SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
US Appeals Court Says California Can Set its Own Low Carbon Fuel Standard:
Late last week, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit published an opinion (PDF) stating that California's regulation of fuel sales based on a lifecycle analysis of carbon emissions did not violate federal commerce rules.
Since 2011, California has had a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) program, which requires fuel sellers to reduce their fuel's carbon intensity by certain deadlines. If oil, ethanol, or other fuel sellers can't meet those deadlines, they can buy credits from companies that have complied with the standard.
California measures "fuel intensity" over the lifecycle of the fuel, so oil extracted from tar sands (which might require a lot of processing) would be penalized more than lighter oil that requires minimal processing. Ethanol made with coal would struggle to meet its carbon intensity goals more than ethanol made from gas.
Plaintiffs representing the ethanol and oil industries have challenged these rules in the court system. Most recently, they challenged California's 2015 version of the rules. (In September 2018, the state's Air Resources Board announced new amendments to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard rules, but those are not discussed in the 9th Circuit's most recent opinion.)
[...] The opinion noted:
The California legislature is rightly concerned with the health and welfare of humans living in the State of California... These persons may be subjected, for example, to crumbling or swamped coastlines, rising water, or more intense forest fires caused by higher temperatures and related droughts, all of which many in the scientific communities believe are caused or intensified by the volume of greenhouse gas emissions.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday January 25 2019, @12:31AM (2 children)
Well, one could argue that uranium is merely condensed supernova energy, I suppose.
But the real drawback to nuclear energy is that nobody is planing on paying to handle the waste. And plant managers cut costs in ways that are unsafe...which with the residual long term effects isn't acceptable. Perhaps fusion will be better.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 25 2019, @12:44AM (1 child)
1/ High level stuff - either burn it for more power or encase it in synrock and stack it in the desert somewhere. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synroc [wikipedia.org] )
2/ Low level - Separate out what can be used for power and stack the rest in the same desert.
3/ Liquids - Separate out whatever is making it radioactive. Goto 1/ or 2/. If it is tritium then that both has uses and a 12 year half life. Not a problem.
(Score: 4, Touché) by RandomFactor on Friday January 25 2019, @01:49AM
Reprocess fuel and use breeder reactors? That's crazy talk!
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды