Climate Change Mega Thread

[The Green Barbarian]

and in a big "poof" another huge whack of taxpayer cash gets lit on fire as yet another solar company goes down, all in the name of fairy tales. They will just never learn.

SunPower files for bankruptcy protection, agrees to sell some assets for $45 mln

Aug 6 (Reuters) - Solar firm SunPower (SPWR.O), opens new tab said it had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States and agreed to sell some of its business to Complete Solaria (CSLR.O), opens new tab for $45 million in cash.

Shares of SunPower fell about 45% to 44 cents premarket on Tuesday after the company listed its assets and liabilities in the range of $1 billion to $10 billion, in a filing with the bankruptcy court in Delaware late on Monday.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/s ... 024-08-06/

https://x.com/JavierBlas/status/1820739054385701310

[fluffy]

Oil producers lobby for permission to operate in the shadows:

Fossil fuel companies pour on the pressure to weaken disclosure rules

Fossil fuel companies are pressuring a financial standards agency to weaken proposed rules to report on greenhouse gas emissions. If the board caves, it could threaten Canada’s economic position through the energy transition, experts say.

The Canadian Sustainability Standards Board (CSSB) is currently studying whether Canada should adopt an internationally recognized set of standards for emissions disclosure. The CSSB is not a federal body, but is an influential agency Canadian financial regulators are looking to in order to inform the rules they will set. The goal is to create a benchmark for emissions reporting to give investors a sense of how risky an investment is as the energy transition unfolds.

Simply put, the higher a company's emissions, the more vulnerable it is in a world increasingly focused on reaching net-zero emissions by mid-century. That’s why investors want to know how exposed companies are to the energy transition.

In March, the CSSB launched a consultation process to gather feedback on implementing the international standards, including whether fully adopting the standards, or constructing rules unique to Canadian companies would be useful. More than 20 countries representing over half of global GDP have already adopted the international rules.

This month, the CSSB published the submissions it received, revealing significant pushback from fossil fuel companies and industry associations.

Companies like Enbridge and TC Energy, alongside fossil fuel lobby groups including the Canadian Gas Association, the Canadian Fuels Association, the Mining Association of Canada, and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, submitted recommendations to the CSSB calling for less stringent emissions reporting rules, according to an analysis of the submissions from U.K.-based think tank InfluenceMap.

Common to many of those submissions was an argument that Canada should align with the United States Securities and Exchange Commision (SEC) rules, which do not require companies to report their Scope 3 emissions. In the fossil fuel industry, Scope 3 refers to emissions when the product is ultimately burned, like what comes from a vehicle’s tailpipe. (Scope 1 and 2 emissions, which include a company’s other, more directly controlled, emissions, are already part of the reporting structure.)

“This would mean companies would not have to disclose the full picture of their contribution to climate change to investors or policymakers, and would mean Canadian regulation would fall out of step with the ‘global baseline’ of climate disclosures promulgated by the ISSB, said Cleo Rank, a senior policy analyst with InfluenceMap, in a statement.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2024/0 ... MAIL_ID%5D

[rustled]

This is pretty funny, fluffy:

“This would mean companies would not have to disclose the full picture of their contribution to climate change to investors or policymakers, and would mean Canadian regulation would fall out of step with the ‘global baseline’ of climate disclosures promulgated by the ISSB, said Cleo Rank, a senior policy analyst with InfluenceMap, in a statement.[/i]

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2024/0 ... MAIL_ID%5D

So the standard is a standard set by the ISSB. What's the ISSB?

The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) is a standard-setting body established in 2021–2022 under the IFRS Foundation, whose mandate is the creation and development of sustainability-related financial reporting standards to meet investors' needs for sustainability reporting.

So this is for investors who are in the thrall of climate alarmism, or pandering to those promoting climate alarmism as a sales tool, etc.

Whether or not Canada meets a standard set by a self-serving body doesn't matter much to folk who aren't in the thrall of climate alarmism.

[fluffy]

I don't read it that way. I see it as the industry trying to avoid being honest about the emissions they are responsible for. Much the same way attempts to regulate greenwashing got so much resistance.

[rustled]

I don't read it that way. I see it as the industry trying to avoid being honest about the emissions they are responsible for. Much the same way attempts to regulate greenwashing got so much resistance.

Perception bias changes how we see things.

Expecting industry to bow to arbitrary "standards" to appease those still in the thrall of climate alarm is at best costly. It's also counterproductive. It's important for us to understand the agendas of those setting these "standards".

[fluffy]

As it is important for us to understand the wishes of the polluters themselves that they set their own standards.

[hozzle]

As it is important for us to understand the wishes of the polluters themselves that they set their own standards.

The very same accusers to which you mention are just a polluted. Only difference is denial.

[Fanboy]

I don't read it that way. I see it as the industry trying to avoid being honest about the emissions they are responsible for. Much the same way attempts to regulate greenwashing got so much resistance.

Because they are on the other side of an argument from you. Doesn't mean that is what they are doing. Let's not forget that the list you provided accounts for what percentage of the Canadian economy?

[rustled]

As it is important for us to understand the wishes of the polluters themselves that they set their own standards.

Canada has had pollution standards for decades. We've had these standards long before the ISSB set their arbitrary standards for "sustainability reporting".

While the climate alarmists do seem to want to muddy the waters by pretending the ISSB standards for "sustainability reporting" are necessary to prevent pollution, there are fewer members of the public still gullible enough to believe this.

[fluffy]

Somewhere between "alarmism" and "denial" there's some fertile ground, call it "prudent caution". The evidence is out there and easily accessed, one only needs an open mind.

[rustled]

Somewhere between "alarmism" and "denial" there's some fertile ground, call it "prudent caution". The evidence is out there and easily accessed, one only needs an open mind.

Prudent caution is what those NOT in the thrall of alarmism continue to recommend: protect the environment, AND strengthen our economy and our infrastructure to help us withstand whatever a changing climate brings us. Those in the thrall of alarmism are less open to this prudent approach, and continue to promote policies that not only damage the environment, but also reduce our capacity to prepare for respond to the negative impacts of a changing climate.

[fluffy]

You're ignoring the part where the actual polluters don't want to change, they just want to put forth the appearance of effort to change. This is why policies that seek to enforce honesty are met with resistance.

[GordonH]

You're ignoring the part where the actual polluters don't want to change, they just want to put forth the appearance of effort to change. This is why policies that seek to enforce honesty are met with resistance.

How about honesty starts with the politicians, lately you probably get more honesty from used vehicle salespeople than any politician.

[rustled]

You're ignoring the part where the actual polluters don't want to change, they just want to put forth the appearance of effort to change. This is why policies that seek to enforce honesty are met with resistance.

Canadian energy producers are operating under some of the most stringent anti-pollution measures in the world. Muddying the waters with "sustainability reporting" from any self-serving agency feeding on - and perpetuating - climate alarmism that results in environmental damage and economic damage is utterly dishonest, and this dishonesty ought to be met with resistance.

It's good to see fewer people are falling for dishonest climate alarmism!

[hozzle]

You're ignoring the part where the actual polluters don't want to change, they just want to put forth the appearance of effort to change. This is why policies that seek to enforce honesty are met with resistance.

No... there is more to it than you've pointed to... "Just Stop Oil" organizers, for example, are grifters and those that choose to ignore the fact they use oil on a daily basis tells a lot about their followers & supporters, because all the climate activists know deep down inside their cold hearts they cannot survive without oil.

So... yes there is climate change going on, but I believe it is a natural progression. If folks out there say I am a polluter and don't want change... then I say "look in the mirror".