-
Powered by
Translate
- Sign Up For Our Newsletter
- donate
- contact
Notable climate quotes from 2019
As 2019 winds down, we’d like to thank everyone working to advance climate solutions for their outstanding dedication, contributions, and leadership. The drumbeat for a low carbon future continues to increase as thoughtful discussion and powerful insights inform the public on the scale and urgency with which we need to achieve emissions reductions. Here are some notable climate quotes from 2019 that highlight climate commitment, challenge the status quo, and push climate solutions forward.
| People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairytales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!
For more than 30 years, the science has been crystal clear. How dare you continue to look away and come here saying that you’re doing enough when the politics and solutions needed are still nowhere in sight. — Greta Thunberg, United Nations Climate Action Summit, September 23, 2019 |
| If we love our children more than we love ourselves, we have only one option: communal action. I understand that in preparation for World War II, the U.S. auto industry pivoted in only six months from making cars and trucks to manufacturing tanks and jeeps. Communal action is how we ended the horrendous mistake of the Vietnam War. Global warming, climate change, ecocide, call it what you will; it all boils down to this, last year global carbon dioxide emissions rose 2.7 percent. We are speeding toward the precipice of irrevocable climate chaos. If we want to stop the brutal future we have set in motion we must decrease global carbon emissions by 50 percent per decade beginning now.
–– Chip Fletcher, associate dean for academic affairs in the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, March 2019 |
| The goal of 2045, 2050 for a low-carbon, no-net-carbon economy is critical. Let’s get everybody moving in that same direction, agreed that we have to reach that goal urgently—almost treating it like war, literally. Because if we don’t get on a war footing in order to do what we have to do … we’re not going to make it.
But something extraordinary is happening in America, which is that states have passed renewable-portfolio laws, and so you’ve got [37] states in our country that are locked in already to moving towards Paris, no matter what the president does. You also have the mayor of every major city in America signed on to the mayor’s commitment to try to live by the Paris Agreement. So you have this dichotomy in America, where the president of the United States has said I’m out, but, frankly, the majority of the American people are still saying, We’re in. — John Kerry, Former United States Secretary of State on launching new climate coalition World War Zero, December 2019 |
| It’s too late for us not to have some impacts. And so there’s gonna have to be some adaptation that’s going to take place. The oceans will be rising and that is going to displace people. And so we’re going to anticipate and care for some of the consequences of that, including large-scale migration and disruptions that are going to be very costly. But there is a big difference between the ocean rising three feet and rising six feet.
— Former President Barack Obama speaking at a Kuala Lumpur conference hosted by the Obama Foundation, December 2019 |
| This year saw atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases hit the highest level ever recorded in human history. While our window of opportunity to do something is quickly closing, fossil fuel companies are frantically expanding new drilling, mining, fracking and exporting.
This is the last possible moment in history when changing course can mean saving lives and species on an unimaginable scale. I beg people to think about how they can ratchet up their activism on climate. Not as an individual but in concert with others, in ways that will awaken more people to the urgency and with a focus on changing policy, shifting power, electing brave people who aren’t scared of bold actions in the face of this crisis. — Jane Fonda, Capital climate protests, December 2019 |
| Every report shows we do not have time to waste when it comes to confronting climate change. In the absence of federal leadership, subnationals are taking bold action toward creating a carbon neutral future. Our collective effort will not only lead to a more resilient United States, it will also signal to the rest of the world that we are committed to meeting this challenge and our determination is still strong.
— Bob Wieckowski Senator, California State Senate, at COP25 in Madrid, December 2019 |
|
If the threat we were facing with #ClimateChange was coming from another country, we would not blink twice at trillions of dollars for a military response that uses violence, bloodshed, and displacement as a solution. We must be honest with ourselves about these realities. #ClimateChange is real, massive, and deserves a kind of peaceful mobilization on par with one that we would mount against an offending nation. — Mark Ruffalo, Twitter, August 2019 |
|
.@EPAAWheeler California is working diligently to fight #airpollution & #globalwarming. Please do your job – or step aside & and let the states lead the way! — Mary Nichols, Twitter, regarding EPA revoking California’s waiver on vehicle emissions standards, October 2019 |
|
We know all too well states cannot rely on the federal government right now to act responsibly and take the bold action scientists have made clear is needed to prevent calamitous climate change fallout in our lifetimes. It’s up to us. — Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, signing an executive order committing New Mexico to essential climate change action, January 2019 |
|
My goal for the next few months is to present proposed modifications to the legislation that still achieves the state’s greenhouse gas reduction goals at the least possible cost while continuing to grow our economy. Let me be very, very clear — I am not backing down. — Gov Kate Brown, after cap-and-trade fails to pass in the Oregon legislature, July 2019 |
|
Had the CPP gone into effect, the EPA’s 2015 analysis showed that by 2030 power plant CO2 emissions would have fallen by 32 percent below 2005 levels and the pollutants that cause life-threatening smog and soot would have been reduced significantly. The CPP pollution cuts would have saved thousands of lives and prevented tens of thousands of pollution-related illnesses. In sharp contrast, the Trump administration’s ACE will achieve virtually no reductions in CO2 emissions and next to no cuts in soot and smog pollution. It will prevent next to none of the premature deaths, cardiac problems, lung damage or asthma attacks suffered by the most vulnerable among us—our kids, seniors and poor families—that the CPP would have prevented. — Gina McCarthy, Janet McCabe, and Joseph Goffman, op-ed, June 2019 |
| Let me be clear: The Trump administration cannot stop the states on about 80 percent of what we are trying to do around climate change. And the other 20 percent we address through litigation. The federal government is not able to stop the states from taking action.
Fighting climate change and protecting our children and grandchildren from its ravages is a monumental task. But it is not insurmountable. Leadership may be lacking in the U.S. federal government, but when the world thinks of the U.S. on climate action, they should think of the states. — Gov Jay Inslee, op-ed, December 2019
|
|
I’m here for one reason and one reason only. And it’s not to weep about all my precious rules being rolled back. Though I admit that the constant roll-back is beginning to tick me off a bit. I’m here to remind the political leadership at the EPA that what they do matters, and it’s time for them to step up and do their jobs. Just do your jobs. Right now this administration is trying to systemically undo health protections by running roughshod over the law. — Gina McCarthy, appearing before Congress, June 2019 |
|
Get the term “global warming” out of your head. What’s actually happening is better described as “global weirding.” The warming of the atmosphere makes the weather weird. First, the hots get hotter. This then leads to greater evaporation, which means there’s more water vapor in clouds for precipitation. So the wets get wetter and the floods get wider. But the droughts in dry areas also get drier. Some of the colds can even get colder, as when a weakened polar vortex, which normally keeps cold air trapped in the Arctic, allows more frigid polar air to push southward into the U.S. At the same time, the hurricanes that are fueled by warmer ocean temperatures get more violent. That’s why you’re seeing weird weather extremes in all directions. — Thomas Friedman, op-ed, June 2019 |
|
Urgent action at an unprecedented scale is necessary to arrest and reverse this situation, thereby protecting human and environmental health and maintaining the current and future integrity of global ecosystems. Key actions include reducing land degradation, biodiversity loss, and air, land and water pollution; improving water management and resource management; climate change mitigation and adaptation; resource efficiency; addressing decarbonization, decoupling and detoxification; and the prevention and management of risk and disasters. Those all require more ambitious and effective policies, including sustainable consumption and production, greater resource efficiency and improved resource management, integrated ecosystem management, and integrated waste management and prevention. — UN, Global Environment Outlook report, March 2019 — https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/27652/GEO6SPM_EN.pdf |
|
It is extremely important that in order to be successful with our environmental crusade and to fight global climate change and to fight all of the pollution we have worldwide, we all have to work together. And the more people we bring into the crusade the better it is. The world leaders alone have not been able to solve the problem and they won’t. Whether it is the Indian movement or the women’s suffrage movement, or anti apartheid movement or the civil rights movement in America — none of those were solved in the capitals, always by people. So people power is essential. — Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, January 2019 |
|
Our air and our water are far cleaner today because policy makers in the 1970s set wildly unrealistic, ambitious, expensive goals. They did so because the public demanded action and those public demands led to widespread bipartisan support for an “environmental moon shot.” And so, despite my skepticism that the Green New Deal is feasible, or politically possible, or technologically sound, I am cheering Representative Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Markey on, at the top of my lungs, hoping that their wild ambition can change hearts and minds about the biggest environmental problem we have ever faced. — UCLA Professor Ann Carlson, blog, February 2019 |
The Reserve is developing a Soil Enrichment Project Protocol (SEPP) to incentivize agricultural practices that enhance carbon storage in soils.
Errata released for Canada Grassland Project Protocol V1.0
Project aggregates and cooperatives help reduce cost and increase efficiency
The cost of project development and verification can be a significant financial barrier for a carbon offset project, particularly smaller projects. To drive even more positive climate impact through offset projects, the Reserve’s voluntary offset program welcomes certain project types to enter into an aggregate or cooperative.
Aggregation involves the bundling of either multiple projects into one group or multiple activities into a single project for the purposes of project development and verification. A “project aggregate” is a group of individual projects in the registry. An “aggregated project” is a single project in the registry, but there may be multiple underlying entities, such as different fields and farmers, and that may appear as individual projects in the registry. A cooperative is essentially the same as an aggregate, but the Reserve employed a different term to denote that there is no quantitative or statistical intermingling, simply shared management and verification (which could occur in grassland and nitrogen management). The flexible options for aggregation allow for the market to determine how to organize projects. The rules for aggregates and cooperatives vary by project type, as determined by the project activity and best process for aggregation in that context.
The main benefits of aggregation are cost savings, increased efficiency, and convenience for participants. Under the Reserve’s voluntary offset program, the following protocols contain policies allowing for some form of aggregation: U.S. Forest, Mexico Forest, U.S Grassland, Canada Grassland, Nitrogen Management, Rice Cultivation, Urban Forest Management, and Livestock project protocols.
Benefits:
Allowing projects to register as part of a group, or allowing multiple instances of eligible project activities to be bundled together, aims to facilitate greater participation and may help with:
- Reduced costs for verification and management. Verification of project aggregates or cooperatives is considered across the broader population, which reduces the verification costs to individual participants participating in an aggregate or cooperative.
For example, for forest projects in an aggregate, by meeting carbon inventory confidence standards across an aggregate, rather than within each project, aggregation reduces the sampling intensity required within each project to meet statistical confidence requirements. Projects benefit from reduced inventory costs (fewer sample plots) and/or smaller deductions for uncertainty with greater enrollment, determined on a programmatic basis. Forest projects in an aggregate also benefit from reduced frequency of required desktop and site visit verifications for individual projects due to the verification sampling process. The reduced costs associated with aggregation provide an accessible pathway for smaller forest projects to participate in the carbon market.
- Streamlined monitoring, reporting, and verification requirements, thus increasing the efficiency and ease of participation.
- Enabling economies of scale and supporting the marketing of offset credits at volume.
Ensuring integrity:
Reserve protocols contain several mechanisms to uphold the rigorous accounting standards at the aggregate level and ensure the integrity of projects participating in an aggregate or cooperative. This is primarily accomplished through pooling and sampling for verification activities. Aggregation may also help increase the accuracy of GHG reduction estimates at a program level by encouraging greater participation, which reduces structural uncertainty within greenhouse gas modeling programs. The features are protocol-specific, based on applicability to each project type.
- Project aggregates or cooperatives may enjoy improved statistical viability through greater participation.
For example, with more forest projects in an aggregate, fewer sample plots are needed per project to achieve the same level of overall confidence in carbon stock estimates. Equivalent statistical confidence to non-aggregate projects can be achieved at the aggregate level through the target sampling error. The higher the number of individual projects in an aggregate, the higher the target sampling error (TSE) applied to each project’s carbon inventory; however, the higher sampling errors on an individual project basis are offset by the overall confidence achieved by the aggregate.
- The aggregate/cooperative structure does not change the quantification methodology in the protocol. Quantification of emission reductions is carried out separately for each individual project, and additionality and baselines are still determined on an individual project basis. Each project must individually submit all required project documents. Reporting may be combined for efficiency, but it must be possible to trace the evidence for the emission reductions from each individual project.
- Onsite verification for projects in an aggregate or cooperative occurs under the same guidelines or at a sampling rate that achieves statistically equivalence to non-aggregated projects.
For example, for grassland cooperatives, as with all grassland projects, the risk is low enough that the site visit during verification has been made optional. However, an additional buffer pool contribution must be made to account for the increased risk. This allows cooperative developers to determine for themselves how many projects within a cooperative should get a site visit for a given verification period.
- Annual monitoring reports are required for each project between onsite verifications and verifiers annually audit a sample of monitoring reports.
- If the verifier cannot reach a positive verification opinion for one or more projects within a cooperative or aggregate, the cooperative or aggregate must take additional steps to be in compliance with the protocol.
- CRTs are serialized and issued to individual projects, rather than the aggregate or cooperative. If a problem is later uncovered, the credits specifically issued to the problem project can be tracked and will be subject to sanction.
- All other protocol requirements must be met by each project, including permanence requirements.
Case studies:
Grassland: Southern Plains Land Trust
The Southern Plains Land Trust is preserving and restoring two Colorado ranches that protect 8,000 metric tons of soil carbon per year. The projects in the cooperative earn offset credits for greenhouse gas emissions reductions from the avoided loss of soil carbon due to the avoided conversion of grassland to cropland. The Raven’s Nest Nature Preserve project comprises 265 acres of grasslands in Bent County, Colorado. The native prairie has never been broken for crop cultivation and a number of rare and threatened flora and fauna exist on this property. This project is entirely too small to be feasible on its own without the cooperative structure. The Heartland Ranch Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects comprise 1895 acres and 2698 acres, respectively, of grassland. Each project entered into a conservation easement to protect the grassland from conversion to cropland and underwent a verification process involving desk review of the Monitoring Plan, GrassTool, and documentation, as well as a site visit to verify the project equipment, location eligibility, GHG management systems, data collection and handling, procedures in place, and risk assessment. In this situation, where the projects in the cooperative are in the same geographic region and managed by the same Project Owner, the cooperative structure offers efficiencies and allows them to largely function as a single project for subsequent verifications.
Mexico Forest: Silviculture Association for the Pachuca and Tulancingo Forest Region
This is an aggregate made up of 20 individual projects, including both ejidal (communal) and private landowners. The forest owners have historically worked together on the management of their forests. Each project only has one Activity Area; the project developer developed the inventory for each Activity Area following the guidance in the MFP Quantification Guidance. Since the aggregate includes a total of 20 Activity Areas, rather than having a TSE of +/- 5% at a confidence of 90%, each Activity Area had to reach a TSE of +/- 20% at a confidence of 90% in order to not receive a confidence deduction. This reduced the number of plots significantly. A typical Activity Area must install 300-400 plots, however, each Activity Area in this case only has around 60 plots. Each project is now undergoing its initial onsite verification; although, only 10 projects will have to undergo an onsite verification in 6 years (then only 10 will undergo the onsite verification in 12 years). For the next desktop review verification, if they choose to undergo the desktop review verification annually, only 5 projects (square root of 20 rounded up) will have to undergo the desktop verification, and those projects are to be selected randomly each year.
A new version of the Reserve Offset Program Manual is now available
The Reserve has released the draft Mexico Forest Protocol Version 2.0 for public review and comment. Revisions include expanding eligible project activities and updating additionality requirements based on project activity, modifying the secondary effects calculation for improved forest management activities, incorporating a new monitoring and quantification methodology for small urban forest, agroforestry, and silvopastoral activities, and clarifying verification requirements, among other revisions.
The Canada Grassland Project Protocol opens opportunities for land conservation, emissions reduction and financial incentives to address climate change
Our newly adopted Forest Project Protocol Version 5.0 makes it easier for smaller forest owners to develop forest carbon projects
First Canadian offset protocol adopted by Reserve Board of Directors
Canada Grassland Project Protocol opens opportunities for land conservation, emissions reduction and financial incentives to address climate change
LOS ANGELES, CA – The Climate Action Reserve Board of Directors adopted the Canada Grassland Project Protocol (CGPP) Version 1.0, establishing a foundation for growing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction opportunities in Canada and creating new financial incentives for the conservation of grassland. The offset protocol provides a standardized approach for quantifying, monitoring and verifying the GHG reductions from the avoided conversion of grassland to cropland in Canada. The protocol adaptation process initially began under contract with the Province of Ontario and its completion was made possible by support from the Canadian Forage & Grassland Association and Viresco Solutions.
“This is a significant development for advancing offsets in Canada and expanding participation across the continent. This protocol wouldn’t have been developed and adopted today if it hadn’t been for the steadfast support of and interest from Canadian groups that saw the value and importance in this opportunity. We were both proud and appreciative to work in collaboration with these leaders, including the Canadian Forage & Grassland Association,” said Linda Adams, Chair of the Climate Action Reserve Board of Directors.
The CGPP was modeled off the US Grassland Project Protocol V2.0 and adapted to conditions in Canada. Eligible lands are private and tribal lands that demonstrate clear ownership and at least 10 years of continuous grassland cover. Projects may receive credits for up to 30 years.
Development of the protocol involved extensive research, incorporation of existing Canadian rating systems and workgroup feedback to produce a protocol that lowers barriers for participation for land owners while maintaining the standards for rigor and integrity that are required for all Reserve protocols. To assist with making Canadian grassland projects more accessible, the CGPP allows project aggregation through “cooperatives” to reduce transaction costs while meeting the ownership and reporting needs of the Reserve’s voluntary program. Eligibility and quantification were also developed to be as streamlined as possible, relying on standardized tests and emission factors.
“This is an exciting first step in Canada for recognizing the significant contribution that Canadian grasslands are making to climate change mitigation through soil carbon sequestration,” said Cedric MacLeod, Executive Director of the Canadian Forage & Grassland Association. “I’m proud of the leadership role that the CFGA has had and the opportunity to assume this role. However, this is only a first step towards helping to conserve Canadian grasslands and monetizing the carbon stored in the soils below them. This is also an opportunity to communicate with Canadians about why grassland conservation is so crucial to achieving many of the ecological and environmental conservation goals shared by many Canadians. We’ve got big plans going forward. This is just a first step.”