[GWSG] Not reforesting; tropical loss; bogus C credits; higher goals; lower fossil values; Dasgupta Review

[Tilley, Al]

1. After a forest fire trees commonly grow back. In many areas it is now too hot and dry for that, and burned forests are being replaced by shrubs and grasses. Plans to sequester carbon through reforestation are in jeopardy. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/10/is-this-the-end-of-forests-as-weve-known-them

2. A Norwegian study finds that humans have destroyed or degraded two-thirds of the world’s tropical rainforests. https://www.ecowatch.com/rainforest-world-destruction-2650991497.html?rebelltitem=3#rebelltitem3

3. Carbon credits are a feature of market-based emission plans. Some credits are spurious, and some represent activities which do not depend on the support of the purchase. Carbon trading schemes will require reform of the credit system if they are to be effective. That reform may be insurmountably difficult. (The implication is that we must depend on regulation rather than carbon taxes for emissions control.)  https://e360.yale.edu/features/is-the-legacy-carbon-credit-market-a-climate-plus-or-just-hype

4. The common idea of an adequate US goal for the immediate future is cutting emissions in half by 2030. A study by Carbon Tracker finds that to limit global rise to 1.5C we will need to achieve about 60% less emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. We would need to cease generating power with fossil fuels by 2035 and to convert to electric cars by 2030. John Kerry is expected to announce the US goals on April 23rd. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/11/new-us-vehicles-must-be-electric-by-2030-to-meet-climate-goals-report

5. Over-valuation of the earnings potential of fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydro plants, and the undervaluation of sun and wind resources, have led to a trillion-dollar bubble and a false evaluation of the levelized cost of energy, according to Rethinx. https://reneweconomy.com.au/over-valued-fossil-fuel-assets-creating-trillion-dollar-bubble-about-to-burst/

6.   In 2019 the UK commissioned Sir Partha Sarathi Dasgupta, an emeritus professor of economics at Cambridge U, to lead a review of the economics of biodiversity. The result is The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review.  Natural capital should be included in measures of wealth, and the ethics of our common context in the life of the world should inform our actions. https://cleantechnica.com/2021/03/12/we-are-losing-the-earths-diversity-of-life-due-to-economics/
The report may be downloaded from the following UK government site. I have read and recommend the abridged version, written for the “concerned citizen.” “She is someone who has watched television documentaries on the state of the biosphere and has read reports in newspapers and magazines on the extent to which Earth is being degraded and biodiversity is being lost. What she wants now is an explanation for how and why we have come to this pass, and she wants to know how to translate that explanation into recommendations.” (Preface) The text is 81 readable and understandable pages long.  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review
The Review is a fulfillment of the need Al Gore identified in his 1992 book Earth in the Balance for an economics which was based on natural wealth. Gore is in the tradition of Alexander von Humboldt, who himself drew on the work of Linneus and others. The Review’s contribution is to consolidate, focus, and systematize conversations which have long been underway in fields such as ecology, climate science, economics, ethics, and political science. Its arguments amount to informed common sense, and together they sketch a most attractive earth community.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.unf.edu/pipermail/gwsg/attachments/20210313/62361004/attachment.html>