Search results

The US fossil fuel industry is vulnerable to opposition from other sectors of the ruling class. Non-fossil fuel capitalists might conclude that climate breakdown jeopardizes their interests. State actors such as judges, regulators, and politicians may come to the same conclusion. However, these other elite actors are unlikely to take concerted collective action against fossil fuels in the absence of growing disruption by grassroots activists. Drawing from the history of the Obama, Trump, and Biden presidencies, I analyze the forces determining government climate policies and private-sector investments. I focus on how the climate and Indigenous movements have begun to force changes in the behavior of certain ruling-class interests. Of particular importance is these movements' progress in two areas: eroding the financial sector's willingness to fund and insure fossil fuels, and influencing judges and regulators to take actions that further undermine investors' confidence in fossil fuels. Our future hinges largely on whether the movements can build on these victories while expanding their base within labor unions and other strategically positioned sectors.

In the backdrop of growing global concern on escalating CO₂ emission leading to climate disorder and controversy between economic growth and environment, this study undertakes a decomposition analysis of the top 20 emitters of the world during 1992–2016 with two objectives: to identify the relative contribution of the major driving factors in CO₂ emission and to comprehend the role and performance of sectoral energy consumption pattern in changing the emission level.

The paper uses variance analysis method to perform two stage decomposition: first, it decomposes emission into the major driving factors, and, secondly, it also decomposes fossil fuel intensity of different sectors into fuel mix and energy intensity effects, which are new in the literature.

The results indicate that aggressive pursuit for economic growth, particularly by developing countries, is the major reason behind unprecedented emission growth, with income effect, fossil fuel intensity effect and population effect having substantial roles. Considerable decline in dependence on fossil fuel, coupled with rising emissions, signifies that emission intensity is still to be harnessed. Sectoral decomposition shows that while fossil fuel intensity has declined in residential sector, it has remarkably shot up in industry, transport and commercial sectors. On the other hand, sectoral energy intensity has declined, particularly due to favourable performances of transport and commercial sectors.

The detailed country-wise sectoral analysis identifies the sectors with favourable contribution in curtailing emission and lends a direction to other countries for policy making.

This study contributes by incorporating multi-country sectoral segregation in decomposition analysis. It focuses not only on energy intensity, but on the effect of energy substitution in each sector as well. It identifies the sectors that have lowered their dependence on fossil fuel to highlight that emission can effectively be dealt with through a prudent choice of fuel mix.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the ethical and environmental implications of allowing space resource extraction to disrupt existing fuel economies, including how companies can be held accountable for ensuring the responsible use of their space assets. It will also briefly consider how such assets should be taxed, and the cost/benefit analyses required to justify the considerable expense of supporting this emerging space industry.

This paper adopts theoretical bioethics methodologies to explore issues of normative ethics and the formulation of moral rules to govern individual, collective and institutional behaviour. Specifically, it considers social justice and social contract theory, consequentialist and deontological accounts of ethical evaluation. It also draws on sociological and organisational literature to discuss Dowling and Pfeffer’s (1975) and Suchman’s (1995) theories of pragmatic, cognitive and moral legitimacy as they may be applied to off-world mining regulations and the handling of space assets.

The findings of this conceptual paper indicate there is both a growing appetite for tighter resource extraction regulations to address climate change and wealth concentration globally, and an opportunity to establish and legitimise new ethical norms for commercial activity in space that can avoid some of the challenges currently facing fossil fuel divestment movements on Earth.

By adopting methodologies from theoretical bioethics, sociology and business studies, including applying a legitimacy lens to the issue of off-world mining, this paper synthesises existing knowledges from these fields and brings them to the new context of the future space resource economy.

This paper aims to examine the complex issue of the social cost of carbon. The authors review the existing literature and the strengths and deficiencies of existing approaches. They introduce a simple methodology that estimates the amount of “legal looting” in the fossil fuel industry as an alternative approach to calculate an unpaid social cost of carbon. The “looting amount” can be defined as society’s failure to charge fossil fuel firms for the damage that their activities cause represents an implied subsidy.

The methodology used in this paper combines decisions in the form of policymakers setting carbon taxes and rational investors investing in carbon emission markets.

The authors show that the unpaid social cost of carbon in the fossil fuel industry was US$12.7tn over 1995-2013, but may be as high as US$115.5tn.

Over the same period, the sum of industry profits, emission trading scheme carbon permit and carbon tax revenue totalled US$7tn, indicating the industry would not be viable if it was made to pay for damages to society.

Introduction: The notion of job losses during energy transition phases and their influences on fossil fuel economies have been debated in various aspects. Meanwhile, unemployment and poverty have been critical economic challenges for many developing countries, even the resource-rich countries in the Middle East. Concurrently, no country so far is poverty-free and has not entirely fulfilled Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Nos. 1 and 8, as many resource-rich countries account for the significant global poverty and unemployment, such as Nigeria, Iraq, Yemen, and Venezuela.

Purpose: The issue of green transition has created new fears for the job market in the fossil fuel economies, where the lives of many people could be mainly affected. This study investigates the macroeconomic challenges of green transition and the macroeconomic consequences that fossil fuel economies will deal with.

Methodology: This study follows content analysis and a desk-search review of job loss during the green transition in the context of fossil fuel economies. In addition, the descriptive analysis is just a clear understanding of the fundamental review of the topic that will lead to another cross-country analysis study based on in-depth knowledge and analysing data.

Findings: The European Green Deal (EGD) will have profound economic, social, and political implications for fossil fuel-dependent economies for various reasons. First, fossil fuel economies are less diversified; the economy depends on a single commodity; the systems must be developed and people must prepare for a quick economic transition.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the scope of applications and benefits of sustainability accounting for the production and industrial use of biomass as an energy source and substitute for fossil‐fuel use. As environmental degradation and unacceptable social impacts not only increase from the production and use of fossil‐fuel based energy, but also from alternative energy sources, the monitoring, controlling and measuring of the (un‐)sustainability of alternative energy production and use emerges as an area in critical need of research.

The paper presents a review of the issues surrounding the accounting for the (un‐)sustainability of industrial biomass production and use, considering what biomass is, the current and forecast importance of industrial biomass, different approaches to its production, and the subsequent measurement and monitoring of its potential (un‐)sustainability.

The paper finds that it is insufficient to conclude in general terms, as is often done or assumed in policy documents and statements, that industrial production and use of biomass is sustainable (or unsustainable) and that accounting for biomass must recognise the broader ecological and social system of which the production and use form a part. A further finding of the paper is that from agricultural or industrial production of biomass through to consumption and industrial use of biomass, the accounting issues surrounding biomass production and use are essential to determining its (un‐)sustainability.

The paper provides an overview of the importance of and problems with the production of biomass for industrial use, and related sustainability issues. It discusses possibilities for and limitations of accounting to address these sustainability issues as well as the need for and the challenges in measuring the (un‐)sustainability of biomass production for industrial use and the accounting for sustainability improvements.

This article traces the regimes of worth that defined energy for centuries as a productive force of human and animal labor, an understanding that transformed in the 18th century to an “industrial-energy” regime of worth supporting an economy of mass production, consumption, and profit and more recently one centered on market forces and price. Industrial and market energy and the conventions and institutions that support them are currently in a period of discursive and material ferment; they are being challenged by different higher order principles of worth. We discuss eight emergent energy justifications that argue what kind of energy is – and is not – in the best interests of society.

This chapter examines SDG 13 which deals with efforts to combat climate change. The chapter begins by outlining the targets related to this goal, the trend towards increased heating of the planet and failures to curtail carbon emissions. This is framed using criminological concepts such as state-corporate crime and carbon criminality. The major concern of the rest of the chapter is to outline a climate action plan. As part of this, it discusses a range of initiatives currently underway intended to pressure governments to take more concerted action around climate change. These include activist interventions and climate litigation. The chapter concludes by exploring the possibilities and obligations of global community action to address the most important issue of our era.

In recognition of the urgency of the global need to reduce CO₂ emissions from the electricity sector, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the cost‐effectiveness of nuclear power and fossil‐fuel‐based power with and without the provision of carbon capture and storage in select, yet environmentally‐significant, group of countries – China, India, Russia, Korea, Pakistan, Poland, Argentina, Bulgaria and Romania.

The analyses are based on comparisons of electricity generation costs for nuclear and fossil‐fuel technologies. These costs, expressed in present value terms, are estimated on the basis of life‐cycle costs, employing detailed country‐specific technological and economic data and assumptions.

The analyses suggest that that the provision of carbon capture and storage is likely to result in a significant increase in the cost of electricity produced from fossil fuels (principally coal) in all countries represented in this paper. Such increase would completely erode the existing cost advantage enjoyed by fossil‐fuel power (in relation to nuclear power) in some countries (Argentina, Bulgaria, China, and India) and considerably enhance the existing cost‐advantage of nuclear power in other countries (Korea, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, and Russia).

Notwithstanding these limitations, the findings of this paper contribute appreciably to the emerging knowledge on this topic and provide useful foresight into the likely challenges of developing internationally acceptable policy prescriptions for mitigation CO₂ emissions from the electricity sector. At a mundane, yet important, level, this paper establishes a platform on which further analyses could be built.

This research uses the social science perspectives of institutions, ecological modernization and social movements to analyze the rationale used by the early-adopting universities of fossil fuel divestment in the USA.

Through analysis of qualitative data from interviews with key actors at the universities that divested their endowments from fossil fuels, the paper examines how institutions navigate competing logics and frame their rationale.

The results show that while many institutions relied on ecological values embedded in their missions to justify their decision to divest, many also continued to embrace an altered version of market logic.

This research is primarily limited by its small population size. If the number of adoptees increases in the future, quantitative analysis should look for statistically robust trends.

The implications of this research are that we can expect more universities to commit to divesting from fossil fuels if their mission statements provide them with cultural material to rationalize the decision, but also expect them to couch the decision in continued goals and concerns for fiduciary responsibility and the subsequent growth of their endowment.

Social actors engaged in the fossil fuel divestment campaign may take this research and conclude that they need to build their arguments around the existing institutional logics and cultural identity.

This paper contributes original primary data documenting how institutional actors confront dominant logics using both a mixture of internal cultural identity and the reframing of the legitimated market logics.