scholarly journals BIOCHAR STANDARDIZATION AND LEGISLATION HARMONIZATION

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian MEYER ◽  
Lorenzo GENESIO ◽  
Ines VOGEL ◽  
Hans-Peter SCHMIDT ◽  
Gerhard SOJA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Soil Amendment ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Soil Improvers ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
The Eu

It is a relatively new concept to use biochar as soil amendment and for climate change mitigation. For this reason, the national and supranational legislation in the EU is not yet adequately prepared to regulate both the production and the application of biochar. Driven by this “regulatory gap”, voluntary biochar quality standards have been formed in Europe with the European Biochar Certificate, in the UK with the Biochar Quality Mandate and in the USA with the IBI Standard which is intended to be used internationally. In parallel to this, biochar producers and biochar users in a number of EU countries were partly successful in fitting the new biochar product into the existing national legislation for fertilisers, soil improvers and composts. The intended revision of the EC Regulation 2003/2003 on fertilisers offers the opportunity to regulate the use of biochar at the EU level. This publication summarizes the efforts on biochar standardization which have been carried out by voluntary products standards and illustrates existing legislation in EU member states, which apply to the production and use of biochar. It describes existing and planned EU regulations, which impact biochar applications and it develops recommendations on the harmonization of biochar legislation in the EU.

Geologic carbon storage resource requirements of climate change mitigation targets in Europe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuting Zhang ◽  
Samuel Krevor ◽  
Chris Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Storage ◽  
North Sea ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Growth Trajectories ◽  
Resource Base ◽  
Storage Resource ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
The Eu

<p>To limit global warming to well below 2<sup>o</sup>C, integrated assessment models have projected that gigaton-per-year-scale carbon capture and storage is needed by c. 2050. These scenarios are unconstrained by limiting growth rates or historical data due to the limited existing deployment of the technology. A new approach using logistic growth models identifies a coupling between storage resource base (pore space underground) and minimum growth rates necessary to meet global climate change mitigation targets (Zahasky & Krevor, 2020). However, viable growth trajectories consistent with carbon storage targets remain unexplored at the regional level. Here, we show the application of logistic modelling constrained by climate change targets and assessed storage resources for the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), and Norway. This allows us to identify plausible growth trajectories of CCS development and the associated discovered storage resource base requirement in these regions. We find that the EU storage resource base is sufficient to meet storage targets of 80 MtCO<sub>2</sub>/year and 92 MtCO<sub>2</sub>/year suggested in the European Commission climate change mitigation strategy to 2050, ‘A Clean Planet for All’. However, the more ambitious goals of 298 MtCO<sub>2</sub>/year and 330 MtCO<sub>2</sub>/year are likely to require additional storage resources based predominantly in the North Sea. Results for the UK indicate that all anticipated storage targets to achieve net-zero economy are achievable, requiring no more than 42 Gt of the storage resource base for the most ambitious target. Furthermore, the UK and the Norwegian North Sea may be able to serve as a regional CO<sub>2</sub> storage hub. There are sufficient storage resources to support combined storage targets from the EU and the UK. The tools used here demonstrate a practical approach for regional stakeholders to monitor carbon storage progress towards future stated carbon abatements goals, as well as to evaluate future storage resource needs.</p><p>Zahasky, C., & Krevor, S. (2020). Global geologic carbon storage requirements of climate change mitigation scenarios. Energy & Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EE00674B</p>

scholarly journals Historic Context of European Union Leadership in Climate Change Mitigation

2017 ◽  
pp. 74-96
Author(s):  
Volodymyr Shatokha
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
European Union ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Mitigation Policy ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation Policy ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
The Eu ◽  
International Climate Change

The role of European Union in defining of the international climate change mitigation policy was studied in the historic context of overcoming the differences in the approaches to reaching the sustainable development targets among the EU, the USA, China and some other influential countries. It has been shown that currently the processes of climate policy definition became more polycentric than in 1992, when the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was signed. The ability to adjust to a new context, to build coalitions and to reach compromise with the wide range of international actors has been crucial for maintaining the EU’s influence on definition of the international climate change mitigation policy. Despite not always supportive internal and external factors, during a quarter of century the EU has managed to maintain its leadership and many times helped to enhance the ambition of global climatic targets by establishing the high level of own commitments and implementing relevant policy instruments. The EU and its members played a decisive role in ensuring of the non-interruptive international climate action during implementation of the Kyoto Protocol and in setting of the Paris Agreement which will define climate regime after 2020. Mitigation of climate change is a complicated task not only in terms of technology and socio-economic aspects but also with respect to policy implementation. Therefore the EU leadership in this sphere remains very important.

18. Climate Change Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 599-639
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Fisher ◽  
Bettina Lange ◽  
Eloise Scotford
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Trading Scheme ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the fast-moving area of law relating to climate change. This includes a considerable body of public international law, from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to the legally innovative Paris Agreement 2015. The chapter also considers legal developments at the EU and UK levels, which both contain a rich body of climate law and policy. The EU and the UK are both seen as ‘world leaders’ in climate law and policy. In EU law, this is due to the EU greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme and the EU’s leadership in advocating ambitious greenhouse gas mitigation targets and in implementing these targets flexibly across the EU Member States through a range of regulatory mechanisms. The UK introduced path-breaking climate legislation in the Climate Change Act 2008, which provided an inspiring model of climate governance, legally entrenching long-term planning for both mitigation and adaptation. The chapter concludes with an exploration of climate litigation, a new and growing field of inquiry.

Economy

2020 ◽  
pp. 154-184
Author(s):  
Peter Hägel
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
Political Consequences ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
Political Resource ◽  
Shaping Power ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Change Mitigation

Chapter 6 presents two cases of billionaires whose pursuit of wealth in the global economy has broader political consequences. It looks at how Charles and David Koch have tried to limit climate change mitigation in order to protect the fossil fuel–based business interests of their conglomerate Koch Industries. The Koch brothers spread climate change skepticism via the funding of think tanks and public advocacy, and they finance campaigns boosting politicians that oppose climate change mitigation. In Rupert Murdoch’s case, his News Corporation has been his main political resource. He has used the opinion-shaping power of his media empire to extract favors from politicians abroad, especially in the UK, but also in Australia, by offering support (or threatening hostility) during election times.

Carbon Reduction in the Post-Kyoto era. Have we progressed? A comparison

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-37
Author(s):  
Bruno Zeller ◽  
Michael Longo
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Global Environment ◽  
Carbon Reduction ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
The World ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
The Eu

In a fragmented global environment, the efforts of state and non-state actors are important in assessing the state of play on climate change mitigation actions around the world. This article will consider from a comparative perspective the various legislative models for addressing climate change and the reduction of GHG emissions with particular focus on the EU, USA, Australia and Switzerland. As legal developments are not limited to legislative schemes, this article will examine the voluntary carbon offset market and other trade related solutions to GHG emissions which have emerged in the absence of mandatory limitation systems. Also warranting attention are the actions of private parties in common law jurisdictions to bring legal proceedings against power companies for damage caused by climate change. Together, these developments demonstrate that climate change abatement is not the sole remit of the legislature.

scholarly journals Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Bickerstaff ◽  
I. Lorenzoni ◽  
N.F. Pidgeon ◽  
W. Poortinga ◽  
P. Simmons
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Change Mitigation

What can cities do to increase resilience?

2007 ◽  
Vol 365 (1860) ◽  
pp. 2731-2739 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Crichton
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Insurance Industry ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Change Mitigation

This paper examines climate change mitigation and adaptation from an insurance industry perspective, with particular reference to London and the USA. It illustrates how British insurers are increasingly shaping public policy and using new technology to manage the risks from climate change impacts and makes a plea for society to make more use of insurance expertise in future decision making. In particular, more dialogue is needed between architects, planners and insurers to adapt our buildings and cities for climate change impacts. The paper is an abbreviated and updated version of the paper presented by the author in Houston, Texas, in 2005.

Balancing climate change mitigation and environmental protection interests in the EU Directive on carbon capture and storage

Climate Law ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimiliano Montini ◽  
Emanuela Orlando
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Potential Conflict ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Environmental Integrity ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
The Eu

The EU Climate and Energy Package highlights the potential contradictions between the climate change imperative of reducing GHGs emissions and the importance to maintain environmental integrity. While the package supports climate change mainstreaming, it remains to be seen to what extent it succeeds in achieving internal environmental integration between climate change mitigation and other environmentprotection objectives. Directive 2009/31/EC on the capture and geological storage of carbon dioxide (hereinafter the CCS Directive) offers a paradigmatic example of this potential conflict. One of the main regulatory challenges arising from the CCS Directive relates to finding the proper balance between the different interests involved and the not-fully-consistent objectives of environmental protection, climate change mitigation, and energy security. The present article will discuss this regulatory challenge and examine how the CCS Directive’s regulatory framework for CCS permits a combination of the various interests at stake and the giving of proper weight to concerns about environmental protection. The role that the precautionary principle in conjunction with the proportionality principle may have in balancing climate change mitigation and environment-protection interests will be considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document