Skip to content
Grist home
Grist home

Climate Climate & Energy

All Stories

  • Al Gore and the IPCC jointly win peace prize

    Photo: Stephen Lovekin/WireImage Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have jointly won the Nobel Peace Prize “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.” Here’s the press release. Here is […]

  • Canada’s version of liquid coal

    Canada has about as much recoverable oil in its tar sands as Saudi Arabia has conventional oil. They should leave most of it in the ground.

    Tar sands

    Tar sands are pretty much the heavy gunk they sound like, and making liquid fuels from them requires huge amounts of energy for steam injection and refining. Canada is currently producing about one million barrels of oil a day from the tar sands, and that is projected to triple over the next two decades.

    The tar sands are doubly dirty. On the one hand, the energy-intensive conversion of the tar sands directly generates two to four times the amount of greenhouse gases per barrel of final product as the production of conventional oil. On the other hand, Canada's increasing use of natural gas to exploit the tar sands is one reason that its exports of natural gas to U.S. are projected to shrink in the coming years.

    So instead of selling clean-burning natural gas to this country, which we could use to stop the growth of carbon-intensive coal generation, Canada will provide us with a more carbon-intensive oil product to burn in our cars. That's lose-lose.

  • Brit judge claims to find errors in Gore movie

    This just in from Fox News:

    A High Court judge in London has turned film critic, highlighting "nine scientific errors" in Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. The judge said some of the errors had arisen in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration" to support the former US vice-president's thesis on global warming.

    The Government's decision to show the film in secondary schools had come under attack from father-of-two Stewart Dimmock, a Kent school governor and a member of political group The New Party, who accused the Government of "brainwashing" children with propaganda.

    Justice Burton ruled at London's High Court that the film, much acclaimed by environmentalists, could be shown in schools as part of a climate change resource pack, but only if it was accompanied by new guidance notes to balance Gore's "one-sided" views.

    Here's my take on this: there is no question that there are a few statements in Gore's movie that make me flinch. Had he run the script by me, I would have suggested he rephrase a few of his points.

  • Why has Gore suddenly left the country?

    There’s been some blogospheric buzz over this item on the San Fran Chronicle blog. Al Gore was going to appear today at a fundraiser for Sen. Barbara Boxer, but he abruptly canceled. Here a bit from the note Boxer sent out: I just got a call from Vice President Al Gore. He told me that […]

  • Satellite solar power plants could be coming soon to an orbit near you

    Ooh, shiny: A federal study has concluded that orbiting solar power plants could soon become economically competitive, thanks to rising oil prices. Over a one-year period, sunlit satellites could generate nearly the equivalent of all the energy available in the world’s oil reserves, says the report from the National Security Space Office. In other news, […]

  • Level of GHG emissions may be much higher than predicted

    There are those who argue that it's irresponsible or alarmist to argue that there will be any climate change effects beyond those cited by the IPCC. I wonder what they'll make of this:

  • Notable quotable

    "People use fossil fuels because the good Lord put them on earth for us to use." — Fred Palmer, senior VP of PR for coal giant Peabody Energy

  • Evaluating U.S. and EU policies

    The last couple of months I've been busy preparing two major reports on government support for biofuels, both for the Global Subsidies Initiative (GSI) of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). These reports follow on from our October 2006 report on support for biofuels in the United States, which we commissioned from Doug Koplow of Earth Track, and which has been cited numerous times on these pages.

    Last month, we issued what we call our "Synthesis Report," our overview of government support for biofuels in selected OECD countries. Coming out right on the heels of the so-called "OECD Paper" (actually, a discussion document for a meeting of the Round Table on Sustainable Development, to which I contributed), "Government Support for Ethanol and Biodiesel in Selected OECD Countries" hasn't yet attracted much attention in the press. It is rather dense in parts, I'll admit. But it contains some crunchy numbers.

    For example, we estimate that total support to biofuels in OECD countries was at least $11 billion in 2006, with most of that provided by the U.S. and the EU. Expressed in terms of dollars per greenhouse-gas emissions avoided, the levels vary widely, but in almost all countries, whether for ethanol and biodiesel, they exceed $250 per tonne of CO2-equivalent. That is several multiples of the highest price of a CO2-equivalent offset yet achieved on the European Climate Exchange.

    Then, last week, we released our long-awaited report on "Government Support for Ethanol and Biodiesel in the European Union" ...

  • Boosting crops for fuel will hurt water supplies, says report

    Increased production of corn and other crops to fulfill America’s biofuel gluttony could threaten both availability and quality of water supplies, according to a report released today by the National Research Council. Fulfilling President Bush’s stated goal of producing 35 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2017 “would mean a lot more fertilizers and pesticides” […]