Finances F**k Future Fuels

Dorothea Lange

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


The recession has walloped investment in clean energy. That means we’re no longer on track to avert the worst impacts of climate change, according to a new analysis.  (Were we ever on track?)

Anyway… New Energy Finance says that although a depressed global economy will reduce CO2 emissions, funding for energy solutions is decreasing faster and that’s likely to have a worse impact on emissions in the long run.

Here are the stats: Investment in clean energy—make that, renewables, energy efficiency and carbon capture and storage—grew from $34 billion to $150 billion between 2004 and 2008. But investment needs to reach $500 billion a year by 2020. That is if we want CO2 emissions to peak before 2020.

There is currently a generalish consensus that continued growth of emissions beyond 2015 or 2020 at the latest will lead to severe and irreversible climate change (though this will only meet the IPCC‘s relatively generous standard not the 350ppm number that Bill McKibben wrote about recently). The new analysis predicts that a peak before 2020 now looks highly unlikely .

So what do we do? Well, for those who have enough money that they actually do things like make investment decisions, why not move your money to where it’s going to count in more ways than mere money? Invest in clean energy. For those of us who do not have anything resembling spare change, invest in a cleaner energy lifestyle. You know: eat more vegetarian; buy more locally; drive less; kill your clothes dryer; air your clothes more & wash them less (another grandmother solution); buy used; think about the long run more. We’ve talked about these solutions before.

As for why we continue to not do these things, at least on a societal level, Chris Goodall at CarbonCommentary makes some interesting, well, commentary.

PLEASE—BEFORE YOU CLICK AWAY!

“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things it doesn’t like—which is most things that are true.

We’ll say it loud and clear: At Mother Jones, no one gets to tell us what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. Please do your part and help us reach our $150,000 membership goal by May 31.

payment methods

PLEASE—BEFORE YOU CLICK AWAY!

“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things it doesn’t like—which is most things that are true.

We’ll say it loud and clear: At Mother Jones, no one gets to tell us what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. Please do your part and help us reach our $150,000 membership goal by May 31.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate