President…Donald…Trump. For those on both sides of the aisle who vowed “Never Trump!,” that’s going to take some getting used to. On this morning after a stunning election, the first impulse may be to describe the future in apocalyptic phrases. Game over for the climate! Game over for NATO! Game over for the Clean Power Plan! Game over for Planned Parenthood!
Energy Institute Research Professor John DeCicco’s newly published research in Climatic Change, “Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use,” has been covered and discussed in media around the country during the past two weeks. Check out a selection of articles below.
Biofuels worse for climate change than gasoline, U-M study says
A new study from University of Michigan researchers challenges the widely held assumption that biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel are inherently carbon neutral.
Contrary to popular belief, the heat-trapping carbon dioxide gas emitted when biofuels are burned is not fully balanced by the CO2 uptake that occurs as the plants grow, according to a study by research professor John DeCicco and co-authors at the U-M Energy Institute.
Consumers Energy in April closed seven of its coal-burning units.
DTE Energy plans to shut eight of its coal-burning units by the year 2023.
Mark Barteau is Director of the University of Michigan Energy Institute. He says eventually, coal is going away because natural gas, wind and solar are more cost-effective - as well as being better for public health and the planet.
Oil and gas development has increased substantially in the United States over the past decade, largely due to production from low-porosity rock formations subjected to hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. This rapid growth has created a variety of opportunities and challenges for local governments across the country. Experts at this seminar will explore the key issues facing local governments in this new era. RFF’s Alan Krupnick will describe RFF’s Community Impacts Initiative.
Long ago, in a galaxy far, far away, the news of “collusion” between Russia, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Qatar to freeze petroleum production would have been greeted with howls that this was a declaration of economic war. It would have prompted frenzied calls for “Energy Independence” and for dramatic increases in alternative domestic energy supplies, especially in the hyperbole-laden rhetoric of an election year. Ah, but the place was not so far away nor the time so long ago. Every U.S.
On November 30, as the Paris international climate conference was getting underway, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a long-overdue update of Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) requirements. Originally established in 2005 and then greatly expanded by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, the RFS mandates increasing use of ethanol, biodiesel and other biofuels in America's cars and trucks.
Panel debate over emissions doesn't follow partisan lines
It was an unusual scenario, to say the least.
Republican lawmakers yesterday needled witnesses on the nuances and intricacies of carbon accounting for biofuels -- models created to showcase how well the fuels performed as a tool for averting climate change.
President Barack Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline was virtually a foregone conclusion well before he announced it.
Just as the prolonged debate about the pipeline was far more a matter of symbolism than substance, so too are the likely consequences of this decision.
At the same time, investment in energy infrastructure of all kinds remains a critical need. Reducing the environmental and climate impacts from energy will require significant investment in fossil fuel and carbon-free energy sources.