Octopus Overlords

US auctions off oil and gas drilling leases in Gulf of Mexico after climate talks

Alefroth wrote: ↑Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:54 pm COP26 isn't even cold yet-

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... AIH9OZSrCY

US auctions off oil and gas drilling leases in Gulf of Mexico after climate talks

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 12:29 am This video makes it more obvious that the actress is lipsynching to the narration. Whether it's her own voice is still up for grabs. Still amusing, even as the voice/actor mismatch is distracting.

Acted by Zoë Amanda Wilson
Voiced by Lucy Cahill

A few weeks ago, scientists participating in the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration, a $25 million five-year-long joint research program between the National Science Foundation in the U.S. and the Natural Environment Research Council in the U.K., presented their latest research. They described the discovery of cracks and fissures in the Thwaites eastern ice shelf, predicting that the ice shelf could fracture like a shattered car window in as little as five years.
[...]
If Thwaites Glacier collapses, it opens the door for the rest of the West Antarctic ice sheet to slide into the sea. Globally, 250 million people live within three feet of high tide lines. Ten feet of sea level rise would be a world-bending catastrophe.

The scientists then examined temperature records from 1920 to 2019, the most recent year available. They found that by 2014, more than 50% of the monthly records across the entire ocean had surpassed the once-in-50–years extreme heat benchmark. The researchers called the year when the percentage passed 50% and did not fall back below it in subsequent years the “point of no return”.

By 2019, the proportion of the global ocean suffering extreme heat was 57%. “We expect this to keep on going up,” said Van Houtan. But the extreme heat was particularly severe in some parts of the ocean, with the South Atlantic having passed the point of no return in 1998. “That was 24 years ago – that is astounding,” he said.

The proportion of the ocean experiencing extreme heat in some large ecosystems is now 80%-90%, with the five worst affected including areas off the north-east coasts of the US and Canada, off Somalia and Indonesia, and in the Norwegian Sea.

Manchin wrote:"I'm very reluctant to go down the path of electric vehicles," Manchin said. "I'm old"

YellowKing wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 12:34 pm One of my bizarre pet peeves is people who complain about batteries. "I'm not going to buy an iPhone because you can't change the battery." How many f-ing times did you change the battery in your flip phone, grandpa?

Kraken wrote: I like fresh batteries, sonny.

The most recent United Nations climate change report indicates that without significant action to mitigate global warming, the extent and magnitude of climate impacts—from floods to droughts to the spread of disease—could outpace the world's ability to adapt to them. The latest effort to introduce meaningful climate legislation in the United States Congress, the Build Back Better bill, has stalled. The climate package in that bill—$555 billion in funding for climate resilience and clean energy—aims to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by about 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, the nation's current Paris Agreement pledge. With prospects of passing a standalone climate package in the Senate far from assured, is there another pathway to fulfilling that pledge?

Recent detailed legal analysis shows that there is at least one viable option for the United States to achieve the 2030 target without legislative action. Under Section 115 on International Air Pollution of the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could assign emissions targets to the states that collectively meet the national goal. The president could simply issue an executive order to empower the EPA to do just that. But would that be prudent?

...

The researchers calculate those net benefits by combining the estimated total cost of carbon dioxide emissions reduction under the policy with the corresponding estimated expenditures that would be avoided as a result of the policy's implementation—expenditures on health care due to particulate air pollution, and on society at large due to climate impacts.

Assessing three carbon dioxide emissions allocation strategies (each with legal precedent) for implementing Section 115 to return cap-and-trade program revenue to the states and distribute it to state residents on an equal per-capita basis, the study finds that at the national level, the economic net benefits are substantial, ranging from $70 to $150 billion in 2030. The results appear in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

"Our findings not only show significant net gains to the U.S. economy under a national emissions policy implemented through the Clean Air Act's Section 115," says Mei Yuan, a research scientist at the MIT Joint Program and lead author of the study. "They also show the policy impact on consumer costs may differ across states depending on the choice of allocation strategy."

Little Raven wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 8:35 pm But should Biden swing for the fences anyway?

in the worst cases, the researchers found that Earth's climate leads to chaos. True, mathematical chaos. In a chaotic system, there is no equilibrium and no repeatable patterns. A chaotic climate would have seasons that change wildly from decade to decade (or even year to year). Some years would experience sudden flashes of extreme weather, while others would be completely quiet. Even the average Earth temperature may fluctuate wildly, swinging from cooler to hotter periods in relatively short periods of time. It would become utterly impossible to determine in what direction Earth's climate is headed.

"A chaotic behavior means that it will be impossible to predict the behavior of Earth System in the future even if we know with great certainty its present state," Bertolami said. "It will mean that any capability to control and to drive the Earth System towards an equilibrium state that favors the habitability of the biosphere will be lost."

Most concerning, the researchers found that above a certain critical threshold temperature for Earth's atmosphere, a feedback cycle can kick in where a chaotic result would become unavoidable. There are some signs that we may have already passed that tipping point, but it's not too late to avert climate disaster.

Zarathud wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 11:34 pm The Planet will survive the Humans. We just won’t like it when it’s our turn to go Extinct.

And what’s left is likely going to be Hell, not Eden.

Whereas Gore sought to alarm his audience into action, Smil offers something akin to a timeout for reflection. His goal is to steer climate debate between what he considers equally unproductive extremes of “catastrophism” and “techno-optimism.”

“We are a fossil-fueled civilization whose technical and scientific advances, quality of life, and prosperity rest on the combustion of huge quantities of fossil carbon,” Smil declares, “and we cannot simply walk away from this critical determinant of our fortunes in a few decades, never mind years.”

To be clear, Smil writes more in sorrow than in anger. He is no climate denier. An environmental scientist affiliated with the University of Manitoba and fellow of the Royal Society of Canada’s Academy of Science, he comprehends and acknowledges the risks posed by accumulating atmospheric carbon dioxide.

You might call him a climate complexifier. Smil reminds us that, as damnably carbon-intense as they are, fossil fuels are undeniably useful, and versatile. That is why the world adopted them to replace other energy sources over the past 150 years or so.

Specifically, humankind uses 17 percent of the world’s primary energy supply just to make four materials — ammonia (for fertilizer), steel, cement and plastic — resulting in 25 percent of all global carbon emissions. These substances, Smil explains, are “pillars of modern civilization,” crucial to feeding, housing, transporting and — through medical devices or hospital construction — healing billions of people.

Not only are there no readily available substitutes for these materials, but also there are no practical low-carbon ways to produce enough to meet current demand. And the world must actually expand their production as Africa and Asia modernize.

OK so for all 6 of your who still have the stomach for this story here’s what my reporting says about the White House-Manchin climate bill/BBB saga dynamics & why it may be intractable

Long thread … sorry sorry

So, the White House is willing to give Manchin approval for fossil fuel projects (a 300 mile gas pipeline in WV, eg, drilling in Alaska) – IF it means he votes yes on a big climate/energy package w/ lots of renewable $, solar & wind etc. The potential swap here makes sense. Climate experts say the renewable $ in Congress is the most important thing. They say: Some oil/gas projects, even if bad for emissions, is dwarfed by upside of climate bill.

But Manchin has not told WH that he'd make this deal 1-1. He’s just saying he really wants it as part of a broader push. That makes the WH nervous. They do not want 2 greenlight oil/gas sites – only for Manchin to THEN block bill w/ renewables $

Worst case scenario for climate

So they’re not approving these projects yet, & not blocking them either. Limbo. That's a problem for Manchin b/c if he votes for the climate bill his leverage dissipates. Manchin could pass the climate bill -- only for WH to then rescind oil/gas approvals

I’ve heard this from sources but you can tell how important these projects are to Manchin by reading his public statements. This is him criticizing the Biden admin in April for holding up the Mountain Valley Pipeline in WV:

Critically important here is Manchin & the WH actually can’t just agree to put both in the bill & pass it.

That's bc the permitting/project approvals that Manchin seeks *fall outside of the reconciliation rules.*

No legislative route to both getting done simultaneously.

So this is a vexing impasse. Remarkably, both sides have a similar outcome my reporting suggests it seems they’d be happy to get to: Approve oil/gas projects + Dem climate bill

But that requires a leap of faith.

Is the trust b/w Manchin & the WH there?

While we wait, the planet is warming catastrophically.

The consequences of failure are fatal, permanent, and global.

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:33 pm Also, the WH's priorities are all fucked up. Reconciliation this year *needs* to be Voting Rights IMHO. Not Dobbs, not BBB. w/o Voting Rights anything done can and will be undone by both the Supremes (Moore v. Harper) and the guaranteed MAGA majorities the failure will create.

Little Raven wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:01 pm

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:33 pm Also, the WH's priorities are all fucked up. Reconciliation this year *needs* to be Voting Rights IMHO. Not Dobbs, not BBB. w/o Voting Rights anything done can and will be undone by both the Supremes (Moore v. Harper) and the guaranteed MAGA majorities the failure will create.

Reconciliation doesn't work that way. Under Senate rules, only budget issues are eligible for reconciliation, and I very much doubt the Senate Parliamentarian is going to allow a voting rights bill to qualify.

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:58 pmJust tie it to voting machine security spending and (the original) Voting Rights bill audits/compliance funding and support. Done. Not as much of an obstacle as you present, IMHO.

Little Raven wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:09 pm

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:58 pmJust tie it to voting machine security spending and (the original) Voting Rights bill audits/compliance funding and support. Done. Not as much of an obstacle as you present, IMHO.

Yes, of course you can make literally ANYTHING a budget issue if you stretch it far enough. "Immigration? Well, immigrants who become citizens will contribute future tax revenues. This is TOTALLY a budget issue!" "Criminal justice reform? Getting people out of prison early will boost the economy and lower penal spending. This is TOTALLY a budget issue!" "Sending humans to Mars? Previous attempts to push the boundaries of human exploration have yielded fantastic technical advances that have totally revamped our economy. This is TOTALLY a budget issue!"

Which is precisely WHY we have a Senate Parliamentarian, to determine whether or not an issue can be considered for reconciliation. Now granted, Elizabeth MacDonough has not, to my knowledge, concretely ruled out passing voting rights via reconciliation, but I suspect Schumer knows what she would say.