Ocean temperatures rise…again

Scientists have recorded the highest global ocean surface temperature ever. Temperatures reached 21.1°C last month—that’s just shy of 70°F—surpassing the previous record of 21°C in 2016. While the increase may seem small, it will undoubtedly impact ecological services and ecosystems. Oceans play a crucial role in regulating global temperatures by circulating heat from the equator toward the poles. The rise in ocean temperatures contributes to sea level rise, threatening U.S. coastal communities like South Florida, where it’s expected that miles of coastline will be lost in the coming decades.

Inland communities will also feel the effects of increased ocean temperatures through intensified marine heat waves, which can devastate ecosystems and disrupt food sources and economies. Warmer waters also fuel stronger storms, and the interaction with El Niño and La Niña cycles can exacerbate these threats. An El Niño cycle, for example, can bring warmer, dryer weather to the Northern U.S. and increased flooding to the Southeast.

EU’s carbon border tax potential

New research from environmental economy groups across Leiden University, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact, and Ecologic Institute suggests that the revenue impact of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) could be much more significant than initially estimated. The CBAM is an import carbon tariff designed to prevent domestic companies from shifting production to regions with less stringent climate policies. The researchers evaluated various implementation scenarios for the tariff and found that in the least ambitious form, it would impact 83 megatons of CO2—that’s the equivalent of removing over 18 million passenger vehicles from the road in a year or powering 10 million homes. And the most aggressive scenario? Well, that could cover over 1,500 megatons of CO2.

The implementation details of the tax are yet to be determined, but one concern is the potential impact on export-related economies in developing nations. Rather than exempting economically vulnerable countries, the researchers recommend using the revenue generated by the border tax to invest in low and middle-income countries to develop clean industries. This would help facilitate a global transition to net-zero while supporting countries most impacted by climate change, like Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.

Supreme Court and climate lawsuits

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined appeals from Exxon Mobil, Suncor Energy, and Chevron to move lawsuits against them to federal courts. The companies are facing five separate cases from the state of Rhode Island and municipalities in Maryland, Colorado, California, and Hawaii. These lawsuits claim that the oil companies concealed and misrepresented the dangers of burning fossil fuels and violated consumer protection laws. Many of the municipalities seek to recover money for climate-related disasters. The Supreme Court’s denial deals a significant blow to the oil companies’ efforts—a win for the plaintiffs, who now expect the companies to defend themselves in front of local juries.

Although this ruling appears to be in stark contrast to the Supreme Court’s decision last year to limit the EPA’s control over power plant emissions, it’s important to note that this is more of a procedural ruling and not indicative of the court’s position on the lawsuits at hand. Keeping these cases at the state level is likely in the best interests of all parties involved.

AI’s environmental impact

The outsized impact that large AI models like ChatGPT have on the environment has gained recent attention. With their meteoric rise in tech and beyond, generative pre-trained transformers (GPT)—a subset of large language models—have come under scrutiny due to their substantial carbon emissions. MIT Technology Review found that a single large model can emit carbon equivalent to what several hundred acres of trees would sequester in a year. 

The emissions from AI across sectors are now comparable to those of the aviation industry—it’s mainly due to the amount of data and computation required to train these models and the energy-intensive data centers in which they operate. Some solutions to reduce AI’s environmental impact include moving training to cleaner data centers, like those powered by hydroelectric energy, and sharing models in a more open-source manner to reduce the need for additional training. However, the proprietary nature of these models makes this less likely. There are calls for a federal body to oversee the development and use of AI, which could also help develop rules to reduce the emissions impact of AI. 

While AI has the potential to compensate for its environmental impact through emissions reductions in other sectors, it’s essential to consider other environmental factors, such as water use, lithium, and environmental justice, as their proliferation continues to progress.

As Earth Day celebrates its 53rd anniversary on April 22, 2023 there’s debate about whether the holiday still holds meaning in the face of rising emissions and the IPCC’s warnings about the ticking clock for worst-case climate outcomes. However, it’s evident that Earth Day, with an estimated billion participants worldwide, continues to inspire hope and action. 

Because Earth Day is so well publicized, it affords companies and individuals the opportunity to see what others are doing and get inspired. This year, Earthday.org, which organizes Earth Day’s annual themes, has landed on “Invest in our Planet,” encouraging everyone to invest their time, effort, and money to ensure a sustainable future.

Earth Day is an opportunity for businesses to launch or revive sustainability efforts. Meaningful engagement with employees and other stakeholders can lead to long-term benefits in reducing environmental impact. 

But Earth Day is also a time to stay vigilant. 

During Earth Day, some companies may offer limited-time promotions, special “eco-friendly” products, or claim to donate to environmental causes for every sale. While these efforts can raise awareness and contribute to environmental causes, it’s essential to be cautious and research a company’s overall sustainability practices and policies. If a company’s Earth Day promotion appears to be an isolated event rather than part of a broader, ongoing commitment to sustainability, it might be an example of greenwashing.

‍

The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation has presented options for the future distribution of Colorado River water due to unprecedented water shortages in reservoirs, including Lake Mead and Lake Powell. 

The seven states with a say in water withdrawal agreements—Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming—failed to come to an agreement last year. And now there are two new proposals, one from California and the other from the rest of the states. 

The Bureau of Reclamation has presented three options for water distribution from the Colorado River, including taking no action after the current guidelines expire in 2026, which would have severe consequences for hydropower production and 30 tribal nations. One of the other options favors California, and the other equally distributes cuts among the lower basin states. 

The proportional cuts in one proposal (you guessed it, not California’s) would result in California’s farmers experiencing significant hardships and interfere with water rights that California does not want to give up. Arizona would face larger cuts in California’s proposal due to its lower ranking in water rights seniority.

Expect legal challenges regardless of the option. Secretary Deb Haaland is expected to make a decision after public comment, with a final version set to be released in August.

How’d we get here? 

Despite record-breaking levels of rain and snow in California, it is unlikely to have a significant impact on the drought, which has been ongoing for more than two decades. 

How do we adapt?

Adapting to less water use is necessary, and the option for financial incentives for farmers to forego planting certain crops is on the table. However, the price of water needs to increase to reflect the precious, at-risk nature of the resource, similar to any other commodity. If water costs remain low, it may result in mandatory restrictions in the future. 

Improved irrigation practices, crop selection, and gray water use can significantly reduce water use. Still, we need to address other fundamental issues, like reduced animal agriculture, food waste, and the ability to grow feed crops in deserts.

The Chocolate Scorecard, a report produced by Be Slavery Free, a non-governmental organization, recently released the fourth edition of its scorecard, which tracks cocoa production in the world’s leading cocoa-producing countries. It grades 43 brands, suppliers, and retailers on various sustainability issues. 

Because cocoa can only grow in specific tropical conditions, it puts economic pressure on countries to escalate deforestation for cocoa production, leading to concerns about pesticide use, biodiversity loss, and soil degradation. The Chocolate Scorecard also addresses sustainability issues in the chocolate industry, including the environment and human rights. 

Countries that produce cocoa tend to have weaker labor laws, leading to child labor issues. Over 1.5 million children are estimated to be involved in the cocoa industry in Ghana and the Ivory Coast, the countries responsible for over half of the world’s cocoa. The opaque supply chains feeding the chocolate industry make traceability and accountability difficult, and this opacity provides convenient cover for the $60 billion chocolate industry to continue to procure cocoa cheaply.

The scorecard’s ranking focuses on traceability, living income, child labor, deforestation, climate, agroforestry, and agrichemical management. Companies that monitor their compliance with anti-deforestation policies receive higher scores. The scorecard also considers if companies have set science-based targets and are progressing towards them. 

Brands like Original Beans and Tony’s rank at the top, while Kellogg’s, Starbucks, and Godiva sit at the bottom. Cadbury chose not to respond to the scorecard survey. So the next time you grab a bar, check the Chocolate Scorecard. 

United announces investment in carbon capture sustainable fuel efforts

United Airlines announced a $15 million investment in carbon capture and sustainable fuel efforts with the Canadian company Svante. The investment is part of United’s Sustainable Flight Fund, which aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 without relying on offsets. Unlike traditional biofuel alternatives, Svante manufactures a carbon capture filter that compresses captured carbon for jet fuel production.

Decarbonizing the aviation industry is considered one of the hardest sectors to tackle. Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is seen as the favored solution, but it is expensive and currently limited to a 50/50 blend with conventional jet fuel. United’s investment in Svante represents progress in sustainable aviation fuel innovation, which is critical for reducing the industry’s staggering carbon footprint.

The White House 2024 budget proposal puts climate tech front and center

The White House has released its requested budget for 2024, which includes $6.8 trillion in spending, with a focus on climate tech. The proposed budget includes $1 billion for fusion technology R&D, $905 million for clean energy jobs in fossil fuel communities, and $52 billion for industrial decarbonization. The budget also includes funding for clean transportation, offshore wind projects, and supply chain enhancements for clean technologies. However, the budget proposal is seen as unrealistic and has little chance of passing a Republican House.

The proposed budget includes a strong focus on climate mitigation, with significant investments in various packages like equity and environmental justice, jobs, manufacturing, and R&D. The proposed funding is meant to position the U.S. to embrace the transition toward net-zero, with a focus on investing in the middle class and working families.

This week Constanze Duke discusses the latest IPCC Synthesis Report, which highlights the urgent and dire situation of climate change.

The report warns that the planet has already warmed by 1.1ºC and is expected to warm by 1.5ºC by 2030, leading to climate-related crises like famine, heat illness, and infectious diseases.

The report calls for immediate and sustained action to address this issue, including eliminating carbon emissions by 2040, investing in CCS tech, implementing sustainable diets, and minimizing fossil fuel use from flying and driving.

The barriers to adaptation include a lack of political will, low climate literacy, and insufficient mobilization of finance, among others.

The report emphasizes the need for effective policies and regulations to cut emissions and address these barriers to adaptation.