Connect with us

Published

on

Originally published by Union of Concerned Scientists, The Equation.
By Christina Swanson 

How many times have we said this before? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) new report, its sixth since 1990, is a “wake-up call.”

The report, authored by more than 200 scientists from across the globe and based on more than 14,000 individual studies, is a comprehensive synthesis of the latest science on the changing state of our climate system. It concludes that it is “unequivocal” that climate change is being caused by human activities, primarily the burning of coal, oil, and gas. Yet, California, a state known for its progressive climate stance, just approved 40,000 new oil wells in Kern County, an area already littered with tens of thousands existing wells and among the most polluted regions in the state.

The IPCC reports that now, decades after scientists’ first warnings, our actions have pushed our climate into an “unprecedented” state. The increase in temperature measured since 1970, when I was a young teenager, is faster than for any other 50-year period going back at least 2000 years.

The IPCC’s report provides graphic descriptions of the human, ecological, and financial costs that we are already paying for climate driven heat wavesdroughtsfloods, and fires, and which will be worse in the future. According to the report, these types of climate and weather extremes are already affecting every inhabited region of the globe. As I write this, my drought-parched state, California, is burning again, with the Dixie fire consuming nearly 600,000 acres (almost 900 square miles!), destroying whole towns, and forcing thousands to evacuate.

And the IPCC sounds an urgent call for action, warning that we have very little time left if we are to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) and avoid the worst, most catastrophic, and irreversible impacts of climate change. Global temperatures have already risen by an average of 1.1 degrees Celsius.

Reading the report, it is painfully clear that, by our ongoing societal failure to act on our knowledge to slow and reverse climate change, we are not only bringing disasters down upon ourselves, we are jeopardizing our children’s future.

Climate change is not just an environmental problem that is damaging ecosystems, harming, displacing, and killing people, and driving species toward extinction on land and sea. It is not just an environmental justice problem that is inflicting disproportionate harm on marginalized and vulnerable communitiescountries, and regions of the globe. Climate change, and its resultant and escalating environmental, social, and economic harms and costs, is a generational justice problem that my generation — and the nearly 70% of the total cumulative emissions that were generated during my lifetime — is dumping on our children and future generations. That’s not right.

But the report also tells us that there is hope and a path — a very slim and very challenging path — for us to reduce our carbon pollution enough to limit global warming to that critical 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold.

We know, and in fact we have known for decades what we need to do: replace coal, oil, and gas with clean energy alternatives for electricity, transportation, industry, and buildings; change the ways we use land and produce food to protect and regenerate the natural systems, like forests and wetlands, that absorb carbon dioxide; and, because climate impacts are already upon us, we need to change how and where we buildwork, and live to adapt to survive our changing climate.

All of these changes are well understood and feasible, some are already in progress, and most of them will provide social and environmental benefits beyond their positive climate effects, like improved health from less air pollution. So why are we failing?

One simplistic answer is that change is hard and often slow because the societies and systems in which we live have the tendency for inertia. At a time when we need different and difficult decisions, by governments, by industries and businesses, by the finance and investment sector, by communities, and by individuals, we are instead intentionally framing and grounding our expectations, planning, and decisions in the context of the status quo, the way things are and have been and in pursuit of short-term outcomes.

And so, informed by the IPCC report, motivated by our own self-interest, and inspired by our moral and ethical responsibilities to our children and future generations, here is one approach that we can take to help guide and facilitate those different and difficult decisions. Rather than making decisions based on the status quo, we could instead evaluate our options and make decisions based on the future and what we want that future to be. For every proposal for a new oil well, pipeline or power plant, or for an expanded highway, urban development, or logging plan, we should be asking “Is this project consistent with the characteristics and constraints of a world in which we meet our climate goal and limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius?” If it’s not, we shouldn’t do it.

“We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.”

This quote is perhaps overused by many of us in the environmental community, but it has always been one of my favorites. It resonates with my deep personal connection with nature, my training as a biologist, and my commitment to apply my professional efforts and talents to better protect our planet. But, with each passing year, as I have watched with joy and pride the next generation of my family grow to adulthood, it feels gloomier and more ominous, an accusation rather than inspirational rallying cry.

The new IPCC report is telling us — again — that we are trashing the planet we have borrowed from our children. We know we are doing it, we know what we need to do to stop it, and we don’t have much time left before the damage becomes catastrophic and irreversible. We are all responsible. We all have the responsibility to act. Most importantly (and most impactfully), policymakers at all levels of government, but especially those in Washington, must take decisive steps to confront the climate crisis. Not next year: now. And that means Congress should advance President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda, which weds an equitable recovery from the pandemic-drive downturn with the climate action we need now.

So please, let’s all of us wake up and get to work.

 

Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.

 

 


Advertisement



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

John Deere electric riding mower gets removable batteries from EGO

Published

on

By

John Deere electric riding mower gets removable batteries from EGO

The new John Deere Z370RS Electric ZTrak zero turn electric riding mower promises all the power and performance Deere’s customers have come to expect from its quiet, maintenance-free electric offerings – but with an all new twist: removable batteries.

The latest residential ZT electric mower from John Deere features a 42″ AccelDeep mower deck for broad, capable cuts through up to 1.25 acres of lawn per charge, which is about what you’d expect from the current generation of battery-powered Deeres – but this is where the new Z370RS Electric ZTrak comes into its own.

Flip the lid behind the comfortably padded yellow seat and you’ll be greeted by six (6!) 56V ARC Lithium batteries from electric outdoor brand EGO. Those removable batteries can be swapped out of the Z370RS for fresh ones in seconds, getting you back to work in less time than it takes to gravity pour a tank of gas.

And, because they’re EGO batteries, they can be used in any 56V-powered EGO-brand tools and minibikes for unprecedented cross-brand interoperability. Tools and minibikes that, it should be noted, can be purchased at John Deere dealers across the country.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The upsell scripts write themselves, kids. And when you start your dialing, tell your prospective customers their new Z370RS Electric ZTrak electric mower lists for $6,499, and if you order now we can bundle it with EGO minibike for the kiddos – just in time for the holidays!

Electrek’s Take


When John Deere launched the first Z370R, Peter Johnson wrote that electrifying lawn equipment needs to be a priority, citing EPA data that showed gas-powered lawnmowers making up five percent of the total air pollution in the US (despite covering far less than 5% of the total miles driven on that gas). “Moreover,” he writes, “it takes about 800 million gallons of gasoline each year (with an additional 17 million gallons spilled) to fuel this equipment.”

It should go without saying, then, that states like California, which are banning small off-road combustion engines, have the right idea.

SOURCE | IMAGES: John Deere.


If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Daimler CEO just dropped some pretty WILD pro-hydrogen claims [update]

Published

on

By

Daimler CEO just dropped some pretty WILD pro-hydrogen claims [update]

Daimler Truck AG CEO Karin Rådström hopped on LinkedIn today and dropped some absolutely wild pro-hydrogen talking points, using words like “emotional” and “inspiring” while making some pretty heady claims about the viability and economics of hydrogen. The rant is doubly embarrassing for another reason: the company’s hydrogen trucks are more than 100 million miles behind Volvo’s electric semis.

UPDATE 22NOV2025: Daimler just delivered five new hydrogen semis for trials.

While it might be hard to imagine why a company as seemingly smart as Daimler Truck AG continues to invest in hydrogen when study after study has shut down its viability as a transport fuel, it makes sense when you consider that the Kuwait Investment Authority (KIA) holds approximately 5% of Daimler and parent company Mercedes’ shares.

That’s not a trivial stake. Indeed, 5% is enough to make KIA one of the few actors with both the access and the motivation to shape conversations about Daimler’s long-term technology bets, and as a major oil-producing country whose economy would undoubtedly take a hit if oil demand plummeted, any future fuel that’s measured molecules instead of electrons isn’t just a concept for the Kuwaiti economy: it’s a lifeline.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

What’s more, Kuwait’s “Oil Strategy 2040” includes plans to nearly double crude oil production and invest billions of dollars in new oil extraction projects and downstream refining facilities, even as the rest of the world rushes to decarbonize.

In that context, the push to make hydrogen seem like an attractive decarbonization option makes more sense. So, instead of giving Daimler’s hydrogen propaganda team yet another platform to try and convince people that hydrogen might make for a viable transport fuel eventually by giving five Mercedes-Benz GenH2 semi trucks to its customers at Hornbach, Reber Logistik, Teva Germany with its brand ratiopharm, Rhenus, and DHL Supply Chain, I’m just going to re-post Daimler CEO Karin Rådström’s comments from Hydrogen Week.

You let me know if they sound any more credible now that there are five (5!) whole trucks on the road.


Earlier this month, Daimler Truck AG issued a press release entitled, “Five and a Half Times Around the World: Daimler Truck Fuel Cell Trucks Successfully Complete More Than 225,000 km (~139,000 miles) in Real-World Customer Operations.” Don’t bother looking for it on Electrek, though. I didn’t run it. And I didn’t run it because, frankly, a fleet of over-the-road semi trucks managing to cover a little over half the number of miles that David Blenkle put on his single Ford Mustang Mach-E isn’t particularly impressive.

In the meantime, Daimler competitors like Volvo, Renault, and even tiny Motiv are racking up millions and millions of all-electric miles and MAN Truck CEO Alexander Vlaskamp is saying that it’s impossible for hydrogen to compete with batteries. Heck, even Daimler’s own eActros BEV semi trucks are putting up better numbers than those hydrogen deals.

So, why then is Rådström pouring on the hydrogen love over at LinkedIn?

For some reason – posts about hydrogen always stir up emotions. I think hydrogen (not “instead of” but “in parallel to” electric) plays a role in the decarbonization of heavy duty transport in Europe for three reasons:

  1. If we would go “electric only” we need to get the electric grid to a level where we can build enough charging stations for the 6 million trucks in Europe. It will take many years and be incredibly expensive. A hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive and you don’t need a grid connection to build it, putting 2000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy.
  2. Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen. Better to use that directly as fuel than to make electricity out of it.
  3. Some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.

At European Hydrogen Week, I saw firsthand the energy and ambition behind Europe’s net-zero goals. It’s inspiring—but also a wake-up call. We’re not moving fast enough.

What we need:

  • Large-scale hydrogen production and transport to Europe
  • A robust refueling network that goes beyond AFIR
  • And real political support to make it happen – we need smart, efficient regulation that clears the path instead of adding hurdles.

To show what’s possible, we brought our Mercedes-Benz GenH2 to Brussels. From the end of 2026, we’ll deploy a small series of 100 fuel cell trucks to customers.

Let’s build the infrastructure, the momentum, and the partnerships to make zero-emission transport a reality. 🚛 and let’s try to avoid some of the mistakes that we see now while scaling up electric. And let’s stop the debate about “either or”. We need both.

KARIN RÅDSTRÖM

Commenters were quick to point out that Daimler recently received €226M in grants from German federal and state governments to build 100 fuel cell trucks – but, while Daimler for sure doesn’t want to give back the money, it’s also pretty difficult to believe that Rådström’s pro-hydrogen posturing is sincere.

Especially since most of it seems like nonsense.

We’re not doing any of that


Daimler CEO at European Hydrogen Week; via LinkedIn.

At the risk of sounding “emotional,” Rådström’s claims that building a hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive than building an electrical infrastructure, and that “you don’t need a grid connection to build it,” are objectively false.

Further, if her claim that “putting 2,000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy” isn’t outright laughable, it’s worth noting that Europe had just 265 hydrogen filling stations in operation in 2024 (and only 40% of those, or about 100, were capable of serving HD trucks). At the same time, the IEA reported that there are nearly five million public charging ports already in service on the continent.

Next, the claim that, “Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen” (emphasis mine), is similarly dubious – especially when faced with the fact that, in 2023, wind and solar already supplied about 27–30% of EU electricity.

I will agree, however, with one of Rådström’s claims. She notes that, “some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.” That’s debatable, but widely accepted as true … for now. Daimler’s own research into lighter, more energy-dense, and lower-cost solid-state battery technology, however, may mean that it won’t be true for long, however.

Unless, of course, Mercedes’ solid-state batteries don’t work (and she would know more about that than I would, as a mere blogger).

Electrek’s Take


Mahle CEO: "We will fail if we don't use blue hydrogen"
Via Mahle.

As you can imagine, the Karin Rådström post generated quite a few comments at the Electrek watercooler. “Insane to claim that building hydrogen stations would be cheaper than building chargers,” said one fellow writer. “I’m fine with hydrogen for long haul heavy duty, but lying to get us there is idiotic.”

Another comment I liked said, “(Rådström) says that chargers need to be on the grid – you already have a grid, and it’s everywhere!”

At the end of the day, I have to echo the words of one of Mercedes’ storied engineering partners and OEM suppliers, Mahle, whose Chairman, Arnd Franz, who that building out a hydrogen infrastructure won’t be possible without “blue” H made from fossil fuels as recently as last April, and maybe that’s what this is all about: fossil fuel vehicles are where Daimler makes its biggest profits (for now), and muddying the waters and playing up this idea that we’re in some sort of “messy middle” transition makes it just easy enough for a reluctant fleet manager to say, “maybe next time” when it comes to EVs.

We, and the planet, will suffer for such cowardice – but maybe that’s too much malicious intent to ascribe to Ms. Rådström. Maybe this is just a simple “Hanlon’s razor” scenario and there’s nothing much else to read into it.

Let us know what you think of Rådström’s pro-hydrogen comments, and whether or not Daimler’s shareholders should be concerned about the quality of the research behind their CEO’s public posts, in the comments section at the bottom of the page.

SOURCE | IMAGES: Karin Rådström, via LinkedIn.


If you drive an electric vehicle, make charging at home fast, safe, and convenient with a Level 2 charger installed by Qmerit. As the nation’s most trusted EV charger installation network, Qmerit connects you with licensed, background-checked electricians who specialize in EV charging. You’ll get a quick online estimate, upfront pricing, and installation backed by Qmerit’s nationwide quality guarantee. Their pros follow the highest safety standards so you can plug in at home with total peace of mind.

Ready to charge smarter? Get started today with Qmerit. (trusted affiliate link)

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

New electric AUDI E SUV concept promises 670 hp, 435 mile range

Published

on

By

New electric AUDI E SUV concept promises 670 hp, 435 mile range

Audi embraced its future in China with the launch of a new Chinese market electric sub-brand called AUDI that ditched the iconic “four rings” logo in favor of four capital letters – but one thing this latest concept hasn’t ditched is the brand’s traditionally teutonic long-roof design language.

Co-developed with Audi’s Chinese production partner, SAIC, the all-new AUDI E SUV concept is based on the PPE (Premium Platform Electric) skateboard, and is only the second model introduced by the company’s domestic sub-brand — which was all-new itself just one year ago.

“The AUDI E SUV concept celebrates the new AUDI brand’s first anniversary following the E concept’s debut in Guangzhou (2024),” said Fermín Soneira, CEO of the Audi and SAIC cooperation, at the E SUV’s unveiling. “It showcases an unmistakable AUDI design language that gives the SUV a prestigious, progressive stance — with no compromise between sporty aesthetics and interior roominess or versatility. This concept embodies our vision for premium electric mobility by fusing Audi’s engineering heritage with digital innovation to fulfill our commitment in China.”

As a vehicle, the AUDI E SUV concept promises to handle “like an Audi,” and is powered by a pair of electric motors good for a combined 500 kW (~670 hp), good enough to get the big crossover from 0-100 km/h (62 mph) in about five seconds. Those efficient motors are fed electrons by a 109 kWh battery riding on AUDI’s 800V Advanced Digital Platform system architecture, and can allegedly add 320 km (~200 miles) of range in under 10 minutes at a high-powered DC fast charging station.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

If you’re a fan of self-driving tech, the AUDI 360 Driving Assist System is the AUDI E SUV concept is for you, with features that, “enable a relaxed and safe driving experience – on highways, in dense city traffic, and during assisted parking.”

No word yet on pricing, but it likely won’t matter. As successful as the AUDI sub-brand has been, it’s still a long shot that we’ll ever get these Stateside, no matter what Canada does.

AUDI E SUV concept


SOURCE | IMAGES: Audi.


If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending