Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Queensland farming lobby launches legal challenge against Great Artesian Basin carbon capture trial

News Feed
Monday, March 18, 2024

Queensland farming body AgForce has launched legal action against the federal government in a bid to stop liquified carbon dioxide from being pumped into the Great Artesian Basin.The Carbon Transport and Storage Corporation (CTSCo), a subsidiary of mining giant Glencore, is awaiting state government approval for a pilot scheme to inject Co2 emitted by a coal-fired power station in southern Queensland into underground water aquifers as part of a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project trial.Farming and environmental groups say the project risks causing irreversible damage to the Great Artesian Basin, a vital freshwater source for farmers and one of the country’s “greatest environmental assets”. Glencore maintains the project is based on robust scientific analysis.The chief executive of AgForce, Michael Guerin, said the lobby group had sought a judicial review of a 2022 decision that found the project did not need to be assessed under the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.“Confidence in our food supply is at genuine risk because of the current proposal from Glencore,” Guerin said. “Court is the last place we want to be but there’s too much at stake not to put our members’ money into this federal court case.”Guerin said AgForce had been “mystified by the lack of engagement” from federal government ministers and that discussions had “got nowhere”. Taking the matter to court was a last resort, he said.The federal environment department said projects that fell outside what could be currently assessed under the EPBC Act did not need to undergo federal environmental assessment. The federal environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, referred questions to the department.“Legally, neither the minister nor the department can consider matters that fall outside national environment law,” the department said in a statement to Guardian Australia.According to CTSCo modelling, the pilot project would create a 1.6km-wide “plume area” some 2.3km underground.The ground water within the plume area would be unsuitable for livestock. But Glencore says there are no farmers currently extracting water at this depth within a 50km radius of the planned injection site.The Queensland environment department is currently reviewing the project’s environmental impact statement, with a decision expected by May 2024. A state government spokesperson said there were “strict regulatory requirements” in place to assess CCS projects.The director of the Queensland Conservation Council, Dave Copeman, said he stood “shoulder to shoulder” with AgForce and the National Farmers Federation in opposing the project.He said the conservation group had been lobbying the federal government to include a requirement to assess the impact of CCS projects on underground aquifers in an impending overhaul of the EPBA Act.“We are calling for that expansion of nature laws to protect the Great Artesian Basin from the impacts of projects such as this,” he said.Copeman said CCS would likely play some role in decarbonising emission-intensive industries “but this isn’t a hard-to-abate sector”.“We need to stop mining coal … this is a sector that should not continue,” he said. “It [the pilot scheme] is a fig leaf by Glencore to keep emitting more fossil fuels.”Glencore said it welcomed the opportunity for a court hearing, where “misleading rhetoric will be shown for what it is and measured against Glencore’s extensive scientific evidence”.“This litigation is an important test for the commonwealth and state’s respective support for carbon capture and storage in Australia,” it said in a statement.

AgForce is seeking a judicial review of a 2022 decision that found the project did not need to be assessed under federal environmental lawsSign up for the Rural Network email newsletterJoin the Rural Network group on Facebook to be part of the communityQueensland farming body AgForce has launched legal action against the federal government in a bid to stop liquified carbon dioxide from being pumped into the Great Artesian Basin.The Carbon Transport and Storage Corporation (CTSCo), a subsidiary of mining giant Glencore, is awaiting state government approval for a pilot scheme to inject Co2 emitted by a coal-fired power station in southern Queensland into underground water aquifers as part of a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project trial.Sign up to receive Guardian Australia’s fortnightly Rural Network email newsletterSign up for the Rural Network email newsletterJoin the Rural Network group on Facebook to be part of the community Continue reading...

Queensland farming body AgForce has launched legal action against the federal government in a bid to stop liquified carbon dioxide from being pumped into the Great Artesian Basin.

The Carbon Transport and Storage Corporation (CTSCo), a subsidiary of mining giant Glencore, is awaiting state government approval for a pilot scheme to inject Co2 emitted by a coal-fired power station in southern Queensland into underground water aquifers as part of a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project trial.

Farming and environmental groups say the project risks causing irreversible damage to the Great Artesian Basin, a vital freshwater source for farmers and one of the country’s “greatest environmental assets”. Glencore maintains the project is based on robust scientific analysis.

The chief executive of AgForce, Michael Guerin, said the lobby group had sought a judicial review of a 2022 decision that found the project did not need to be assessed under the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

“Confidence in our food supply is at genuine risk because of the current proposal from Glencore,” Guerin said. “Court is the last place we want to be but there’s too much at stake not to put our members’ money into this federal court case.”

Guerin said AgForce had been “mystified by the lack of engagement” from federal government ministers and that discussions had “got nowhere”. Taking the matter to court was a last resort, he said.

The federal environment department said projects that fell outside what could be currently assessed under the EPBC Act did not need to undergo federal environmental assessment. The federal environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, referred questions to the department.

“Legally, neither the minister nor the department can consider matters that fall outside national environment law,” the department said in a statement to Guardian Australia.

According to CTSCo modelling, the pilot project would create a 1.6km-wide “plume area” some 2.3km underground.

The ground water within the plume area would be unsuitable for livestock. But Glencore says there are no farmers currently extracting water at this depth within a 50km radius of the planned injection site.

The Queensland environment department is currently reviewing the project’s environmental impact statement, with a decision expected by May 2024. A state government spokesperson said there were “strict regulatory requirements” in place to assess CCS projects.

The director of the Queensland Conservation Council, Dave Copeman, said he stood “shoulder to shoulder” with AgForce and the National Farmers Federation in opposing the project.

He said the conservation group had been lobbying the federal government to include a requirement to assess the impact of CCS projects on underground aquifers in an impending overhaul of the EPBA Act.

“We are calling for that expansion of nature laws to protect the Great Artesian Basin from the impacts of projects such as this,” he said.

Copeman said CCS would likely play some role in decarbonising emission-intensive industries “but this isn’t a hard-to-abate sector”.

“We need to stop mining coal … this is a sector that should not continue,” he said. “It [the pilot scheme] is a fig leaf by Glencore to keep emitting more fossil fuels.”

Glencore said it welcomed the opportunity for a court hearing, where “misleading rhetoric will be shown for what it is and measured against Glencore’s extensive scientific evidence”.

“This litigation is an important test for the commonwealth and state’s respective support for carbon capture and storage in Australia,” it said in a statement.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

The World's Fourth Mass Coral Bleaching Event Is Underway—and It Could Become the Worst One Yet

The impacted reefs represent 54 percent of the planet's total, and that figure is currently increasing by 1 percent each week, NOAA scientists say

Bleached corals in the Great Barrier Reef during a previous mass bleaching event. Brett Monroe Garner via Getty Images Reefs and coastlines around the world are losing their color, as the fourth global coral bleaching event in recorded history is now underway, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Coral Reef Watch announced this week. The event further endangers the world’s already at-risk corals and the communities that live with them. On the heels of ten consecutive record-breaking months of global air temperature, ocean heat is hitting alarming extremes in 2024. And when it comes to sea surface temperature, not a single day this year has been cooler compared to the 2023 calendar, which easily broke records. Among the most vulnerable organisms to this change are the world’s corals. When faced with heat stress, they expel the colorful, photosynthetic algae they need to survive, turning a ghostly white in a process known as bleaching. In this state, corals are more vulnerable to starvation, disease and death, though bleaching can be undone if environmental extremes quickly return to normal. The grave concern today: conditions are getting worse, experts say. “I do get depressed sometimes, because the feeling is like, ‘My God, this is happening,’” Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, a climatologist at the University of Queensland in Australia, tells the New York Times’ Catrin Einhorn. “Now we’re at the point where we’re in the disaster movie.” Since February 2023, more than 54 percent of the world’s coral reefs have experienced heat-induced bleaching—and this figure is currently increasing by about 1 percent each week, as Derek Manzello, coordinator of NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch, tells the New York Times. The previous three mass coral bleachings occurred in 1998, 2010 and between 2014 and 2017. During these events, respectively, 20 percent, 35 percent and 56 percent of the world’s reefs were affected, writes the Guardian’s Graham Readfearn. If current trends continue, the new bleaching event could become the largest ever. Coral bleaching has been documented across at least 53 countries and territories in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans and across both hemispheres. Some of the world’s largest and most precious reefs are being hit the hardest. For the first time ever, all three areas of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park—for which this is the fifth mass bleaching event since 2016—are experiencing high levels of bleaching simultaneously, reports BBC News’ Georgina Rannard. And scientists at coastlines in Florida, the Caribbean, Costa Rica, Tanzania, Kenya, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf and Indonesia—among many other places—are observing corals lose their color. “A realistic interpretation is that we have crossed the tipping point for coral reefs,” David Obura, an ecologist who leads CORDIO East Africa, a coral reef research and conservation organization, tells Reuters’ Gloria Dickie and Alison Withers. “They’re going into a decline that we cannot stop, unless we really stop carbon dioxide emissions.” A bleached coral, with a healthier coral behind it. Currently, corals in at least 53 countries and territories have experienced mass bleaching since February 2023. Wikimedia Commons under CC BY 3.0 The decline of reefs constitutes not only an environmental and cultural loss, but a financial one as well. Coral reefs help drive a $2.7 trillion global economy by supporting tourism, fisheries and coastal protections against storms. Reefs’ disappearance would have profound effects on tens of millions of people who rely on the ecosystems for their livelihoods. Since 1950, Earth has lost half of its coral reefs. And if global air temperatures reach 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming compared to pre-industrial levels, scientists project a 99 percent decline in the world’s coral. Under a high-emissions scenario, this point is expected to be reached by 2050 or sooner. “If given a chance, coral are actually resilient and can recover,” Emma Camp, a marine biologist at the University of Technology Sydney, tells BBC News. “But as bleaching becomes more frequent and stronger in intensity, we’re really narrowing that window.” Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

CO2
Conservation
Health

EV adoption has brought modest, but measurable, declines in Bay Area emissions: Study

The adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) across the Bay Area has brought a small but steady decrease in carbon dioxide emissions to the region, a new study has found. Using an air quality monitoring network set up in the area more than a decade ago, scientists documented a 2.6 percent annual decline in vehicle emissions...

The adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) across the Bay Area has brought a small but steady decrease in carbon dioxide emissions to the region, a new study has found. Using an air quality monitoring network set up in the area more than a decade ago, scientists documented a 2.6 percent annual decline in vehicle emissions rates over a five-year period. They published their results Wednesday in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. The researchers amassed their data by using a network of air pollution monitoring sensors first set up in 2012 by Ronald Cohen, a University of California, Berkeley chemistry professor, who is also the senior author of the study. Today, the Berkeley Environmental Air Quality and CO2 Network (BEACO2N) has expanded to more than 80 stations, including seven in San Francisco and on the East Bay, stretching from Sonoma County through Vallejo and San Leandro, Calif. Combing through data from 2018 to 2022, the researchers found that 57 of the 80 sensors recorded a modest but meaningful decrease in carbon dioxide emissions — or about 1.8 percent annually. When factoring in California data for EV adoption rates, that drop translated into a 2.6 percent yearly plunge in vehicle emissions rates, according to the study.  "That's 2.6 percent less CO2 per mile driven each year," lead author Naomi Asimow, a graduate student in the department of Darth and planetary science, said in a statement. While this decline is generally good news, it's a far cry from the yearly decrease that the Bay Area and the rest of California would need to exhibit in order to meet long-term climate goals. "The state of California has set this goal for net zero emissions by 2045, and the goal is for 85 percent of the reduction to come from actual reduction of emissions, as opposed to direct removal of CO2 from the atmosphere," Asimow said. "What we report is around half as fast as we need to go to get to net zero emissions by 2045," she added. The annual rate of decline in overall emissions needs to be 3.7 percent, rather than 1.8 percent, Asimow explained. Although carbon dioxide releases are usually estimated based on known sources of carbon — such as how much gas is used in heating or fuel consumption and efficiency in registered vehicles — the authors said that taking such an approach did not indicate the emissions decline that they identified. Their approach, instead, involved combining direct carbon dioxide measurements from the network sensors with meteorological data to calculate ground-level emissions. Advocating for the installation of such sensors in other cities, Cohen said that they are inexpensive enough — less than $10,000 per sensor — that major metropolitan areas could deploy such a network and gain a clearer perception of their air pollution burden and the sources of those plumes. "This is cost-effective and translatable and easily accessible to the public in a way that nothing else is," Cohen said.

CO2
Climate
Science

These curious experiments are finding new ways to tackle pollution

At the Green Propulsion Laboratory in Italy, scientists are trying to harness natural organisms to rehabilitate the environment. Photographer Luigi Avantaggiato explores

The Purple-B projectLuigi Avantaggiato 2024 THESE curious experiments are products of the Green Propulsion Laboratory in Venice, Italy: a publicly owned research centre exploring new ways to rehabilitate the environment and generate energy. An unusual mix of scientists, engineers and psychologists at the lab have created prototypes that harness natural organisms to do useful jobs, often taking on a sculptural aspect as a side effect that attracts resident artists. “Despite being objects of science, there is beauty,” says photographer Luigi Avantaggiato. He spent time cataloguing devices such as Purple-B (shown above), which uses a bacterium called Rhodopseudomonas palustris, commonly found in the Venice lagoon, to convert human waste into useful hydrogen. The experiment has been funded by the European Space Agency as it could provide a way to process astronauts’ waste in orbit and create usable fuel, but it could be of use on Earth’s surface too. The main laboratory of the Green Propulsion Lab of the Veritas GroupLuigi Avantaggiato 2024 The bright green contents of several tanks in the lab (pictured above) are what is known as the Liquid Forest, a project in which tiny algae, such as Chlorella, capture the carbon dioxide that is warming our planet. Each tank contains 250 litres, and every cubic centimetre of that can hold around a billion algae. Researcher at work in one of the GPLabs laboratories.Luigi Avantaggiato 2024 Another shot (pictured above) shows a geodesic dome in which environmental engineers from a start-up called 9-Tech are working on new ways to recover silicon from obsolete solar panels. The whole lab site was created by Veritas, which handles the waste and water supply for around a million residents and 50 million tourists in Venice and Treviso.

CO2
Energy
Forests

Germany's solar panel makers face tough competition and policy challenges

In a rapidly evolving energy sector, Germany's solar panel manufacturers are navigating a competitive landscape shaped by low-priced Chinese imports and stringent U.S. trade policies, even as the demand for renewable energy sources surges.Melissa Eddy reports for The New York Times.In short:Germany, once a pioneer in solar energy production, now struggles against China's dominating low-cost production and U.S. protectionist measures.German manufacturers advocate for government incentives to sustain the industry, emphasizing the environmental and reliability benefits of local production.Europe's heavy reliance on imported solar panels has intensified debates about trade protectionism and the future of domestic manufacturing in the renewable energy sector.Key quote:“While other countries such as the United States and China are strongly promoting the establishment and scaling up of solar gigafactories, the German government has yet to take concrete action.”— The German Solar AssociationWhy this matters:On one hand, the availability of inexpensive Chinese solar panels has been a boon for the solar installation sector, contributing to a surge in solar energy adoption by making it more financially accessible to a broader population. However, this pricing disparity has put pressure on American and European manufacturers, who argue that they are at an unfair disadvantage due to China's state-backed subsidies and lower labor costs.With solar leading the way, clean energy capacity growth is helping the planet avoid billions of tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year.

In a rapidly evolving energy sector, Germany's solar panel manufacturers are navigating a competitive landscape shaped by low-priced Chinese imports and stringent U.S. trade policies, even as the demand for renewable energy sources surges.Melissa Eddy reports for The New York Times.In short:Germany, once a pioneer in solar energy production, now struggles against China's dominating low-cost production and U.S. protectionist measures.German manufacturers advocate for government incentives to sustain the industry, emphasizing the environmental and reliability benefits of local production.Europe's heavy reliance on imported solar panels has intensified debates about trade protectionism and the future of domestic manufacturing in the renewable energy sector.Key quote:“While other countries such as the United States and China are strongly promoting the establishment and scaling up of solar gigafactories, the German government has yet to take concrete action.”— The German Solar AssociationWhy this matters:On one hand, the availability of inexpensive Chinese solar panels has been a boon for the solar installation sector, contributing to a surge in solar energy adoption by making it more financially accessible to a broader population. However, this pricing disparity has put pressure on American and European manufacturers, who argue that they are at an unfair disadvantage due to China's state-backed subsidies and lower labor costs.With solar leading the way, clean energy capacity growth is helping the planet avoid billions of tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year.

CO2
Energy
Government

The EPA Accidentally Killed Small Cars

Like the rest of us, the Environmental Protection Agency seems to have noticed that cars are an increasingly rare sight on American roads, having been rapidly displaced by seemingly ever-larger trucks and SUVs. In its impact analysis of the agency’s new tailpipe emissions standards, a final version of which was unveiled this week, the EPA considers its own role in killing the sedan.The issue, the EPA analysis says, may have been the “attribute-based GHG standards for light-duty vehicles,” which first applied to new cars released in 2012. While federal regulators had distinguished between passenger and “non-passenger” vehicles since the 1970s, this Obama-era change amended U.S. corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards such that vehicles would be held to different emissions standards based on their size—specifically, the vehicle’s wheelbase multiplied by its track length (width). This meant that larger cars—those classified as light trucks—would be held to less stringent standards than passenger vehicles. What might sound like a wonky bureaucratic tweak has dramatically changed how Americans drive.In less than a decade after that change took effect—between 2012 and 2021—the EPA found that the percentage of new vehicle sales classified as passenger cars and those classified as light trucks has essentially flipped. In 2012, 64 percent of new vehicle sales were classified as passenger vehicles, while 34 percent were classified as light trucks. By 2021, light trucks accounted for 63 percent of sales while passenger vehicles accounted for 37 percent of sales. “Sedans have largely been replaced with taller vehicles such as truck-like sport utility vehicles (SUVs) and crossover utility vehicles (CUVs),” the agency writes. Pickup trucks’ share of new cars sales jumped from 10 to 16 percent over the same period. During that time, the overall average footprint of new cars grew by more than 5 percent.American autos aren’t bigger because consumers have suddenly embraced off-roading, the construction trades, or home improvement projects. They’re bigger because automakers want to escape regulations. Each manufacturer is required to comply with boutique greenhouse gas emissions standards, which are calculated based on the size and capabilities of the cars in their fleets. Smaller cars are held to different standards than larger cars. So are those with specialty features like all-wheel drive or large towing capacities. By changing the makeup of their fleets, in other words, car companies can change the standards to which they’re held. Those greenhouse gas emissions targets are measured in grams of carbon dioxide or its greenhouse gas equivalent per mile.As the EPA points out in its impact analysis, carmakers’ shift to larger vehicles has undermined the effectiveness of EPA regulations. The recent, rapid growth in car size, the agency writes, “has permitted compliance under higher numerical standards.” As a result of the increased average footprint of cars, automakers in 2021 could emit eight more grams per mile than in 2012. The EPA had projected the rules it implemented that year would result in average targets that were 22 grams per mile lower than those that were actually in place in 2021. And it therefore projected its 2012 rules would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 3.5 percent per year from 2012 through 2021. Instead, the agency found it reduced emissions by about 2 percent per year.The EPA—which did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication—seems aware of the sweeping, unintended consequence of changing the way that cars are classified. I’ll be writing soon about the ways its new tailpipe emissions rules do and do not address that challenge. On its own, though, the agency’s analysis of how dramatically its policies have shaped the way Americans drive should serve as a cautionary tale for just how influential even the most boring regulatory shifts can be when it comes to long-term emissions.

Like the rest of us, the Environmental Protection Agency seems to have noticed that cars are an increasingly rare sight on American roads, having been rapidly displaced by seemingly ever-larger trucks and SUVs. In its impact analysis of the agency’s new tailpipe emissions standards, a final version of which was unveiled this week, the EPA considers its own role in killing the sedan.The issue, the EPA analysis says, may have been the “attribute-based GHG standards for light-duty vehicles,” which first applied to new cars released in 2012. While federal regulators had distinguished between passenger and “non-passenger” vehicles since the 1970s, this Obama-era change amended U.S. corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards such that vehicles would be held to different emissions standards based on their size—specifically, the vehicle’s wheelbase multiplied by its track length (width). This meant that larger cars—those classified as light trucks—would be held to less stringent standards than passenger vehicles. What might sound like a wonky bureaucratic tweak has dramatically changed how Americans drive.In less than a decade after that change took effect—between 2012 and 2021—the EPA found that the percentage of new vehicle sales classified as passenger cars and those classified as light trucks has essentially flipped. In 2012, 64 percent of new vehicle sales were classified as passenger vehicles, while 34 percent were classified as light trucks. By 2021, light trucks accounted for 63 percent of sales while passenger vehicles accounted for 37 percent of sales. “Sedans have largely been replaced with taller vehicles such as truck-like sport utility vehicles (SUVs) and crossover utility vehicles (CUVs),” the agency writes. Pickup trucks’ share of new cars sales jumped from 10 to 16 percent over the same period. During that time, the overall average footprint of new cars grew by more than 5 percent.American autos aren’t bigger because consumers have suddenly embraced off-roading, the construction trades, or home improvement projects. They’re bigger because automakers want to escape regulations. Each manufacturer is required to comply with boutique greenhouse gas emissions standards, which are calculated based on the size and capabilities of the cars in their fleets. Smaller cars are held to different standards than larger cars. So are those with specialty features like all-wheel drive or large towing capacities. By changing the makeup of their fleets, in other words, car companies can change the standards to which they’re held. Those greenhouse gas emissions targets are measured in grams of carbon dioxide or its greenhouse gas equivalent per mile.As the EPA points out in its impact analysis, carmakers’ shift to larger vehicles has undermined the effectiveness of EPA regulations. The recent, rapid growth in car size, the agency writes, “has permitted compliance under higher numerical standards.” As a result of the increased average footprint of cars, automakers in 2021 could emit eight more grams per mile than in 2012. The EPA had projected the rules it implemented that year would result in average targets that were 22 grams per mile lower than those that were actually in place in 2021. And it therefore projected its 2012 rules would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 3.5 percent per year from 2012 through 2021. Instead, the agency found it reduced emissions by about 2 percent per year.The EPA—which did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication—seems aware of the sweeping, unintended consequence of changing the way that cars are classified. I’ll be writing soon about the ways its new tailpipe emissions rules do and do not address that challenge. On its own, though, the agency’s analysis of how dramatically its policies have shaped the way Americans drive should serve as a cautionary tale for just how influential even the most boring regulatory shifts can be when it comes to long-term emissions.

CO2

Suggested Viewing

A Low Carbon Future for China’s Furnace Cities

China’s economic development and rapid urbanization has led to a dramatic rise in energy consumption due to excessive heating and air-conditioning causing carbon emissions of immense proportions. China’s government has set the ambitious target of reducing CO2 emissions by 40–45% by 2020 against the 2005 baseline. A UK/China-funded team working on how to solve the problem in some of the most extreme climate regions in China. The team discovers groundbreaking solutions using computational-fluid-dynamics simulations.

CO2
Energy
Climate

The Carbon Chronicles

The Carbon Chronicles: Who owns the air? The Carbon Chronicles is an experimental animated visualisation of the build-up of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses has radically altered the Earth’s atmosphere. It is a collaboration between artists from the Manifest Data Lab and scientists from the British Antarctic Survey. The animation maps from the industrial revolution to the present day the regions contributing most to the climate crisis, which can be traced through the stalagmite growths representing CO2 emissions growing out from the different countries. Beginning with the UK in the 1750s, emissions from coal start enveloping the planet, other regions soon follow. By the late 1800s through to the current period, growing industrial and extraction activity in the Global North is responsible for 92% of CO2 with 8% coming from the Global South. The spread of CO2 described in the animation mirrors the wider historic processes of power distribution visited on poorer countries and shows that the atmosphere is as contested a space as the territories beneath it. The work describes a living breathing planet, under the pressure of human produced exhalations of CO2. It attributes responsibility in ways that can inform the need for equitable solutions to the climate crisis that are mindful of the historic consequences of carbon exploitation and its impacts. The Carbon Chronicles informs the need for equitable solutions to the climate crisis that are mindful of the historic consequences of carbon exploitation to ask: Who Owns the Air?

Animation
CO2
Experimental

THE SPRAYER

In the land occupied with the sprayers army, no one has the right to grow any kind of plants either in public or private. So many of the people and soldiers do not even know how a plant grows or looks like, until one day one of the soldiers finds a seed buried deep down in the dust and his curiosity is just the beginning of something extraordinary, something big, something revolutionary.

Plants
CO2
Animation

CO2? CO-Nee!

Joep van Dijk is a passionate climate scientist. He likes to search for extreme examples that show how life can be lived sustainably. This documentary follows Joep on his CO2-neutral journey from Amsterdam to the United States of America and shows how this choice inspires himself and others to live a climate conscious life.

Climate
CO2
Sustainable

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.