Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Dana Nuccitelli Profile picture
Dana Nuccitelli
@dana1981
Research Coordinator for @citizensclimate, environmental scientist, climate journalist for @CC_Yale. Author of Climatology versus Pseudoscience. Views my own.
Dec 7, 2022 • 11 tweets • 4 min read
Thread 🧵on why I think it's a big mistake for progressives and environmental justice advocates to kill a permitting reform deal in the current lame duck session of Congress. Permitting reform is crucially important for both the climate and frontline communities [1/10] Everyone agrees we need to speed up the rate at which we build electricity transmission. Otherwise we can't connect new wind & solar to the grid fast enough, and as @JesseJenkins' team found, we would squander 80% of the Inflation Reduction Act's potential emissions cuts [2/10] Image
Sep 8, 2022 • 11 tweets • 4 min read
An important new study from two dozen experts published in @Nature provides a comprehensive update of the social cost of carbon, finding at $185/ton it's >3.5 times higher than the current federal estimate. My @CC_Yale and 🧵 on the details follow [1/11]
yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/09/new-st… Why it's important: federal agencies have to consider the costs & benefits of proposed regulations. For climate regs, benefits from avoided damages come from the SCC. Bigger SCC = bigger benefit/cost ratios = more aggressive climate rules from agencies like @EPA [2/11]
Jun 20, 2022 • 8 tweets • 4 min read
In @CC_Yale today I've got a piece on a new Science study examining what it will take for the US to meet its 50% by 2030 Paris commitment. It's still within reach, but will take major policy accelerations. Article & thread 🧵follow [1/8]:
yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/06/what-i… With two-thirds of the time between 2005 & 2030 having passed, emissions have only fallen about 15% (~1 Gt). The study looked at 7 energy system model scenarios to see what it'll take to reduce US emissions another 35% (~2.3 Gt) below 2005 levels in just the next 8 years [2/8]
May 4, 2022 • 12 tweets • 4 min read
Carbon dioxide removal has been a hot topic of late, with the @IPCC_CH discussing its critical importance & @stripe coordinating the ~$1B Frontier Fund to purchase CDR from startups. I wrote about CDR for @CC_Yale today. Article & thread 🧵follow [1/12] yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/05/what-y… Unfortunately, we're not going to meet the Paris targets without CDR. Existing + planned fossil fuel infrastructure alone is enough to blow the 1.5°C carbon budget and eat nearly all of the 2°C budget. The @IPCC_CH noted that CDR serves 3 purposes over different timeframes [2/12]
May 3, 2022 • 5 tweets • 3 min read
Need a break from doomscrolling about the decline of American society? I wrote about the #ElectrifyEverything strategy for @citizensclimate today. My blog post on why and how to electrify, plus a thread 🧵discussing some additional nuances [1/5]:
citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/ho… It’s critical to decarbonize the electricity sector ASAP because marginal demand increase is often supplied by fossil fuels. One recent study found that increased marginal electricity emissions would offset >half the reductions from deploying EVs [2/5]
pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…
Apr 13, 2022 • 5 tweets • 3 min read
We have a new piece by the @citizensclimate Research Team's Jonathan Marshall on the @BudgetHawks report on the emissions-reducing and revenue-generating benefits of a price on carbon pollution. Article and thread 🧵 below [1/5]:
citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/ne… The @BudgetHawks is a non-partisan group led by political and business notables from both sides of the aisle, including budget chiefs and political advisors to Ronald Reagan and both presidents Bush. So they have street cred with many traditional conservatives [2/5]
Feb 18, 2022 • 7 tweets • 4 min read
As @GernotWagner & @AndrewDessler have recently noted, economic assessments of climate damages have been very conservative because they can only account for impacts we can identify & quantify. In @CC_Yale today I write about an example of a new one 🧵:
yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/02/study-… Global warming increases rainfall on average because a hotter atmosphere holds more water vapor. Previous climate-economic assessments had concluded that this increase in wetness would benefit the economy, in particular because more rain is beneficial in dry areas.
Dec 15, 2021 • 12 tweets • 5 min read
For the @citizensclimate blog, I wrote about new @NatureClimate research showing that a carbon price + dividend reduces poverty & inequality, and that aggressive climate policy is good for the economy. A thread 🧵explaining why (1/11):
citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/ne… The first study considers a hypothetical carbon price starting at $30/ton in 2015, rising about 5% or ~$2 per year, with 100% of the revenue returned equally to individual taxpayers. Not dissimilar from the Energy Innovation & Carbon Dividend Act (2/11):
congress.gov/bill/117th-con…
Dec 14, 2021 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
My retrospective on the climate year of 2021 and look forward to 2022 in @CC_Yale today. Lots of important events are happening in the worlds of climate science and policy! Article and quick thread 🧵below:
yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/12/2021-w… 2021 was the sixth- or seventh-hottest year on record, hotter than any year on record prior to 2015, and the hottest La Niña year ever recorded. It was consistent with the human-caused global warming trend of about 0.2°C per decade:
Nov 11, 2021 • 10 tweets • 4 min read
The @WSJopinion page loves to publish junk from Bjorn Lomborg downplaying the risks posed by the climate crisis. Today he argues that potentially catastrophic 3.5°C global warming is 'economically optimal' based on Nordhaus' research. A thread 🧵 discussing the many errors here: 1) It's based on one paper (a.k.a. "single study syndrome", a.k.a. "cherrypicking"). Lomborg tries to bolster his case by noting the paper is by Nordhaus who won a Nobel Prize. But Nordhaus has said high-warming scenarios are uncertain and dangerous.
theguardian.com/environment/cl…
Aug 11, 2021 • 14 tweets • 6 min read
Quick thread 🧵 debunking the misinformation in @GeorgeWill's latest ignorant climate musings in @washingtonpost @PostOpinions (1/14): The quote below is utter nonsense. The referenced "exhortations to combat climate change" are based on the authoritative @IPCC_CH report, and there have been plenty of climate policies proposed that are congruent with 'conservative agendas' like carbon pollution pricing (2/14)
Mar 23, 2021 • 43 tweets • 14 min read
In 2019, @sarahknapton wrote quite a bad climate denial piece for @Telegraph. I identified 30 climate myths in the thread below.

She's got another one there today. Let's see if it's any better this time, 1.5 years later. Debunking thread! 🧵 1) "The planet's average ground temperature has risen by around 1.62F (0.9C) during that period [since 1850]"

It's more like 1.2°C now.
telegraph.co.uk/environment/0/…
Feb 17, 2021 • 24 tweets • 12 min read
Let's do a thread 🧵 of conservatives falsely blaming Texas' power outages on wind turbines. To start, @DanCrenshawTX (who purely coincidentally happens to be the 3rd-highest House recipient of oil & gas money):
Montana's @RepRosendale, h/t to @karinkirk_mt:
Feb 3, 2021 • 13 tweets • 7 min read
The @POTUS Climate Crisis Executive Order last week was a BFD! In @CC_Yale today, I discuss how it was basically a mini #GreenNewDeal. Here's the article, and thread 🧵:
yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/02/bidens… The #GreenNewDeal framework is largely a deployment of federal investments in clean technologies for lots of sectors, creating millions of jobs while cleaning up fossil fuel pollution and correcting environmental injustices. That's exactly the framework of the climate crisis EO!
Nov 30, 2020 • 10 tweets • 5 min read
It's conservatives' favorite argument against climate solutions: "it's too expensive!"

In @CC_Yale I tried to do a definitive debunking of this myth, also available @skepticscience short URL sks.to/costs. Please read it, then this thread (1/10)
yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/11/fighti… First, HUGE CAVEAT: we can't put a $$$ value on many climate crisis consequences like suffering, trauma, extinctions, lost biodiversity, etc., as advocates like @GretaThunberg & @sunrisemvmt remind us. Nevertheless, the economic case for climate solutions is a no-brainer (2/10)
Oct 28, 2020 • 14 tweets • 4 min read
So, what's happening in the Arctic now is kinda crazy, but also really important to extreme weather throughout the northern hemisphere. Read my piece today on the topic, but here's a Thread:
yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/10/warmer… First, the basics: there's a "positive feedback" (positive in the negative sense, Trump would say), like a mutually destructive relationship. Warming melts ice & snow in the Arctic, making the surface less reflective -> absorb more sunlight -> warm more -> melt more -> etc. 1/n
May 1, 2020 • 9 tweets • 4 min read
Today @CC_Yale published my article debunking Michael Moore & Jeff Gibbs' garbage anti-clean energy film.

Fellow environmentalists, I'd like to have a word. Please read my piece and then step into my Twitter office, if you would.
yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/05/michae… We've been fighting for climate action (without a lot of success) for over 30 years now. The reason we haven't won isn't that @algore or @billmckibben are secret evil villains, as Moore and Gibbs would have us believe.

It's that THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY ARE ACTUAL VILLAINS!!
Apr 21, 2020 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
There is soooooooo much misleading junk in this film. Most of it is focused on biomass from wood, which supplies 2% of energy in the US. And wind turbines are bad because ... they only last several decades and NIMBYs don't like them?

I yelled at the screen 3 times watching this. The film's solution is, I guess don't use any energy because no source of energy is perfect? There's no comparison of pros and cons, no consideration of benefits at all. It only looks at the downside of every source of energy and thus basically concludes that civilization is bad.
Oct 15, 2019 • 32 tweets • 19 min read
@sarahknapton You should have dived deeper, because this article is full of inaccuracies.

1) "the warming trend is slower than most climate models have forecast."

False: skepticalscience.com/comparing-glob… @sarahknapton 2) "In 1990 the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted that temperatures would rise by 0.54F (0.3C) per decade."

False: skepticalscience.com/lessons-from-p…
Oct 8, 2019 • 12 tweets • 7 min read
Really interesting report on California GHG emissions by @Next10: next10.org/publications/2…

A thread follows, with lots of pretty charts!

Overall, CA is doing well, already beating its 2020 target of bringing emissions below 1990 levels (1/n) @Next10 But emissions cuts will need to accelerate in order to meet the state's aggressive 2030 and 2050 targets
Mar 15, 2019 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Wow, @AOC is the only one in the room (including Wilbur Ross and his lawyers) aware that 1) the proposed census citizenship question wording is substantively different from the previous version, and 2) such wording changes must be submitted to Congress law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/13… For those interested in the details of the law that @AOC references, it says Secretary Ross must submit one report to Congress detailing the subjects to be included in the census [Section (f)(1)], and a second report with the census questions [Section (f)(2)] ...