Climate Notes

What Are You Humans Doing?

Climate Change Killing Cocoa

From The Guardian:
A searing heatwave that struck west Africa in February was made 4C hotter and 10 times more likely by human-caused global heating, a study has found.

The heat affected millions of people but the number of early deaths or cases of illness are unknown, due to a lack of reporting.

Farmers in Ivory Coast said in February that the high temperatures and lack of rain were damaging their crops. In March, major cocoa plants there and in Ghana stopped or reduced processing because they could not afford to buy the beans, Reuters reported. The price of cocoa beans has risen to an unprecedented high of more than $8,000 a tonne, more than three times the price in March 2020.

Globally, this February was the hottest February ever recorded, the ninth month in a row that such a record has been broken. Carbon emissions, which continue to rise, and the return of the El Niño phenomenon have driven the high temperatures.

Take the Train But Only on the East Coast Corridor

From the New York Times:
I took a train across America and ended up emitting more planet-warming emissions, not less.

...A nonstop flight from New York to San Francisco emits, on average, about 840 pounds of carbon dioxide per economy class passenger, according to Google Flights, whose data is independently reviewed. That’s equivalent to burning 420 pounds of coal, or more than the annual emissions of someone living in Cameroon. Air travel is wildly polluting.

But what about trains? I tracked down several estimates of carbon emissions per passenger-mile, including Amtrak’s official estimate. What I got back: My cross-country train journey had emitted somewhere from 950 to 1,133 pounds of carbon dioxide per passenger.

There are a few reasons for this result. Amtrak is far cleaner than flying where its tracks are electrified, along the Northeast Corridor, from Washington to Boston. But outside the Northeast, Amtrak trains run on diesel, a highly polluting fuel.

You’ll Be Shocked To Learn The World’s Biggest Meat Company Has Been Lying To Us About Its Climate Commitments

From The Guardian:

When the office of the New York attorney general, Letitia James, announced that it would be suing the world’s largest meat company, JBS, for misleading customers about its climate commitments, it caused a stir far beyond the world of food. That’s because the suit’s impact has the potential to influence the approach all kinds of big businesses take in their advertising about sustainability, according to experts.

It’s just one in a string of greenwashing lawsuits being brought against large airline, automobile and fashion companies of late. “It’s been 20 years of companies lying about their environmental and climate justice impacts. And it feels like all of a sudden, from Europe to the US, the crackdown is beginning to happen,” said Todd Paglia, executive director of environmental non-profit Stand.earth. “I think greenwash[ing] is actually one of the pivotal issues in the next five years.”

And You’ll Be Shocked To Learn That ExxonMobil Has Been Accused of ‘Greenwashing’ Over Carbon Capture Plan In Which It Did Not Actually Invest. Exxon’s UK Boss Proposes The Magic Wand.

From The Guardian:

Investigation reveals project oil giant promoted may never leave drawing board and has received no licence or government support. Motorists concerned about the impact on the planet of petrol and diesel cars may be comforted by Esso’s marketing campaign on “thoughtful driving”.

One of its most eye-catching initiatives is a proposal to trap carbon dioxide at a vast oil refinery and petrochemical complex on the south coast and store it under the seabed of the English Channel.

The oil refinery at Fawley, a village in Hampshire, is operated by the US firm ExxonMobil, Esso’s parent company. The oil firm says the scheme will mean drivers can “fill up with less impact” and make “a major contribution to the UK’s move to net zero”.

But now the oil giant faces allegations of greenwashing as an investigation by openDemocracy reveals that the project may never get off the drawing board. It hasn’t received a licence or government support, and the company has not committed any of its own money to build it.

Paul Greenwood, Exxon’s UK boss, has said a 2030 target to complete a first phase of construction may be hit only “if you wave a magic wand”.

2023 Was the Hottest Year in Recorded History But “There's a woeful lack of investment in climate tech adaptation.”

From Axios:

There's a woeful lack of investment in climate tech adaptation, writes Axios Pro: Climate Deals' Katie Fehrenbacher.

Why it matters: Climate change is already happening, and a warmer world will need new types of infrastructure and services.

Catch up quick: Scott Tierney is a partner with venture firm Valo Ventures, and co-founder of Google's growth fund CapitalG.

Katie's interview with Scott was lightly edited for clarity.

What in your view has been the biggest news in climate tech investing so far this year?

"We've got thousands of business leaders, policymakers and investors headed to Houston for CERAWeek, the largest annual energy conference, and it happened in a state that just experienced its largest wildfire with over a million acres in the Smokehouse Creek Fire.

With the continuing evidence of climate change, it's important that we keep the drumbeat on to accelerate the digitization, decarbonization and adaptation."

What would you add to the narrative?

"We're woefully under-invested in adaptation, and I expect this will become an increasing area of time, attention and focus.

The expectation is that we're going to have a lot more outages. I worry that that's going to create a public backlash against the energy transition.

We're very focused now on carbon-free firm power, and the best sources for firm power are nuclear small modular reactors and next-generation geothermal."

Yes. And also:

The cost of Mother Nature's wrath: $280B

Climate change and insurance costs

Global losses from natural catastrophes in 2023 amounted to about $280 billion, Andrew writes.

Why it matters: A new Swiss Re Institute report warns that global insured disaster losses are sharply increasing, and climate change is a small but growing driver.

Driving the news: About 38%, or $108 billion, of the total were insured losses, and this category is growing rapidly, the reinsurance giant found.

During 2023, which was the planet's hottest year since the start of modern instrument data, there were a record high 142 natural catastrophe events, Swiss Re notes.

Losses from severe thunderstorms, including their hazards such as large hail and high winds, also set a new high, at $64 billion, and much of these costs were incurred within the U.S.

Overall, natural disaster insured losses have increased at a faster rate than the global economy during the past three decades, the report found, and it expects this to continue.

The insured loss burden has more than doubled between 1994-2023, Swiss Re found, and it projects the next doubling to take place within just the next decade.

Between the lines: The summary of natural disaster losses during 2023, along with recent trends, notes that while climate change is increasingly affecting certain types of extreme weather events, such as hurricanes and extreme precipitation events, it is not the primary cause for rising costs.

When combined with other research from Swiss Re, it becomes clear this disaster loss burden will be unevenly distributed worldwide, with countries with the most at-risk assets, and greatest exposure to climate change-linked perils, likely to be hit the hardest.

What's next: According to Swiss Re, which along with its competitors has long been sounding the alarm on climate change, it won't be enough to simply raise the costs of insurance to compensate for more loss expenses.

This will simply price too many people out of insurance markets, as is already being seen in Florida, Louisiana and California.

Damn. So money can’t buy back the earth when it’s dead. What a surprise.