Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Seagrove who wrote (1023653)	7/5/2017 9:56:03 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577188

"The Paris treaty provided for the expenditure by 2040 of US$3 trillion in subsidies for green energy" You say that like it's a bad thing. Trump’s coal announcement completely misunderstands global coal markets The United States is going to have to renegotiate another international agreement. Rolling back restrictions on financing coal projects overseas is part of President Trump’s road-map to a “new era of American energy dominance,” he said a speech at the Department of Energy’s headquarters on Thursday. Trump argued that by removing barriers to financing coal projects, the United States could export more of its coal to overseas power plants?—?though Trump failed to acknowledge that building coal plants in developing countries would also build in years of coal-related greenhouse gas emissions. Financing coal projects overseas would also be unlikely to boost national coal production, according to experts. Environmental groups also argue that the move would run afoul of an Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) agreement that went into effect in January limiting the types of coal projects that member nations could finance. Thirty-four countries, including the United States, agreed to the OECD restrictions in 2014; the restrictions mandate that countries stop financing coal projects unless the most efficient technology is used or unless the projects serve the most underdeveloped countries where no alternatives are available. In 2013, the Treasury Department issued guidance on coal financing, saying that it would not support coal projects abroad except in “very rare” cases. Trump could easily unilaterally rescind that guidance. Pulling out of the OECD agreement completely, however, would be more difficult. More likely, according to DeAngelis, the Trump administration will probably both rescind the Treasury Department’s 2013 guidance and seek to weaken the OECD agreement when it goes through review in the next year. That’s concerning for environmental groups, which have looked forward to the review process as a chance to tighten, not loosen, restrictions. “We’ve been trying to push for the expansion of those restrictions and now we’re worried that the U.S. is going to try to weaken those restrictions,” Kate DeAngelis, Friends of the Earth’s international policy analyst, told ThinkProgress. According to DeAngelis, even if the United States were to weaken restrictions on coal financing, it’s unlikely that U.S. coal would be the primary beneficiary. More often, it’s coal technology that is exported to power plants overseas, not U.S. coal itself. Moreover, getting coal out of the United States remains difficult; the most direct export path for coal mined in the Powder River Basin?—?which supplies about 40 percent of the nation’s coal?—?runs through the Pacific Northwest, which has shown fierce opposition to a slew of proposed coal export terminals in recent years. Coal is both one of the most widely-used fuel sources in the world and one of the primary contributors to global warming, so financing new coal plants is hardly good news for the climate. But there are signs that, at least before the Trump administration, coal’s grip on the world’s energy mix was starting to loosen. Globally, demand for coal has fallen for the second year in a row, replaced by natural gas and renewables. Construction of coal-fired power plants also fell 19 percent last year, with countries like China and India abandoning plans for more than 100 sites. Earlier this week, Coal India?—?one of the largest coal companies in the world?—?announced that it would be shutting down 37 mines that were no longer economically viable. But other countries, such as Japan, show signs of increasing both domestic coal capacity and international coal financing. According to a Natural Resources Defense Council analysis, G20 countries contributed at least $8 billion in financing to overseas coal projects in 2016. Japan, Korea, and China are the largest backers of overseas coal projects, and Vietnam, Indonesia, and Bangladesh were the top recipients of funds. thinkprogress.org

To: James Seagrove who wrote (1023653)	7/5/2017 10:14:39 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577188

Time to electrify our economy for climate change, say senators By Paul J. Massicotte & Richard Neufeld in Opinion, Energy, Politics \| July 4th 2017 Change is sometimes painful, sometimes expensive and often unavoidable. These three characteristics apply to climate change, which is forcing us to rethink our habits. Indeed, a fully-committed, sweeping behavioural change is needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change, if we are to meet Canada’s 2030 target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 219 megatonnes. As part of its study on transitioning to a lower-carbon economy, the Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources released its second interim report on various sectors of Canada’s economy responsible for the bulk of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. This report focuses on Canada’s transportation sector, which accounted for 23 per cent (or 171 megatonnes) of our annual emissions in 2014. It addresses road transportation, aviation, rail, marine and urban planning. nationalobserver.com