BRUSSELS, March 23 (TASR) - EU countries reached a preliminary agreement on Thursday to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the maritime sector by increasing the use of renewable fuels on ships. The aim of the agreement is to set maritime transport on the path to meeting the EU's climate goals in 2030 and 2050 by increasing targets for reducing emissions from energy used on ships and introducing measures to support the use of so-called renewable fuels of non-biological origin. "The agreement will ensure that fuel suppliers, ships and maritime transport operators have enough time to adapt to the new conditions so that the maritime sector meets the climate targets," Swedish Infrastructure Minister Andreas Carlson said in a statement. The agreement between representatives of EU member states and the EU Parliament will now have to be formally accepted by EU ministers.

An editorial in the Guardian writes that "Germany's internal combustion engine defense is a disastrous signal in the race to meet net zero targets". It begins: “Germany's pro-business Free Democratic Party (FDP) has long been an uncompromising defender of Europe's largest domestic car industry. A few years ago, she campaigned against proposals to introduce a national speed limit on motorways, which would help reduce CO2 emissions in Germany. However, as a coalition partner in the government led by Olaf Scholz's Social Democrats, he is taking environmental obstructionism to a new level. The FDP is the driving force behind German opposition to Brussels' plans to ban the sale of new cars with internal combustion engines from 2035. Until this month, the date was seen as a done deal and is an important pillar of the EU's strategy to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. But Germany is now insisting that the European Commission offer an exemption and allow carmakers to continue making these engines if they find a way to supply carbon-neutral "e-fuels" to power them. The highly technical nature of this debate may obscure its dangerous implications for Europe's climate ambitions.” The editorial concludes: “Given its wealth and industrial history, Europe bears a special responsibility in the fight to limit global warming. Hard times have undoubtedly made the policy of meeting net-zero emissions commitments more difficult and given an opportunity, especially to the populist right. But the response cannot be to delay and weaken the necessary measures in the hope that some new technology will emerge to solve the problem, Mr. Micawber-style. As a cold political wind begins to blow, there is an urgent need to defend the pace and necessity of Europe's ecological transformation." A Times editorial focusing on China-Russia relations states that "The West must find new ways to win the trust of developing countries, and also through practical assistance in areas such as medicine, green technologies and development financing".

Meanwhile, in other comments, the Daily Mail devotes an entire page to climate skeptic Ross Clark (who is promoting a new book on the subject) to attack the "hysterical language" of the new IPCC report. The Financial Times has a 'big read' titled: 'Solar power: Europe tries to get out of China's shadow'. Finally, Bloomberg published an investigation with the headline: "Consumers foot the bill for traders 'manipulating' UK energy market". The article begins as follows: “Traders from firms including Vitol's VPI, Uniper SE and SSE Plc have frequently announced that they will reduce power capacity ahead of peak evening periods – sometimes with only a few hours' notice. At the same time, they offered power from their plants in a special secondary market where they charged higher prices to cover the shortfalls they helped create... In response to detailed questions, most of the firms featured in this article provided brief statements saying they were in compliance.”

Editorial, The Guardian, Carbon Brief

The suicidal mission of the European Union in the area of reducing CO emissions₂ it will have no meaning from a global point of view. The EU produces approximately ten percent of global emissions - even if we were to get to zero, which is impossible due to the nature of natural biological processes alone, the world's climate will not even notice it.

Europe will just liquidate its industry, hand itself over to imports - most likely from China, and at the same time lose resources that could be invested, for example, in real nature protection, the restoration of ecosystems, which by their natural functioning bind atmospheric carbon dioxide and reduce the temperature of the environment.

These efforts, which over time are transformed into increasingly strict political regulations, do not have their effect even according to the IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In its other report released last week, this scientific platform, which all anti-emissions campaigners refer to, states that in 2019 global anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (CO₂ and others) 12 percent higher than in 2010 and 54 percent higher than in 1990. "Average annual greenhouse gas emissions during 2010-2019 were higher than in any previous decade on record," reported by the IPCC. Any successes in reducing emissions brought about by EU measures over the past years and decades are thus completely irrelevant from a global perspective. And if we start from the premise that the global increase in temperature is a direct consequence of human emissions of greenhouse gases, nothing changes in this growth either.

It is a general experience from centrally controlled economies that if reality contradicts the plans, its creators do not react by adjusting the plans, but by bending reality and hardening even more in the revolutionary struggle for a better tomorrow. Although the measures do not work simply because of their absurdity, the central planner is convinced that they do not work because of their inadequacy. And that's why they need to be tightened. Despite all measures, emissions will continue to rise and the temperature will rise. The logical outcome will be that other sources of emissions will be sought, which will have to be reduced or completely eliminated in the name of combating climate change. And if the possibilities in the area restriction of traffic are exhausted, all buildings are compulsorily renovated, all cattle are slaughtered, and emissions continue to grow, the personal zone of each of us will come next.

From the Arctic to the tropics, wetlands occupy approximately 6 % of the planet's surface. These waterlogged soils are the largest natural source of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that plays a key role in increasing global temperatures. As climate change increases global temperatures and disrupts rainfall patterns, wetlands release methane into the atmosphere at a faster rate – a phenomenon known as the "wetland methane feedback". The new research, published as a "brief notice" in the journal Nature Climate Change, says there was an "exceptional" increase in methane emissions from wetlands in 2020-21. The document adds that tropical wetlands in particular are "hotspots" for wetland methane emissions, with South America accounting for the largest increase in emissions from tropical wetlands in the 21st century. A separate study, also published in the journal Nature Climate Change, said global warming is also affecting carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions from wetlands. The paper concluded that "warming undermines the potential of intact wetlands to mitigate climate change even with a limited temperature increase of 1.5-2°C".

Methane feedback in wetlands
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas that has caused about 30 % of all human-caused global warming since the Industrial Revolution. Most methane emissions come from human activity – including the fossil fuel industry, landfills and agriculture. In 2021, the US, EU, Indonesia, Canada, Brazil, the UK and many other countries signed the "Global Methane Commitment", pledging to reduce their methane emissions by 30 % over the period 2020-30. Meanwhile, a report released last year by the International Energy Agency as part of its Global Methane Monitor concluded that "the most cost-effective options for reducing methane emissions are in the energy sector, particularly oil and gas operations." However, 40 % of methane emissions come from natural sources. The largest natural source of methane emissions in the world are waterlogged soils called wetlands, which are flooded with water for at least part of the year.

Wetlands take many different forms, from arctic permafrost bogs to tropical mangrove plantations to salt marshes. About 40 % of all species live or breed in wetlands. They also provide key ecosystem services, such as water filtration, and are important carbon sinks. Therefore, wetland restoration is often discussed as an important option for mitigating climate change. However, wetlands also release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. A new study examines how climate change affects methane emissions in two key types of wetlands – permafrost and tropical wetlands. Permafrost wetlands, found at low temperatures in high latitudes, consist of partially frozen and waterlogged soil. As the climate warms and permafrost thaws, long-dormant microbes begin to "wake up" and release methane into the atmosphere. Meanwhile, tropical wetlands, which are usually found in hot and humid climates. As a changing climate causes changes in rainfall patterns, new soils are becoming waterlogged and these wetlands are expanding, the paper says. Overall, this means that global warming is causing more methane emissions from wetlands. This process is called "wetland methane feedback".

Underestimation of emissions
The paper assesses wetland methane feedback using two different types of data—samples collected over many decades of fieldwork and data from a "reanalysis" that combines observations from multiple sources with model simulations. The authors use these two data sources to run wetland methane model simulations, which they use to forecast future methane emissions from both tropical and permafrost wetlands under various warming scenarios. The following graph shows 2000-22 wetland methane emissions compared to 2000-2006 levels as estimated from field data (dashed black line) and reanalysis data (solid black line). It also shows projected emissions taken from the fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) up to 2100. CMIP is a framework for climate model experiments that allows scientists to study and compare the output of different climate models.

The dark blue, light blue, yellow and red lines show the scenario of low (RCP2.6), medium high (RCP4.5), high (RCP 6.0) and extremely high (RCP8.5) emissions.

Ayesha Tandon, Carbon Brief

Carbon Brief covers all the details of the Green Deal industrial plan proposed by the European Commission. The new set of proposed legislation is widely interpreted as the EU's response to the US's anti-inflation law.

Daisy Dunne and Josh Gabbatiss, Carbon Brief

US President Joe Biden's approval of ConocoPhillips' $8 billion plan to extract 600 million barrels of oil from federal lands in Alaska "came with a thud of betrayal and an air of inevitability," says David Wallace-Wells. Wallace-Wells writes in her New York Times newsletter: "On the campaign trail, Biden promised 'no more drilling on federal lands, period.' Dot, dot, dot”. But for all the talk of the renewable energy boom and the green transition and all the money pouring into it, there has been little concerted effort, at least in the US, to actually reduce our wasteful use of what is actually poisoning the climate: fossil fuels.” He asks “how big a carbon bomb” is the Willow project, noting: “The honest answer is that it's not zero, but it's not catastrophically big in itself. If the project goes ahead and produces oil as predicted, it is expected to produce an extra 9.2 million metric tonnes of CO2 each year – roughly the equivalent of two new coal-fired power plants added to our fleet or 2 million petrol cars added to the road . That's bad—any amount of additional carbon promises to push the world even further outside the temperature envelope that has so far bounded and helped cultivate the entire history of human civilization... And yet 9 million metric tons represents only about two-tenths of 1 % of current US emissions.” But , he continues, "the same logic could be used to justify any particular fossil fuel project." Such is "the nature of the problem, which permeates almost every aspect of industrial and post-industrial civilization: The scale of the challenge seems to both urge urgency and recommend a kind of indifference." He concludes: "A line has to be drawn somewhere, and the Biden administration keeps crossing it."

David Wallace-Wells, The New York Times, Carbon Brief

According to the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), greenhouse gas emissions in Germany fell by 1.9 % in 2022, Reuters reports. According to the agency, which adds that the reduction to 40 % below 1990 levels was due to higher renewable energy production and lower energy demand, emissions will need to fall by 6 % per year to meet the country's 2030 target. Deutsche Welle it reports this data under the headline: "Germany meets 2022 greenhouse gas emissions target". However, it says the energy and transport sectors "still do not contribute sufficiently to reductions". He adds that Germany aims to reduce emissions by 65 % by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. Bloomberg leads its coverage with the sentence that German transport emissions rose in 2022 "as the post-pandemic recovery was offset by higher fuel prices, subsidies to railways and a record number of new electric vehicles". It reports that Germany recently "blocked the European Union's plan to phase out internal combustion engines by 2035."
Another Reuters article said greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands fell 9 % to 32 % below 1990 levels "as the energy crisis reduced the use of natural gas in industry and buildings, the Dutch National Statistics Office said on Wednesday."

Markus Wacket and Vera Eckert, Reuters, "Carbon Brief"

Greenhouse gases from rotting and otherwise discarded food account for about half of all emissions from the global food system, according to a new study. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), approximately one third (pdf) of all food produced is lost or wasted each year. One of the UN Sustainable Development Goals is to halve global food waste by 2030 and reduce food losses in production and supply. The study assesses the emissions of food loss and waste at every link in the supply chain – from the moment food is harvested to the moment it ends up in landfill or compost. It found that in 2017 global food waste caused 9.3 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions (GtCO2e), which is about as much as the combined US and EU emissions in the same year. Along with carbon emissions, this comes at a time when more than 800 million people will be affected by hunger in 2021, according to the UN. A new study published in the journal Nature Food also explores several ways to reduce emissions from food waste, such as cutting meat consumption in half and composting instead of landfilling.

Where does food waste come from?

The global food system produces about a third of total annual greenhouse gas emissions. A new study reports that food waste causes about half of these emissions. Location, socio-economic differences and other factors play a role in the level of food waste emissions around the world. For example, developed countries generally have more advanced and environmentally friendly technologies – which can lead to lower emissions from waste management, the study said.

"Carbon Brief"

According to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who spoke at the opening ceremony on Wednesday (8 March), the opening is an important moment for the green transformation and competitiveness of EU industry. The Greensand project is the first venture to engage in cross-border carbon capture and storage (CCS), by transporting CO2 from Belgium and injecting it into a depleted oil field under the Danish North Sea.

The project, whose first injection will take place on Wednesday, aims to safely and sustainably store up to eight million tonnes of CO2 per year by 2030, equivalent to 40 % of Denmark's emissions reduction target and more than 10 % of the country's annual emissions.

"This is what Europe's competitive sustainability is all about," von der Leyen said in a video address at the launch event in Denmark.

"You are showing that it can be done - that we can grow our industry through innovation and competition, while removing carbon emissions from the atmosphere through ingenuity and collaboration," she added.

The project represents a breakthrough in carbon capture, where CO2 is taken from one country and injected into another, said Brian Gilvary of INEOS energy, one of 23 organizations running the Greensand project along with other businesses, academia, governments and start-ups.

According to Gilvary, the energy transition will require carbon capture and storage "as a cornerstone" to achieving the world's climate goals. “It is impossible for the industry or the planet to get [to net zero by 2050] without carbon capture. So it's absolutely integral to what we're going to do going forward," he said.

The event is significant for Europe's decarbonisation goals, said the NGO Clean Air Task Force, which spoke to EURACTIV at the inaugural event in Denmark.

"This grand opening confirms the rapid progress Denmark has made in advancing carbon capture and storage projects and will play a critical role in showcasing the benefits of a coordinated effort to address industrial decarbonisation in Europe," said Alessia Virone, Director of EU Affairs at the Clean Air Task Force.

Growing interest in CCS
Europe is increasingly focusing on carbon capture and storage technologies as a way to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. This means that any emissions released into the atmosphere will have to be offset by an equivalent removal.

"The scientific knowledge is clear. Industrial carbon removal is an essential part of our climate toolkit," said von der Leyen, who called the Greensand project "an important step towards European carbon neutrality".

According to the European Commission's estimates, the EU will need to store at least 300 million tons of CO2 annually by 2050 in order to reach its zero net climate goal.

"My friends, without CO2 storage we have no chance of meeting the global climate goals," said Lars Aagaard, Denmark's Minister for Climate, Energy and Utilities, who spoke at the conference.

At the EU level, funding for CCS projects has resumed after a gap of several years following the first series of failed projects. EUR 2.8 billion has already been allocated to 24 industrial decarbonisation projects under the EU Innovation Fund.

Carbon capture projects are likely to receive more support as part of the upcoming European Commission law on net zero industry, which is to be adopted on March 14. In a leaked draft bill seen by EURACTIV, CCS projects are listed as "strategic technologies" that can apply for special status to get faster authorization and easier access to finance.

"We have embarked on a mission to secure Europe's industrial edge, create good and meaningful jobs and fix our planet. Carbon removal is part of that mission," von der Leyen said on Wednesday.

The European Commission plans to publish a carbon capture, use and storage strategy this year.

The dangerous plan to build a waste incinerator in Šala may become a reality. The Ministry of the Environment despite our professional objections issued a favorable opinion as part of the environmental impact assessment. I have been helping local citizens defending their right to a healthy environment for several years - since the beginning of the process. We worked out professional arguments and documents with the team. However, the ministry swept our objections off the table.

The nineties are back
The practices I observe during the process remind me of the infamous nineties. Judge for yourself. I am contacted by unhappy citizens to whom the investor sends letters and threatens fines of up to 20 million euros. Despite the fact that TV Močenok published the extraordinary meeting of the municipal council, the investor threatens local residents with a fine for publishing the meeting on the social network. Similar practices are experienced by local residents who have dared to express a critical opinion on the construction of an oversized waste incinerator in Šala for years.

The ministry ignores the experts
The Ministry of the Environment under the leadership of Minister Budaj systematically ignored all data, scientific studies and practical experience that did not suit them to issue a favorable opinion. The proposed waste incinerator has not solved the problems of toxic substances, would produce a large amount of greenhouse gas emissions and would discourage the development of reuse, separate collection and recycling. This is exactly what I am fighting for on the floor of the European Parliament.

Why is an incinerator a bad solution?
If the waste is burned, it will not disappear. And the need for landfills will not disappear either. After burning, cinders and toxic ash remain, which must be landfilled anyway. Fly ash contains persistent organic pollutants and heavy metals also pose serious risks to the health of all of us.

I will continue to support local residents against this senseless plan. Every person who values nature, the environment and health should oppose this construction. I believe that Minister Ján Budaj will comply with our appeal and change the final opinion to disagree or return the matter for a new discussion.
Of course, it does not end with the support of the community around the planned incinerator. The absolute basis is reducing the amount of waste or recycling it. In these months, I am working in the European Parliament on draft laws to achieve just this. Less unnecessary, especially plastic waste. More reuse and recycling. More recycled materials in products. Of course, we will also offer such measures in our election program.
If you are interested in helping us in the fight against the senseless incinerator in Šala, let your friends and acquaintances know about it.

More than 1,000 human-caused "methane super-emission events" have been detected in 2022, according to new figures reported on the Guardian's front page. The paper notes that most of the events came from oil and gas fields. It continues: “Methane super-emitting locations were identified by analysis of satellite data, with the US, Russia and Turkmenistan responsible for the largest number of fossil fuel installations. The largest event was a spill of 427 tons per hour in August near Turkmenistan's Caspian Sea coast and a major gas pipeline. This single leak was equivalent to the emission rate of 67 million cars, or the hourly national emissions of France." Meanwhile, separate data reveals 55 "methane bombs" - defined as "fields where the leakage from full resource use alone would result in emissions equal to at least a billion tonnes of CO2 " – is stated in the document. He says more than half of those fields are already in production — including the three largest, all of which are in North America. He adds: "According to a recent estimate of the global carbon budget, methane bomb emissions are also significantly higher than the emission limit of 380 billion tonnes of CO2 from all sources needed to keep global warming below 1.5°C." These datasets show that addressing leakage from sites with fossil fuels is the fastest and cheapest way to reduce methane emissions, the paper says. Newspaper they inform separately on the impact of the "Pennsylvania Climate Disaster"—one of the super-emitter events in the main investigation—on the local community.

Emergency situation in the field of emissions