Connect with us

Published

on

Demonstrators display signs and a banner during a “No Climate, No Deal” march on the White House, in Washington, DC, June 28, 2021.
Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters

After a summer of astonishing climate extremes, a landmark scientific report on climate change provides another stark warning. 

It states we have less than a decade to stabilize the Earth’s climate and that this will require big and immediate cuts in carbon emissions. And given the planet is already 1.1 degrees Celsius warmer than pre-industrial times, the need to adapt to higher temperatures could not be clearer.

This window for action is getting narrower by the day, but it is still open. We are being given one final opportunity to stave off catastrophic climate change, and we must seize it.

The report, by the world’s foremost climate scientists at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, calls for “immediate, rapid, and large-scale reductions” in emissions. If we stop pumping heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere altogether, scientists believe we may be able to contain warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. If we fail, the consequences for our planet will be dire.

Climate change is a long-term, systemic threat that requires immediate and adequate action that must be sustained over decades. What is required is nothing less than the total transformation of our economic and social systems, from where we source our energy to how we transport goods and people, where we live and work, and what we buy.

Reaching net-zero carbon emissions requires vast amounts of funding. The International Monetary Fund estimates that 6-10% of global GDP — somewhere in the region of an additional $6 trillion to $10 trillion — needs to be invested in the next decade to green our economies.

These are huge sums, but they should not be viewed as a sunk cost — like the expense of cleaning up after flooding, wildfires, and other ravages of extreme weather. Greening our economies is above all an economic opportunity that will create jobs, drive innovation, and boost economic growth.

The coronavirus pandemic proved that vast resources can be marshalled quickly when governments are faced with an existential threat.

In addition to ramping up investment, we need three things to address our climate crisis quickly and at scale.

First, we need a global price on carbon, beginning with a price floor agreement among major emitters that also distinguishes according to countries’ income levels. This could take the shape of taxes, trading schemes, or measures that achieve the same outcome, such as combinations of feebates or regulations at the sectoral levels. Either way, the goal should be to price fuel appropriately and incentivize the switch to cleaner alternatives. Without an appropriate price on carbon, we will not get to net-zero emissions before it is too late.

Second, we need to set aside funds to help millions of people across the world adapt to climate change, especially in developing countries that may not have the resources for the large investments needed. Coastal cities, riverside towns and small island states are vulnerable to storm surges and rising sea levels. Farming communities everywhere need to improve their water efficiency and switch to drought-resistant crops. Because even if we were able to halt all planet-warming emissions tomorrow, scientists warn we will be living in an era of climate extremes for centuries.

Third, the cost of transforming economies to be greener and more resilient must be shared. The transition must be just, both across and within countries. Climate change affects everyone, but it affects the poorest and those who have contributed the least to global warming the most. So far, the sums raised for climate action have fallen far short of the $100 billion a year agreed by the world’s leaders more than 10 years ago. We must now find a way to magnify the impact of climate funding, and transform the billions currently being invested in climate solutions into trillions.

Investing in climate resilience would be a good start. GCA research shows that investing $1.8 trillion globally until 2030 in five climate-adaptation areas — early warning systems, climate-resilient infrastructure, improved dryland agriculture, mangrove protection, and increasing water resilience — could result in $7.1 trillion in net benefits. Adapting now is in everyone’s strong economic self-interest. Beyond preventing dramatic human and economic losses, adaptation policies can pave the way for high-return investments that would not otherwise be viable due to climate risk.

The IMF is doing its part. Its largest allocation of Special Drawing Rights in its history — equivalent to $650 billion  — is now effective and provided a welcome boost to member countries. Options are now being explored to channel SDRs from wealthier to poorer and more vulnerable member countries to support their pandemic recovery and achieve resilient and sustainable growth. A new Resilience and Sustainability Trust is being considered for this purpose.

The world is not short of money or ideas needed to fight climate change. What we need now is for the international community to seize this historic opportunity and act together to create a greener, more equitable and prosperous world for us all.

Kristalina Georgieva is managing director of the International Monetary Fund. Patrick Verkooijen is CEO of the Global Center on Adaptation.

Continue Reading

Environment

Hyundai recalls more than 145,000 EVs

Published

on

By

Hyundai recalls more than 145,000 EVs

Hyundai Motors is recalling 145,235 EVs and other “electrified” vehicles in the US, citing concerns about a loss of driving power, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said on Friday.

The NHTSA announced this morning that the recall affects selected IONIQ 5 and IONIQ 6 EVs, as well as certain luxury Genesis models, including the GV60, GV70, and G80 electrified variants, from the 2022-2025 model years, Reuters reported.

2025-Hyundai-IONIQ-5-prices
2025 Hyundai IONIQ 5 (Source: Hyundai)

It looks like the issue stems from “the integrated charging control units in these vehicles, which may become damaged and fail to charge the 12-volt battery. This malfunction could lead to a complete loss of drive power, posing safety risks for drivers,” the NHTSA stated.

If you’re an owner of one of these Hyundai models dating 2022-2025, stay tuned. Hyundai has not yet provided a timeline as to when affected vehicles will be repaired.

To make that happen, the company’s dealers will inspect and replace the charging unit and its fuse if necessary, NHTSA said. Free of charge, of course.

Importantly, no crashes, injuries, fatalities, or fires due to this issue have been reported in the US, Hyundai reported.


If you’re an electric vehicle owner, charge up your car at home with rooftop solar panels. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing on solar, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have 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 Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla brings ‘Actually Smart Summon’ to Europe and Middle East where FSD is limited

Published

on

By

Tesla brings 'Actually Smart Summon' to Europe and Middle East where FSD is limited

Tesla announced that ‘Actually Smart Summon,’ its autonomous driving feature that enables moving its vehicles without anyone inside over short distances, is now being launched in Europe and the Middle East.

The automaker’s Full Self-Driving suite of features has been limited in those markets due to regulations and Tesla’s focus on making them work in North America first.

Actually Smart Summon is the vision-only version of Tesla’s “smart summon” feature, which was released years ago on Tesla vehicles with ultrasonic sensors.

When Tesla transitioned away from ultrasonic sensors, Smart Summon was one of the missing features that Tesla had yet to adapt to the vision-only (cameras and neural nets) system.

CEO Elon Musk said that it would be coming in 2022, but it finally came only a few months ago, in 2024.

However, that’s only in North America where Tesla focuses its Full Self-Driving (FSD) development, the feature package that includes Actually Smart Summon, also referred to as ‘ASS’.

Most of Tesla’s other markets, including Europe, don’t have the same capabilities under the Full Self-Driving package. That’s partly due to regulations, but Tesla also focuses on making the features work on North American roads first.

Now, Tesla has announced that its Actually Smart Summon feature is launching in Europe and the Middle East:

The feature can only be used on private roads, like parking lots and driveways. Most people have used it to bring their vehicles parked in a large parking lot to them as they exit a store or restaurant. However, the vehicle moves quite slowly under the feature and the owner needs to keep an eye on it at all time and be ready to cancel the summon as Tesla doesn’t take any responsibility for accidents caused by using Actually Smart Summon., like all other FSD features.

Therefore, most people I know who have the feature, myself included, tried once or try to see or impress some friends who have never seen a car move without anyone inside and then stopped using it.

The feature’s main useful use-case is for people with extremely tight parking spots. It enables them to exit the vehicle before it is in its final parking spot and then move the car in and out remotely.

However, that has been the case for years with the regular Smart Summon, as you generally don’t need the vehicle to handle complex parking lots. You mostly need it to move a few feet forward or backward.

But a recent update has broken this feature for some people. We recently reported on a very unfortunate situation that resulted in a Tesla owner having to get out of his car through his trunk.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Big auto learned its lesson? It’s begging Trump not to blow up emissions rules

Published

on

By

Big auto learned its lesson? It's begging Trump not to blow up emissions rules

US Automakers are planning to ask Mr. Trump to retain President Biden’s EPA exhaust rules, in the face of signs that Mr. Trump might try to reverse them. If the rules are reversed, it would cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of deaths per year.

Interestingly, this is the opposite of what big auto did the last time a reality TV show came to the White House – signaling that they have perhaps learned their lesson this time ’round.

First, some history.

In the middle of the 20th century, the effects of human activity on the atmosphere became readily apparent. Certain cities – with Los Angeles among the forefront – were choked by smog, and it was soon found out that vehicle pollution was the primary reason for this smog.

Since Los Angeles was one of the most smog-choked cities, California led the way on clean air regulation, creating the California Air Resources Board in 1967 (under then-Governor Ronald Reagan).

The federal government gave California special dispensation to set stricter regulations than the rest of the country, in recognition that it had a unique smog problem in its primary metropolis. California has retained this dispensation, in the form of a “waiver,” since then. And other states can follow California’s rules, but only if they copy all of the rules exactly.

Thus, there have been two separate sets of clean air regulation in this country since then – the federal rules, and then the “CARB states” which follow California’s rules.

In 2012 that finally changed, when President Obama’s EPA negotiated with California to finally harmonize these standards and also implement higher fuel efficiency nationwide. This would have been a huge boon for both industry and consumers, saving money and giving regulatory certainty to the auto industry.

But then, in 2016, the candidate who got the 2nd most votes in the presidential election was headed for the White House. And automakers responded by immediately lobbying to torpedo these standards, even before inauguration.

Now, you might think that asking a profoundly ignorant individual, who ended up staffing the EPA with bought-and-sold science deniers (huh, that would never happen again would it?), to change rules which had already been set through years of negotiation and lobbying was not a great idea. And you’d be right.

Not long after automakers had the dumb idea to ask an idiot to fix something that wasn’t broken, that idiot went and broke things further, fracturing the agreement between California and the federal government and ensuring less regulatory certainty for automakers.

After realizing their blunder (which they could have avoided by, y’know, thinking at all about it beforehand), big auto relented and asked the government to please not implement the rollbacks automakers had asked for. Some companies even forged their own agreement with California.

But it was too late, and we are now back in the era of disparate regulatory regimes – something which John Bozzella, head of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (formerly called Global Automakers), keeps complaining about these days, despite having lobbied for exactly this in the first place.

The US EPA and California are still not fully harmonized, but both released recent new standards which do have somewhat similar targets. If a manufacturer builds towards one set of rules, they’ll probably not be too far off from meeting the other.

So in the end, we did get better emissions regulations and California has continued to push forward with clean air regulations, thus signaling a failure on the part of Mr. Trump to cause the long term harm to Americans that he and his oil industry solicitors so desperately seem to desire.

The most recent EPA standards, finalized in March (after being softened at the auto industry’s request), do not mandate any particular powertrain, but rather require steep emissions cuts – and EVs are the easiest way to achieve lower emissions.

Notably, Tesla lobbied in favor of making this last set of standards stronger, and they also lobbied against ruining the Obama/CA standards in 2016 – being one of very few automakers who were on the correct side of that discussion.

Despite that the President Biden EPA’s rules do not mandate any particular powertrain, Mr. Trump, in his usual ignorance, has said that he will end the nonexistent EV mandate. And now that he has received more votes than his opponent for the first time (after three tries, and despite committing treason in 2021 for which there is a clear legal remedy), it looks like the upcoming EPA might be directed to end these emissions cuts and fuel/health cost savings for Americans.

But in this instance, it sounds like the automakers might actually do the right thing for once, and ask the government not to do any rollbacks, and instead let them continue on with the plans without disruption from a convicted felon who seems determined to cede a US EV manufacturing boom back to China.

Detroit’s Big Three automakers – GM, Ford and Stellantis – are all reportedly trying to figure out how to ensure that these rules stay in place. The mentality is that constantly changing regulations are not beneficial for companies – particularly in the auto realm, where models take on the order of 7 years to plan and execute. Long-term planning is important for the hundreds of billions in manufacturing investment that EVs have attracted in the US during Biden’s EV push.

These attitudes are notable, given that this is not what automakers did in 2016/2017. That time, they compulsively pushed for fewer regulations, and now they are asking for regulations to remain in place.

It’s further notable that Tesla CEO Elon Musk, whose company lobbied strongly in favor of emissions cuts and makes more use of the federal EV tax credit than any other company, is now allied with the very entity that’s looking to harm EVs. It seems that we have entered opposite world.

So it remains to be seen where we will go from here – on the one hand, doctorsnursesscientists, environmental groupsmany businessespeople who recognize that they have lungs which they would like to continue using, and so on, generally support the strongest regulation possible. Now, automakers have been added to the pile asking for strong regulations.

On the other hand, a former reality TV host – tagged along with by the CEO of the company that has sold more electric cars than any other – seem determined to kill electric cars, despite the harm that would cause to Americans’ pocketbooks and health insurance premiums. And that famously vindictive character may be even more spurred towards this harmful course of action after failing in his efforts the first time.

Who ya got?


Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*

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

Continue Reading

Trending