The first output from my ongoing work for the European Commission on carbon removals is now available - a review paper on certification methodologies for carbon removals with permanent storage https://t.co/rxkrAgzGD5
@GHGGuru@ryankatzrosene 4/4 It’s not rocket science to work out that those major emitters are the entities who are truly agenda driven in their interaction with this question.
@GHGGuru@ryankatzrosene 3/4 It’s not a coincidence that many of the loudest voices supporting GWP* as a regulatory metric are major methane emitters who would be delighted to have their current emissions bundled into a baseline term and given a free pass.
@GHGGuru@ryankatzrosene 2/4 In contrast, summing GWP on any given timeframe diverges from the estimated temperature impact for periods shorter/longer than that timeframe, but is a pretty reasonable basis to impose accountability through inventory accounting.
@GHGGuru@ryankatzrosene 1/4 It's disingenuous to frame this just as an issue of 'physics' though isn't it. Summing GWP* over time gives an ok estimate of the temperature impact of changing methane emissions, but is a ropey basis to impose accountability for climate impact through inventory accounting.
@MichaelWWara@scianalysis I second Colin's observation, I think that the level of soy consumption has been mostly driven by RFS and the biomass based diesel tax credit, LCFS has put more focus on waste oils, and made a big difference to where HVO and waste based biodiesel get supplied.
A good story in the Guardian noting the serial failure of the aviation industry to meet self-declared climate goals https://t.co/g85XoXkfSx
Voluntary goals for alternative fuel use have generally suffered a similar fate, this is why #SAF deployment requires firm regulatory action
I'm very proud of my cousin Miranda whose "Don't Look Up" moment talking about climate action on Good Morning Britain yesterday seems to have inspired a lot of people, not least Gary Lineker
Seeing the interview in its entirety is sickening, but at the same time the bullying & patronising nature of it is getting plenty of coverage for what is the most crucial time for our future existence on this planet. Only one person came out of this well & that’s Miranda Whelehan
@dcullenward @scianalysis@rorypjacobson @ThoughtEnergy @RogerAines @orbuch 4/4 one gallon of reduced production of fossil fuels somewhere else. That simplification has never been perfect, and one can argue it's problematic, but it's not a new framework introduced for CO2 EOR.
@dcullenward @scianalysis@rorypjacobson @ThoughtEnergy @RogerAines @orbuch 3/4 expanded to consider whether additional oil production (and eventually consumption) is likely to be caused. That's an important question, but LCFS has always been built upon a simplification/assumption that one gallon of new fuel production here (e.g. of biofuels) means ...
@dcullenward @scianalysis@rorypjacobson @ThoughtEnergy @RogerAines @orbuch 2/4 the Air Resources Board is not attentive to analysis in its decision making. Scope questions are vital in LCA - in this case, whether the scope of the assessment of the use of CO2 in EOR should be restricted to physical carbon sequestration or ...
@dcullenward @scianalysis@rorypjacobson @ThoughtEnergy @RogerAines @orbuch 1/4 I don't think it's helpful to present a flat dichotomy between politics and analysis. Clearly you're kidding yourself if you think that politics has no role in the final decision making in any climate policy, but it would be obtuse and demonstrably wrong to argue that...
@ISCCSystem Perhaps I'm missing something, but in what circumstance would a gas-to-liquid fuel be counted as "sustainable aviation fuel" by anyone of any consequence?!