Webinar on tools for assessing national #climate pledges (NDCs) by @WRIClimate. @davidwaskow reminds: #ParisAgreement is meant to work thru an iterative process of increasing ambition (faster emission reductions), leading to #netzero emissions by 2050. (Thread 1/n)
2 are on track (e.g., crop yields)
13 right direction but too slow (e.g., need electric vehicle sales to be 22x faster than now)
2 in wrong direction: forests, ag emissions
@davidwaskow from @climateactiontr, @WRIClimate et al 3/n
100s of credible datasets,
100,000s of data points
to assess #climate trends, targets, bring transparency to inform + drive #ClimateAction.
For govts, biz, researchers, NGOs
Run by @JohannesFried.
(See also other forest, energy, ... tools) 5/n
Only 20 countries have long-term #climate strategies
Only 20 have submitted updated, more ambitious pledges (NDCs)
26 have net zero targets
62 have economy wide #climate policy
@MengpinGe (7/n)
Coming soon: #NetZero tracker (see report:https://t.co/Kb5JB2VgMu).
@MengpinGe (9/n)
OECD 2018 found $78.9 bn/yr (78% public $), of $100 bn/yr promised in Paris, per @davidwaskow (12/12)
More from Economy
Let's discuss how little you actually understand about economics and energy.
The first thing to understand is that energy is not globally fungible. Electricity decays as it leaves its point of origin; it’s expensive to transport. There is a huge excess (hydro) in many areas.
In other words, it can also be variable. It's estimated that in Sichuan there is twice as much electricity produced as is needed during the rainy season. Indeed, there is seasonality to how Bitcoin mining works. You can see here:
Bitcoin EXPORTS energy in this scenario. Fun fact, most industrial nations would steer this excess capacity towards refining aluminum by melting bauxite ore, which is very energy intensive.
You wouldn't argue that we are producing *too much* electricity from renewables, right?
"But what about the carbon footprint! ITS HUGE!"
Many previous estimates have quite faulty methods and don't take into account the actual energy sources. Is it fair to put a GHG equivalent on hydro or solar power? That would seem a bit disingenuous, no?
Well that's exactly what some have done.
The first thing to understand is that energy is not globally fungible. Electricity decays as it leaves its point of origin; it’s expensive to transport. There is a huge excess (hydro) in many areas.
Let's discuss the environmental cost of bitcoin. Because despite all the push for sustainable and green investment in the tech sector, there's a giant smoldering Chernobyl sitting at the heart of Silicon Valley which a lot of investors would prefer you remain quiet about. \U0001f9f5 (1/)
— Stephen Diehl (@smdiehl) January 17, 2021
In other words, it can also be variable. It's estimated that in Sichuan there is twice as much electricity produced as is needed during the rainy season. Indeed, there is seasonality to how Bitcoin mining works. You can see here:
Bitcoin EXPORTS energy in this scenario. Fun fact, most industrial nations would steer this excess capacity towards refining aluminum by melting bauxite ore, which is very energy intensive.
You wouldn't argue that we are producing *too much* electricity from renewables, right?
"But what about the carbon footprint! ITS HUGE!"
Many previous estimates have quite faulty methods and don't take into account the actual energy sources. Is it fair to put a GHG equivalent on hydro or solar power? That would seem a bit disingenuous, no?
Well that's exactly what some have done.