There has long been a debate in the USA about whether global warming is a figment of scientists’ imagination, and whether it is something really worth devoting policy time too. As such, it’s no surprise to see its consideration as a “top priority” slump over the last year.

According to a political survey by the Pew Research Centre for the People and the Press, the US public believe that economic issues are the top priority for the country – with 86 per cent believing that strengthening the economy should be a leading issue for both the President and Congress this year. Indeed 82 per cent saw improving the job rate as a top priority. By contrast, no other issue in the survey attracted the attention of more than 70 per cent of Americans – and a mere 25 per cent called global warming a top priority, down 13 percentage points over the last five years.  

Generally, the public’s concerns were focused on domestic policy – 81 per cent believe Obama should focus on domestic policy; with just nine per cent highlighting foreign policy. As such, the defence against terrorism and strengthening the military are seen as much less of a priority than previously.

Instead, it is the federal budget deficit that is seen as the fastest growing policy priority – largely among Republicans.

Unsurprisingly there is no issue that divides the party lines quite like environmental protection. Whereas 58 per cent of Democrats believe it is a top priority, only 27 per cent of Republicans share this belief.

If the US is to avoid disastrous environmental consequences as a result of climate change then it must make fundamental changes to its energy innovation system.

That’s the verdict of a three-year study conducted by researchers at MIT. They identified a number of policy and investment strategies that could help to accelerate innovation in the United States and assist it in reducing carbon dioxide while meeting growing energy needs. 

Results of the study are released in the new book Unlocking Energy Innovation by Richard Lester and point out that “business as usual” is unsustainable over the long term. As the build-up of greenhouse gases continues, the environmental and human costs are mounting and the authors state that for each year of delay it will be necessary to bend the curve of carbon emissions all the more sharply to avert the worst consequences of climate change.

It states that currently there is not broad public support for bold action and it is needed for a comprehensive national policy to be sustainable.

In an effort to encourage energy innovation, the authors want competition to be encouraged; timely selections to be made of promising concepts; and matching the scale of the system with the scale of the need.

Furthermore, Lester wants to see parallel innovation strategies pursued, including: changes focused on building insulation and gas mileage; mid-range efforts to reduce the costs and risks of low carbon energy supply; and, from 2050 on, a third wave of technological deployments that draw on new developments.

It is well known throughout the world that many Americans, perhaps more than inhabitants of any other nation, have serious doubts about the scientific evidence behind global warming. However, it appears the opinion of the naysayers may be starting to change.

According to a poll from Pew Research, the percentage of Americans who say there is “solid evidence” of global warming has increased over the last two years – up to 63 per cent compared to 57 per cent in October, 2009. The number of people believing global warming to be a “very serious” problem has also increased to 38 per cent – that’s up from 32 per cent last year and 35 per cent in 2009. Indeed the majority of Americans now believe it is either a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem, at 38 per cent and 27 per cent respectively.

The national survey also revealed that 38 per cent believe global warming is occurring due to human activity – such as the burning of fossil fuels. That’s slightly up from last year’s figure of 34 per cent.

However, despite what appears to be increasing backing for the theory of global warming, actually fewer Americans say there is solid evidence than did so during 2006-2008.

There is also a partisan divide in opinions about global warming: 77 per cent of Democrats and 63 per cent of independents believe there is solid evidence; compared to just 43 per cent of Republicans.

Potential harmful effects of air pollution are well known – but just what is the monetary cost of Europe’s largest polluting facilities?

According to a new report from the European Environment Agency (EEA), air pollution from the 10,000 largest polluting facilities in the continent cost citizens between €102billion and €169billion in 2009 alone. Indeed half of this damage came from just 191 facilities.

The report, entitled: Revealing the costs of air pollution from industrial facilities in Europe, looked at local air pollutants: ammonia (NH3), nitrogen oxides (NOx), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), particulate matter (PM10), carbon dioxide (CO2) and sulphur oxides (SOx). It also includes the heavy metals arsenic, chromium, lead, mercury, cadmium and nickel; as well as organic micro-pollutants such as dioxins and furans, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and benzene.

Among the industrial facilities covered by the analysis are: large power plants, manufacturing combustion and industrial processes, waste, refineries and certain agricultural facilities.

Additional key findings from the report included: air pollution from the facilities costs every European citizen €200-300; countries such as Germany, the UK, Poland, France and Italy have a high number of large facilities and therefore contribute most to the total damage costs – however, when damage costs are weighted to reflect the productivity of national economies, emissions from countries such as Bulgaria, Romania, Estonia, Poland and the Czech Republic are relatively more significant to damage costs.

Carbon dioxide emissions contribute the most to damage costs – at approximately €63billion in 2009.

Reducing emissions by 2020 to a level that could keep temperature rise below two degrees Celsius is feasible – at least according to a new study by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).

In its Bridging the Emissions Gap report, it suggests the accelerated uptake of renewable energy, combined with fuel switching and energy efficiency improvements can deliver a large part of the necessary cuts – with other measures including penetration of public transport; and the use of more fuel efficient vehicles in areas such as agriculture and waste management.

The report also highlights aviation and shipping emissions as special cases – together they account for around five per cent of CO2 emissions. Options for reducing emissions in these sectors include using low carbon fuels and reducing ship speeds.

In addition, the report examined various economic sectors to consider technical potential for emissions reductions ahead of 2020.

Among the areas highlighted were:

- Agriculture: 1.1-4.3GtCO2e could be reduced each year with changes in cropland and livestock management.

- Aviation and shopping: 0.3-0.5GtCO2e cut out per year through improved fuel efficiency and low carbon fuel measures.

- Buildings: 1.4-2.9GtCO2e per year with improved efficiency of heating, cooling, lighting and appliances.

- Electricity production: 2.2-3.9GtCO2e per year can be reduced through more efficient power plants and the use of renewable energy and carbon capture.

- Forestry: 1.3-4.2GtCO2e per year could be eliminated with reduced deforestation and through changes in forest management.

- Industry: 1.5-4.6GtCO2e per year could be saved thanks to energy efficiency, power recovery, fuel switching and materials efficiency.

- Transport: 1.4-2.0GtCO2e per year can be saved with improved fuel efficiency and the adoption of electric vehicles.

At TheGreenCarWebsite.co.uk, our focus is usually on transport emissions and the threat they pose to the environment. It’s justified too as the carbon dioxide churned out by our vehicles is arguably the biggest environmental threat we have to deal with. However, that may be about to change.

According to a new report from the UN Environment Programme, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) could be responsible for emissions equivalent to 3.5-8.8Gigatonnes (Gt) of carbon dioxide by 2050. That is comparable to the total current annual emissions from transport, which is estimated at 6-7Gt annually.

HFCs come from air conditioners, refrigerators, insulation foams and fire-fighting equipment and are becoming increasingly popular. Currently they contribute less than one per cent of all greenhouse gases but levels are rising as they replace HCFCs. The report from the UN Environment Programme notes that HFC emissions would be the equivalent of seven-19 per cent of the CO2 emissions in 2050 based on the IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios; and 18-45 per cent based on the 450ppm CO2 emissions pathway scenario.

According to Achim Steiner, the UN under-secretary general and UNEP executive director, HCFCs represent a new challenge. Even though they cause near zero damage to the ozone layer, they are powerful greenhouse gases in their own right – but the good news is that alternatives exist alongside technological solutions.

Among the improvements and solutions outlined are: improved building designs that removes the need for air conditioners and uses fibre rather than insulation; non-HFC substances that range from ammonia to dimethyl ether; and climate-friendly HFCs that have shorter lifetimes in the atmosphere at just months rather than years.

USPresident Barack Obama has requested that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdraw its Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) rulemaking.

The standards had been proposed for ground-level ozone in January 2010 with final standards expected to be released at the end of August the same year with provisions based on scientific evidence about ozone and its effects on people and the environment.

In the same month, the EPA also proposed strengthening the eight-hour primary ozone standard that is designed to protect public health and suggested a seasonal secondary standard to protect sensitive vegetation and ecosystems.

In January this year, Lisa Jackson, administrator of the EPA, declared she was fully committed to the finalising the EPA’s reconsideration of the Clean Air Act and expected to release this recommendation by the end of July.

However, President Obama has now changed the plans outlining concerns about reducing regulatory burdens and uncertainty as the economy continues to recover. With that in mind, he stated, he has requested that the standards are withdrawn at this time and they will be reconsidered in 2013.

The issue of global warming may continue to dominate the headlines, but a new survey by Nielsen suggests that it’s no longer our number one environmental concern.

According to the 2011 Global Online Environment and Sustainability Survey of more than 25,000 respondents in 51 countries, environmental issues such as air and water pollution, packaging waste and the use of pesticides are raising more concern.

The findings show that 69 per cent of global online consumers are concerned about climate change and global warming (up from 66 per cent in 2009, but down from 72 per cent in 2007). However, air pollution was a major concern for 77 per cent of respondents; and water pollution for 75 per cent. The area where concern is growing at its fastest rate is over the use of pesticides, packaging waste and water shortages, which increased by 16, 14 and 13 percentage points, respectively.

There were differences in the levels of concern among continents too. For example, the top environmental concerns among Asia Pacific consumers included water shortages and air pollution; while water pollution was the main area for worries among Latin Americans, Europeans, Middle Eastern/Africans and North Americans.

The USA in particular, reported a steep decline in concern about climate change and global warming with a 14 per cent drop from 2007 to 2011. Indeed less than half of Americans (48 per cent) are worried about climate change – a sharp contrast to other areas of the world, such as: Latin America (90 per cent), Middle East/Africa (80 per cent), Asia Pacific (72 per cent) and Europe (68 per cent). In China, concern also fell by 17 per cent in the last two years from 77 per cent in 2009 to 64 per cent in 2011.

However, globally, Latin Americans appear to be the most concerned about climate change, with Arturo Garcia, the president of Nielsen Latin America, reporting that the area had experienced “a number of distressing and impactful environmental events over the last several years” which are being increasingly attributed to broad climate change.

Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne has revealed the UK Government’s Fourth Carbon Budget – a limit on the total amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted from 2023-2027.

Taking advice from the independent Committee on Climate Change, the budget is 1950 MtCO2e for the period – a 50 per cent reduction compared to 1990 levels. It also puts forward a target of 310MtCO2e from today’s level of 574 MtCO2e for 2030. This means there would be a 46 per cent reduction over the next 20 years with a subsequent reduction of 62 per cent between 2030 and 2050.

The Budget follows on from the Climate Change Act 2008, which outlined a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the UK by at least 80 per cent from 1990 levels by 2050. It requires the Government to set carbon budgets including limits on greenhouse gas emissions over five year periods. Under the terms of the Act, the target for the five-year period from 2023-2027 must be set by June 30, 2011.

In addition, the fourth report recommends that Parliament legislate to adjust the first three budgets to reflect non-traded sector emissions. It also proposes that the UK should argue for a tightening of the EU ETS cap. Furthermore, it incorporates measures to minimise the cost of the low carbon transition to industries that are exposed to international competition. The Government will continue to argue that the EU moves to a 30 per cent target for 2020.

The UK will also review EU climate negotiations in early 2014 and before the end of the year the Government will announce a number of measures to reduce the impact of policy on the cost of electricity for energy intensive industries and help them adjust to a low carbon society.

The issue of global warming is certainly contentious in the United States, but now it has taken a new twist with a US National Research Council committee reiterating the need for action to limit climate change.

In its report, America’s Climate Choices, the report reaffirms that human activities are the most likely cause for most of the global warming that has occurred over the last several decades; and it believes that America’s response to climate change is ultimately about making choices in the face of risk.

According to the report, some essential responses include: enacting policies and programs to reduce risk by limiting the causes of climate change; investing in research and development efforts to increase knowledge; developing institutions and processes that ensure pertinent information is collected; and evaluating how response efforts are progressing periodically.

It is believed that substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions should be among the highest priorities for the nation and waiting for impacts to occur before taking action would be too late for meaningful mitigation.

In addition, it is reiterated that because emission reductions in the US alone will not be adequate to avert climate change, the country also needs to remain active in international climate change. However, it is down to the US to pursue strong emission reduction efforts so it can influence other countries to do the same.