Sopuli
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
jeffw@lemmy.world to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.net · 10 months ago

Debate grows over whether some PFAS chemicals have a place in clean energy

www.thenewlede.org

external-link
message-square
0
link
fedilink
12
external-link

Debate grows over whether some PFAS chemicals have a place in clean energy

www.thenewlede.org

jeffw@lemmy.world to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.net · 10 months ago
message-square
0
link
fedilink
By Shannon Kelleher As the planet warms at an alarming rate, culminating in the hottest summer on record, nations worldwide are rapidly scaling up so-called clean energy technologies that can replace the world’s dependence on climate change-inducing fossil fuels. More than 100 countries last year committed to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030 to try to slow climate change and reduce the related devastating human and environmental toll from increasingly frequent and extreme weather events. In the United States, manufacturers of electric vehicles (EVs) and EV batteries have announced more than $188 billion in investments over the last nine years, with most of the money committed during the last two. And this May, the US Department of Energy (DOE) announced a $71 million investment in projects to expand access to solar power – dubbed the “cheapest form of energy” by the DOE. But behind the enthusiasm lies a little-discussed but looming concern. Many of these technologies being heralded as tools to turn back climate change rely on fluoropolymers, a family of plastics that are part of a class of chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Many types of PFAS are considered so hazardous that the US and many other countries have targeted them for elimination. PFAS have been identified as ubiquitous environmental pollutants that don’t break down naturally, with several linked to a range of human health problems. Fluoropolymer safety for humans and the environment is still a matter of debate. But the paradox of boosting the use of potentially harmful types of PFAS chemicals in order to create technologies that can address harmful climate change is stirring debate among some experts and prompting a deeper look at the pursuit of “clean energy”. “Obviously, the green energy transition is very important,” said Ian Cousins, a professor at the University of Stockholm in Sweden who studies the environmental impact of PFAS.  “I don’t want to hinder that. But at the same time… the green industry should be not just green energy but green in every regard.”
alert-triangle
You must log in or # to comment.

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.net

climate@slrpnk.net

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !climate@slrpnk.net

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 486 users / day
  • 2.3K users / week
  • 3.49K users / month
  • 9.57K users / 6 months
  • 101 local subscribers
  • 6.88K subscribers
  • 9.2K Posts
  • 38K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • silence7@slrpnk.net
  • BE: 0.19.12
  • Modlog
  • Legal
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org