An all-you-can-eat climate buffet

Mar 21, 2023 View in browser   By Debra Kahn THE BIG IDEA Carbon-cutting firms are seizing on the latest UN climate report to bolster their business cases. | AP ALL-INCLUSIVE IPCC — The "synthesis report" released by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on Monday puts a thumb firmly on the side of doing everything possible to slow global warming: "Everything, everywhere all at once," in the words of UN Secretary-General António Guterres. If two worldviews have emerged over the past several years in response to steadily increasing CO2 levels and worsening climate impacts — do everything or only the most-effective things — "all of the above" is winning the tug of war. The worse things get, the better every type of climate mitigation looks. Bad news for the planet is good news for some, including the new crop of buzzy technologies that promise to capture carbon dioxide and bury it or use it. "Each passing year, basically, the role and the importance of these technologies becomes more important because the window in which to act and kind of keep the climate system in the way that is livable for humanity is closing," Jessie Stolark, executive director of the nonprofit Carbon Capture Coalition, told our Allison Prang. It's also good for the existing stable of carbon markets and technologies. That includes mainstays like renewables and electric vehicles but also nuclear power, low-carbon construction materials, reforestation, reducing methane from agriculture and fossil fuels and "sustainable healthy diets," all of which get shoutouts in the IPCC's report. (It's worth looking at page 28 for a relative ranking of each solution's cost and emissions benefits.) Expect more attempts to monetize nature, more corporate interest in voluntary carbon markets, and much, much more talk about "natural capital." ("Not a silver bullet" is the new "silver bullet.") Marco Albani, CEO of Chloris Geospatial, a Boston-based startup that's using satellites to estimate the amount of carbon stored in vegetation, envisions a new world of data on the effectiveness of nature-based solutions — a "Bloomberg for nature." One notable omission in the report: There was no mention of geoengineering, a far-off idea to block sunlight that's gained cachet recently with scientists and members of Congress. It would have been interesting to hear what the IPCC thinks of the technology, which kicks off the plot of Kim Stanley Robinson's 2020 climate-geopolitics novel, Ministry for the Future. "The idea that these impacts are going to happen like they're saying but we will not utilize geoengineering strikes me as something that requires greater explanation than is in the IPCC report," said Michael Wara, director of policy at Stanford University's Doerr School of Sustainability. "At some point, all options are on the table. I don't know what that point is. I don't think we're there yet, but if you take this report seriously, we might get there pretty darn soon." WASHINGTON WATCH ANTI-ESG AMMO — President Joe Biden on Monday made a GOP anti-ESG bill his first veto, Eleanor Mueller reports. He got in a few digs, too: "This bill would risk your retirement savings by making it illegal to consider risk factors MAGA House Republicans don't like," Biden said on Twitter. "Your plan manager should be able to protect your hard-earned savings — whether Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene likes it or not." The veto thwarted a Republican-led effort to undo the Biden Labor Department’s reversal of a Trump-era policy that restricted the ability of retirement plan managers to incorporate environmental, social and governance factors in making investment decisions. The Biden rule allows them to do so but does not require it. POINTLESS PERMITTING — The Republican push to loosen federal permitting rules for energy projects is falling flat with the industry it’s designed to benefit, Zack Colman reports. Interviews with 11 energy developers, former Republican administration officials, trade associations and lobbyists representing energy firms revealed a consensus opinion: Lawmakers are spending precious time on feeble or unworkable solutions, potentially stranding billions of dollars in new federal incentives and jeopardizing Biden’s goal of cutting the nation’s planet-warming emissions in half during this decade. “When you look at what’s on the Hill, we are spending 99 percent of our political capital on a set of reforms that will be of no statistically significant consequence,” said Jim Connaughton, who led permitting efforts as chair of former President George W. Bush’s White House Council on Environmental Quality. “Half-measures are worth zero."   DOWNLOAD THE POLITICO MOBILE APP: Stay up to speed with the newly updated POLITICO mobile app, featuring timely political news, insights and analysis from the best journalists in the business. The sleek and navigable design offers a convenient way to access POLITICO's scoops and groundbreaking reporting. Don’t miss out on the app you can rely on for the news you need, reimagined. DOWNLOAD FOR iOS– DOWNLOAD FOR ANDROID.     BUILDING BLOCKS CLIMATE HOMICIDE — Lawyers for years have been bringing civil actions against oil companies trying to hold them liable for their alleged role in causing climate change. But what about criminal charges? A new academic paper proposes holding the industry responsible for climate-related deaths that occurred after companies allegedly deceived the public about the dangers of burning fossil fuels, Lesley Clark reports for POLITICO's E&E News. The authors argue that criminal charges are routine “for far less culpable and lethal conduct." They cite, for example, the case of a Florida man convicted of felony murder after a security guard who tried to stop him from shoplifting died of a heart attack. “We concluded there aren’t really any legal or factual barriers to prosecution,” said David Arkush, director of Public Citizen’s climate program and a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute. “The real potential barriers are political, cultural," he said. "Does this strike people as just too out there? Do the fossil fuel companies have too much power, culturally, politically, economically? Those are the real barriers.” YOU TELL US GAME ON — Welcome to the Long Game, where we tell you about the latest on efforts to shape our future. We deliver data-driven storytelling, compelling interviews with industry and political leaders, and news Tuesday through Friday to keep you in the loop on sustainability. Team Sustainability is editor Greg Mott, deputy editor Debra Kahn and reporters Jordan Wolman and Allison Prang. Reach us all at gmott@politico.com, dkahn@politico.com, jwolman@politico.com and aprang@politico.com. Want more? Don’t we all. Sign up for the Long Game. Four days a week and still free! WHAT WE'RE CLICKING — It’s time to stop trying to save Lake Powell to keep “mud glaciers” from threatening Colorado River water supply and the Glen Canyon Dam, according to a New York Times guest essay. — A Montana lawmaker has proposed legislation that would prohibit mandatory diversity training. The Associated Press has that story. — The CEO of candy giant Mars Inc. says companies that succumb to anti-ESG pressure risk alienating a generation of talent, the Financial Times reports.   LISTEN TO POLITICO'S ENERGY PODCAST: Check out our daily five-minute brief on the latest energy and environmental politics and policy news. Don't miss out on the must-know stories, candid insights, and analysis from POLITICO's energy team. Listen today.       Follow us on Twitter Debra Kahn @debra_kahn Greg Mott @gwmott Jordan Wolman @jordanwolman Allison Prang @AllisonPrang   Follow us

To change your alert settings, please log in at https://www.politico.com/_login?base=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com/settings This email was sent to rouf@idiot.cloudns.cc by: POLITICO, LLC 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA, 22209, USA Please click here and follow the steps to unsubscribe.