• Il colonialismo del carbonio vissuto dalle comunità indigene dell’Amazzonia colombiana

    I programmi di conservazione forestale che permettono di emettere crediti di carbonio sui mercati internazionali si mostrano inefficaci ma soprattutto ingiusti. Reportage dalla fitta foresta del #Guaviare, casa dei #Nükak, stretti tra i “#carbon_cowboy” che puntano alla mercificazione del loro territorio, le disidencias delle Farc e attori esterni che ne minano la coesione sociale.

    “Dove si mette l’anidride carbonica? Porteranno delle bottiglie?”, chiede un membro dei Nükak, comunità indigena dell’Amazzonia colombiana. Si rivolge a un dipendente di #CorpoGreen, azienda che ha proposto alla comunità un progetto #REDD+ (acronimo di #Reducing_emissions_from_deforestation_and_forest_degradation), programma di conservazione forestale che permette di emettere crediti di carbonio sui mercati internazionali.

    Chi acquista questi crediti, ovunque si trovi, può così compensare le proprie emissioni di gas a effetto serra, invece di ridurle. Il giornalista britannico George Monbiot le ha definite “indulgenze climatiche”.

    La domanda che si sentono rivolgere molti sviluppatori di progetti REDD+ cela un nodo fondamentale: come funziona la compensazione del carbonio? Come si va dalla spunta alla casella “compensa le emissioni del tuo volo” all’immagazzinamento di tonnellate equivalenti di anidride carbonica?

    Provando ad aprire questa “scatola nera”, ricercatori e giornalisti d’inchiesta hanno dimostrato l’inefficacia biogeochimica di queste iniziative e ne stanno facendo venire a galla i tangibili impatti sociali, dall’accaparramento di terre alle violazioni dei diritti umani.

    Prerequisito fondamentale per la compensazione “basata sulla natura” è infatti una vasta estensione di foresta “incontaminata”, modo occidentale di definire ecosistemi che, come dimostra la ricerca in campo biologico e paleoantropologico, sono in realtà stati “coltivati” nel corso dei millenni dalle popolazioni indigene. Di terra -in teoria- i Nükak ne hanno a volontà: quasi un milione di ettari, in gran parte coperti da foresta tropicale. Modificando alcuni loro comportamenti che -sempre in teoria- causerebbero deforestazione, l’azienda sviluppatrice può sostenere di avere evitato delle emissioni future, e così giustificare l’emissione dei crediti.

    Ma chi sono i Nükak? Comunità semi-nomade di cacciatori e raccoglitori, fino al 1988 ha vissuto in isolamento volontario nella fitta foresta del Guaviare, dipartimento dell’Amazzonia colombiana noto -tra le altre cose- per la capillare presenza delle Forze armate rivoluzionarie della Colombia (Farc). Nei quasi 40 anni trascorsi dal primo contatto, l’inevitabile processo di integrazione nella comunità nazionale colombiana si è rivelato colmo di ostacoli e i problemi sociali, dalla povertà al consumo di sostanze stupefacenti fino alla prostituzione infantile, abbondano. Per i Nükak la foresta è tutto: ambiente di vita, cantiere, parco giochi, supermercato, teatro e cimitero. Non per niente, la parola che usano per foresta è la stessa che usano per indicare il mondo: #ye.

    Con una certa lungimiranza, negli anni Novanta il governo colombiano ha riconosciuto loro la proprietà collettiva di un ampio territorio al fine di garantirne la sussistenza nomadica. In tempi di crisi climatica, però, questo ha destato l’interesse degli sviluppatori REDD+, detti anche “carbon cowboy” per la spregiudicatezza nell’aprire nuove frontiere di accumulazione di capitale sull’onda della decarbonizzazione. Ci hanno provato a più riprese anche nel Guaviare, da ultimo l’enigmatica azienda di “servizi ambientali” CorpoGreen, ma sono progetti destinati a fallire. Non solo queste aziende sono “empresas de garaje” sorte dall’oggi al domani senza particolari competenze -come ci confida un leader indigeno colombiano- ma le premesse teoriche stesse dell’iniziativa di conservazione non reggono: i Nükak hanno un impatto minimo sull’ecosistema amazzonico e, in ogni caso, non hanno una presenza capillare nel proprio territorio, in buona parte controllato dalle disidencias delle Farc (i gruppi che non hanno sottoscritto l’accordo di pace del 2016 e imperversano ancora, a macchia di leopardo, in varie zone del Paese).

    Spesso, una volta bruciatisi, gli stessi carbon cowboy ricompaiono con una ragione sociale diversa o mediante prestanome. A un certo punto, CorpoGreen è stata affiancata da una sorta di agenzia di consulenza (#Mantis) rappresentata dalle stesse persone: “Mantis è apparsa dal nulla. Non hanno incarichi precedenti degni di nota né esperienza con i Nükak. È un sistema di scatole cinesi”, ci rivela un informatore locale. Un sistema oliato che poggia anche su entrature istituzionali: “La cosa viene dal profondo del ministero dell’Interno, per questo qui nessuno oserà contrastarli”.

    In Paesi come la Colombia, segnati da decenni di violenza e militarizzazione, la contiguità tra istituzioni, criminalità organizzata e gruppi guerriglieri o paramilitari comporta rischi che vanno ben oltre le vie giudiziarie: “Sono una persona coraggiosa, se vedo un serpente in mezzo alla strada non scappo. Ma questa faccenda mi spaventa”, ci confessa una cooperante locale. Un’altra rincara la dose: “Preferirei sedermi a parlare con i guerriglieri piuttosto che con questa gente (gli sviluppatori, ndr). La corruzione uccide più delle Farc”.

    Con le #Farc, però, pare essersi già seduta CorpoGreen. Anzi, fonti riferiscono che i suoi manager avrebbero legami diretti con le disidencias. Forse non è un caso che, per promuovere il progetto, si muovano con gran disinvoltura in territori che sono off-limits per molti enti pubblici e Ong. In questi territori rientra il perimetro, formalmente di proprietà dei Nükak, del progetto REDD+. Per molti le disidencias sono ormai assimilabili a un puro racket del narcotraffico, avendo abbandonato gli ideali marxisti che caratterizzavano le Farc della prima ora: “Dicono di credere in Karl Marx ma penso che credano di più in Pablo Escobar”, ha ironizzato tempo fa l’ormai ex presidente Gustavo Petro (il 21 giugno di quest’anno il suo erede designato Iván Cepeda ha perso al ballottaggio contro l’ultradestra populista di Abelardo de la Espriella). Gli alti e bassi della coca, però, uniti alla repressione governativa e alla perdita di legittimità presso la popolazione, hanno indotto le guerriglie a diversificare le fonti di introiti: l’ultima frontiera è proprio quella dei progetti REDD+.

    A lanciare l’allarme per la prima volta in forma ufficiale è stata la Defensoría del Pueblo (l’ombudsman colombiano) nel 2024, segnalando pagamenti forzati (una sorta di pizzo chiamato vacuna, “vaccinazione”) imposti dalle disidencias agli sviluppatori di iniziative ambientali. In Guaviare è il segreto di Pulcinella: “Qui pagano tutti. Pagano i negozianti, paga chiunque porti avanti un progetto”, afferma un funzionario locale. Un ex guerrigliero ne illustra le modalità: “Le Farc impongono un dazio di accesso al territorio e una sorta di tassa sul fatturato. Stando alla legge Farc 002 del 2000, si applicherebbe una percentuale del 10% sul valore presunto del progetto”. Considerando che un credito di carbonio può valere 5-10 dollari e che CorpoGreen in questo caso ne millanta una produzione potenziale nell’ordine dei quattro milioni, se ne può desumere un pizzo multimilionario.

    Al di là dei tratti locali assunti dal fenomeno, i progetti di compensazione si inseriscono in un quadro più ampio di colonialismo “verde”: come ricostruito in un recente studio scientifico (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13563467.2025.2572047) condotto da chi scrive in collaborazione con Torsten Krause (Università di Lund, Svezia), i mercati del carbonio sono veicolo di uno scambio diseguale che sfrutta il lavoro e le risorse delle popolazioni del Sud del mondo per allargare la forbice di ricchezza tra Paesi ricchi ed ex colonie mantenendole in una condizione di dipendenza economica e tecnologica. Tra il 2020 e il 2023, i mercati del carbonio volontari avrebbero drenato oltre 200 milioni di dollari dalla sola Colombia. Quella della compensazione, dunque, sarebbe non tanto una soluzione climatica “falsa” (ossia inefficace) quanto “ingiusta” da una prospettiva socio-ambientale.

    Eppure la politica sembra andare in direzione opposta: la COP30 di Belém ha infatti rilanciato i mercati del carbonio con il convinto contributo dell’Ue (che permetterà ai Paesi membri di coprire il 5% degli obiettivi di mitigazione con crediti extra-UE); in Italia, intanto, è stato lanciato il registro nazionale dei crediti di carbonio forestali per “contrastare il fenomeno del greenwashing (sic)”.

    A dispetto di quanto si potrebbe pensare, la soluzione a queste ingiustizie non passa necessariamente dall’abolizione dei mercati del carbonio. Come spesso accade quando si parla di equilibri socio-ambientali, la realtà è contraddittoria: alcune comunità indigene, intravedendo un’opportunità di emancipazione economica meno distruttiva rispetto all’estrattivismo convenzionale, intendono governare il fenomeno a proprio vantaggio. L’Organizzazione dei popoli indigeni dell’Amazzonia colombiana (Opiac), ad esempio, sta sviluppando corsi ad hoc per formare i leader indigeni sulla gestione di questi progetti. Al di là della scarsa praticabilità politica dell’abolizione di un programma attorno al quale ruotano corposi interessi economici, sussiste dunque il rischio che lo smantellamento dall’alto del carbon forestry diventi a sua volta un’imposizione coloniale.

    I Nükak, loro malgrado, si trovano tra l’incudine e il martello, costretti ad accettare la mercificazione del proprio territorio per poter intravedere vie d’uscita dall’indigenza ma al contempo esponendosi alla manipolazione di attori esterni che ne minano la coesione sociale. Sballottati a destra e a manca da chi ne vuole sfruttare la condizione di vulnerabilità (intercettando i relativi stanziamenti pubblici), faticano a vedere la luce in fondo al tunnel: “Non stiamo camminando bene insieme -dice sconfortato un esperto mediatore Nükak, sul retro di una camionetta che ci porta verso alcuni insediamenti lungo il fiume Inírida-. Non siamo ancora riusciti a capire la vostra civiltà. Voi kawene (stranieri, ndr) vi capite, ma noi non vi capiamo. I nostri anziani non hanno ancora deciso che cosa fare”.

    https://altreconomia.it/il-colonialismo-del-carbonio-vissuto-dalle-comunita-indigene-dellamazzo
    #carbone #colonialisme_du_carbone #crédit-carbone #Amazonie #forêt #peuples_autochtones #injustice #inefficacité #Colombie #marchandisation #compensation #émissions_de_CO2 #accaparemment_de_terres #colonialisme_vert #green-washing #carbon_forestry

    • The unequal exchange of carbon: calculating value appropriation and atmospheric colonisation through carbon offsetting

      Despite a flurry of critical analyses discussing its controversial track record in terms of effectiveness and social feasibility, carbon offsetting remains one of the key mechanisms within global climate governance. We address an understudied dimension of the offsetting paradigm, with a focus on the voluntary carbon market and nature-based ‘solutions’, to inquire whether carbon trading constitutes a form of unequal ecological and economic exchange. We quantify the global unequal exchange through carbon credits. To ground our hypotheses, we analyse the carbon trading landscape of Colombia and offer a country-specific quantification of value plunder through carbon commodity chains. We find that, only through voluntary carbon markets, wealthy countries appropriated 4 billion USD in 4 years from the Global South, whereas the value drain from Colombia is estimated at 200 million USD. We also highlight further value leakage through both formal and informal carbon brokers.

      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13563467.2025.2572047

  • #IA : les centres de données émettent bien plus de #CO2 qu’estimé, selon Allianz Trade

    Les centres de données, dont les besoins explosent avec l’essor de l’IA, émettraient beaucoup plus de CO2 qu’estimé jusqu’ici, selon une étude publiée mardi par l’assureur-crédit #Allianz_Trade.

    Les applications d’IA générative se multiplient, faisant que les centres de données, qui hébergent et alimentent ces services, deviennent un moteur majeur de la consommation mondiale d’électricité.

    Selon l’étude, les émissions de ces infrastructures ont atteint 286 millions de tonnes de CO2 en 2025, soit 57% de plus que les évaluations antérieures.

    L’IA représente déjà entre 15% et 20% de la consommation électrique des centres de données, et cette proportion pourrait grimper à 40% d’ici à 2030, est-il expliqué.

    « Les centres de données passent d’un phénomène marginal à un moteur structurel de la demande d’électricité dans de nombreuses régions », souligne Patrick Hoffmann, économiste climat chez Allianz Trade, cité dans un communiqué.

    Une même puissance de calcul peut générer des émissions très différentes selon l’origine de l’électricité utilisée.

    Les émissions liées au courant dépassent ainsi 600 grammes de CO2 par kilowattheure (kWh) en Inde, contre moins de 30 grammes en Norvège ou en Suède, où l’électricité est largement décarbonée.

    La France en est à 41 grammes de CO2 par kWh, contre 329 grammes en Allemagne, pays parmi les moins bien classés en Europe en raison du poids encore important du charbon dans sa production d’électricité.

    Selon Allianz Trade, près de 70% des émissions mondiales des centres de données sont aujourd’hui concentrées aux Etats-Unis et en Chine.

    Sans accélération de la décarbonation, elles pourraient atteindre jusqu’à 643 millions de tonnes de CO2 d’ici à 2030.

    Les besoins en eau augmentent également rapidement : les centres de données auraient consommé quelque 814 milliards de litres d’eau dans le monde en 2025, un volume susceptible de passer à 1.800 milliards de litres d’ici à la fin de la décennie, selon l’étude.

    S’exprimant mardi dernier à Londres, en pleine canicule en Europe, le chef de l’ONU, Antonio Guterres, a demandé aux entreprises de l’IA de dire « toute la vérité » sur le coût écologique de leurs centres de données et à s’engager à recourir aux énergies renouvelables d’ici 2030.

    https://www.france24.com/fr/info-en-continu/20260630-ia-les-centres-de-donn%C3%A9es-%C3%A9mettent-bien-plus-de-co2-qu-

    #AI #intelligence_artificielle #émissions_de_CO2 #rapport #statistiques #chiffres #infrastructure #data_centers #centres_de_données

    • Code, carbon, kilowatts: AI’s hidden toll and the race to green the grid

      - Data-center investment reached USD580bn in 2025, putting AI on track to become one of the world’s fastest-growing sources of electricity demand. Installed capacity is expected to double by 2030, with AI workloads already accounting for 15–20% of data-center electricity use and potentially approaching 40% by the end of the decade. Yet the sector’s environmental footprint remains underestimated as most analyses focus only on operational electricity use. This analysis takes a broader systems view across 26 countries (+93% of global capacity), adding lifecycle emissions, water use and AI’s growing resource demand.
      – Identical workloads can generate up to 24 times more emissions depending on the emission intensity of the grid, making location as decisive as demand growth. Fossil-dependent grids in Indonesia, India and Malaysia exceed 600 gCO₂/kWh, compared with under 30 gCO₂/kWh in Norway and Sweden. The US and China, which host the largest data-center clusters, sit in between at 384 gCO₂/kWh and 526 gCO₂/kWh, respectively, giving Europe’s cleaner power mix a structural advantage for low-carbon AI growth. These disparities are amplified by transmission and distribution losses of 10–15% in some markets, while less reliable grids raise electricity needs and dependence on backup generation.
      – At 286 MtCO₂ in 2025, the true carbon footprint of data centers is 57% larger than IEA estimates suggest. Electricity consumption (Scope 2) accounted for 76% of this footprint, at 218 MtCO₂, with hardware manufacturing and construction (Scope 3) contributing a further 66 MtCO₂, or 23%, and direct Scope 1 emissions remaining negligible (<1%). Emissions are also heavily concentrated geographically, with the US and China alone accounting for roughly 70% of the global total. AI accounts for an estimated 43-60 MtCO₂ of today’s emissions, and this is set to climb steeply as deployment widens and computing demand grows.
      – Without grid decarbonization, global data-center emissions would more than double to 643 MtCO₂ by 2030, leading to an estimated USD154bn in annual climate damages (up from USD68bn today). AI workloads already account for an estimated USD13bn in climate damages annually and could exceed USD50bn by 2030. By contrast, an ambitious decarbonization pathway would hold emissions to around 329 MtCO₂ despite continued growth in computing demand, and keep climate damages at USD79bn. This makes the pace of power-sector decarbonization the primary determinant of whether AI growth can be decoupled from emissions in the near term. Even under ambitious decarbonization, however, the footprint does not vanish but moves up the supply chain: as Scope 2 falls from more than 70% of the footprint today to around half by 2030, embodied emissions from servers, semiconductors and infrastructure become the binding constraint, approaching 50% of the total. Achieving genuinely low-carbon AI will therefore require not only cleaner power, but also closer attention to emissions embedded in digital infrastructure supply chains.
      – Deployed across the economy, AI could cut global CO₂ emissions by around 1.4 Gt a year by 2035, more than offsetting the emissions generated by its own infrastructure and creating net savings of roughly 750 MtCO₂. According to the IEA, these reductions would result from efficiency gains, optimization and improved resource management across sectors such as energy, industry, buildings and transport, and are equivalent to around 2.6% of current global emissions. However, this outcome is not guaranteed. With most AI applications still at an early stage of deployment, its ultimate climate impact will depend on whether these economy-wide benefits can scale faster than the infrastructure required to support them.
      – Data centers consumed 814bn liters of water in 2025 and could require 1.3–1.8trn liters by 2030, comparable to Switzerland’s annual consumption, making water the overlooked resource constraint of AI. Most of this footprint is indirect, with roughly three-quarters originating from electricity generation and the remainder from on-site cooling and semiconductor manufacturing. This ties water use closely to the energy transition, since fossil and nuclear plants require substantial cooling water while wind and solar use little or none in operation, lowering both the carbon and water footprints of a cleaner grid. Although power-sector decarbonization can help moderate future water demand, water-related risks are becoming increasingly concentrated in water-stressed regions such as South Korea, India, Mexico and parts of China, where rapid data-center growth is colliding with existing pressure on local water resources, raising the risk of access constraints and community or regulatory opposition to new capacity.
      – Realizing “green AI” will depend less on making data centers marginally more efficient than on transforming the energy systems that power them. Unlocking AI’s environmental potential will require a broader policy framework, combining clean-power expansion, greater transparency on resource use, stronger incentives to price environmental costs, and faster deployment of AI applications that reduce emissions across the wider economy.

      https://www.allianz.com/en/economic_research/insights/publications/specials_fmo/260630-ai-carbon.html

  • State of European Transport

    Europe is in an existential global competition to achieve its climate goals, lead on clean future technologies, and to provide a beacon to the rest of the world. This year’s addition to the state of transport is a story of EU competitiveness in a global race against time.

    https://www.transportenvironment.org/state-of-european-transport/state-of-transport-2026

    #rapport #transport #Europe #climat #statistiques #chiffres #CO2 #émissions_de_CO2 #transports

  • Le emissioni climalteranti e gli sponsor fossili delle Olimpiadi “più sostenibili di sempre”

    I Giochi olimpici invernali di Milano Cortina determineranno l’emissione di 930mila tonnellate di anidride carbonica. Lo sostiene una ricerca del Scientists for global responsibility e del New weather institute. Un valore che cresce ulteriormente se si considerano i partner dell’evento che comprendono #Eni, #Stellantis, #Ita. Il tutto mentre la crisi climatica minaccia la sopravvivenza stessi degli sport invernali.

    Le Olimpiadi più sostenibili di sempre causeranno emissioni di gas climalteranti pari a circa 930mila tonnellate di anidride carbonica equivalente. Un simile contributo porterà a una perdita stimata di 2,3 chilometri quadrati di manto nevoso -ovvero circa 1.300 piste olimpiche di hockey su ghiaccio- e di oltre 14 milioni di tonnellate di ghiaccio glaciale.

    Sono questi i calcoli di una nuova ricerca realizzata dai think tank Scientists for global responsibility e dal New weather institute che evidenziano come l’impatto climatico delle Olimpiadi invernali potrebbe mettere a rischio nel futuro gli stessi Giochi.

    “Questo rapporto si aggiunge alle prove su come la copertura nevosa si sta perdendo a causa del cambiamento climatico, dimostrando che gli stessi sport invernali contribuiscono a tale impatto sia direttamente attraverso le loro emissioni di carbonio sia promuovendo i principali inquinatori attraverso la pubblicità e le sponsorizzazioni”, ha dichiarato Stuart Parkinson, direttore di Scientists for global responsibility, climatologo e principale autore del rapporto. È bene tenere presente che si tratta comunque di una ricerca che, anche per esigenze di tempo, non è stata pubblicata su una rivista scientifica né valutata da un comitato esterno.

    Responsabili delle emissioni sono soprattutto i viaggi che gli spettatori di tutto il mondo effettueranno per assistere ai giochi, circa 410mila tonnellate. Il resto è diviso più o meno equamente fra l’organizzazione dei Giochi e le sue infrastrutture. Sotto la prima ricadono quei gas prodotti a causa dell’energia usata durante l’evento, la costruzione di infrastrutture temporanee, i viaggi dello staff e il merchandise. Le infrastrutture includono invece le emissioni provocate dalla costruzione di edifici permanenti che non saranno smantellati alla fine. Ma il report fa un passo ulteriore, sottolineando come queste siano solo le cifre conteggiate ufficialmente dagli organizzatori. Se si prendono in considerazione anche quelle degli sponsor, i numeri crescono esponenzialmente.

    I ricercatori hanno infatti sviluppato un metodo per stimare anche quelle emissioni che deriverebbero dall’aumento delle vendite dei prodotti sponsorizzati e che provengono da settori con un alto impatto sul clima. Sotto questo aspetto, Milano Cortina 2026 non fa invidia alle precedenti edizioni: tre dei suoi maggiori sostenitori sono infatti Eni, il gigante fossile italiano; la casa automobilistica Stellantis; e la compagnia aerea nazionale Ita Airways.

    Prendendo in considerazione anche il loro contributo, le emissioni aumentano così di un 40%, aggiungendo fino a 1,3 milioni di tonnellate di CO2. Gli scienziati hanno così stimato che l’impatto complessivo dei Giochi porterà quindi alla perdita di circa 5,5 chilometri quadrati di manto nevoso e a oltre 34 milioni di tonnellate di ghiaccio.

    Gli autori avvertono comunque che le loro sono stime preliminari con significative incertezze, poiché non esiste un dato ufficiale pubblico sull’ammontare versato dalle singole imprese. Ma “indicano comunque un impatto molto grande degli accordi con sponsor altamente carbonici, che è stato finora completamente negato dal comitato olimpico”, scrivono nel report.

    “Abbiamo guardato a eventi del passato, prendendo in considerazione i dati sulle diverse categorie di sponsorizzazione e facendo una stima -spiega ad Altreconomia Andrew Simms, condirettore del New weather institute e ricercatore associato in Economia politica globale all’Università di Sussex-. Dato che questi numeri non sono disponibili pubblicamente, è l’unico modo per farlo. Ma probabilmente sono stime addirittura conservative”.

    Ad Altreconomia Eni ha però replicato di aver comunicato in modo “trasparente”, il 23 dicembre scorso che il suo supporto è relativo soltanto alla fornitura di prodotti e servizi e non genera attività climalteranti aggiuntive. In particolare, rifornirà i giochi di un bio-Gpl da materie prime rinnovabili per alimentare il bruciatore delle torce olimpiche e paralimpiche e di carburanti provenienti al 90% da materie prime rinnovabili. Di conseguenza, Eni reputa che il report stimi “in modo tendenzioso il valore delle emissioni di anidride carbonica indotte dai principali sponsor dei Giochi. Nel caso specifico di Eni, le stime sono calcolate sulla base dei dati globali relativi all’anno 2024 disponibili online e non possono quindi essere riconducibili al contributo di Eni in qualità di premium partner di Milano Cortina 2026”.

    Altreconomia ha contattato anche Stellantis, Ita e la Fondazione Milano Cortina 2026 per avere la loro versione, ma al momento della pubblicazione (29 gennaio) non è arrivata alcuna risposta. Ad oggi si sa che Stellantis fornirà una flotta di circa tremila veicoli, metà dei quali elettrificati.

    Il paradosso rimane che le prossime Olimpiadi si terranno proprio nel momento in cui il cambiamento climatico sta mettendo a dura prova la presenza della neve sulle Alpi. Uno studio pubblicato dalla rivista Nature climate change nel 2023 rivela come il manto nevoso non fosse mai stato così effimero negli ultimi 600 anni, con la neve che permane oltre un mese in meno rispetto a 20 anni fa. Secondo gli ultimi dati della Fondazione Cima la quantità di acqua presente nella neve a gennaio in tutta Italia era inferiore del 33% rispetto alla media degli anni dal 2011 in avanti. A causa di questi cambiamenti, il New weather institute ricorda che negli ultimi cinque anni l’Italia ha perso 265 stazioni sciistiche. Mentre la Francia, che ospiterà i Giochi nel 2030, ne ha viste sparire 180.

    L’ultimo rapporto “Consumo di suolo, dinamiche territoriali e servizi ecosistemici” del Sistema nazionale per la protezione dell’ambiente (Snpa) ha inoltre sottolineato come delle 94 opere “olimpiche” per Milano Cortina da realizzare solo 15 contenessero il termine “ristrutturazione”. Inoltre, circa il 50% non è mai stato accompagnato da una “valutazione ambientale formale”, come ha già raccontato Altreconomia.

    Quando si guarda alla maggiore riduzione delle emissioni, è inevitabile però notare come sia avvenuta ai giochi di Pechino in Cina del 2022 a causa della pandemia da Covid-19, che aveva ridotto quasi a zero il numero di spettatori, generando un risparmio di circa 805mila tonnellate di CO2. “I grandi eventi dovrebbero avere attività più localizzate e una chiara preferenza di base per le popolazioni locali, proprio perché le maggiori emissioni provengono dai viaggi”, sostiene quindi Simms.

    Per gli autori del report, la vera differenza sarebbe comunque iniziare a rifiutare le sponsorizzazioni di industrie con un’alta impronta carbonica. Se le cinque maggiori aziende che supportano Milano Cortina fossero sostituite da imprese con le stesse emissioni che ha, ad esempio, il Gruppo Ferrovie dello Stato, si sarebbero potute risparmiare 1,4 milioni di tonnellate di CO2.

    “Ispirate da atleti, esperti di salute e scienziati, i Giochi di Calgary in Canada nel 1988 hanno preso una posizione decisiva contro la pubblicità e le sponsorizzazioni del tabacco -conclude Simms-. Ora che la conta dei morti a causa dell’inquinamento atmosferico causato dai combustibili fossili è ai livelli del tabacco, è il momento che le Olimpiadi seguano quel precedente e mettano fine a quei collegamenti che minacciano non solo i suoi atleti ma la loro stessa esistenza”.

    https://altreconomia.it/le-emissioni-climalteranti-e-gli-sponsor-fossili-delle-olimpiadi-piu-so
    #JO #Milano-Cortina #émissions_de_CO2 #jeux_olympiques #JO2026 #sponsors #CO2

    • The hidden carbon footprint of the Winter Olympics

      Over the past five years, the host of the 2026 Winter Olympics, Italy, lost a reported 265 ski resorts, while France, due to host the next Winter Games in 2030 has seen the loss of over 180 resorts. The disappearance of snow due to global heating is a prime factor undermining winter sports, with the Games increasingly dependent on artificial snow. Yet, through the promotion of high carbon corporations in Olympic sponsorship deals - for example, oil and gas companies, airlines and car-makers - the Winter Games are in danger of torching their own future. This is the main conclusion of a new report by the New Weather Institute (NWI) and Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), in association with Champions for Earth.

      The key findings of the report are:

      – Based only on official data - and excluding emissions related to sponsorship deals with major polluters - this report estimates that the 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan Cortina will cause greenhouse gas emissions of about 930,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e), with the largest contribution – about 410,000 tCO2e – being due to spectator travel.
      – Based on climate research, this total will in the coming years cause a loss of approximately 2.3 square kilometres (km2) of snow cover and over 14 million tonnes (Mt) of glacier ice – major impacts on exactly the environment needed to support winter sports.
      - But, this report estimates that sponsorship deals between the 2026 Winter Olympics at Milan Cortina promoting three major, heavily polluting corporations - oil and gas producer, Eni; car-maker, Stellantis (whose brands include Maserati and Fiat); and ITA Airways - will induce additional greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of about 1.3 million tCO2e - about 40% more than the rest of the estimated carbon footprint of the event - including emissions due to preparation, infrastructure construction, hosting, and spectator travel. These emissions are not normally included in carbon footprint assessments, but they are a key part of the bigger picture.
      – These extra emissions will lead to additional future losses of 3.2 km2 of snow cover and over 20 Mt of glacier ice. That puts the total impact for the Games and these three sponsorship deals at 5.5 km2 of snow cover loss and over 34 Mt of glacier ice.
      – The additional emissions induced by the sponsorship deal with Eni alone are estimated to be nearly 700,000 tCO2e and will push on its own the estimated losses of 1.7 km2 of snow cover and 11 Mt of glacier ice.
      – Based on an assessment of several Winter Olympics, the most effective actions for reducing GHG emissions would be to: end sponsorship deals with high carbon corporations; avoid construction of new venues and other infrastructure; and markedly reduce the numbers of spectators travelling by air.

      Without change, Milan Cortina will hand a baton of melting snow and ice to the French Alpine hosts of 2030. But, instead of being a billboard for the carbon emissions behind climate breakdown, the Winter Games could draw on its own recent history to be a poster child for progress towards clean, pollution free sport.

      Inspired by athletes speaking out, and medical experts explaining the scientific evidence, it was the Calgary Winter Games in 1988 that took a decisive stand against tobacco advertising and sponsorship that ultimately rid the Olympics, and much of sport more widely, of its lethal influence. With the death toll today from the air pollution alone caused by burning fossil fuels on a par with tobacco, the time has come for the Olympics to end a link that threatens not just its athletes, but its very existence.

      https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/hidden-carbon-footprint-winter-olympics
      #rapport #empreinte_carbone

  • Fossil fuel #CO2 emissions increase again in #2024

    Global carbon emissions from fossil fuels have reached a record high in 2024, according to new research by the #Global_Carbon_Project science team.

    The 2024 #Global_Carbon_Budget projects fossil carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of 37.4 billion tonnes, up 0.8% from 2023.

    Despite the urgent need to cut emissions to slow climate change, the researchers say there is still “no sign” that the world has reached a peak in fossil CO2 emissions.

    With projected emissions from land-use change (such as deforestation) of 4.2 billion tonnes, total CO2 emissions are projected to be 41.6 billion tonnes in 2024, up from 40.6 billion tonnes last year.

    Over the last 10 years, fossil CO2 emissions have risen while land-use change CO2 emissions have declined on average – leaving overall emissions roughly level over that period.

    This year, both fossil and land-use change CO2 emissions are set to rise, with drought conditions exacerbating emissions from deforestation and forest degradation fires during the El Niño climate event of 2023-2024.

    With over 40 billion tonnes released each year at present, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere continues to rise – driving increasingly dangerous global warming.

    The research team included the University of Exeter, the University of East Anglia (UEA), CICERO Center for International Climate Research, Ludwig-Maximilian-University Munich, Alfred-Wegener-Institut and 80 other institutions around the world.

    “The impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly dramatic, yet we still see no sign that burning of fossil fuels has peaked,” said Professor Pierre Friedlingstein, of Exeter’s Global Systems Institute, who led the study.

    “Time is running out to meet the Paris Agreement goals – and world leaders meeting at COP29 must bring about rapid and deep cuts to fossil fuel emissions to give us a chance of staying well below 2°C warming above pre-industrial levels.”

    Professor Corinne Le Quéré, Royal Society Research Professor at UEA’s School of Environmental Sciences, said: “Despite another rise in global emissions this year, the latest data shows evidence of widespread climate action, with the growing penetration of renewables and electric cars displacing fossil fuels, and decreasing deforestation emissions in the past decades confirmed for the first time.”

    Dr Glen Peters, of the CICERO Center for International Climate Research in Oslo, said: “There are many signs of positive progress at the country level, and a feeling that a peak in global fossil CO2 emissions is imminent, but the global peak remains elusive.

    “Climate action is a collective problem, and while gradual emission reductions are occurring in some countries, increases continue in others.

    “Progress in all countries needs to accelerate fast enough to put global emissions on a downward trajectory towards net zero.”

    Professor Friedlingstein added: “Until we reach net zero CO2 emissions globally, world temperatures will continue to rise and cause increasingly severe impacts.”

    Other key findings from the 2024 Global Carbon Budget include:

    - Globally, emissions from different fossil fuels in 2024 are projected to increase: coal (0.2%), oil (0.9%), gas (2.4%). These contribute 41%, 32% and 21% of global fossil CO2 emissions respectively. Given the uncertainty in the projections, it remains possible that coal emissions could decline in 2024.
    - China’s emissions (32% of the global total) are projected to marginally increase by 0.2%, although the projected range includes a possible decrease in emissions.
    – US emissions (13% of the global total) are projected to decrease by 0.6%.
    - India’s emissions (8% of the global total) are projected to increase by 4.6%.
    - European Union emissions (7% of the global total) are projected to decrease by 3.8%.
    – Emissions in the rest of the world (38% of the global total) are projected to increase by 1.1%.
    – International aviation and shipping (3% of the global total, and counted separately from national/regional totals) are projected to increase by 7.8% in 2024, but remain below their 2019 pre-pandemic level by 3.5%.
    – Globally, emissions from land-use change (such as deforestation) have decreased by 20% in the past decade, but are set to rise in 2024.
    - Permanent CO2 removal through reforestation and afforestation (new forests) is offsetting about half of the permanent deforestation emissions.
    – Current levels of technology-based Carbon Dioxide Removal (excluding nature-based means such as reforestation) only account for about one-millionth of the CO2 emitted from fossil fuels.
    – Atmospheric CO2 levels are set to reach 422.5 parts per million in 2024, 2.8 parts per million above 2023, and 52% above pre-industrial levels.
    - The effects of the temporary El Niño climate event also led to a reduction in carbon absorption by ecosystems on land (known as the land CO2 “sink”) in 2023, which is projected to recover as El Niño ended by the second quarter of 2024.
    – Emissions from fires in 2024 have been above the average since the beginning of the satellite record in 2003, particularly due to the extreme 2023 wildfire season in Canada (which persisted in 2024) and intense drought in Brazil.
    - The land and ocean CO2 sinks combined continued to take up around half of the total CO2 emissions, despite being negatively impacted by climate change.

    How long until we pass 1.5°C of global warming?

    This study estimates the remaining “carbon budget” before the 1.5°C target is breached consistently over multiple years, not just for a single year. At the current rate of emissions, the Global Carbon Budget team estimates a 50% chance global warming will exceed 1.5°C consistently in about six years. This estimate is subject to large uncertainties, primarily due to the uncertainty of the additional warming coming from non-CO2 agents (e.g., CH4, N2O, aerosols). However, it’s clear that the remaining carbon budget – and therefore the time left to meet the 1.5°C target and avoid the worst impacts of climate change – has almost run out.

    The Global Carbon Budget report, produced by an international team of more than 120 scientists, provides an annual, peer-reviewed update, building on established methodologies in a fully transparent manner. The 2024 edition (the 19th annual report) will be published in the journal Earth System Science Data on November 13 as a pre-print, and later as a peer-reviewed paper.

    https://globalcarbonbudget.org/fossil-fuel-co2-emissions-increase-again-in-2024
    #rapport #émissions_de_CO2 #chiffres #statistiques #augmentation

    • Les 1 % les plus riches émettent autant de CO2 que deux tiers de l’humanité

      - Les 1% les plus riches ont été responsables de 16% des émissions mondiales en 2019.
      - Leurs émissions sont suffisantes pour provoquer 1,3 million de décès supplémentaires dus à la chaleur.
      - Les décès liés aux inondations sont sept fois plus importants dans les pays inégalitaires que dans les pays plus égalitaires.
      - Une taxation juste des ultra-riches permettrait de lutter à la fois contre les inégalités et contre les changements climatiques.

      Un nouveau rapport publié aujourd’hui par Oxfam révèle qu’en 2019, les 1 % les plus riches ont généré autant d’émissions de carbone que 5 milliards de personnes qui représentaient alors les deux tiers les plus pauvres de l’humanité. Ce rapport a été rendu public en amont de la Conférence des Parties (COP) sur les changements climatiques qui se tiendra à Dubaï, dans un contexte d’inquiétude croissante alors que l’objectif de limiter le réchauffement mondial à 1,5 °C semble de plus en plus difficile à réaliser.

      Ces émissions démesurées des 1 % les plus riches vont causer 1,3 million de décès supplémentaires liés à la chaleur, soit environ l’équivalent de la population de Bruxelles. La plupart de ces décès surviendront entre 2020 et 2030.

      « Les ultra-riches pillent et polluent la planète au point de la détruire, et laissent l’humanité en proie aux chaleurs extrêmes, aux inondations et aux sécheresses, dénonce Amitabh Behar, directeur général par intérim d’Oxfam International.

      « Depuis des années, nous luttons pour mettre fin à l’ère des combustibles fossiles et sauver des millions de vie, ainsi que notre planète. Il est plus que jamais clair que cet objectif n’est possible que si nous mettons également fin à l’ère de l’extrême richesse », estime M. Behar.
      77 millions de personnes responsables de 16% des émissions mondiales

      Le rapport « Égalité climatique : une planète pour les 99% » est basé sur des recherches menées par l’Institut de l’environnement de Stockholm (SEI). Il analyse les émissions de consommation générées par différents groupes de revenus en 2019, l’année la plus récente pour laquelle des données sont disponibles. Ce rapport souligne l’écart considérable entre l’empreinte carbone des ultra-riches, dont le mode de vie gourmand en carbone et les investissements dans des industries polluantes comme les combustibles fossiles accélèrent le réchauffement climatique, et celle du reste de l’humanité.

      - Les 1 % les plus riches (77 millions de personnes) ont généré 16 % des émissions mondiales liées à la consommation en 2019, soit plus que l’ensemble des émissions liées aux voitures et au transport routier. Les 10 % les plus riches sont responsables de la moitié des émissions mondiales.
      - Il faudrait près de 1 500 ans à une personne appartenant au 99 % restants de l’humanité pour générer autant d’émissions de carbone que les milliardaires les plus riches produisent en un an.
      - Chaque année, les émissions des 1 % les plus riches annulent les économies de carbone réalisées grâce à l’utilisation de près d’un million d’éoliennes.
      - Depuis les années 1990, les 1% les plus riches ont consommé deux fois plus de budget carbone disponible pour limiter le réchauffement à 1,5°C que la moitié la plus pauvre de l’humanité.
      - Les émissions des 1 % les plus riches sont parties pour être 22 fois plus élevées en 2030 que le niveau requis pour limiter le réchauffement à 1,5°C défini dans l’Accord de Paris.

      Les pays à faible revenu, les plus sévèrement touchés par la crise climatique

      Les dérèglements climatiques et les inégalités perpétuent un cercle vicieux. Oxfam a constaté dans les pays dans lesquels elle est active que les personnes en situation de pauvreté, les femmes, les filles, les communautés autochtones et les pays du Sud global sont touchés de manière disproportionnée par les effets des changements climatiques qui, à leur tour, exacerbent les inégalités. Le rapport établit qu’il y a sept fois plus de décès dus aux inondations dans les pays plus inégalitaires. Les changements climatiques aggravent déjà les inégalités nationales et internationales.

      Les gouvernements peuvent s’attaquer au double fléau des inégalités et des changements climatiques en ciblant les émissions excessives des ultra-riches et en investissant dans les services publics et la réalisation des objectifs climatiques. D’après les estimations d’Oxfam, un impôt de 60 % sur les revenus des 1 % les plus riches réduirait les émissions d’une quantité supérieure aux émissions totales du Royaume-Uni et rapporterait 6,4 milliards de dollars par an pour financer l’abandon des combustibles fossiles et la transition vers les énergies renouvelables.

      « Nous devons montrer clairement l’interdépendance de ces deux questions. Tant qu’ils ne seront pas imposés, les plus riches vont continuer à spolier le reste de l’humanité, à détruire notre planète et à miner la démocratie. La taxation des richesses extrêmes renforcerait considérablement la lutte contre les inégalités et la crise climatique. Elle permettrait de générer des milliers de milliards de dollars qui sont requis pour investir dans nos démocraties et la mise en place de politiques gouvernementales réellement respectueuses de l’environnement », conclut M. Behar.

      https://oxfambelgique.be/les-1-les-plus-riches-emettent-autant-de-co2-que-deux-tiers-de-lhumani
      #rapport #1% #99%

      Pour télécharger le rapport :
      https://oi-files-d8-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2023-11/VF%20Resume%CC%81%20executif_Oxfam_Franc%CC%A7ais%20.pdf

    • Les 1% les plus riches émettent autant de CO2 que deux tiers de l’humanité selon une étude d’#Oxfam

      En 2019, la frange la plus riche de la population mondiale (1%) a généré autant de CO2 que 5 milliards de personnes, qui représentaient alors les deux tiers les plus pauvres de l’humanité, indique l’ONG Oxfam dans un rapport publié lundi, à deux semaines de l’ouverture de la COP28 à Dubaï.

      Fondé sur les recherches de l’Institut de l’environnement de Stockholm (SEI), ce nouveau rapport, intitulé « Égalité climatique : une planète pour les 99% », analyse les émissions de consommation générées par différents groupes de revenus en 2019, dernière année pour laquelle des données sont disponibles.

      Selon les auteurs, les 1% les plus riches (77 millions de personnes) ont généré 15% des émissions mondiales liées à la consommation en 2019, soit plus que l’ensemble des émissions liées aux voitures et au transport routier. Les 10% les plus riches sont, quant à eux, responsables de la moitié des émissions mondiales.

      De l’autre côté de la pyramide, les 50% les plus pauvres ne sont responsables que de 8% des émissions en équivalent carbone sur la planète. « Il y a cercle vicieux qui s’installe avec la richesse, indique Alexandre Poidatz, responsable de campagne climat et inégalités chez Oxfam. Plus on est riche, plus on a un mode de vie qui émet du CO2. Cela s’explique par la consommation de biens de luxe non-essentiels et particulièrement polluants comme des yachts ou des jets. »

      Cet élément avait déjà été mis en avant par une étude scientifique réalisée aux Etats-Unis en 2021, qui démontrait que les 20 plus grands milliardaires des Etats-Unis avaient une emprunte carbone moyenne de 8000 tonnes de CO2 par an, alors qu’elle est de 8 tonnes pour un « Européen normal », et ce, en ne tenant compte que des émissions liées au logement, aux transports et aux yachts.

      D’après Oxfam, les 0,1% les plus riches émettent 77 fois plus de CO2 que l’objectif de 2,8 tonnes de CO2 par personne demandé par les Accords de Paris pour rester sous les 1,5°C de réchauffement climatique.
      La moitié des Belges font partie des 10% les plus riches

      Le riche n’est pas toujours l’autre. Car en jetant un œil à qui sont les « 10% les plus riches de la planète », on retrouve environ la moitié de la population belge assure Alexandre Poidatz d’Oxfam. Le fait de savoir où on se place au niveau mondial démontre que « notre mode de vie actuel général en Belgique n’est pas compatible avec un réchauffement climatique limité à 1,5°C. Et de fait, alors que le Belge émet en moyenne 6 à 7 tonnes de CO2 par an, on devrait descendre cela à 2,6 tonnes de CO2 par an. »

      Selon Oxfam, pour réduire cela, il est nécessaire que l’Etat propose des modes de consommation alternatifs et moins polluants, en favorisant par exemple le train face à la voiture individuelle.
      La solution ? Réduire les modes de consommation « non-essentiels »

      Pour réduire ces émissions carbone, et combattre en même temps les « inégalités extrêmes », Oxfam propose une taxation des plus riches. « Cela permettrait de réduire les inégalités en garantissant un revenu quotidien minimum de 25 dollars à chacun tout en réduisant les émissions mondiales de 10% ».

      Et d’un cercle vicieux « richesse - pollution », on passerait alors à un cercle vertueux « répartition des richesses - réduction des émissions de CO2 ». « Mais pour créer ce cercle vertueux, on a besoin que les décideurs politiques et économiques puissent orienter l’argent vers une transition écologique qui soit juste », pointe Alexandre Poidatz. Un appel lancé à 10 jours du début de la COP 28 au Qatar.
      Méthodologie

      Pour désigner la part de la population « la plus riche », Oxfam s’est basé sur le « Word inequality Database » qui classe la répartition mondiale des revenus des 5,15 milliards d’adultes en termes en parité de pouvoir d’achat (1 dollar permet d’acheter moins de choses aux USA qu’au Kenya). La méthodologie utilisée par Oxfam est accessible en anglais. L’ensemble des statistiques croisées entre revenus et émissions de CO2 sont consultables sur le site emissions-inequality.org.

      Les émissions de CO2 attribuées aux personnes, et a fortiori aux plus riches, ne tiennent pas compte des éventuelles sociétés dont ils auraient des parts.

      https://www.rtbf.be/article/les-1-les-plus-riches-emettent-autant-de-co2-que-deux-tiers-de-l-humanite-selon

  • #Data_center emissions probably 662% higher than big tech claims. Can it keep up the ruse?

    Emissions from in-house data centers of #Google, #Microsoft, #Meta and #Apple may be 7.62 times higher than official tally.

    Big tech has made some big claims about greenhouse gas emissions in recent years. But as the rise of artificial intelligence creates ever bigger energy demands, it’s getting hard for the industry to hide the true costs of the data centers powering the tech revolution.

    According to a Guardian analysis, from 2020 to 2022 the real emissions from the “in-house” or company-owned data centers of Google, Microsoft, Meta and Apple are probably about 662% – or 7.62 times – higher than officially reported.

    Amazon is the largest emitter of the big five tech companies by a mile – the emissions of the second-largest emitter, Apple, were less than half of Amazon’s in 2022. However, Amazon has been kept out of the calculation above because its differing business model makes it difficult to isolate data center-specific emissions figures for the company.

    As energy demands for these data centers grow, many are worried that carbon emissions will, too. The International Energy Agency stated that data centers already accounted for 1% to 1.5% of global electricity consumption in 2022 – and that was before the AI boom began with ChatGPT’s launch at the end of that year.

    AI is far more energy-intensive on data centers than typical cloud-based applications. According to Goldman Sachs, a ChatGPT query needs nearly 10 times as much electricity to process as a Google search, and data center power demand will grow 160% by 2030. Goldman competitor Morgan Stanley’s research has made similar findings, projecting data center emissions globally to accumulate to 2.5bn metric tons of CO2 equivalent by 2030.

    In the meantime, all five tech companies have claimed carbon neutrality, though Google dropped the label last year as it stepped up its carbon accounting standards. Amazon is the most recent company to do so, claiming in July that it met its goal seven years early, and that it had implemented a gross emissions cut of 3%.

    “It’s down to creative accounting,” explained a representative from Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, an advocacy group composed of current Amazon employees who are dissatisfied with their employer’s action on climate. “Amazon – despite all the PR and propaganda that you’re seeing about their solar farms, about their electric vans – is expanding its fossil fuel use, whether it’s in data centers or whether it’s in diesel trucks.”
    A misguided metric

    The most important tools in this “creative accounting” when it comes to data centers are renewable energy certificates, or Recs. These are certificates that a company purchases to show it is buying renewable energy-generated electricity to match a portion of its electricity consumption – the catch, though, is that the renewable energy in question doesn’t need to be consumed by a company’s facilities. Rather, the site of production can be anywhere from one town over to an ocean away.

    Recs are used to calculate “market-based” emissions, or the official emissions figures used by the firms. When Recs and offsets are left out of the equation, we get “location-based emissions” – the actual emissions generated from the area where the data is being processed.

    The trend in those emissions is worrying. If these five companies were one country, the sum of their “location-based” emissions in 2022 would rank them as the 33rd highest-emitting country, behind the Philippines and above Algeria.

    Many data center industry experts also recognize that location-based metrics are more honest than the official, market-based numbers reported.

    “Location-based [accounting] gives an accurate picture of the emissions associated with the energy that’s actually being consumed to run the data center. And Uptime’s view is that it’s the right metric,” said Jay Dietrich, the research director of sustainability at Uptime Institute, a leading data center advisory and research organization.

    Nevertheless, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol, a carbon accounting oversight body, allows Recs to be used in official reporting, though the extent to which they should be allowed remains controversial between tech companies and has led to a lobbying battle over GHG Protocol’s rule-making process between two factions.

    On one side there is the Emissions First Partnership, spearheaded by Amazon and Meta. It aims to keep Recs in the accounting process regardless of their geographic origins. In practice, this is only a slightly looser interpretation of what GHG Protocol already permits.

    The opposing faction, headed by Google and Microsoft, argues that there needs to be time-based and location-based matching of renewable production and energy consumption for data centers. Google calls this its 24/7 goal, or its goal to have all of its facilities run on renewable energy 24 hours a day, seven days a week by 2030. Microsoft calls it its 100/100/0 goal, or its goal to have all its facilities running on 100% carbon-free energy 100% of the time, making zero carbon-based energy purchases by 2030.

    Google has already phased out its Rec use and Microsoft aims to do the same with low-quality “unbundled” (non location-specific) Recs by 2030.

    Academics and carbon management industry leaders alike are also against the GHG Protocol’s permissiveness on Recs. In an open letter from 2015, more than 50 such individuals argued that “it should be a bedrock principle of GHG accounting that no company be allowed to report a reduction in its GHG footprint for an action that results in no change in overall GHG emissions. Yet this is precisely what can happen under the guidance given the contractual/Rec-based reporting method.”

    To GHG Protocol’s credit, the organization does ask companies to report location-based figures alongside their Rec-based figures. Despite that, no company includes both location-based and market-based metrics for all three subcategories of emissions in the bodies of their annual environmental reports.

    In fact, location-based numbers are only directly reported (that is, not hidden in third-party assurance statements or in footnotes) by two companies – Google and Meta. And those two firms only include those figures for one subtype of emissions: scope 2, or the indirect emissions companies cause by purchasing energy from utilities and large-scale generators.
    In-house data centers

    Scope 2 is the category that includes the majority of the emissions that come from in-house data center operations, as it concerns the emissions associated with purchased energy – mainly, electricity.

    Data centers should also make up a majority of overall scope 2 emissions for each company except Amazon, given that the other sources of scope 2 emissions for these companies stem from the electricity consumed by firms’ offices and retail spaces – operations that are relatively small and not carbon-intensive. Amazon has one other carbon-intensive business vertical to account for in its scope 2 emissions: its warehouses and e-commerce logistics.

    For the firms that give data center-specific data – Meta and Microsoft – this holds true: data centers made up 100% of Meta’s market-based (official) scope 2 emissions and 97.4% of its location-based emissions. For Microsoft, those numbers were 97.4% and 95.6%, respectively.

    The huge differences in location-based and official scope 2 emissions numbers showcase just how carbon intensive data centers really are, and how deceptive firms’ official emissions numbers can be. Meta, for example, reports its official scope 2 emissions for 2022 as 273 metric tons CO2 equivalent – all of that attributable to data centers. Under the location-based accounting system, that number jumps to more than 3.8m metric tons of CO2 equivalent for data centers alone – a more than 19,000 times increase.

    A similar result can be seen with Microsoft. The firm reported its official data center-related emissions for 2022 as 280,782 metric tons CO2 equivalent. Under a location-based accounting method, that number jumps to 6.1m metric tons CO2 equivalent. That’s a nearly 22 times increase.

    While Meta’s reporting gap is more egregious, both firms’ location-based emissions are higher because they undercount their data center emissions specifically, with 97.4% of the gap between Meta’s location-based and official scope 2 number in 2022 being unreported data center-related emissions, and 95.55% of Microsoft’s.

    Specific data center-related emissions numbers aren’t available for the rest of the firms. However, given that Google and Apple have similar scope 2 business models to Meta and Microsoft, it is likely that the multiple on how much higher their location-based data center emissions are would be similar to the multiple on how much higher their overall location-based scope 2 emissions are.

    In total, the sum of location-based emissions in this category between 2020 and 2022 was at least 275% higher (or 3.75 times) than the sum of their official figures. Amazon did not provide the Guardian with location-based scope 2 figures for 2020 and 2021, so its official (and probably much lower) numbers were used for this calculation for those years.
    Third-party data centers

    Big tech companies also rent a large portion of their data center capacity from third-party data center operators (or “colocation” data centers). According to the Synergy Research Group, large tech companies (or “hyperscalers”) represented 37% of worldwide data center capacity in 2022, with half of that capacity coming through third-party contracts. While this group includes companies other than Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft and Apple, it gives an idea of the extent of these firms’ activities with third-party data centers.

    Those emissions should theoretically fall under scope 3, all emissions a firm is responsible for that can’t be attributed to the fuel or electricity it consumes.

    When it comes to a big tech firm’s operations, this would encapsulate everything from the manufacturing processes of the hardware it sells (like the iPhone or Kindle) to the emissions from employees’ cars during their commutes to the office.

    When it comes to data centers, scope 3 emissions include the carbon emitted from the construction of in-house data centers, as well as the carbon emitted during the manufacturing process of the equipment used inside those in-house data centers. It may also include those emissions as well as the electricity-related emissions of third-party data centers that are partnered with.

    However, whether or not these emissions are fully included in reports is almost impossible to prove. “Scope 3 emissions are hugely uncertain,” said Dietrich. “This area is a mess just in terms of accounting.”

    According to Dietrich, some third-party data center operators put their energy-related emissions in their own scope 2 reporting, so those who rent from them can put those emissions into their scope 3. Other third-party data center operators put energy-related emissions into their scope 3 emissions, expecting their tenants to report those emissions in their own scope 2 reporting.

    Additionally, all firms use market-based metrics for these scope 3 numbers, which means third-party data center emissions are also undercounted in official figures.

    Of the firms that report their location-based scope 3 emissions in the footnotes, only Apple has a large gap between its official scope 3 figure and its location-based scope 3 figure.

    This is the only sizable reporting gap for a firm that is not data center-related – the majority of Apple’s scope 3 gap is due to Recs being applied towards emissions associated with the manufacturing of hardware (such as the iPhone).

    Apple does not include transmission and distribution losses or third-party cloud contracts in its location-based scope 3. It only includes those figures in its market-based numbers, under which its third party cloud contracts report zero emissions (offset by Recs). Therefore in both of Apple’s total emissions figures – location-based and market-based – the actual emissions associated with their third party data center contracts are nowhere to be found.”

    .
    2025 and beyond

    Even though big tech hides these emissions, they are due to keep rising. Data centers’ electricity demand is projected to double by 2030 due to the additional load that artificial intelligence poses, according to the Electric Power Research Institute.

    Google and Microsoft both blamed AI for their recent upticks in market-based emissions.

    “The relative contribution of AI computing loads to Google’s data centers, as I understood it when I left [in 2022], was relatively modest,” said Chris Taylor, current CEO of utility storage firm Gridstor and former site lead for Google’s data center energy strategy unit. “Two years ago, [AI] was not the main thing that we were worried about, at least on the energy team.”

    Taylor explained that most of the growth that he saw in data centers while at Google was attributable to growth in Google Cloud, as most enterprises were moving their IT tasks to the firm’s cloud servers.

    Whether today’s power grids can withstand the growing energy demands of AI is uncertain. One industry leader – Marc Ganzi, the CEO of DigitalBridge, a private equity firm that owns two of the world’s largest third-party data center operators – has gone as far as to say that the data center sector may run out of power within the next two years.

    And as grid interconnection backlogs continue to pile up worldwide, it may be nearly impossible for even the most well intentioned of companies to get new renewable energy production capacity online in time to meet that demand.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/sep/15/data-center-gas-emissions-tech
    #données #émissions #mensonge #ChatGPT #AI #IA #intelligence_artificielle #CO2 #émissions_de_CO2 #centre_de_données

    • AI’s emissions are about to skyrocket even further

      Data center emissions have tripled since 2018. As more complex AI models like OpenAI’s Sora see broad release, those figures will likely go through the roof.

      It’s no secret that the current AI boom is using up immense amounts of energy. Now we have a better idea of how much.

      A new paper, from teams at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, examined 2,132 data centers operating in the United States (78% of all facilities in the country). These facilities—essentially buildings filled to the brim with rows of servers—are where AI models get trained, and they also get “pinged” every time we send a request through models like ChatGPT. They require huge amounts of energy both to power the servers and to keep them cool.

      Since 2018, carbon emissions from data centers in the US have tripled. For the 12 months ending August 2024, data centers were responsible for 105 million metric tons of CO2, accounting for 2.18% of national emissions (for comparison, domestic commercial airlines are responsible for about 131 million metric tons). About 4.59% of all the energy used in the US goes toward data centers, a figure that’s doubled since 2018.

      It’s difficult to put a number on how much AI in particular, which has been booming since ChatGPT launched in November 2022, is responsible for this surge. That’s because data centers process lots of different types of data—in addition to training or pinging AI models, they do everything from hosting websites to storing your photos in the cloud. However, the researchers say, AI’s share is certainly growing rapidly as nearly every segment of the economy attempts to adopt the technology.

      “It’s a pretty big surge,” says Eric Gimon, a senior fellow at the think tank Energy Innovation, who was not involved in the research. “There’s a lot of breathless analysis about how quickly this exponential growth could go. But it’s still early days for the business in terms of figuring out efficiencies, or different kinds of chips.”

      Notably, the sources for all this power are particularly “dirty.” Since so many data centers are located in coal-producing regions, like Virginia, the “carbon intensity” of the energy they use is 48% higher than the national average. The paper, which was published on arXiv and has not yet been peer-reviewed, found that 95% of data centers in the US are built in places with sources of electricity that are dirtier than the national average.

      There are causes other than simply being located in coal country, says Falco Bargagli-Stoffi, an author of the paper and Assistant Professor at UCLA Fielding School of Public Health. “Dirtier energy is available throughout the entire day,” he says, and plenty of data centers require that to maintain peak operation 24-7. “Renewable energy, like wind or solar, might not be as available.” Political or tax incentives, and local pushback, can also affect where data centers get built.

      One key shift in AI right now means that the field’s emissions are soon likely to skyrocket. AI models are rapidly moving from fairly simple text generators like ChatGPT toward highly complex image, video, and music generators. Until now, many of these “multimodal” models have been stuck in the research phase, but that’s changing.

      OpenAI released its video generation model Sora to the public on December 9, and its website has been so flooded with traffic from people eager to test it out that it is still not functioning properly. Competing models, like Veo from Google and Movie Gen from Meta, have still not been released publicly, but if those companies follow OpenAI’s lead as they have in the past, they might be soon. Music generation models from Suno and Udio are growing (despite lawsuits), and Nvidia released its own audio generator last month. Google is working on its Astra project, which will be a video-AI companion that can converse with you about your surroundings in real time.

      “As we scale up to images and video, the data sizes increase exponentially,” says Gianluca Guidi, a PhD student in artificial intelligence at University of Pisa and IMT Lucca and visiting researcher at Harvard, who is the paper’s lead author. Combine that with wider adoption, he says, and emissions will soon jump.

      One of the goals of the researchers was to build a more reliable way to get snapshots of just how much energy data centers are using. That’s been a more complicated task than you might expect, given that the data is dispersed across a number of sources and agencies. They’ve now built a portal that shows data center emissions across the country. The long-term goal of the data pipeline is to inform future regulatory efforts to curb emissions from data centers, which are predicted to grow enormously in the coming years.

      “There’s going to be increased pressure, between the environmental and sustainability-conscious community and Big Tech,” says Francesca Dominici, director of the Harvard Data Science Initiative, Harvard Professor and another coauthor. “But my prediction is that there is not going to be regulation. Not in the next four years.”

      https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/12/13/1108719/ais-emissions-are-about-to-skyrocket-even-further

  • Comment les #entreprises_polluantes ont transformé les #quotas gratuits de #CO₂ en un marché de plusieurs milliards d’euros
    https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2023/05/30/comment-les-entreprises-polluantes-ont-transforme-les-quotas-gratuits-de-co-

    C’est une histoire de trente ans qui se chiffre en milliards d’euros. Trente longues années qui ne resteront pas dans les annales de l’Union européenne (#UE) comme étant les plus glorieuses dans sa lutte contre le réchauffement climatique. Trois décennies au cours desquelles les #industries les plus #polluantes du Vieux Continent – l’acier, le ciment, le pétrole, l’aluminium et d’autres – auront reçu gratuitement des quotas d’#émissions_de_CO2, sortes de « droits à polluer » supposés être réduits dans le temps, afin de les inciter à réduire leurs émissions de gaz à effet de serre.

    Or, le dispositif a rapidement été détourné de son objet pour devenir un outil financier permettant à ses bénéficiaires d’augmenter leurs profits, grâce à la revente de ces quotas. Rien qu’entre 2013 et 2021, estime le Fonds mondial pour la nature, les plus grosses industries émettrices ont empoché 98,5 milliards d’euros et n’ont consacré qu’un quart de cette somme (25 milliards d’euros) à l’action climatique.

    Le système des #quotas_gratuits, lancé le 1er janvier 2005 et toujours en vigueur, est appelé à disparaître en 2034. Le 18 avril, le Parlement européen a en effet adopté un nouveau plan pour le climat prévoyant son remplacement progressif par un « mécanisme d’ajustement carbone aux frontières » de l’Union, dans le but de verdir, cette fois, les importations des secteurs les plus émetteurs de CO2. L’UE, en optant pour un dispositif plus simple, n’a pas fait officiellement son mea culpa. Mais c’est bien de cela qu’il s’agit.

    Détournement « légal »
    Comme nous le révélons au terme de huit mois d’enquête avec le soutien financier du fonds Investigative Journalism for Europe (IJ4EU), ce système, qui se voulait bienveillant à l’égard des industriels, a été détourné de son but initial. Nous nous sommes intéressés aux sidérurgistes et aux cimentiers de France et d’Espagne, deux secteurs qui font partie des plus gros bénéficiaires.

    L’analyse approfondie des transactions financières enregistrées par ces acteurs sur le système d’échange de quotas d’émissions (SEQE-EU-ETS en anglais) confirme ce que certains supposaient depuis longtemps : les entreprises ont revendu une partie de leurs quotas gratuits pour des centaines de millions d’euros, parfois des milliards. Mais, contrairement à l’énorme fraude à la TVA qui avait ébranlé le dispositif à ses débuts, faisant perdre 6 milliards d’euros aux pays de l’UE et donnant lieu à des condamnations en justice bien des années après, le détournement dont il est question s’opère de façon légale.

  • Nous sommes au bord du précipice
    https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2023/03/20/le-rapport-de-synthese-du-giec-un-guide-pratique-pour-desamorcer-la-bombe-a-

    Je vous donne directement le scenario catastrophe prévu (« le très émetteur ») — ce qui arrivera donc : la température mondiale s’élèvera, lors de la période 2081-2100 de 2,5 à 4,4 °C « en cas de poursuite des politiques actuelles ».

    La poursuite des émissions entraînera des perturbations plus importantes du cycle de l’eau, une accélération de la débâcle des glaces, de l’#acidification et de la #désoxygénation des #océans, des baisses de #productions_agricoles, ainsi qu’une moindre efficacité des puits de carbone (forêts, océans, etc.), qui absorbent actuellement la moitié des #émissions_de_CO2. Avec, à la clé, encore davantage de #mortalité, de pénuries, de pauvreté, de famines ou de conflits. Ces impacts seront non seulement « de plus en plus complexes à gérer », mais ils se produiront souvent simultanément, avec parfois des conséquences « en cascade » d’une région à l’autre.

    Certains changements sont irréversibles. L’#élévation_du_niveau_des_mers va par exemple se poursuivre pendant des siècles ou des millénaires, sous l’effet de leur réchauffement et de la #fonte_des_calottes_glaciaires, qui vont également perdurer sur des échelles de temps très longues.

    Il ne reste que ça d’essentiel une fois retirées les passages utiles sur les causes et les implorations inutiles à destination des agents politiques du capitalisme mondiale, du genre (jeu : trouvez l’intrus — attention, c’est difficile) :

    Pourtant, l’humanité peut encore reculer et éviter le grand saut.

    … cependant, le Père Noël existe.

    … il reste une chance de limiter le réchauffement planétaire à 1,5 °C par rapport à la période préindustrielle.

    … on peut freiner le désastre

    La fenêtre pour éviter les pires effets de la #crise_climatique « se ferme rapidement », mais on peut encore s’y faufiler…

    … les chances de limiter le #réchauffement à 1,5 °C, à condition d’un sursaut international…

    Tous les pays doivent « appuyer immédiatement sur l’accélérateur », résume #Antonio_Guterres, qui demande aux économies développées d’avancer l’atteinte de la neutralité carbone au plus vite…

    La seule solution est entre les mains des producteurs eux-mêmes — la classe des travailleurs. Tous les discours nous enjoignant d’espérer des États aux ordres des possédants, les véritables prédateurs, ne sont sur des diversions mortifères.

    #GIEC #rapport #capitalisme #capitaloscène #réchauffement_climatique #catastrophes #désastre_climatique

  • ArcelorMittal : révélations sur un pollueur hors-la-loi
    https://disclose.ngo/fr/article/arcelormittal-revelations-sur-un-pollueur-hors-la-loi

    Depuis dix ans, le leader européen de l’acier dépasse les limites de pollution autorisées par la loi, en dépit de graves risques sanitaires. Des documents confidentiels obtenus par Disclose révèlent des manquements répétés au sein des deux principales usines d’ArcelorMittal en France, à Dunkerque et Fos-sur-Mer. Lire l’article

  • ArcelorMittal : un champion des émissions de CO2 biberonné aux aides publiques
    https://disclose.ngo/fr/article/arcelormittal-un-champion-des-emissions-de-co2-biberonne-aux-aides-publiqu

    Depuis 2013, le géant de l’acier ArcelorMittal a reçu pas moins de 392 millions d’euros de fonds publics, malgré des infractions répétées à la réglementation environnementale et de multiples condamnations pour pollution en France. Lire l’article

  • #Développement_humain (2020)

    - L´#indice_de_développement_humain et ses composantes
    – L´évolution de l´indice de développement humain
    – L´indice de développement humain ajusté aux #inégalités
    – L´indice de développement de #genre
    – L´indice d´#inégalités_de_genre
    – Indice de #pauvreté multidimensionnelle : pays en développement
    – Tendances démographiques
    #Santé
    – Niveaux d´#instruction
    #Revenu_national et composition des ressources
    #Travail et #emploi
    #Sécurité_humaine
    #Mobilité humaine et flux de capitaux
    – Qualité du développement humain
    – Inégalités femmes-hommes sur le cycle de vie
    – Autonomisation des #femmes
    #Durabilité_environnementale
    – Viabilité socio-économique

    http://www.cartostat.eu/dr=2020_developpement_humain/F/TABLEAU.html

    #cartothèque #cartes #visualisations #développement_humain
    #ressources_pédagogiques #statistiques #chiffres #monde
    #inégalités #démographie #éducation #mobilité_humaine #dette #tourisme #migrations #téléphone #téléphone_mobile #mortalité_infantile #paludisme #tuberculeuse #VIH #HIV #scolarisation #alphabétisation #PIB #chômage #réfugiés #IDPs #déplacés_internes #suicide #suicides #violence_domestique #violence_conjugale #alimentation #déficit_alimentaire #espérance_de_vie #lits_d'hôpitaux #soins #médecin #PISA #électricité #eau_potable #assainissement #travail_domestique #accouchement #contraception #congé_maternité #combustibles_fossiles #CO2 #émissions_de_CO2 #forêt #engrais #industrie_agro-alimentaire #pollution #pollution_atmosphérique #hygiène #dépenses_militaires #armée #pauvreté

    ping @reka

  • Le #Phare des Baleines de l’île de Ré, mémoire des transitions énergétiques

    Le basculement du guidage des #navires depuis les #phares vers les #satellites a-t-il réduit les besoins en #énergie_fossile et par voie de conséquence les #émissions_de_CO2 ?

    C’est probablement l’inverse : l’énergie primaire utilisée par les #technologies_de_l’information n’est pas directement visible comme l’étaient l’huile de baleine ou le charbon hissé au sommet des anciens phares. Mais elle est élevée car l’imagerie satellite implique toute une infrastructure consommatrice d’#énergie_grise. Surtout, le guidage par satellite permet de multiplier les usages finaux et contribue à la croissance très rapide de la navigation maritime : l’une des sources d’émission #CO2 qui augmente le plus rapidement dans le monde !

    http://theconversation.com/le-phare-des-baleines-de-lile-de-re-memoire-des-transitions-energet

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phare_des_Baleines

    #transition_energetique #ecologie #transport_maritime #ile_de_ré

  • De l’impossibilité de l’éco-fuite et de l’inefficacité de la #consom’action (Nicolas Casaux, Le Partage)
    http://partage-le.com/2017/11/8324

    Les 10% d’individus les plus riches du monde sont responsables de la moitié des émissions de GES d’origine anthropique. La moitié la plus pauvre de l’humanité est responsable d’environ 10% des émissions de GES d’origine anthropique.
    […]
    Et pourtant les gouvernements, comme toutes les institutions et la doxa dominantes, suggèrent qu’une manière de diminuer les #émissions_de_CO2 afin de faire un geste pour la planète consiste en ce que les gens ordinaires se brossent les dents à sec et s’éclairent avec des ampoules basse consommation.
    […]
    Ce qu’on peut remarquer c’est qu’on ne lit que très rarement voire jamais de suggestion incitant les riches à cesser d’acheter des yachts ou des jets privés et de les utiliser. Tandis qu’on incite le citoyen moyen à faire preuve d’une certaine #vertu_écologique, les riches du monde, qui sont de plus en plus nombreux, consomment toujours plus. Pas non plus de recommandations concernant l’achat ou l’utilisation de smartphones, de téléviseurs et d’appareils électroniques en général, dont les ventes sont mondialement croissantes, dont les productions épuisent les #ressources non-renouvelables tout en émettant des quantités astronomiques de #gaz_à_effet_de_serre […].
    La plupart des suggestions grand public consistent en des changements minimes des #modes_de_vie individuels, elles ne visent jamais à s’opposer frontalement aux logiques de #croissance et de #consommation qui dirigent la civilisation industrielle et son #biocide planétaire.
    La solution au désastre #socio-écologique en cours passe nécessairement par la #décroissance. Seulement, cette décroissance n’adviendra certainement pas par l’ascèse écologique (très relative) d’une minorité d’individus parmi ceux qui n’étaient déjà pas les pires pollueurs et émetteurs de GES du monde.
    […]
    Nous avons besoin d’un « contre-frottement pour stopper la machine » (Thoreau), d’une résistance politique proactive et organisée à même d’entreprendre des actions véritablement déstabilisantes et perturbatrices de la #civilisation_industrielle mondialisée.
    Au lieu de quoi les médias supposément alternatifs/libres/indépendants (parfois les trois à la fois, marketing oblige) prennent les illusions de l’#écocapitalisme pour l’« antithèse » du #capitalisme, pour une solution aux problèmes de notre temps.

    #écologie

  • Almost three-quarters of new ships carrying consumer goods already exceed IMO’s post-2025 energy efficiency requirement – new study

    Almost three-quarters (71%) of all new containerships, which emit around a quarter of global ship #CO2 emissions, already comply with the post-2025 requirements of the IMO’s Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), a new study reveals. Additionally, the best 10% of new containerships are already almost twice as efficient as the requirement for 10 years time. These findings are part of a study based on analysis of the International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) own data and conducted by Transport & Environment (T&E), a founding member of the Clean Shipping Coalition (CSC).


    https://www.transportenvironment.org/press/almost-three-quarters-new-ships-carrying-consumer-goods-alread

    #transport_maritime #émissions_de_CO2
    via @reka

  • Les grandes villes se mobilisent pour le climat
    http://fr.myeurop.info/2015/12/08/les-grandes-villes-se-mobilisent-pour-le-climat-14454

    Daniel Vigneron

    En marge de la Cop 21, les grandes villes mondiales se sont engagées à réduire plus vite leurs émissions. Partout en #Europe, les métropoles annoncent des initiatives pour contrer le réchauffement.

    Chronique sur #RFI - Les villes et le climat

    Réunis vendredi dernier en marge de la Cop 21 qui se poursuit à Paris, 700 maires de grandes #métropoles_mondiales se sont montrés résolus à prendre une lar lire la (...)

    #EUROFOCUS #Allemagne #Danemark #France #Italie #Pologne #Royaume-Uni #C40 #circulation_alternée #émissions_de_CO2 #émissions_de_dioxyde_de_carbone #péages_urbains #pollution #pollution_de_l'air #villes_polluées