Recherche : Articles 
Audio – podcast Fiches Livres Sites Vidéos retour Veille
Uniquement les Articles de la décennie 2010
➔ 
Pour voir les références d’un(e) auteur(e), cliquez sur son nom. Pour revenir à la page, utilisez le bouton refresh ci-dessous.
Cela fonctionne également avec les mot-clés de chaque référence.
filtre:
fuel
Industry funds ‘grassroots’ resistance to tougher rules while touting green credentials, study shows
Just 20 companies are responsible for 35% of carbon emissions yet they continue to ignore calls for change
Natural gas, marketed for years as a “bridge fuel” to cleaner energy sources, cannot be part of any climate solution, according to a new report from Oil Change International.
The world’s five largest publicly traded oil companies are increasing their investments in oil and gas, putting a combined $110 billion in new fossil-fuel production. Meanwhile, those firms are projected to spend just $3.6 billion on low-carbon investments, such as biofuels and renewables, according to a new analysis that Influence Map
We develop roadmaps to transform the all-purpose energy infrastructures (electricity, transportation, heating/cooling, industry, agriculture/forestry/fishing) of 139 countries to ones powered by wind, water, and sunlight (WWS). The roadmaps envision 80% conversion by 2030 and 100% by 2050. WWS not only replaces business-as-usual (BAU) power, but also reduces it ∼42.5% because the work: energy ratio of WWS electricity exceeds that of combustion (23.0%), WWS requires no mining, transporting, or processing of fuels (12.6%), and WWS end-use efficiency is assumed to exceed that of BAU (6.9%). Converting may create ∼24.3 million more permanent, full-time jobs than jobs lost. It may avoid ∼4.6 million/year premature air-pollution deaths today and ∼3.5 million/year in 2050; ∼$22.8 trillion/year (12.7 ¢/kWh-BAU-all-energy) in 2050 air-pollution costs; and ∼$28.5 trillion/year (15.8 ¢/kWh-BAU-all-energy) in 2050 climate costs. Transitioning should also stabilize energy prices because fuel costs are zero, reduce power d
Large misinformation campaigns on climate change science are being funded by a handful of sources with an interest in maintaining the status quo.
a lot of corporations, including oil companies, that objected to the Kyoto accords in 1997. But most of them lobbied against the treaty on economic and fairness grounds that would cost the economy of the United States too much for the benefits promised, and also that it wasn’t fair that developing societies would be left out of the bargain. But Exxon did something that I think was fairly radical, which was that they chose to go after the science.
