and physical processes (EnvCan, 2006). In Guler (2008) the method used to estimate emission factors considers only the total amount of fuel and electricity produced from power plants. The previous methodology does not take into consideration the offset cyclical relationship, daily and yearly, between electricity generated by renewable technologies. It should be noted that none of the methods mentioned above include seasonal/daily adjustments to annual emission factors. Specifically, the proposed research would include analyzing existing methods in calculating emission factors and attempt to estimate new emission factors based on the hourly electricity demand for the Province of Ontario. In this Chapter, several GHG emission factor methodology was discussed and compared to newly developed monthly emission factors in order to realize the true CO2 reduction potential for small scale renewable energy technologies. The hourly greenhouse gas emission factors based on hour-by-hour demand of electricity in Ontario, and the average Greenhouse Gas Intensity Factor (GHGIFA) are estimated by creating a series of emission factors and their corresponding profiles that can be easily incorporated into simulation

Taking Stock of Strategies on Climate Change and the Way Forward: A Strategic Climate Change Framework for Australia

For many developing countries, the land use sector, particularly agriculture and forestry, represents a large proportion of their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, making this sector a priority for GHG mitigation activities. Previous global surveys (e.g., IPCC 2000) as well as the most recent IPCC assessment report clearly indicate that the greatest technical potential for carbon sequestration and reductions of non-CO2 GHG emissions from the land use sector is in developing countries. Estimates that consider economic feasibility suggest that agriculture and forestry together provide among the greatest opportunities for short-term and low-cost mitigation measures across all sectors of the global economy1 (IPCC 2007). In addition, it is widely recognized that the ecosystem changes entailed by most mitigation practices, i.e., building soil organic matter, reducing losses and tightening nutrient cycles, more efficient production systems and preserving native vegetation, are well aligned with goals of increasing food security and rural development as well as buffering land use systems against climate change (Lal 2004). Hence, there is growing interest in jump-starting the capacity for broad-based engagement in agriculturally-based GHG mitigation projects in developing countries.

Climate change is a complex and contentious public issue, but the risk-management options available to us are straightforward and have well-characterized strengths and weaknesses.

A “lifeline out of the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 crisis”? An ecofeminist critique of the European Green Deal

For centuries, coastal marshes have been subjected to anthropogenic stressors. Great expanses of coastal marshes were drained and filled to make way for development, and those that remained were diked and ditched, encroached upon by upland development, and used for agricultural purposes such as livestock grazing. Today, as the values and services coastal marshes provide to human society are understood, marshes are protected from direct degradation. However, especially in developed and densely populated estuaries such as Narragansett Bay, coastal marshes are subject to impacts including nutrient pollution and introduction of invasive species. Global climate change and associated sea level rise further threaten coastal ecosystems. As marsh vegetation community structure, biogeochemistry, and microbial and faunal assemblages shift in response to anthropogenic impacts and global change, ecosystem function is likely to be altered as well. Since coastal marshes provide highly valued services such as coastline protection, wildlife habitat, nitrogen (N) transformations and carbon (C) sequestration, understanding the outcomes of these functional shifts is an important research concern. Of particular interest is the potential for impacts to coastal marshes’ important ecosystem service of C sequestration, since perturbations to this function could result in climate change-exacerbating feedbacks. Coastal marshes are such effective C sinks due to their high productivity and associated carbon dioxide (CO2) uptake, slow decomposition, and minimal emission of climate-altering greenhouse gases (GHGs). However, emission of GHGs may be stimulated by several of the global change drivers coastal marshes face. These potential drivers include N pollution, which can stimulate emission of the potent GHG nitrous oxide (N2O) from coastal marshes, and invasion of the aggressive introduced grass Phragmites australis, which may stimulate emission of methane (CH4). Testing how these impacts may interact to alter fluxes of GHGs in coastal marshes is important for a clear understanding of the role that coastal marshes play in global climate and whether this role is likely to be affected by a changing climate. Very recently, development of novel technologies for measuring GHG concentrations in situ in real time have made simultaneous measurement of the GHGs CO2, CH4, and N2O a possibility, and have opened the door to experiments that will improve understanding of coastal marsh GHG flux dynamics and their response to changes to the coastal marsh ecosystem. The objective of the research projects presented in this dissertation was to elucidate responses of coastal marsh GHG fluxes to drivers of global change including climate change, N