Sex in a Warming World: Lady Chatterley’s Lover as Fossil Fuel Fiction

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-304
Author(s):  
Stewart Cole
Author(s):  
Elmar Kriegler ◽  
Gunnar Luderer ◽  
Nico Bauer ◽  
Lavinia Baumstark ◽  
Shinichiro Fujimori ◽  
...  

We explore the feasibility of limiting global warming to 1.5°C without overshoot and without the deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. For this purpose, we perform a sensitivity analysis of four generic emissions reduction measures to identify a lower bound on future CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes. Final energy demand reductions and electrification of energy end uses as well as decarbonization of electricity and non-electric energy supply are all considered. We find the lower bound of cumulative fossil fuel and industry CO 2 emissions to be 570 GtCO 2 for the period 2016–2100, around 250 GtCO 2 lower than the lower end of available 1.5°C mitigation pathways generated with integrated assessment models. Estimates of 1.5°C-consistent CO 2 budgets are highly uncertain and range between 100 and 900 GtCO 2 from 2016 onwards. Based on our sensitivity analysis, limiting warming to 1.5°C will require CDR or terrestrial net carbon uptake if 1.5°C-consistent budgets are smaller than 650 GtCO 2 . The earlier CDR is deployed, the more it neutralizes post-2020 emissions rather than producing net negative emissions. Nevertheless, if the 1.5°C budget is smaller than 550 GtCO 2 , temporary overshoot of the 1.5°C limit becomes unavoidable if CDR cannot be ramped up faster than to 4 GtCO 2 in 2040 and 10 GtCO 2 in 2050. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels’.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyla Tienhaara

AbstractThe system of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) found in over 3,000 bilateral investment treaties and numerous regional trade agreements has been criticized for interfering with the rights of sovereign states to regulate investment in the public interest, for example, to protect the environment and public health. This article argues that while much of the public debate around ISDS has focused on a small number of cases that have arisen over the regulation of tobacco packaging, there is a far greater threat posed by the potential use of ISDS by the fossil fuel industry to stall action on climate change. It is hypothesized that fossil fuel corporations will emulate a tactic employed by the tobacco industry – that of using ISDS to induce cross-border regulatory chill: the delay in policy uptake in jurisdictions outside the jurisdiction in which the ISDS claim is brought. Importantly, fossil fuel corporations do not have to win any ISDS cases for this strategy to be effective; they only have to be willing to launch them. The article concludes with three options to reform trade and investment agreements to better align them with climate change mitigation efforts: (i) exclude ISDS provisions; (ii) prohibit fossil fuel industries from accessing ISDS; or (iii) carve out all government measures taken in pursuit of international obligations (for example, under the Paris Agreement on climate change) from challenge under ISDS.


Nature ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 379 (6567) ◽  
pp. 671-671
Keyword(s):  

Nature ◽  
2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Clarke
Keyword(s):  

2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (136) ◽  
pp. 455-468
Author(s):  
Hartwig Berger

The article discusses the future of mobility in the light of energy resources. Fossil fuel will not be available for a long time - not to mention its growing environmental and political conflicts. In analysing the potential of biofuel it is argued that the high demands of modern mobility can hardly be fulfilled in the future. Furthermore, the change into using biofuel will probably lead to increasing conflicts between the fuel market and the food market, as well as to conflicts with regional agricultural networks in the third world. Petrol imperialism might be replaced by bio imperialism. Therefore, mobility on a solar base pursues a double strategy of raising efficiency on the one hand and strongly reducing mobility itself on the other.


This article presents the case of Chatterley and Clifford, the two main characters in Lady Chatterley’s Lover, to consider tenderness a basic working emotion to shape human relationships. The lack of tenderness causes emotional as well as physical distance in relation, especially that of male-female’s relation. The first part of the article reviews tenderness. The second part reviews how tenderness and lack of tenderness affect a male-female relationship in the selected novel, Lady Chatterley’s Lover. On the basis of a careful analysis of Lady Chatterley’s Lover, the present writer tries to prove that the lack of tenderness is the main culprit for the broken relationship between husband and wife: a major one of the relations between man and woman in human society and mutual tenderness elicits people awakening to a new way of living in an exterior world that is uncracking after the long winter hibernation. Lawrence, through a revelation of Connie’s gradual awakening from tenderness, has made his utmost effort to explore possible solutions to harmonious androgyny between men and women so as to revitalize the distorted human nature caused by the industrial civilization. Key words: relationship, husband and wife, tenderness, main culprit, Connie


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Corrie Grosse

From 2011 to 2014 fossil fuel corporations trucked tar sands processing machinery along rural Idaho highways. The machinery was bound for the world's largest deposits of tar or oil sands, a heavy crude oil substance called bitumen, located in the western Canadian province of Alberta. These loads of machinery, what became known as megaloads, encountered much resistance. Throughout Idaho and the surrounding region, a network organized opposition. Neighbors, grassroots organizations, nonprofits, and the Nez Perce and other tribes all collaborated. They held information sessions, protested, waged legal battles, monitored the loads, and blockaded highways. What oil companies hoped would be a cost-effective solution for transporting their megaloads became a David versus Goliath, Coyote versus the Monster—to reference the Nez Perce creation story—struggle to protect rural and indigenous ways of life and sovereignty, and the planet.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document