Scrutable

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 03, 2020 2:29 pm

This is very cool - a growing number of lawsuits against fossil fuel companies for lying about climate change for 50 years, causing irrevocable damage to communities.

‘At the Forefront of Climate Change,’ Hoboken, New Jersey, Seeks Damages From ExxonMobil

Hoboken is the 20th municipality, state or private organization to sue the fossil fuel industry over climate change since 2017. Other plaintiffs include Baltimore, Oakland and San Francisco; numerous counties in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maryland, New York and Washington; and the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Minnesota.

The number of high tide flood days has already more than doubled since 2000, the lawsuit said, while climate change also threatens the city with more frequent and severe flooding from storm surge during coastal storms.

Other defendants named in the lawsuit include BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell and the American Petroleum Institute, an oil and gas trade association.

"The climate harms masked by defendants' half-century of deception have now slammed into the shores of Hoboken," the lawsuit said.

Warning of an impending financial implosion driven largely by fossil fuel industry deception, a recent report calls on fossil fuel insiders and other potential whistleblowers to help expose and prosecute this fraud.

According to this new report from the National Whistleblower Center (NWC) published July 23, fossil fuel executives’ deception on the financial risks of climate change—to their business and the economy at large—is widespread and is likely actionable fraud, meaning that further securities fraud lawsuits against companies like ExxonMobil should be expected particularly if whistleblowers come forward to work with financial regulators and prosecutors.

jimbob wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 04, 2020 2:38 pm

And a different set of lawsuits:

https://www.desmog.co.uk/2020/07/30/fos ... port-warns

Warning of an impending financial implosion driven largely by fossil fuel industry deception, a recent report calls on fossil fuel insiders and other potential whistleblowers to help expose and prosecute this fraud.

According to this new report from the National Whistleblower Center (NWC) published July 23, fossil fuel executives’ deception on the financial risks of climate change—to their business and the economy at large—is widespread and is likely actionable fraud, meaning that further securities fraud lawsuits against companies like ExxonMobil should be expected particularly if whistleblowers come forward to work with financial regulators and prosecutors.

Poland has been the only European Union state to refuse to pledge climate neutrality by 2050, with the ruling Law and Justice party saying that it needs more time and money to shift its economy from coal to cleaner energy sources.

But rising carbon emission costs, the European Union’s ambitious climate policies and the coronavirus outbreak are forcing Warsaw to speed up its energy transformation.

In the updated energy strategy, which still needs to be approved by government, the climate ministry said that coal’s share in electricity production will fall to 37%-56% in 2030 and to 11-28% in 2040, depending on the carbon emission costs.

In November 2019 Poland had expected the share of coal at 56%-60% in 2030 and at 28% in 2040.

Following the announcement, shares in Polish utilities jumped on the view that these companies would benefit from phasing out coal more quickly.

FlammableFlower wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:13 pm

Due to the pandemic, 80% of North Dakota's oil rigs are sitting idle.

FlammableFlower wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:39 pm

Also for the state to look elsewhere for revenue.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:09 pm

FlammableFlower wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:39 pm

Also for the state to look elsewhere for revenue.

I imagine they should have plenty of potential for solar. They are south of the U.K. after all.

bjn wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 11:10 am

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:09 pm

FlammableFlower wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:39 pm

Also for the state to look elsewhere for revenue.

I imagine they should have plenty of potential for solar. They are south of the U.K. after all.

Wind resources are pretty good actually.

I imagine that many of the skills needed to build and maintain oil wells are transferable to building and maintaining wind turbines.

bjn wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:25 pm

Hydrogen as an energy storage for transport seems to have just had a kick in the teeth. Nikola, wannabe makers of H2 fuelled artic tractors, seems to have perpetuated something very close to fraud, including filming a prototype rolling down a hill at speed pretending it was moving under power. They may be in some trouble very soon. Share price has tanked.

Even if the company isn't fraudulent, there is no rational way that H2 can compete against FFs or batteries for road transport. Large inefficiencies in round-tripping electricity through H2, capital cost of H2 generation equipment, storage and transportation problems work against it.

shpalman wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:53 pm

bjn wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:25 pm

Hydrogen as an energy storage for transport seems to have just had a kick in the teeth. Nikola, wannabe makers of H2 fuelled artic tractors, seems to have perpetuated something very close to fraud, including filming a prototype rolling down a hill at speed pretending it was moving under power. They may be in some trouble very soon. Share price has tanked.

Even if the company isn't fraudulent, there is no rational way that H2 can compete against FFs or batteries for road transport. Large inefficiencies in round-tripping electricity through H2, capital cost of H2 generation equipment, storage and transportation problems work against it.

You really don't need something called "Hindenburg Research" fisking your hydrogen-based transport solution.

bjn wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 15, 2020 9:04 pm

Hitachi looks to be pulling the plug on the proposed Wylfa nuke plant in Wales. Seems to be that no one wanted to pay for it. Should find out the details tomorrow.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 15, 2020 10:16 pm

bjn wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 15, 2020 9:04 pm

Hitachi looks to be pulling the plug on the proposed Wylfa nuke plant in Wales. Seems to be that no one wanted to pay for it. Should find out the details tomorrow.

That’s a shame. We will be using gas and coal for a bit longer I suspect. I really hope I’m wrong and storage + renewables + interconnectors make up for it.

NIC wrote:New research carried out for the National Infrastructure Commission shows how sharp falls in the cost of renewable generation mean that Britain should aim for renewables to meet two thirds of electricity needs by 2030 and that this can be delivered at the same overall cost as meeting only half of total demand by that date.

NIC wrote:The report further notes that renewables alone cannot create a resilient energy system for future decades, and that further work on new storage technologies, efficient interconnectors, and other innovations are needed to support renewables and ensure the security of the electricity system. This could include an increased role for low carbon hydrogen generation, as envisaged in the Commission’s report Net Zero: Opportunities for the Power Sector, published in March 2020.

1. business as usual : which is weak recovering demand, then a slow decline, with a 10% drop in oil use by 2050,
2. rapid : doing what we need to do to limit carbon emissions to achieve a 2 degree target by 2100, with a 50% drop by 2050,
3. net zero : the rapid scenario plus extra measures to limit warming to 1.5 degrees by 2100, with a 70% drop by 2050.

bjn wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:21 am

The National Infrastructure Commission now thinks that 65% renewables generation is achievable in the UK by 2030, because of their continual plunge in prices. The loss of Wylfa is no biggy.

NIC wrote:New research carried out for the National Infrastructure Commission shows how sharp falls in the cost of renewable generation mean that Britain should aim for renewables to meet two thirds of electricity needs by 2030 and that this can be delivered at the same overall cost as meeting only half of total demand by that date.

However, we need more interconnects and storage longer term...

NIC wrote:The report further notes that renewables alone cannot create a resilient energy system for future decades, and that further work on new storage technologies, efficient interconnectors, and other innovations are needed to support renewables and ensure the security of the electricity system. This could include an increased role for low carbon hydrogen generation, as envisaged in the Commission’s report Net Zero: Opportunities for the Power Sector, published in March 2020.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 17, 2020 9:06 am

Both the EU and possibly the US (election depending) are looking likely to commit to scenario 2, with targets for 2030. Those are both pretty big markets, which might help to f.ck some of those companies up.

little economic rationale for new nuclear build in the US or Western Europe, owing to massive cost escalations and renewables’ cost competitiveness

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 18, 2020 10:07 am

Standard and Poor's, the global credit-rating agency, sees

little economic rationale for new nuclear build in the US or Western Europe, owing to massive cost escalations and renewables’ cost competitiveness

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... l-nuclear/