Search

Geoengineering is the focus of a large debate over potential solutions to climate change. However, in the midst of geoengineering and other large‐scale proposals, such as reducing emissions at an industrial level, the role of individual actions to reduce emissions is often overlooked. Given the current and fast‐paced changes we have seen as emissions are reduced by COVID‐19 social distancing strategies, it is time to re‐examine the impact that individual actions can have. This paper considers how one individual action (reducing carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline‐fueled private vehicles), when adopted at a global scale, may have an effect that is comparable to the effects of geoengineering. This paper also argues that the role of geoengineering as a safeguard against climate change may be encouraging complacency and reducing motivation for individual action. Plain Language Summary: As global temperatures continue to rise, several types of solutions are being considered to mitigate climate change. One of these is geoengineering—the large‐scale use of technology coupled with and enhancing Earth's natural processes. Geoengineering is the focus of a large debate over potential solutions to climate change since, while different geoengineering solutions may help curb CO2 concentrations, they remain largely untested and may pose greater risks. Further, it has been argued that, as we consider geoengineering and other large‐scale proposals, we risk the public losing sight of the potential for their individual actions to reduce emissions, and instead putting more faith in science to save us from climate change. Given the current and fast‐paced changes we have seen as emissions are reduced by COVID‐19 social distancing strategies, it is time to re‐examine and reinforce the impact that individual actions can have. This paper considers how one individual action (reducing CO2 emissions from private vehicles), when adopted at a global scale, may have an effect that is comparable to that of geoengineering. This paper also argues that the role of geoengineering as a safeguard against climate change may be encouraging complacency and reducing motivation for individual action. Key Points: Replacing private vehicles with electric or hybrid vehicles could significantly mitigate climate change compared to geoengineeringIt is important that the portrayal of geoengineering as a safeguard does not reduce motivation for emission cuts [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examined the economic impacts of China's emissions trading system (ETS), implemented in 2013, in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) and per capita GDP. The methodology drew on a difference-in-differences (DID) method using dynamic panel data for 30 provincial regions. The estimation results show that implementing an ETS policy has statistically significant negative effects on economic growth. When considering the additional control variables, these effects are still statistically significant. Furthermore, these negative impacts increase over time with respect to both GDP and per capita GDP. The counterfactual tests confirm the robustness of our DID estimation results. The specific influence mechanism of China's ETS policy was finally discussed. Our findings provide a quantitative decision-making support for popularizing ETS policy in China. Based on our DID model, empirical investigations of the ETS policy, especially concerning economic growth in other regions would produce prolific contributions to the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Geoengineering is the focus of a large debate over potential solutions to climate change. However, in the midst of geoengineering and other large‐scale proposals, such as reducing emissions at an industrial level, the role of individual actions to reduce emissions is often overlooked. Given the current and fast‐paced changes we have seen as emissions are reduced by COVID‐19 social distancing strategies, it is time to re‐examine the impact that individual actions can have. This paper considers how one individual action (reducing carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline‐fueled private vehicles), when adopted at a global scale, may have an effect that is comparable to the effects of geoengineering. This paper also argues that the role of geoengineering as a safeguard against climate change may be encouraging complacency and reducing motivation for individual action.

• Developing countries face the dual challenges of industrialising and 'catching up' while mitigating CO 2 emissions. • Medium- and high-technology manufacturing is associated with lower emissions than low-technology manufacturing, with differences varying by the income levels of countries. • A shift to more technology-intensive manufacturing could be one aspect of environmentally sustainable industrialisation in developing countries. Industrialisation is an important engine of growth and 'catch up', but also associated with harmful carbon dioxide emissions and hence with climate change. This poses a challenge for sustainable industrial development, particularly for late industrialisers on how to industrialise while also mitigating carbon dioxide emissions. This paper investigates the effect of technology intensity across manufacturing industries on carbon dioxide emissions: are medium- and high-technology manufacturing industries less emissions-intensive than low-technology manufacturing industries in developing countries? The paper analyses this relationship for a panel of 68 developing and emerging economies over the period 1990–2016, by adapting the environmental Kuznets curve and the stochastic effect by regression on population, affluence and technology approaches. Using two alternative measures of emissions and estimating generalised method of moments model, the results show that medium- and high-technology manufacturing industries are associated with lower carbon dioxide emissions than low-technology manufacturing industries. The results also show that these differences vary by the income levels of countries. These findings have important policy implications, suggesting that a shift towards more technology-intensive manufacturing production processes may be a more environmentally sustainable industrialisation path for developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental impacts of the mineral extraction have been a public concern. Presently, there is widespread global interest in the area of mining and its sustainability that focused on the need to shift mining industry to a more sustainable framework. The aim of this study was to systematically assess all possible environmental and climate change related impacts of the limestone quarrying operation in Thailand. By considering the life cycle assessment method, the production processes were divided into three phases: raw material extraction, transportation, and comminution. Both IMPACT 2002+ and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol methods were used. Results of IMPACT 2002+ analysis showed that per 1 ton crushed limestone rock production, the total depletion of resource and GHGs emissions were 79.6 MJ and 2.76 kg CO2 eq., respectively. Regarding to the four damage categories, 'resources' and 'climate change' categories were the two greatest environmental impacts of the limestone rock production. Diesel fuel and electricity consumption in the mining processes were the main causes of those impacts. For climate change, the unit of CO2 eq. was expressed to quantify the total GHGs emissions. Estimated result was about 3.13 kg CO2 eq. per ton limestone rock product. The results obtained by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol were also similar to IMPACT 2002+ method. Electrical energy consumption was considered as the main driver of GHGs, accounting for approximately 46.8 % of total fossil fuel CO2 emissions. A final point should be noted that data uncertainties in environmental assessment over the complete life cycle of limestone quarrying operation have to be carefully considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]