Same as the title, any resource in this direction would also help.

The results of the U.S. election are the worst-case outcome for climate policy, writes Michael Gerrard. Any hope for U.S. progress on climate now lies with cities, states, and the clean tech sector. Read more.

https://preview.redd.it/ke51z8v4mn1e1.jpg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0f8b966ecfca40b17f222dd9489cfd734d53426d

Am I calculating this correctly?

Trump's 'drill baby drill' policies are expected to create 4 billion tonnes of additional CO2 by 2030 (5 years from taking office).

https://www.axios.com/2024/03/06/co2-emissions-trump-biden-scenarios

In 2023, there were just under 40 billion tonnes of CO2 emmitted globally.

https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2023/executive-summary

So that means that Trump's new policy will increase global CO2 emmissions by about 2% per year (equivalent to 2 additional Switzerlands) - is that number correct?

Trump has returned to the Oval Office with Republican control of Congress, and there are discussions about dismantling Biden’s climate policy, particularly the Inflation Reduction Act. However, with key Republican states benefiting economically from clean energy investments, could Trump risk alienating his base?

Additionally, with Elon Musk in his corner, will this complicate matters?

More in this perspective: https://pvbuzz.com/trump-repeal-inflation-reduction-act/

After some research, it appears that the Kuwaiti government, represented by the Environment Public Authority (KEPA), announced a goal of reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2060. This announcement was made during last year’s COP, as reported by Kuwait News Agency (https://www.kuna.net.kw/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=3125088&language=en).

However, I struggled to find any detailed information about this strategy online. KEPA’s Climate Change page (https://epa.gov.kw/en-us/ClimateChange) doesn’t mention it, and the only other reference I found was a brief mention in KEPA’s magazine from earlier this year (source in Arabic: https://epa.gov.kw/Portals/0/pdf/EPAMagazine172.pdf). There was another brief mention from October event, where KEPA director stated that the strategy will achieve net zero by 2050 (!).

I’m honestly a bit confused. The country formally announced this strategy nearly a year ago, and it’s still being referred to, yet there’s no official documentation or published details available.

During my search, I identified two international consultants who contributed to the strategy’s study. According to them, they have already submitted all their work to their contracting agency, UNEP, which I understand is providing technical assistance to KEPA and basically drafted the strategy on their behalf.

The question now, is this normal when it comes to climate strategies?

Shouldn't a strategy be made public for different parties prepare themselves for what to come that might affect them?

Could the strategy development still being delayed?

By the way, there is another net zero 2050 strategy in Kuwait, which is the Kuwait Petroleum Corporation (KPC) strategy. However, my understanding is that this strategy is not netzero carbon emissions but rather net zero green house gas emissions... and not from KPCs Kuwait operations but GLOBAL operations.

I was also not able to find any details on this, the fact that they intend to use CCSU, and that local research institute is currently investigation CCSU, makes me wonder if their strategy as well has not been fully developed and still in early stages.

Appreciate any inputs you might have. Thanks!

Trump is returning to the White House: What happens to the ITC & IRA?

This article examines the current state of solar tax credits and their development under President Biden. It also discusses potential changes that may occur now that Trump has been re-elected and implications for Canada.

⬇️⬇️⬇️

More in this perspective: https://pvbuzz.com/second-trump-administration-mean-canada-itc/

Of course no country is immune to the effects of climate change, but it is probably realistic that effective policies will be implemented sooner when the effects help the country itself.

In The Netherlands (where I live) we perhaps stand to loose half the country in ~200 years due to a rising sea level without effective climate policies. But being a small country, whatever we do only has this much impact of the overall climate.

I have not been able to find a comprehensive study of the (economical) impacts of climate change per country versus the ability to act (with significant results).

I’m especially curious to learn about the position of China in this equation.