More horrid news - #SaudiArabia is driving a huge #global investment plan to create demand for its #oil and #gas in developing countries, an undercover investigation has revealed. Critics said the plan was designed to get countries “hooked on its harmful products”."

Jut like #tobacco, no? (I am personally hooked on tobacco, so I know what I'm talking about)

Little was known about the oil demand sustainability programme ( #ODSP ) but the investigation obtained detailed information on plans to drive up the use of #FossilFuel - powered cars, buses and planes in #Africa and elsewhere, as #rich countries increasingly switch to clean energy.

The #ODSP plans to accelerate the development of supersonic air travel, which it notes uses three times more jet fuel than conventional planes, and partner with a carmaker to mass produce a cheap combustion engine vehicle. Further plans promote power ships, which use polluting heavy fuel oil or gas to provide electricity to coastal communities.

The ODSP is overseen by Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, the crown prince Mohammed bin #Salman, and involves its biggest organisations, such as the $700bn Public Investment Fund, the world’s largest oil company, Aramco, the petrochemicals firm Sabic, and the government’s most important ministries.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/27/revealed-saudi-arabia-plan-poor-countries-oil

#Climate #Klima #ClimateCrisis #Klimakrise #Cop28 #Cop28UAE #ClimateEmergency #ClimateDisaster #ClimateDiary @pvonhellermannn

Here is a somewhat comical but also highly indignant commentary about the folly of “Net Zero by 2050”…
_______________________

We insiders — by which I mean anyone paying attention — know that the plan to mitigate the climate catastrophe with Net Zero by 2050 is complete bullshit. But maybe you’ve absorbed that knowledge without really understanding why. So let’s talk about it.

What does Net Zero actually mean? Net Zero is the point at which the CO2 burden in the atmosphere is no longer increasing. We’re still putting some up, but we’re also taking just as much out.

This definition immediately tips off two major problems.

The “still putting some up” part is a major issue because the fossil fuels industrial/political complex hears that and stops listening. The “still putting some up” part is their job, and somebody else can do the “take just as much out” part.

In other words, it's Business As Usual for fossil fuels, including continuing growth. Someone else can do the preserving-life-and-the-climate part.

The second obvious problem with Net Zero is the very idea of “taking just as much CO2 out of the atmosphere each year as the fossil fuel industry is adding to it each year.” We know of only two ways to reduce the CO2 load of the atmosphere. One is time. But CO2 stays in the atmosphere for thousands of years, so time is not on our side.

The other way to reduce CO2 is carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). Carbon is “captured” from the atmosphere using a chemical solvent that absorbs CO2, after which it can be buried in the ground where the CO2 will stay safely out of the atmosphere virtually forever.

CCS technology both does and does not exist.

CCS does exist in that there are many ingenious systems for doing it, including several pilot programs demonstrating direct air capture, the holy grail of CCS. Many fossil fuelled electricity generation plants have been removing CO2 from their smokestack emissions for decades. Unfortunately, much of the currently captured CO2 is being injected into played-out oil wells, forcing more of the remaining oil to be recoverable, to burn as fuel. Totally self-defeating, as far as reducing the CO2 load in the atmosphere.

But CCS also does NOT exist in terms of a significant contributor to Net Zero. They remove so little CO2 from the atmosphere, and at such a cost, as to make them completely impractical. To make a dent in carbon emissions, hundreds of thousands of CCS plants are needed, if not millions. The cost is prohibitive. Not to mention the carbon costs of manufacturing all those plants.

But surely CCS technology will improve over the next decade or two. Maybe someone will even find a miraculous breakthrough that will make it truly practical?

Sorry, but no. It’s not that there hasn’t been enough research into CCS. It has been heavily researched and the science is known. It’s actually some pretty simple chemistry. We can tweak around the efficiency edges, but there are no breakthroughs waiting in the wings to be discovered.
_______________________

FULL ARTICLE -- https://lannierose.medium.com/net-zero-by-2050-get-the-joke-946c2d0c0530

#Science #Environment #Climate #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency #Capitalism #BusinessAsUsual
#CO2 #Emissions

It can be argued that electric vehicles are an improvement when replacing ICE vehicles.

But that misses a much bigger point — which is that the very best car is *not* an electric car. The very best car is no car at all!

Building electric cars requires massive use of fossil fuels, including petrochemicals for the manufacture of plastics. In addition, mining of lithium for batteries as well as trawling for other minerals in the deep ocean is environmentally disastrous, killing biodiversity while polluting our water, soil, and air.

LITHIUM EXTRACTION — https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future

DEEP-SEA MINING — https://climatejustice.social/@breadandcircuses/109814016209990908

The kind of “Green Growth” championed by capitalists and politicians, which features more electric cars, a bit of solar, and a few wind farms — along with continued use of fossil fuels — is not a good answer. It does not solve any of our problems, and in fact only makes them worse.

Say NO to more cars, of any kind. Push instead for active transportation and for improved public transit.

Continued economic growth is unsustainable. Period. The only logical choice for us and for the biosphere is de-growth.

#Environment #Climate #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency #Degrowth #WarOnCars #BanCars

Bread and Circuses

2023-02-05 20:28:29

Deep-sea mining… 🤔

Sure, why not? Every other industry we’ve tried has made money for capitalists, had no side effects, and never caused problems. Right?
_____________________

Interest in deep-sea mining for copper, cobalt, zinc, manganese and other valuable metals has grown substantially in the last decade and mining activities are anticipated to begin soon. Deep-sea mining poses significant risks, not only to the area immediately surrounding mining operations but also to the water hundreds to thousands of feet above the seafloor, threatening vast midwater ecosystems.
_____________________

More info here — https://climateandcapitalism.com/2020/07/10/deep-sea-mining-threatens-more-than-the-seafloor/

#Pollution #BiodiversityLoss #AntiCapitalism

Deep sea mining threatens more than the seafloor – Climate & Capitalism

^{climateandcapitalism.com}