Coal-hungry China [image credit: democraticunderground.com]
Hard to say which is the greater fantasy: the belief in human-caused climate change due to trace gases, or the prescribed attempts to ‘tackle’ the imagined problem. Demand for energy is rising worldwide, meaning attempts to restrict its supply look doomed. One analyst says: “Despite more than two decades of climate policy making, fossil fuel production levels are higher than ever.”
There’s a huge gulf between ambition and reality, reports DW.com.
The world is on track to produce far more fossil fuels than permissible to meet its target of limiting global warming to at most 2 degrees Celsius, and ideally 1.5 degrees C.
That’s the conclusion of the Production Gap Report, created from leading research institutions together with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
“This report shows, for the first time, just how big the disconnect is between Paris temperature goals and countries’ plans and policies for coal, oil, and gas production,” said Michael Lazarus, lead author of the report from the Stockholm Environment Institute. The report proposes solutions to close this gap, he added.
Inge Anderson, Executive Director of UNEP, called for a “sharpened and long overdue” focus on fossil fuels. “The world’s energy supply remains dominated by coal, oil and gas, driving emission levels that are inconsistent with climate goals.”
Planned production of fossil fuels by 2030 is around 50 percent too high to limit global warming to 2 degrees C, the report found, and is more than double that needed to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C.
Keep it in the ground
By looking closely at individual energy sources, the scientists showed fossil fuels are not on the necessary reduction paths to meet emissions pledges — which themselves are not enough to reach the Paris goals.
Coal mining, for instance, would need to halve worldwide by 2030 to hit 2 degrees C, and drop by two-thirds to hit 1.5, the report found.
National projections suggest countries are planning on 17% more coal in 2030 than is consistent to meet their pledges.
Continued here.
– – –
From BBC News today (20th Nov.):
Climate change: China coal surge threatens Paris targets
Quote: The authors say that right now the amount of coal power under construction or under suspension and likely to be revived is about 147.7GW, an amount that is almost the same as the entire coal generating capacity of the European Union (150GW).
Compared to the rest of the world, China is building about 50% more coal plants than are under construction in all other countries combined.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
I doubt China or India are concerned about missing their Paris goals. Seems like they are both right on track, given the nature of the promises made.
“This report shows, for the first time, what everybody knows.”
FIFY
Green No More: China Set For Massive Coal Expansion
Date: 20/11/19 Bloomberg
The nation is on track to cap installed coal power capacity at 1,100 gigawatts by 2020. However, its coal and power industry groups are proposing further expansion to capacity of 1,200 to 1,400 gigawatts by 2035, according to the report. Should that be adopted, China alone would have more than triple the limit on worldwide coal power determined by the Paris climate agreement to keep global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), GEM said. [bold added]
https://www.thegwpf.com/green-no-more-china-set-for-massive-coal-expansion/
– – –
Who is kidding who in the crazy climate game?
Reblogged this on Gds44's Blog.
the Production Gap Report: from WHERE do these gonks get their data? – don’t they check it all o ut for valididity as well? Naw , probably not, too difficult and easier to do the journo’ thing and cut n paste rubbbish…..
Planting millions of trees in UK cities… against walls, in pavements etc – what is that going to do? Who will be responsible for the falling leaves andlater, Branches, and how it affects the Neigbours in their shaded gardens? ……
When will the idiots at the UN realise that people want reliable, continuous power not unreliable intermittent maybe power. That means reliable FF power generators are in demand which implies that fossil fuel demand will go up to meet that demand. In fact it will get worse when the developing nations realise all the green garbage they are being sold will not advance the nations in any productive way.
Any way, where do the idiots get their figures from about warming? Obviously not the real world (it is 3C outside at the moment, 23:48 20/11/19) and as we know models can, and do, give garbage results.
Reblogged this on Climate- Science.press.
Germany already used up their carbon budget:
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-govt-refuses-name-co2-budget-says-depends-intl-agreements
The German government has declined to specify the amount of greenhouse gas emissions the country would be allowed to emit if it were to achieve a fair share in global climate action, reports tageszeitung (taz). In a reply to a parliamentary inquiry by the Left Party, seen by Clean Energy Wire, Jochen Flasbarth, state secretary in the environment ministry, said the international community would first have to agree on key issues before a budget could be established.
“For example, it would have to be clarified whether only future or also historical emissions should be taken into account when distributing the budget, or whether every citizen worldwide should be granted an identical emissions budget, whether the existing economic and trading structures should be taken into account when distributing the budget, and so on.”
Germany has already used up its Carbon Budget
2009, Carbon Budgets – John Schellnhuber and the WGBU: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260044894_wbgu_factsheet_32009_The_WBGU_Budget_Approach
“In order to avoid dangerous climate change, the international community must limit the total amount of CO2 emitted from fossil-fuel sources by setting a global budget. This budget should not exceed 750 billion tonnes (Gt).
With an estimated population of 82.2 million for 2010, Germany would have a national CO2 budget of 9 Gt. How quickly a country exhausts its national budget will depend on its emissions and hence its mitigation efforts.
If Germany’s annual CO2 emissions of around 0.9 Gt remain unchanged at the current level and no flexible mechanisms are deployed, the German budget would be exhausted within 10 years.”
[In 2018, Germany’s emissions were still 0.865 Gt, down from 0.905Gt the previous year. They must stop using fossil fuels instantly]
“A race against time [2009]
The decarbonization process must be launched as soon as possible. Unless total
global emissions start to decrease between 2015 and 2020, it will be almost
impossible to achieve compliance with the 2°C guard rail.”
‘carbon budget’
‘greenhouse gas emissions’
‘dangerous climate change’
‘decarbonization process’
‘compliance’
Blah blah blah 🥱
Sumping I’ve always been worried about. What is the level of atmospheric CO2 we need to be at to keep below, uh, 1,5degsC above, er, pre industrial levels? And how calculated? The Guardian’s weather page daily says 350ppm is ‘safe’. Is that it? Must be true
Coeur de Lion – the Guardian focuses on a trivial metric (0.04% of the atmosphere) based on ‘greenhouse gas’ theory, just like all the other warmists.
There is no greenhouse, due to the presence of convection and other factors. Lapse rate and atmospheric pressure are key ingredients on any planet or moon with a significant atmosphere.
https://www.britannica.com/science/lapse-rate