The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

On Monday the Senate passed a bill approving the Keystone XL pipeline in a procedural vote just shy of the 67 votes needed to override a veto, setting up what could be an extensive debate on energy policy and climate in next year’s presidential election.  The move followed a bipartisan vote in which the House of Representatives passed a similar bill, Jan. 9. 

The House vote came just hours after Nebraska’s Supreme Court cleared the way for the controversial project by upholding a 2012 law giving the governor permitting authority for major oil pipelines.  The court overruled a lower court finding that allowing the governor and pipeline owner TransCanada to use eminent domain to lay the pipeline on private land was unconstitutional.  However, an attorney for the landowners in the case suggested that the litigation was not over, stating that the outcome amounted to a “nondecision open to further review” because most judges agreed with the landowners on the standing issue and three declined to weigh in on the law’s constitutionality. 

The ruling shifted the debate over Keystone to Washington, where Republicans are pushing for its final approval after more than six years of review by the U.S. State Department. 

“Regardless of the Nebraska ruling,” said White House spokesman Eric Schultz, “the House bill still conflicts with longstanding executive branch procedures regarding the authority of the president and prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that could bear on U.S. national interests.” 

In fact, it could take months for the administration to reach a final verdict because the State Department must take comments from eight agencies before reaching its own conclusion about the project. 

Environmentalists and other opponents of the pipeline have highlighted the potential for extraction and transport of crude from Canada’s tar sands to contaminate water, pollute air, and harm wildlife.  But the GOP, the oil industry, and other pipeline backers argue that Keystone will lead to jobs and increase oil independence as well as strengthen bonds with Canada. 

“Boosting American-made energy results in more American jobs and improved international relations,” said Rep. Leonard Lance. “ This is a winning combination for our Nation’s economy, our national security and a centerpiece in our relationship with our ally, Canada.” 

Rep. Adam Smith had a different take: “Rather than focusing on Keystone XL, we should be working on bigger picture investments in clean energy and energy efficient technologies that will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels that hurt our environment.” 

“This strategy will benefit the economy, the climate and public health,” said Dan Utech, President Obama’s advisor on energy climate change, though activists say the cuts fall short of those needed to reach the administration’s international climate change pledges. 

Breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing technology are projected to increase methane emissions from oil and gas operations.  Methane leaks from oil and natural gas drilling sites and pipelines are 50 percent higher than previously thought according to a 2014 study published in the journal Science. 

Estimates of Social Cost of Carbon Vary Widely, with Policy Consequences

The social cost of carbon (SCC) or the economic damage caused by a ton of carbon dioxide emissions—which the United States uses to guide energy regulations and, potentially, future mitigation policies—is $37 per ton according to a recent U.S. government study or, according to a new study by Stanford researchers published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, six times that value. 

The Stanford scientists say the current pricing models fail to reflect all the economic damage each ton of CO2 causes and that a higher value on that damage could change policy. 

“If the social cost of carbon is higher, many more mitigation measures will pass a cost-benefit analysis,” said study co-author Delavane Diaz. “ Because carbon emissions are so harmful to society, even costly means of reducing emissions would be worthwhile.” 

“For 20 years now, the models have assumed that climate change can’t affect the basic growth rate of the economy,” said study coauthor Frances Moore. “ But a number of new studies suggest this may not be true.  If climate change affects not only a country’s economic output but also its growth, then that has a permanent effect that accumulates over time, leading to a much higher social cost of carbon.” 

But William Pizer, a faculty fellow at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions who has worked on and recommended regular updating of the SCC estimate, questioned the methodology of the Stanford analysis, pointing out that it relied on the impact on national economies of short-term temperature spikes rather than on long-term trends that might reveal permanent economic reductions. 

“To me, it just seems like it has to be an overestimate,” Pizer said of the Stanford result of $220 (subscription required). “ I think it’s great they’re doing this,” he added. “ I just think this is another data point that someone needs to weigh as they’re trying to figure out what the right social cost of carbon is.  But this isn’t like a definitive new answer.” 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is delaying the release of carbon emissions rules for all power plants and will publish them for new as well as existing plants at the same time mid-summer. 

“It’s become clear to us … that there are cross-cutting topics that affect the standards for new sources, for modified sources and for existing sources, and we believe it’s essential to consider these overlapping issues in a coordinated fashion,” said Janet McCabe, the EPA’s acting administrator for air quality. 

McCabe also announced that the EPA will begin drafting a “model rule” for states that do not submit individual plans to meet emissions reduction targets in the existing power plant regulations. 

Under the proposed regulations for new sources, the EPA has functionally required new coal power plants to include carbon-capture technology, which critics of the emissions rules say lack proof of efficacy on a large scale and have a high cost to implement.  In 2011, the American Electric Power Company reported that including carbon-storing processes at a West Virginia plant would cost an estimated $668 million. 

Key program stakeholders, industry leaders, public officials and environmental advocates agree that consumers will see a rise in gas prices, but the amount remains uncertain. 

“There’s a very large universe of variables which could affect gas prices on a daily basis, and we don’t set fuel prices,” said California Air Resources Board spokesperson Dave Clegern.  He added, “We don’t see them going up more than a dime, at the most, based on any current cap-and-trade compliance costs.” 

It is estimated that 25 percent of secured funds from the emissions trading program will be allotted to the state’s high-speed rail project. 

California’s program includes an allowance reserve initially proposed by Nicholas Institute and Duke University researchers that prevents carbon allowance prices from reaching levels beyond the scope of purchasers. 

Congress Prepare to Vote on Keystone XL Pipeline

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has cleared legislation to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, which would deliver some 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada’s oil sands to Gulf Coast refineries.  But White House press secretary Josh Earnest, citing the Obama administration’s “well-established” review process, said, “If this bill passes this Congress, the president wouldn’t sign it.” 

The pipeline has become a flash point in the debate over climate change and economic growth. 

In a December 19 press conference, the president said, “I want to make sure that if in fact this project goes forward, that it’s not adding to the problem of climate change, which I think is very serious and does impose serious costs on the American people, some of them long term, but significant costs nonetheless.” 

Critics of Keystone have pointed to the carbon intensive production of the crude it will carry.  In an op-ed in The Hill, the new president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, Rheh Suh, called production of oil from Canadian tar sands an “environmental disaster.” 

Supporters argue that Keystone will be a source of economic stimulus.  In a statement, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton said, “After six years of foot-dragging, it’s time to finally say yes to jobs and yes to energy.  It’s time to build [this pipeline].” 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Editor’s Note: In observance of the holidays, The Climate Post will not circulate on December 25th and January 1st.  We will return on January 8, 2015. 

Negotiators have reached a deal at United Nations (UN) talks in Peru, setting the stage for a global climate pact in Paris in December 2015.  The agreement, dubbed the Lima Call for Climate Action, for the first time in history commits every nation to reducing its rate of greenhouse gas emissions. 

“As a text, it’s not perfect but it includes the positions of the parties,” said Peru environment minister and conference chair Manuel Pulgar-Vidal. 

In addition to an “ambitious agreement” in 2015 that reflects each nation’s “differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities,” the Lima document calls for submission of national pledges by the first quarter of 2015 by those states “ready to do so” and for setting of national targets that go beyond countries’ “current undertaking.” 

Countries already imperiled by climate change, such as small island states, were promised a “loss and damage” program of financial aid. 

“There is still considerable work to be done,” said Felipe Calderon, former president of Mexico and chairman of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, at the conclusion of the talks. “ But I am encouraged that countries, all around the world, are beginning to see that it is in their economic interest to take action now.” 

“We are happy that the final negotiated statement at COP20 in Lima has addressed the concerns of developing countries,” said India’s environment minister Prakash Javadekar. “ It gives enough space for the developing world to grow and take appropriate nationally determined steps,” he said. 

But the negotiations, at which U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had made an impassioned plea for agreement, were considered a failure by those hoping for ambitious emissions reductions commitments. 

“Against the backdrop of extreme weather in the Philippines and potentially the hottest year ever recorded, governments at the U.N. climate talks in Lima opted for a half-baked plan to cut emissions,” said Samantha Smith, leader of World Wildlife Fund’s global climate and energy initiative. 

The remaining North-South divide over which countries should carry the majority of emissions-cutting costs—plus other thorny matters, such as how to finance poorer countries’ reductions and preparations for extreme climatic events—has increased the diplomatic heavy-lifting required to reach a final agreement in 2015. 

“They [countries] got through Lima by largely skirting the issue for now,” said Elliot Diringer, executive vice president at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. “ It’s hard to see that flying in Paris.” 

Solar Net Metering Terms Set in South Carolin​a

An agreement filed in South Carolina outlines new terms for solar net metering in the state.  The terms ensure homes, businesses, schools, and any nonprofit organizations using rooftop solar panels will be provided “one-to-one” retail credit (or full retail value) from the state’s utilities for each kilowatt hour generated back to the electric grid—making South Carolina the 44th state (subscription) to allow for full rate credit. 

Referred to as net metering, this process was a key component of Act 236, a law passed in June, which made solar power more accessible in the state. 

According to Dukes Scott, executive director of the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff, proposed rules from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan on reducing carbon emissions will help determine the value or contribution of solar power. 

Among the challenges is disagreement about regular auditing of carbon emission pledges.  The European Union insists on a formal review of all country pledges, whereas the United States recommends a voluntary approach to emissions cuts with the disclaimer of no backtracking in targets. “ You could assign every country a particular reduction that on paper looks like a perfect result and then you can’t get agreement on it,” said Todd Stern, United States Special Envoy for Climate Change. “ This is a way to get everyone in.” 

Another challenge is differentiating the responsibilities of developed countries and those of developing countries.  China, Brazil, India, and South Africa, which have coordinated their positions at the Lima talks, want to make sure the potential new agreement will allow poorer nations to meet their prevalent needs such as poverty eradication. “ Poor people have aspirations,” said India’s Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar. “ We must give them energy access.” 

Host country Peru, along with other Latin American nations (Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Panama), is pushing for aggressive emission cuts by major economies as well as emerging economies such as China and Brazil.  However, critics are quick to point out the country’s poor record in protecting rainforests, which play a critical role as carbon sinks. 

Struggling through hammering rainfall from Typhoon Hagupit, the Philippines are asking for all nations, developing and developed, to cut use of fossil fuels. 

“The thinking of the pivot is—we’re going to take on commitments and do our part,” said Tony La Viña, a Philippine climate change delegate. “ The call has always been for developed countries to act.  But the thinking is simple.  If we’re going to get hit every year again and again, how can we call on developed countries to reduce their emissions, but not reduce our own?” 

A new UN report showing climate adaptation costs for developing countries could be two to three times higher than current global estimates makes the 2050 zero-carbon goal another contentious issue.  Meeting this goal would significantly affect oil and gas production as well as coal extraction methods. “ With a concept like zero emissions and ‘let’s knock fossil fuels out of the picture’, without clear technology diffusion and international cooperation program, you are really not helping the process,” said chief Saudi Arabian negotiator Khalid AbuLeif. 

The Climate Action Tracker report released by a group of independent scientists notes that recent pledges by the United States, China and the European Union to limit greenhouse gas emissions will, in fact, slow the rate of global warming this century, though not enough to limit warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit). 

Draft text of the 2015 global climate change agreement being negotiated in Lima includes a May 3, 2015, deadline for nationally determined contributions—promises from individual countries for internal action on climate change.  Figuring into these commitments are estimates of the social cost of carbon, or the per-metric-ton dollar value of reducing climate change damages—a metric that the United States uses in regulatory analysis and that it and other developed countries could use to leverage greater emissions reductions commitments from developing countries. 

Several economy and environmental policy experts are recommending that the government change the way (subscription) it establishes this cost.  In an article in Science, former U.S. Department of the Treasury Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy and Nicholas Institute faculty fellow William Pizer and his coauthors recommend that the United States adopt a standardized process to regularly evaluate the cost and that the process undergo a public comment period and a review by the National Academy of Sciences. 

Commenting on the need for a consistently used and rigorously maintained estimate of climate damages, Pizer said, “It’s important that we draw on the expertise of all government agencies, as well as independent experts in the field.  This level of high-quality collaboration and peer review would decrease the likelihood of political factors interfering with the process, and ensure we have the most robust Social Cost of Carbon.” 

“What we saw in 2014 is consistent with what we expect from a changing climate,” said Michel Jarraud, World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General. “ Record-breaking heat combined with torrential rainfall and floods destroyed livelihoods and ruined lives.” 

A report by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that finds that the historic California drought is due to natural weather patterns, as opposed to hot temperatures across the state, raised the ire of some climate scientists, who said the report did not take into account how record warmth worsened the drought. 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

At the 2014 United Nations Climate Change Conference twentieth Conference of the Parties, known as COP20, in Lima, Peru, delegates from more than 190 nations are hashing out details of an international agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions and curb permanent damage caused by global warming.  Those details will set the stage for next December’s UN meeting in Paris, where negotiators are aiming to finalize a global climate change deal. 

Diplomats and longtime observers of the talks say there is rising optimism that negotiators will secure a deal committing all countries to take action against climate change. “ I have never felt as optimistic as I have now,” said Tony de Brum, the foreign minister of the Marshall Islands, which are sinking as sea levels rise in the Pacific. “ There is an upbeat feeling on the part of everyone that first of all there is an opportunity here and that secondly, we cannot miss it.” 

What’s driving the momentum? 

Last month, the United States and China, the world’s top emitters of greenhouse gases, announced an agreement to slash their emissions.  In October, the European Union pledged to reduce its emissions 40 percent, compared with 1990 levels, by 2030.  And, the UN’s Green Climate Fund, which helps developing countries address climate change, is on track to meet its ten-billion-dollar initial target. 

“We’re in far better shape a year ahead of Paris than at any stage leading up to Copenhagen,” where world leaders tried but failed to reach a climate deal in 2009, says Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. 

EPA Closes Public Comment Period on Proposed Clean Power Plan

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has officially closed the public comment period on its proposed Clean Power Plan (CPP), having collected more than 1.6 million comments from legislators, industry, environmental advocates and the general public. 

The EPA had extended the comment period by 45 days, to December 1, to give the public additional time to understand and analyze the plan, which aims to cut carbon emissions from power plants across the country by approximately 30 percent by 2030. 

“We’ve heard that the carbon reductions targets we proposed are too tough and we’ve heard that they’re not tough enough,” said EPA Air and Radiation Administrator Janet McCabe in an official EPA blog. “ What we know for sure is that people care about this issue and we know we have a lot to consider as we work toward a final rule.” 

Particularly contentious are the CPP’s state-specific emissions goals.  According to the Edison Electric Institute, the association representing all U.S. investor-owned utilities, and other industry leadership, the goals could cause power companies to install costly upgrades that would diminish electricity affordability.  Meanwhile, environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council say that falling solar and wind power prices and advancements in efficiency standards could allow the EPA to require steeper emissions cuts sooner—by 2020. 

A recent report issued by the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP) says the United States can use existing or soon-to-be-available technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050—the trajectory on which the recent U.S. agreement with China would put the country, according to Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern. 

“If you bet on America’s ability to develop and commercialize new technologies, then the net cost of transforming the energy system could be very low, even negative, when you take fuel savings into account,” said Jim Williams, chief scientist at San Francisco-based consulting firm Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. and the report’s lead author. 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Editor’s Note: In observance of the Thanksgiving holiday, The Climate Post will not circulate next week.  It will return on December 4. 

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has released its World Energy Outlook (WEO) 2014 report, which for the first time provides energy trend projections through the year 2040.  Among the key challenges in the next two and a half decades is, a 37 percent rise in global energy demand, driven mainly by emerging markets in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America.  Asia will account for 60 percent of global growth in demand, and by early 2030s, China may surpass the U.S. as the world’s largest oil consumer. 

“The short-term picture of a well-supplied oil market should not disguise the challenges that lie ahead as reliance grows on a relatively small number of producers,” according to the WEO report. 

The IEA projects that global oil consumption will rise from 90 million barrels a day in 2013 to 104 million barrels a day in 2040, requiring a $900 billion investment in oil and gas development by the 2030s. 

Overall use of coal is projected to decrease slowly in demand, while use of renewable energy from wind, solar and hydropower will grow.  The IEA anticipates renewables will saturate one-third of global energy demand by 2040. 

CO2 emissions are expected to grow by one-fifth by 2040, which puts the world’s temperature well on track to rise to 3.6 degrees Celsius by the end of this century, increasing the risk of droughts, rising sea levels, damaging storms and mudslides. 

According to IEA projections, limiting global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius deemed by U.N. as the level necessary to avoid dangerous changes would require the world to ramp up low-carbon energy investments by four times their current levels—bringing annual global investment up to approximately $1 trillion. 

On the domestic front, a majority of Americans support stricter regulations on carbon emissions, according to a new poll by Yale’s Project on Climate Communication.  Further, two thirds of those polled (1,275 adults) support limits on carbon dioxide emissions even after being told such measures would raise power prices. 

U.S. Pledges $3 Billion to UN’s Green Climate Fund

On the heels of its climate deal with China, the U.S. announced its intent to contribute $3 billion to the United Nation’s Green Climate Fund, which was established in 2013 to provide support to developing countries in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.  The “game-changing pledge,” made by President Obama on the eve of the G-20 Summit in Brisbane, Australia, last week, makes the U.S. the fund’s largest contributor.  The Obama administration has not specified whether its pledge will come from existing sources of funding or new appropriations from Congress—a strategy that could face stiff resistance from Republican lawmakers. 

“The contribution by the U.S. will have a direct impact on mobilizing contributions from the other large economies,” said Hela Cheikhrouhou, executive director of the Green Climate Fund. “ The other large economies—Japan, the U.K.—have been watching to see what the U.S. will do.” 

After several years of heated debate, the North Carolina Mining and Energy Commission approved a detailed list of regulations to guide companies interested in securing unconventional oil and gas permits in the state.  The rules were unanimously approved by commission members after review of approximately 217,000 public comments by 30,000 groups and individuals. 

One of the rules revised by the commission in light of those comments calls for inclusion of leak detection systems and continuous monitoring of liners for open pits where fluids such as drilling waste are stored. 

The approved regulations will be reviewed in December by the NC Rules Review Commission and in January by the state legislature.  The commission has identified a number of areas for continued work, including authority to stop a company’s work. 

“Just because we don’t have that stop-work authority doesn’t mean we can’t stop the work on site,” said Amy Pickle, vice chair of the commission and director of the State Policy Program at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. “ If something is going wrong, there’s injunctive authority, there is the ability to go to court to require them to stop working, there’s an ability through inspections and monitoring to revoke that permit.” 

Across the country, unconventional oil and gas issues continue to be highly polarizing, as measures passed during mid-term elections revealed.  A development ban was passed by the town of Denton, the Texas city where the earliest exploration began.  In a compromise plan, limited development was approved by the U.S. Forest Service for the George Washington National Forest in Virginia.  A 2011 plan draft would have allowed drilling in much of the forest’s 1.1 million acres. 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Two nations that account for more than one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions reached a climate deal.  The United States will accelerate the pace of its net greenhouse gas emissions reductions from 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 to 26–28 percent by 2025.  China will increase the non-fossil fuel share of all its energy to approximately 20 percent—roughly a fifth of its energy supply—by 2030. 

“This is a major milestone,” said President Obama. “ This is an ambitious goal, but this is an achievable goal.  We have a special responsibility to lead the world effort to combat global climate change.” 

The deal was reached after several rounds of talks between the two nations.  At a joint press conference where the deal was announced, Obama indicated that he hoped the deal would “encourage all major economies to be ambitious and all developed and developing countries to work across divides” so that an agreement could be reached on climate change targets in Paris next year. 

Chinese President Xi Jinping had similar comments. 

“We agreed to make sure international climate change negotiations will reach agreement as scheduled at the Paris conference in 2015 and agreed to deepen practical cooperation on clean energy, environmental protection and other areas,” he said.  The deal calls for China to deploy an additional 800–1,000 gigawatts of nuclear, wind, solar and other zero-emission energy sources—a capacity greater than that of all the coal–fired power plants in China and nearly equal to total electricity generation in the United States.  Among other initiatives on which the two countries agreed: Expand joint clean energy research and development, advance major carbon capture and storage demonstrations, enhance cooperation on hydrofluorocarbons, creating a federal framework for cities in both countries to share experiences and best practices for low-carbon economic growth and adaptation to climate change impacts, and boosting trade in “green” goods, including energy efficiency technology and resilient infrastructure. 

China is still largely poor, but its economy and energy use is still growing rapidly.  At the same time, China is combating severe air pollution. 

“Just the fact that they agreed to cap their emissions in the future is a significant development,” said Brian Murray, director of the Environmental Economics Program at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. “ As important as these two countries are, they can’t get the job done working alone.  But without them, the world can’t get the job done.” 

Will China’s pledge keep the climate from warming 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels—a scientific benchmark for averting dangerous climate impacts?  A number of scientists say it falls short of what is needed to hit that target. 

Congressional Republicans are skeptical of the deal. “ As I read the agreement, it requires the Chinese to do nothing at all for 16 years, while these carbon emission regulations are creating havoc in my state and other states across the country,” said Mitch McConnell, who is in line to become the new Senate majority leader in January. 

Grid Reliability In Question

New analysis by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) discusses the potential impacts of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan on grid reliability (subscription).  Specifically, NERC points to rapid transition as a factor in damaging capacity margins, increasing the difficulty of maintaining power quality and leaving the grid vulnerable to extreme weather. 

The EPA said the report on the impact of the Clean Power Plan, which would reduce carbon emissions from existing fossil fuel–fired power plants, offered no new analysis and overlooks new capacity that will be built by 2020. 

“The world is going to change regardless of this new proposed rule, and we know new capacity is going to build and NERC just ignores that completely,” a staff member in the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation told Greenwire (subscription). “ There are a lot of assertions and claims in the report that aren’t really substantiated by any particular analytics they mention, or supported by a deeper look into the issues.” 

A U.S. Department of Energy study, due out in 2015, will examine the rule’s impact on utilities, according to The Hill. 

OPEC Reduces Forecast Amid Low Oil Prices

In its annual World Oil Outlook, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which supplies a third of the world’s crude oil, cut demand forecasts to 28.2 million barrels per day in 2017—a 14-year low.  The 2014 report estimates approximately 600,000 barrels a day less than the 2013 report and 800,000 below the amount required this year. 

The report further states that there will be a “small decline in real values” over this decade, together with a “constant nominal price” of $110 a barrel between now and 2020. 

Booming U.S. oil production has put domestic output on the same level as that of energy giants Russia and Saudi Arabia, but oil prices are on the decline.  UT San Diego News says the overall economy may still win, noting that “we still consume far more petroleum—in the form of gasoline and thousands of related products—than we pump from the ground.  This means import costs are falling, too.” 

Despite the decline in oil prices—to some $77 a barrel—companies like BP and Total are continuing to invest in major projects. 

“We are not changing our investment decisions because of this [current price],” said Bob Dudley, BP chief executive. 

“We have little time before the window of opportunity to stay within the 2C of warming closes,” said IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri. “ To keep a good chance of staying below the 2C, and at manageable costs, our emissions should drop by 40 to 70 percent globally between 2010 and 2050, and falling to zero or below by 2100.” 

To have a 66 percent chance of limiting total average warming to the U.N.-set threshold of less than 2 degrees Celsius relative to preindustrial levels, the world’s population can emit no more than one trillion tons of carbon dioxide.  But we’ve already emitted more than half that much. 

The report includes conclusions of three previous IPCC reports on the science, impacts of climate change and on ways to address it. 

One key finding: It’s “extremely likely” that humans are contributing to climate change—mainly through the burning of fossil fuels.  There is evidence—through sea-level rise, shrinking glaciers, decreasing snow and ice cover and warmer oceans—that human-caused climate change is happening now. 

The report indicates that “continued emission of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and long-lasting changes in all components of the climate system, increasing the likelihood of severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts.”  In fact, if we stick to our current path, we could see 3.7 to 4.8 degrees Celsius of warming by the end of the century. 

The report is timed just ahead of international negotiations in Lima, Peru, set to take place in December and intended to establish parameters for an emissions reduction agreement that negotiators may sign in Paris next year. 

This piggy backs on another recent report, Climate Change and Environmental Risk Atlas 2015, provides comparable risk data for 198 countries across 26 climate-related issues.  Echoing studies by groups such as the Pentagon, the report finds climate change and food insecurity could lead to increased civil unrest and violence in 32 countries assessed in the next 30 years.  The countries include Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Nigeria, Chad, Haiti, Ethiopia and the Philippines.  All 32 depend on agriculture; 65 percent of their combined working population are employed in farming. 

“I think the most surprising thing [the new data shows] is how closely linked food security and climate change are,” said James Allan, associate director of global analytics firm Maplecroft. “ We were not expecting this level of linkage.” 

New Cause for Arctic Warming? 

A new mechanism may be a large contributor to warming in the Arctic according to a new study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that looked at a long-wavelength region of the electromagnetic spectrum called far infrared. 

“Our research found that non-frozen surfaces are poor emitters compared to frozen surfaces,” said lead author Daniel Feldman. “ And this discrepancy has a much bigger impact on the polar climate than today’s models indicate.  Based on our findings, we recommend that more efforts be made to measure far-infrared surface emissivity.  These measurements will help climate models better simulate the effects of this phenomenon on the Earth’s climate.” 

Through their simulations, researchers revealed that far-infrared surface emissions have the biggest impact on the climates of arid high-latitude and high-altitude regions.  In the Arctic, open oceans were found to hold more far-infrared energy than sea ice, resulting in warmer oceans, melting sea ice and a 2-degree Celsius increase in the polar climate. 

The White House released a series of reports documenting 38 federal agencies’ vulnerabilities to climate change and their plans to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, save energy, cut waste and save taxpayer dollars. 

“Under President Obama’s leadership, federal agencies have already made significant progress in cutting carbon pollution, improving energy efficiency, and preparing for the impacts of climate change,” said Mike Boots, who leads the White House Council on Environmental Quality. “ These agency climate plans underscore the administration’s commitment to leading by example throughout the federal government so we can leave behind a planet that is not polluted and damaged and protect our ability to provide the vital services American communities depend on.” 

Among some of the findings by agency:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates an increase by 2050 of up to 100 percent in the number of acres annually burned by wildfires. 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) not only sees rising sea levels and extreme storms as a major risk but believes that climate change could hinder its ability to get to space.  It writes that “Many agency assets—66 percent of assets when measured by replacement value—are within 16 feet of mean sea level and located along America’s coasts, where sea level rise and increased frequency and intensity of high water levels associated with storms are expected.” 

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services outlines risks that include more frequent or worse extreme heat events—one weather-related cause of death in the United States. 

The reports stem from a five-year process that began with an executive order by President Obama in 2009.  The order called on the federal government to reduce its emissions and become more energy efficient and sustainable.  According to separate documents, measures to fulfill the order have resulted in a 17 percent decrease in emissions by the federal government since Obama came into office. 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Last week the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was told by a federal appeals court that it could move forward with implementing a program to curb air pollution that crosses state lines.  The Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CASPR) would require 28 states to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide by power plants.  The rule establishes a two-step process: 1) The EPA determines if a state contributes more than 1 percent of the pollution causing a downwind state to exceed emissions standards to 2) The EPA using modeling analysis to determine state emissions targets (subscription).  CASPR’s first phase would be implemented next year, with the final phase beginning in 2017. 

Days later, the agency announced it’s making additional data available to elicit further comments on another controversial rule.  In its Notice of Data Availability (NODA), the EPA points to areas of “concern” raised by stakeholders during the public comment period for its proposed Clean Power Plan, which aims to reduce carbon dioxide pollution from existing power plants.  EPA Assistant Administrator Janet McCabe indicated that the agency hopes to get additional comments before the public comment period ends Dec. 1— specifically comments related to the trajectory of emissions reductions from 2020 to 2029, the way building blocks are established and the way in which state goals are calculated. 

“We wanted to address issues where the feedback we were getting went beyond what we laid out in the preamble [of the Clean Power Plan],” she said. 

Utility Dive and Bloomberg BNA break down stakeholder concerns in detail and describe how the EPA is looking to address them. 

Along with the NODA, the EPA announced a supplemental proposal to reduce carbon pollution on tribal lands and territories housing fossil-fuel fired power plants.  Like the Clean Power Plan does for states, the proposal sets area-specific goals for Indian country and territories and provides options for meeting those goals.  The proposal, which relies on and builds upon measures outlined in the Clean Power Plan, would affect coal-fired power plants on lands belonging to three tribes—the Navajo Nation, the Ute Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation and the Fort Mojave Tribe—as well as plants in Puerto Rico and Guam. 

EU Makes Climate Promise Ahead of U.N. Negotiations

Fresh off talks in Bonn, Germany, that were meant to make progress on identifying the information that countries will have to provide next year when making individual pledges for curbing greenhouse gas emissions, European Union leaders have announced a new emissions deal.  It will cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent by 2030, compared with 1990 levels, and will increase energy efficiency and renewables by 27 percent.  A “flexibility clause” was added to the final text to ensure that the EU can return to the targets after the U.N. summit in December 2015. 

The deal sends a signal to the rest of the world to take action on a climate treaty at the upcoming Conference of the Parties in Paris.  The EU is responsible for about one-sixth of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. 

Rising greenhouse gases are increasing the likelihood of “severe, pervasive and irreversible” impacts for people and ecosystems, according to a draft of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Synthesis Report.  Due for approval and release Nov. 2, the report provides a summary of three other IPCC publications issued over the course of the last year.  It is expected serve as a road map for upcoming U.N. negotiations. 

According to a leaked draft of the report obtained by ClimateWire, to avoid a global temperature rise of 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, net global emissions must decrease 40–70 percent by 2050 and hit zero by the end of the century. 

Oil remnants from BP’s 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill have formed rings—roughly the size of Rhode Island—near the site of the blown-out well, according to a new study in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.  The study suggests that “significant quantities” of crude are present near the site of the Macondo well. 

“We don’t know with certainty how the oil reached the bottom,” said David Valentine, lead author and professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara. “ We do provide hypotheses, that a combination of coagulation and bacterial growth drove the oil into a floc form and facilitated particles or droplets sinking to the seafloor.  Some of the oil was certainly eaten by bacteria, and other components dissolved into the water.” 

BP criticized the research, saying authors “failed to identify the source of the oil, leading them to grossly overstate the amount of residual Macondo oil on the sea floor and the geographic area in which it is found.” 

During the study, researchers collected more than 3,000 samples, analyzing them for a hydrocarbon found in oil called hopane.  What they traced represented 4–31 percent of the oil thought to be trapped deep in the ocean (as much as 16 percent of the total oil spilled). 

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a rule that sets domestic production consumption limits for hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs)—eventually phasing them out completely by 2020.  The rule aims to reduce emissions from leakage and stockpiles of four HCFCs, a class of refrigerant linked to ozone depletion and climate change. 

“This rule finalizes allowed amounts of HCFC production and import in 2015–2019 that protect human health and the environment, while also encouraging transition to non-ozone-depleting alternatives and greater recycling of existing HCFCs,” the EPA said, adding that the rule “should promote a smooth and stable transition, since without this rule, domestic production and consumption of these HCFCs is prohibited as of January 1, 2015.” 

The final rule caps HCFC-22 at 10,000 megatons, down from the 13,700 megatons included in the EPA’s December proposal (subscription).  It also creates an incentive for commercial consumers relying on outdated equipment that uses HCFCs to convert to energy-efficient models. 

Meanwhile, the EPA is tasked—under court order—with proposing a change to the existing National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone by Dec. 1.  Agency watchers speculate that the standards, currently at 75 parts per billion, will be made more stringent.  Although some have argued that the cost of tighter standards would be high—$11 billion in 2020, according to the EPA—a new report by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) indicates these concerns may be premature. 

“There has been speculation regarding the economic impact of a NAAQS revision,” CRS’s James McCarthy writes. “ At the moment, no one knows what a revised NAAQS would cost, because EPA hasn’t proposed one and we don’t know what areas will be designated nonattainment.  But even after a proposal is signed, cost estimates will be little better than guesses.” 

NOAA Reports Forecast Record Yearly Temps, Winter Outlook

Year to date, 2014 ties with 1998 and 2010 as the warmest year on record, according to new analysis from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).  Recorded temperatures were 1.22 degrees Fahrenheit above average. 

“If 2014 maintains this temperature departure from average for the remainder of the year, it will be the warmest year on record,” the report indicated.  Why?  The increased chance for an El Nino—a warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean affecting weather worldwide.  These rising ocean temperatures have implications for coral reefs, sea level rise and weather patterns worldwide. 

When it comes to winter, the southern United States will see colder weather and western states warmer temperatures based on NOAA’s yearly winter outlook. 

“Last year’s winter was exceptionally cold and snowy across most of the United States, east of the Rockies,” NOAA said. “ A repeat of this extreme weather pattern is unlikely this year, although the [outlook] does favor below-average temperatures in the south-central and southeastern states.” 

Tackling Rising Emissions

New data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) indicates that carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S. energy sector increased 2.5 percent between 2012 and 2013—a jump from 5,267 million metric tons (MMmt) to 5,396 MMmt.  Despite the increase, emissions were 10 percent below their 2005 level. 

“An increase in energy intensity … was a leading cause of the 2013 increase in energy-related CO2 emissions when compared with the trend from the prior decade, which was -2.0pc,” EIA said. “ Weather played an important role in the year-to-year increase in CO2 emissions.” 

Negotiators from more than 190 nations were urged to “build bridges” toward a new global pact to curb greenhouse gas emissions at a meeting in preparation for talks in Lima, Peru, this December.  Nations are working toward an agreement, to be decided in Paris in 2015, that would cut these emissions beginning in 2020.  On the table—steps that can be taken to increase commitments from countries and the extent to which a 2015 treaty will be legally binding.  Two themes in particular—carbon capture, storage and use; and non-CO2 greenhouse gases like methane and HCFCs are dominating the discussions.