Study Guide.

This Changes Everything:
Ch 12:
1. Why is the Sierra Club pursuing "triage" on the Northern Cheyenne and Crow Reservations in Montana?
2. What did Red Cloud say is part of Natives' way of life?
3. What are the roots of Denmark's and Germany's commitment to renewables?
4. What are participants in the divestment movement asking colleges and municipalities to do, in addition to divesting?
5. What's the greenest town in America?
Ch 13:
1. What got worse for Klein, after covering the BP Oil Spill? What caused her attitude to improve?
2. How did Klein's experience at the fertility clinic replicate our collective approach to high-risk geoengineering technologies?
3. What do most drug and chemical risk assessments focus on?
4. What was BP's working assumption when it confidently predicted that a spill would have minimal impact?
5. How has species extinction changed in the age of fossil fuels?
6. What defeats the strength and tenacity of salmon?
7. What recurring pattern is replacing the pure extraction model?
8. Only what can save us now?
Atmosphere of Hope:
Ch 1-2
1. What gathering last December does Tim Flannery say might create an atmosphere of hope?
2. Digital connectedness has brought what new opportunities?
3. What may the "third way" allow us to do in coming decades?
4. What excellent website on climate science does Flannery recommend?
5. What "silent killer" accounted for so many "excess deaths" in Melbourne?
6. What other silent killer takes more than 300,000 lives every year?
7. Why are extreme warming-induced snowfalls a problem?
8. How long might "mega droughts" last, later in this century?
9. What did NASA conclude about six big glaciers that drain into Amundsen Bay?
Ch 3-7
1. What was the purpose of the Biosphere 2 experiment, and what did it teach us?
2. What has huge potential to reduce ocean acidification and global warming?
3. How was Flannery naive a decade ago?
4. Whose polar bear comments are given disproportionate weight by the media? Why?
5. What may be the first mammals to become extinct in the US due to climate change?
Ch 5
1. When will we reach climate conditions last seen 55 million years ago, if current rates of increase in atmospheric CO2 continue?
2. What do divergent climate models remind us?
3. What worst-case scenario do scientists consider increasingly likely?
Ch 6-7
4. What economic idea favored by climate skeptics is clearly wrong?
5. The backlash to what environmental classic should have forewarned us about "Climategate"?
6. What nation was rated last on the 2014 Global Green Economy Index?
7. The world's largest single source of carbon pollution is what?
8. How much will demand for coal in electricity generation in the U.S. decline by 2020?
Ch 8-10
1. What new form of extraction halved US OPEC imports?

2. Name a seemingly small initiative that contributes to reduced demand for oil products.

3. What lesson might we learn from the 2013 rail tragedy in Quebec?

4. What was Randolph Kirkpatrick's "not entirely crackbrained" idea?

5. Why does Dieter Helm hate wind turbines?

6. Why isn't gas going to solve the climate problem?

7. By what date are we now projected to use up our entire carbon budget?

8. Why are fossil-fuel companies fundamentally overvalued?

9. What are green bonds?

Ch 11-13

1. How does global wind power capacity compare to nuclear capacity a quarter century ago (when nuclear was in the ascendant)?

2. What's an example of a "positive societal impact" in Japan after Fukushima and the subsequent shuttering of all nuclear plants?

3. What's happened to US greenhouse gas emissions since the Kyoto Protocol?

4. How has Google Earth helped cut costs for solar energy?

5. What "game changer" for electric cars is being built in Nevada?

6. Why is the sales success of plug-in hybrids important?

Why Dakota is the New Keystone

The Native Americans who have spent the last months in peaceful protest against an oil pipeline along the banks of the Missouri are standing up for tribal rights. They’re also standing up for clean water, environmental justice and a working climate. And it’s time that everyone else joined in.

The shocking images of the National Guard destroying tepees and sweat lodges and arresting elders this week remind us that the battle over the Dakota Access Pipeline is part of the longest-running drama in American history — the United States Army versus Native Americans. In the past, it’s almost always ended horribly, and nothing we can do now will erase a history of massacres, stolen land and broken treaties. But this time, it can end differently.

Those heroes on the Standing Rock reservation, sometimes on horseback, have peacefully stood up to police dogs, pepper spray and the bizarre-looking militarized tanks and SWAT teams that are the stuff of modern policing. (Modern and old-fashioned both: The pictures ofGerman shepherds attacking are all too reminiscent of photos from, say, Birmingham, Ala., in 1963.)

The courage of those protesters managed to move the White House enough that the government called a temporary halt to construction. But the forces that want it finished — Big Oil, and its allies in parts of the labor movement — are strong enough that the respite may be temporary.

In coming weeks, activists will respond to calls from the leaders at Standing Rock by gathering at the offices of banks funding the pipeline, and at the offices of the Army Corps of Engineers, for protest and civil disobedience. Two dozen big banks have lent money to the pipeline project, even though many of them have also adopted elaborateenvironmental codes. As for the Corps, that’s the agency that helped “expedite” the approval of the pipeline — and must still grant the final few permits.

The vast movement of people across the country who mobilized to block fossil-fuel projects like the Keystone pipeline and Shell’s plans to drill in the Arctic need to gather once more. This time, their message must be broader still.

There are at least two grounds for demanding a full environmental review of this pipeline, instead of the fast-track approvals it has received so far. The first is the obvious environmental racism of the whole project.

Originally, the pipeline was supposed to cross the Missouri just north ofBismarck, until people pointed out that a leak there would threaten the drinking water supply for North Dakota’s second biggest city. The solution, in keeping with American history, was obvious: make the crossing instead just above the Standing Rock reservation, where thepoverty rate is nearly three times the national average. This has been like watching the start of another Flint, Mich., except with a chance to stop it.

The second is that this is precisely the kind of project that climate science tells us can no longer be tolerated. In midsummer, the Obama administration promised that henceforth there would be a climate test for new projects before they could be approved. That promise was codified in the Democratic platform approved by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which says there will be no federal approval for any project that “significantly exacerbates” global warming.

The review of the Dakota pipeline must take both cases into account.

So far, the signs are not good. There has been no word from the White House about how long the current pause will last. Now, the company building the pipeline has pushed the local authorities to remove protesters from land where construction has already desecrated indigenous burial sites, with law enforcement agents using Tasers, batons, mace and “sound cannons.”

From the Clinton campaign, there’s been simply an ugly silence, perhaps rooted in an unwillingness to cross major contributors like theLaborers’ International Union of North America, which has lashed outagainst the many other, larger unions that opposethe project. But that silence won’t make the issue go away: Sioux protesters erected a tepee in herBrooklyn campaign office on Thursday. If Mrs. Clinton is elected on Nov. 8, this will be the new president’s first test on environmental and human rights.

What’s happening along the Missouri is of historic consequence. That message should reverberate not just on the lonely high plains, but in our biggest cities, too. Native Americans have carried the fight, but they deserve backup from everyone with a conscience; other activists should join the protest at bank headquarters, Army Corps offices and other sites of entrenched power.

The Native Americans are the only people who have inhabited this continent in harmony with nature for centuries. Their traditional wisdom now chimes perfectly with the latest climate science. The only thing missing are the bodies of the rest of us joining in their protest. If we use them wisely, a fresh start is possible. 

Bill McKibben

Alternative Quiz Questions

1. According to Flannery, a decade ago nuclear power was viewed by many, including himself, as having what? (113)

2. How can one regard Pakistan's grand plans for nuclear power due to its economy? (114)

3. In June 2014, energy minister Segolene Royal announced that France would cut its dependence on nuclear power from what to what percentage by 2025? (117)

4. What issues make it clear why nuclear power is only progressing in countries where governments will provide subsides in terms of accepting insurance risks, taking on decommissioning and providing fixed-price power purchase agreements that run for decades? (118)

5. What did William Lash say would happen if America were to achieve the modest reductions in greenhouse gas emissions envisaged under the Kyoto Protocol? (119)

6. What happened to Australia's economy after a carbon price of about $23 per ton was put in place in the middle of 2012 despite the warnings of denialists? (120)

7. Some utilities are trying to survive by selling the technologies, including solar panels and storage options in response to what? (121)

8. What is an important reason for massive growth in wind and solar energy? (122)

9. What year does Jessica Trancik predict that solar energy will become cost-competitive against coal, at least in places where sunlight is prevalent? (125)

10. If the solar industry is to generate 40 percent of our electricity needs by 2050, how many gigawatts of capacity would need to be installed each year for the next 25 years? (126)

11. Who is the current market leader in models of electric cars as of 2014? (127)

12. Which government pledged to install seven million EV charging stations by 2030? (129)

13. Flannery says that one hopeful sign for fully electric vehicles concerns the sales trends of plug-in hybrids as opposed to what? (130)

220 'Significant' Pipeline Spills Already This Year Exposes Troubling Safety Record

Good article showing why trusting pipelines to be safe is almost crazy and how over time they have proven to be anything but safe and dependable.

A significant incident is defined as one that results in serious injury or fatality, costs more than $50,000, releases more than five barrels of volatile fluids such as gasoline or 50 barrels of other liquids, or results in a fire or explosion.

326 in 2015, almost one per day
220 significent incidents so far this year
3,032 since 2006 with 4.7 billion in costs associated with 
55% of US pipeline is more than 45 years old



http://www.ecowatch.com/pipeline-spills-2061960029.html

Why Are California Farmers Irrigating Crops With Oil Wastewater?

Some concerning facts here about our food and what potential danger the food from this area may have.

In the last three years, farmers in parts of California's Central Valley irrigated nearly 100,000 acres of food crops with billions of gallons of oil field wastewater possibly tainted with toxic chemicals, including chemicals that can cause cancer and reproductive harm, according to an Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis of state data.Since 2014, oil companies reported that they used more than 20 million pounds and 2 million gallons of chemicals in their operations, including at least 16 chemicals the state of California classifies as carcinogens or reproductive toxicants under the state's Proposition 65 law

http://www.ecowatch.com/california-crops-oil-wastewater-2064638069.html

Dakota Access Pipeline: Authorities, Protesters brace for showdown

Dakota Access Pipeline: Authorities, Protesters brace for showdown. They may lose this round but hopefully they will fight on.

They are fighting for the rest of us. Maybe we can at least send some moral support.

What is the Dakota Access Pipeline?

It's a $3.7 billion project that would cross four states and change the landscape of the US crude oil supply. Depending on who you ask, the results could be an economic boon that makes the country more self-sufficient or an environmental disaster that destroys sacred Native American sites.

The 1,172-mile pipeline, currently under construction, would stretch from the oil-rich Bakken Formation -- a vast underground deposit where Montana and North Dakota meet Canada -- southeast into South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois.

The oil potential in Bakken is massive. An estimated 7.4 billion barrels of undiscovered oil is believed to be in its US portion, according to the US Geological Survey.

After the pipeline is completed, it would shuttle 470,000 barrels of crude oil a day, developer Energy Access Partners said. That's enough to make 374.3 million gallons of gasoline per day.

From Illinois, the oil could go to markets and refineries across the Midwest, East Coast and Gulf Coast.

Who approved it?

The US Army Corps of Engineers approved the project and granted final permits in July.

By the numbers

1,172 miles: Length of Dakota Access Pipeline

30 inches: Width of the pipeline

470,000: Barrels of crude oil to be moved daily

374.3 million: Equivalent gallons of gasoline per day

Sources: Energy Access Partners, US Energy Information Administration

But the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe sued the Corps, saying the pipeline "threatens the Tribe's environmental and economic well-being, and would damage and destroy sites of great historic, religious, and cultural significance to the Tribe."

Read the complaint

The Army Corps of Engineers has declined to comment to CNN, citing pending litigation.

But an advocacy group says the tribe's claims are misleading, saying the pipeline "does not cross into the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's reservation."

The Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now also said 100% of the affected landowners in North Dakota, where part of the tribe lives, voluntarily signed easements to allow for construction.

What's the argument for and against?

83 protestors were arrested Saturday, the Morton County Sheriff's Department said.

Pro: The pipeline wouldn't just be an economic boon, it would also significantly decrease U.S. reliance on foreign oil, the developer Energy Transfer Partners said. The pipeline would also help free up railways to transport "crops and other commodities currently constrained by crude oil cargos."

Con: Construction for the pipeline will "destroy our burial sites, prayer sites and culturally significant artifacts," the Standing Rock Sioux tribe said. Opponents also cite environmental concerns, including possible contamination due to breaches and eventual greenhouse gas emissions.

What's the environmental impact?

Depends on who you ask.

The developer says the pipeline would provide a safer, more environmentally friendly way of moving crude oil compared to other modes of transportation, such as rail or trucks.

Pipeline supporters cite the 2013 disaster in Quebec, Canada, where a train carrying crude oil derailed and destroyed downtown Lac-Megnatic.

2013: Crude oil train derails in Canada, decimates town 01:49

But Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II said he doesn't support moving more crude oil from North Dakota. He told CNN affiliate KFYR that Americans should look for alternative and renewable sources of energy.

More than 271,000 online petitioners agree.

"The Dakota Access pipeline would fuel climate change, cause untold damage to the environment, and significantly disturb sacred lands and the way of life for Native Americans in the upper Midwest," a petition on CredoAction.com states.

America's aging pipelines 03:08

Opponents also say they're worried what would happen if the pipeline, which would go under the Missouri River, ruptured and contaminated the water supply.

But the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now backed the developer's claim that pipelines are a safe way of moving crude oil.

"Already, 8 pipelines cross the Missouri River carrying hundreds of thousands of barrels of energy products every day," the group said in a statement.

What's the economic impact?

Energy Transfer Partners estimates the pipeline would bring an estimated $156 million in sales and income taxes to state and local governments. It'll also add 8,000 to 12,000 construction jobs, the developer said.

The US Energy Information Administration shows the network of existing crude oil pipelines across the country.

But Archambault said his tribe will settle for nothing less than the stop of the pipeline's construction.

"We're not opposed to energy independence. We're not opposed to economic development," he told CNN. "The problem we have -- and this is a long history of problems that evolved over time -- is where the federal government or corporations take advantage of indigenous lands and indigenous rights."

Native Americans march to a burial ground site they say was disturbed by bulldozers building the Dakota Access Pipeline.

What do the landowners get?

Energy Transfer Partners said it has tried to steer the pipeline away from residential areas and has tried to reach voluntary deals with property owners "at a fair price."

But Archambault, the tribal chairman, said he thinks the Native Americans are getting short-changed once again.

"What we're opposed to is paying for all the benefits that this country receives," he said. Whenever there's a benefit, whether it's energy independence ... whether it's economic development, tribes pay the cost. And what we see now are tribes from all over sharing the same concern that we have, saying, 'It's enough now. Stop doing this to indigenous people. Stop doing this to our indigenous lands.'"

CNN's Marlena Baldacci, Madison Park and Alberto Moya contributed to this report.

DQ institutions now committed to divestiture

DQ from Dr. Oliver.

·                     Research assignment: how many colleges, cities, and religious institutions have now committed to selling their stock holdings in fossil fuels? (It was 6, 17, & 12 respectively in '14)

We do not appear to be in any list that I examined.

http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/index.php

http://www.thinkglobalgreen.org/divestment.html

http://gofossilfree.org/commitments/

ABOUT FOSSIL FREE

If it is wrong to wreck the climate, then it is wrong to profit from that wreckage. We believe that educational and religious institutions, governments, and other organizations that serve the public good should cut their ties to the fossil fuel industry.

Fossil fuels companies cultivate sponsorship relationships to help create a ‘social licence to operate’. This contributes to the veneer of legitimacy that enables them to keep expanding operations at a time of climate crisis and to stifle the demands for justice of those communities who live on the frontline of their destructive, polluting operations.

We are an international network of campaigns and campaigners working toward freeing communities from fossil fuels. While each campaign is independently run and may bring different emphases and asks depending on their local context, the majority of campaigns are asking institutions to:

·         Immediately freeze any new investment in fossil fuel companies;

·         Divest from direct ownership and any commingled funds that include fossil fuel public equities and corporate bonds within 5 years

·         End their fossil fuels sponsorship

Most campaigns use this list of the top 200 fossil fuel companies by reserves.

Fossil Free is a project of 350.org. Click here to contact members of our staff, or email us at hello[at]gofossilfree.org for general inquiries.

You can read more about what divestment is and how it has historically been used as a tactic for social change here.

http://divestinvest.org/

Oct 27 Ch 8-13 Atmosphere of Hope

Don Enss

Chapter 8-13

:

1.      Why does the demand for jet biofuels remain low? (93).

2.      When is it anticipated that solar can be globally competitive with coal? (100).

3.      There are good reasons for believing that solar represents a better deal than gas not least of which is the fact that solar runs on what cost fuel stock? (102).

4.      What is causing investors to sell off their shares in various fossil-fuel based industries? (106).

5.      In May of  2012, what significant event happened regarding nuclear power in Japan? (115).

6.      What is one issue that relates to nuclear waste that remains problematic? (118).

7.      Who are prosumers? (121).

8.      With no fuel costs, and diminishing maintenance, what is set to become a ferocious competitor in the energy sector? (123).

9.      What may provide the momentum for a decisive end to the fossil-fuel era? (131).

Natural Gas Is Not Going to Save the World

I found this article about the natural gas, and also it discusses why fossil fuels can't solve the problems created by fossil fuels. It's really a good article:
That truth is basic chemistry: when you burn natural gas, the amount of carbon dioxide (CO₂) produced is, other things being equal, much less than when you burn an equivalent amount of coal or oil. It can be as much as 50% less compared with coal, and 20% to 30% less compared with diesel fuel, gasoline, or home heating oil. When it comes to a greenhouse gas (GHG) heading for the atmosphere, that's a substantial difference. It means that if you replace oil or coal with gas without otherwise increasing your energy usage, you can significantly reduce your short-term carbon footprint. 
Replacing coal gives you other benefits as well, such as reducing the sulfate pollution that causes acid rain, particulate emissions that cause lung disease, and mercury that causes brain damage. And if less coal is mined, then occupational death and disease can be reduced in coal miners and the destruction caused by damaging forms of mining, including the removal, in some parts of the country, of entire mountains can be reduced or halted. 
Also it discusses How Gas (CH₄) Heats the Atmosphere Much More than CO_2:
As a result, gas leaks are a cause for enormous concern, because any methane that reaches the atmosphere unburned contributes to global warming more than the same amount of CO₂. How much more? This is a question that has caused considerable angst in the climate science community, because it depends on how you calculate it. Scientists have developed the concept of "Global Warming Potential" (GWP) to try to answer this question.
Most calculations of the impact of methane leakage use the 100-year time frame, which makes sense if you are worried about the cumulative impact of greenhouse gas emissions on the world as a whole, but not—many scientists have started to argue—if you are worried about currently unfolding impacts on the biosphere. After all, many species may go extinct well before we reach that 100-year mark. It also does not make sense if you are worried that we are quickly approaching irreversible tipping points in the climate system, including rapid ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
Also it discusses fracking, why gas is unlikely to be a bridge to renewable, exports and infrastructure: The road to more climate change, and so why are so many people so enthusiastic about gas?

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/07/natural-gas-not-going-save-world

"Love may not be in the ballot but it is in the race."

"I am simply here to tell you that you have been tricked. Fooled. Bamboozled. Hoodwinked. Run amok. Led astray. By leaders who claim they are committed to unity but truthfully seek division. See while their smiles say peace, their eyes scream war. Their words say fresh and new.. but haven't we heard this song somewhere before? 

And so I come to you through your screen today with one question and one question only. "How long?" How long will we look for leaders to save us? Someone has to say this, how long will we believe the next leader is going to be better than the last one and fix everything? How long until we see the truth up close?"

"Environmental and energy issues have received relatively little attention from the two major-party candidates in the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. But when Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have spoken out on these issues, the differences — like just about everything else about this campaign — have been stark. In this chart, Yale Environment 360 compares what Clinton and Trump have said on topics ranging from climate change to coal."

Quiz Oct 27

AH 11-13

1. How does global wind power capacity compare to nuclear capacity a quarter century ago (when nuclear was in the ascendant)?

2. What's an example of a "positive societal impact" in Japan after Fukushima and the subsequent shuttering of all nuclear plants?

3. What's happened to US greenhouse gas emissions since the Kyoto Protocol?

4. How has Google Earth helped cut costs for solar energy?

5. What "game changer" for electric cars is being built in Nevada?

6. Why is the sales success of plug-in hybrids important?

DQ

• Are you worried about the danger of a major nuclear incident in the future? Do you know your legislative representatives' positions on nuclear power?
• Why do politicians get away with misinforming the public, as Ronald Reagan did with regard to nuclear waste? How can "fact-checking" be made more prominent in our politics? 113
• When do you plan to upgrade to an electric car?
• Your thoughts on the free speech forum Tuesday?*
• Your DQs please

* How we conduct ourselves in public space is an environmental issue. I've sent this to our Provost. Your thoughts?

Regarding the verbally abusive evangelist who once again was afforded a platform on our campus, these past two days (very disruptively, by the way, just outside my classroom in the Honors Building): can you please clarify, if you know, the process whereby this individual and organization have repeatedly been granted permits (with police escort) to harangue, insult, and humiliate our students? I'm told he called some of them "whores," directed blatantly racist remarks at others, spoke in the most vulgar terms about homosexuality, and assured students that they were bound for hell. He posts videos of his MTSU "open air preaching" on YouTube.

I'd be more inclined to defend the presence of such a hateful and vitriolic speaker on campus if we had any sort of free speech culture here, or a speaker's forum available to all comers; but it seems Mr. Skelly and his organization are just about the only controversial or provocative outside speakers who are regularly permitted to appear on the MTSU lawn.

I firmly believe in the principle that the best remedy for offensive and obnoxious speech is more and better counter-speech, but we never seem to hear from others at MTSU. Have other individuals and groups, representing other perspectives, petitioned for an opportunity to speak here? Who exactly makes the decision to welcome such "guests"? To whom are requests for permits to speak directed?

	Eric Thomas Weber (@erictweber)
10/26/16, 9:22 AM David Rutherford and I have a piece in this volume on ethics & climate change mitigation. Check it out.twitter.com/SpringerRef/st…

Electric & hybrid vehicle news (nyt)... Chevy Bolt a game-changer... Plug-in America FAQs

In 2006, as many as 5,000 modern electric cars were destroyed by the major car companies that built them. (Who Killed the Electric Car?). 

Who Killed the Electric Car Official Trailer
https://youtu.be/k96tIRjxzw0

Who Killed the Electric Car Documentary
https://youtu.be/0bWSe02UK-s

Today, less than 5 years later, the electric car is back... with a vengeance in (Revenge of the Electric Car), director Chris Paine takes his film crew behind the closed doors of Nissan, GM, and the Silicon Valley start-up Tesla Motors to find the story of the global resurgence of electric cars. Without using a single drop of foreign oil, this new generation of car is America's future: fast, furious, and cleaner than ever.

With almost every major car maker now jumping to produce new electric models, Revenge follows the race to be the first, the best, and to win the hearts and minds of the public around the world. It's not just the next generation of green cars that's on the line. It's the future of the automobile itself.

Revenge of the Electric Car Official Trailer
https://youtu.be/jkRIu5a6Sb0

The Electric Revolution Documentary
https://youtu.be/44mFzZI1_r0

The Electric Revolution documentary goes back to the very first electric car and charts up and down the 110 year history. The film features vintage electric car collectors, EV designers and EV evangelists. Including Tesla Motors.

The film examines the failings of early EVs, the false dawn resulting from the energy crisis of the 70s and the controversial crushing of the GM EV1. Lastly, as mainstream manufacturers such as Renault invest billions in new EVs and governments invest in charging infrastructure, the film examines why it will be different this time.

The Green Bonds.

“The emergence of green bonds represents one of the most significant developments in the financing of low- carbon, climate-resilient investment opportunities.” Ban Ki Moon, UN Secretary-General
Since the first Bonds and Climate Change: State of the Market report in 2012 there has been a huge growth in labelled green bonds. Equally there remains a large unlabeled universe of climate-aligned bonds available for investment now. For the purposes of this report the total climate-aligned bonds are both labelled green bonds (with defined use of proceeds) and unlabeled bonds issued by climate-aligned entities. They estimate the universe of climate aligned bonds outstanding to be $597.7bn. The universe is made up of 2,769 bonds from 407 issuers. These bonds span across six climate themes; Transport, Energy, Buildings and Industry, Agriculture and Forestry, Waste and Pollution, and Water. The largest theme in the $597.7bn climate-aligned universe continues to be Transport with $418.8bn bonds outstanding since January 1, 2005. Rail accounts for 95% of this, largely from state backed entities. Energy ($118.4bn) is the second largest sector, with 20% of the universe. This theme is comprised of a range of renewable energy power producers including hydropower, wind, solar, bioenergy, geothermal and nuclear (p5). Buildings and Industry ($19.6bn) is the third main theme and has captured the attention of the labelled green bond market in the past year. The remaining themes, Water ($3.2bn), Waste & Pollution ($7.1bn), and Agriculture & Forestry ($2.3bn), are crucial investment areas for climate adaptation. These will require scaling up if we are to address the climate risks of food supply, flooding, water scarcity, and health issues, such as pollution.
The climate-aligned universe has increased by $95bn since the 2014 report. Almost a third of the increase (32%) came from the rapid growth of the labelled green bond market (additional $30.6bn of green bonds). Unlabeled climate-aligned bonds financing rail in China, India, France, South Korea and the UK contributed another 40% of the increase. The climate-aligned universe has a range of maturities. The majority of outstanding issuances have tenors over 10 years. This reflects the long-term nature of climate assets such as rail infrastructure bonds.

https://www.climatebonds.net/files/files/Green%20Bonds%20101%20Slides.pdf
https://www.climatebonds.net/files/files/CBI-HSBC%20report%207July%20JG01.pdf