“Obama is not the problem” – Interview with Alexander Ochs on the current debate about U.S. Climate and Energy Policy

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on “Obama is not the problem” – Interview with Alexander Ochs on the current debate about U.S. Climate and Energy Policy
May 052011
 

[This is the translation of my recent interview for the Italian magazin e La Nuova Ecologia] 

1)      Can you explain to our Italian readers what the current status of Climate Change legislation is in the United States?

The situation in the United States is a bit tricky to understand for European observers due to the country’s complicated political system of “divided government” that provides “checks and balances” between the executive and legislative governmental branches. The House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy & Security Act, a far-reaching climate and energy bill in June 2009. This was the first time that a chamber of the U.S. parliament – or “Congress” – passed a bill that sets mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions: 17 percent emission reductions below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. The decision was very tight with a vote of 219-212, with 211 Democrats and only 8 Republicans supporting the bill. Since the House legislation has passed, all focus is on the Senate, the second chamber of the Congress. Here, Democrats Barbara Boxer and John Kerry introduced the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act in September of last year. This bill would reduce greenhouse gas emissions 3 percent below 2005 levels by 2012, 20% by 2020, 42% by 2030, and 83% by 2050. The bill also includes massive public investment in clean energy and carbon capture and storage (CCS) research. While hailed by environmentalist, from the moment of its introduction the 821 pages of the Kerry-Boxer bill have faced fierce opposition from Republican lawmakers and Conservative commentators as too complicated, too wide-ranging, and too costly. It is clear that the bill will not be passed in its original version.

 2)      So what happens next?

There is now an additional bill that has gained some attention: First, the Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal Act, introduced in December 2009 by Senators Maria Cantwell and Susan Collins. With more modest mandatory caps below 2012 levels of 5% by 2020 and 80% below by 2050, this legislation tries to find new middle ground for the climate change and energy debate. Most importantly, it would create a “cap and dividend” system that gives up to 75% of the revenue generated from auctioning of pollution permits to American households to offset the likely rise in energy costs after companies get regulated. The remaining revenues go into a fund intended to continue energy research and transition to a clean energy economy. In order to securely pass the Senate, any climate bill will need 60 votes. Currently, I would estimate the numbers of very probable supporters in the low 40s. About one third of the Senators are passionately opposed. The rest are fence sitters that will decide whether there will be climate legislation in the United States or not.

Continue reading »

Value of Fossil Fuel Subsidies Declines; National Bans Emerging

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Value of Fossil Fuel Subsidies Declines; National Bans Emerging
May 012011
 

 By Alexander Ochs and Annette Knödler  |  Vital Signs, May 11, 2011

Gobal fossil fuel consumption subsidies fell to $312 billion in 2009 from $558 billion in 2008, a decline of 44.1 percent.[i] The reduction is due primarily to changes in international energy prices as well as in domestic pricing policies and demand, rather than because the subsidies themselves were curtailed. The number also does not include fossil fuel production subsidies that aim at fostering domestic supply, which are estimated at an additional $100 billion globally per year.[ii]

Fossil fuel consumption subsidies include public aid that directly or indirectly lowers the price for consumers below market price. The International Energy Agency (IEA) defines energy subsidies as “any government action directed primarily at the energy sector that lowers the cost of energy production, raises the price received by energy producers or lowers the price paid by energy consumers.”[i] Common means of subsidizing energy include trade instruments, regulations, tax breaks, credits, direct financial transfers like grants to producers or consumers, and energy-related services provided by the government, such as investments in energy infrastructure or public research.[ii] Many observers believe that fossil fuel subsidies should be phased out because they reduce the competitiveness and use of cleaner, alternative energy sources .

Please find the full article [here].

First edition of CONNECTED published!

 newsletter  Comments Off on First edition of CONNECTED published!
Feb 102011
 

CONNECTED_1_2011

Dear Readers,

In his 2011 State of the Union Address, President Obama set the national goal to generate 80 percent of electricity from clean energy sources by 2035; the German government recently outlined its long-term energy concept which envisions full energy import independence and a 60 percent renewable energies share by 2050; the City of San Francisco launched an initiative aiming at a 100 percent renewables supply within just a decade; and under the motto “growth with foresight,“ Hamburg, this year Europe’s green capital, shows how urban development can be both economically beneficial and environmentally sustain-able. These are only a few examples illustrating that true leadership willing to tackle the twin challenges of climate change and energy security can be found on both sides of the Atlantic.

Content_CONNECTED1_2Welcome to the first edition of CONNECTED – a newsletter discussing climate and energy from a transatlantic perspective. With CONNECTED, partners adelphi and Worldwatch, headquartered in Berlin and Washington DC, will support the Transatlantic Climate Bridge, an initiative that since its inception in 2008 has promoted numerous activities by public authorities, the private sector, civil society, and academia in order to strengthen climate protection and energy security. CONNECTED aims to showcase and review policy and research initiatives that are aimed at low-emissions development. Opinion pieces, interviews, as well as reports on studies, dialogues and conferences will provide a regular update on the progress made toward building climate-compatible economies in Europe, the United States and beyond.

[I am co-editor of CONNECTED, together with Dennis Taenzler. Please find the full first issue of CONNECTED here]

Petrocaribe: Making Our Case For Us

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on Petrocaribe: Making Our Case For Us
Feb 092011
 
The Worldwatch Institute has begun implementing a Low Carbon Energy Roadmaps project to help Caribbean Small Island Developing States (SIDS) transition to a low-carbon economy. Undertaking such a transition is an immediate imperative for these states. If they can capitalize on their indigenous, renewable resources they can reduce their oil imports, reduce exposure to volatile prices, and invest any saved money in other areas of their economy. Still, it’s always nice to have someone (or something) else burnish our argument.

In 2005, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez initiated the Petrocaribe Energy Cooperation Agreement, an arrangement that allowed 12 Caribbean nations, including the Dominican Republic, to purchase oil at a subsidized cost. Nevertheless fuel prices in the D.R. have jumped 50 percent in the last two years.  Gasoline and diesel currently cost around $4.60 and $4.16 per gallon, respectively. Dominican taxi and bus drivers have recently begun taking out their frustration over higher fuel costs on Venezuela, protesting outside the Venezuelan Embassy and demanding more information on the details of the Petrocaribe program. In response, Alfredo Murga, Venezuela’s ambassador to the D.R., pointed out that Dominican authorities set their own fuel prices based on international crude oil markets. In other words, even Petrocaribe does not protect Dominicans from the vagaries of oil prices.  These developments only reinforce Worldwatch’s position: such complete dependence on oil for electricity in addition to vehicle fuel is untenable for the Dominican Republic. 

[Read the full Re|Volt blog here]

Renewable Energy Not a “Competing” Priority in Haiti

 blog  Comments Off on Renewable Energy Not a “Competing” Priority in Haiti
Dec 302010
 
by Mark Konold and Alexander Ochs

Recently the Brookings Institution hosted a panel that examined Haiti’s political and humanitarian developments since the January 2010 earthquake. A theme that came up regularly was that of competing priorities such as turbulent elections, a cholera outbreak, a lack of dependable energy supply, and gender-based violence. As the Worldwatch Institute prepares to develop a Low-Carbon Energy Roadmap for Haiti, some have questioned whether limited donor resources should be channeled into something more pressing than assessing and improving the country’s energy infrastructure. Is an energy roadmap really needed right now, or are other matters more important?

The cholera outbreak in Haiti is an urgent matter that deserves all the attention it is currently receiving. However, we must keep in mind that a lack of proper sanitation – due to a lack of electricity – helped cause the recent outbreak. Had the country’s energy infrastructure been more robust and sustainable, basic sanitation and electricity in hospitals might not have been lost and the current epidemic might have been avoided.

[Read the rest of this ReVolt blog]

“bridges” Lecture Series 2010: Debate on Global Climate-Change Policy with Roger Pielke, Jr., David Goldston, and Alexander Ochs

 online report, presentation  Comments Off on “bridges” Lecture Series 2010: Debate on Global Climate-Change Policy with Roger Pielke, Jr., David Goldston, and Alexander Ochs
Dec 212010
 

bridges vol. 28, December 2010 / Noteworthy Information

The challenge of addressing climate change inspires fierce, divisive debates, pitting science against politics, environmentalism against commerce, and the most powerful nations in the world against their less-developed neighbors. Roger Pielke, Jr. , professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado , bridges columnist, and a renowned expert on science and public policy, attempts to take on this challenge. In his new book, The Climate Fix: What Scientists and Politicians Won’t Tell You About Global Warming , he seeks to propose a novel, alternative way of looking for solutions for the climatic changes the earth is experiencing.

ochspielkegoldston

The Office of Science and Technology at the Embassy of Austria chose the occasion of the publication of this book to invite Roger Pielke, Jr., and two more experts on the issue – David Goldston and Alexander Ochs – for a debate with the audience on global climate-change policy. David Goldston is the director of Government Affairs for the Natural Resources Defense Council and previously served as chief of staff for the chairman of the US House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Science and Technology. Alexander Ochs works for Worldwatch Institute, directing its Climate and Energy Program. 

[Read the rest of the event report on the bridges website]

La producción de alimentos y la contaminación

 newspaper article  Comments Off on La producción de alimentos y la contaminación
Dec 092010
 

El Nuevo HeraldLa mayoría culpa a los automóviles y las fábricas por el cambio climático y los efectos devastadores que están teniendo en los patrones del clima global. Y esta semana en la Conferencia sobre el Cambio Climático de las Naciones Unidas en Cancún, también conocida como la UNFCCC COP16, los gobiernos internacionales y las delegaciones pasarán mucho tiempo en negociaciones, y discutiendo sobre culpas y soluciones.

Pero es probable que lo que está en nuestros platos es igual de perjudicial para el clima. La producción de alimentos en el mundo genera entre 13 y 30 por ciento de la emisión de gases de efecto invernadero que están causando el calentamiento global. Del campo, a la mesa, y al cesto de la basura, los alimentos que producimos, comemos y desechamos pueden tener un gran impacto sobre el medio ambiente, tanto como los vehículos que conducimos y los derrames de petróleo que producimos, y es crucial que lo que esté en nuestro plato también deba estar en la agenda de la UNFCCC.

Mediante la exploración de formas alternativas de producir, preparar y desechar los alimentos, podemos ayudar tanto a los agricultores de todo el mundo a poner fin al hambre y revertir el cambio climático. Encerrado en el suelo y en los árboles y plantas hay tres veces más carbono del que puede aguantar la atmósfera de la Tierra. Muchas prácticas agrícolas de hoy reducen la capacidad del suelo para encerrar el carbono, lo que libera una mayor cantidad de este gas de efecto invernadero a la atmósfera. Pero hay métodos agrícolas alternativos que mantienen el carbono enterrado, como restaurar los procesos naturales que garantizan que los niveles atmosféricos de carbono sean bajos.

En el Sahel, la extrema sequía en los últimos 40 años ha disminuido la producción de alimentos y desplazado a gran parte de la población. Pero los pequeños agricultores están cambiando la situación, mejorando sus medios de vida y su dieta y contribuyendo a mitigar el cambio climático mediante el cultivo de árboles autoctónos.

[Read the rest of Danielle Nierenberg’s and my op-ed in E Nuevo Herald here]

Mapping the future: Why bidding farewell to fossil fuels is in our interest – and how it can be done

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Mapping the future: Why bidding farewell to fossil fuels is in our interest – and how it can be done
Dec 082010
 

Developing efficient, sustainable energy systems based on renewable energy and smart grid technology is not only an environmental necessity: it is a social and economic imperative. We rely on fossil fuels for more than 85 per cent of all energy we use and pay a high price for our dependency, on all fronts. An overhaul of the way we produce, transport, store, and consume energy is underway and an improved energy world is emerging, slowly. Intelligent policies based on concise roadmaps will get us there faster.

cover_ClimateAction_2010People around the world are already suffering from the impacts of climate change. Rising sea levels, melting glaciers, storms, droughts, and floods – these natural processes, artificially intensified by global warming, will affect agriculture, fishing, transportation, and tourism to an ever greater degree. Changing ecosystems and landscapes, biodiversity losses, the surge of tropical diseases, and food and water shortages will lead to economic and welfare losses on an unprecedented scale should climate change remain largely unabated as it is today.

The cost of fossil fuels is unjustifiable

Even if we take climate change, which has been called this century’s greatest challenge, off the table for a moment, transitioning our energy systems is a socioeconomic imperative. For a host of reasons, our reliance on fossil fuels comes at an unjustifiably high cost to our economies. First, the burning of coal and petroleum pollutes our air and water. China, for example, estimates that addressing its pollution and pollution-related health problems swallows up to 10 per cent of its total annual GDP. Imagine if the country could put these huge resources into addressing pressing social needs!

[Please find the full article here. It has been published in UNEP’s Climate Action 2010 book; please find the whole book here.]

Low-Carbon Energy Roadmaps

 presentation  Comments Off on Low-Carbon Energy Roadmaps
Dec 022010
 

Presentation at Side Event of the European Climate Foundation at COP 16
EU Pavilion, Cancun, 2 December 2010

OVERVIEW

Global Primary Energy Supply by Source, 2007
Average Global Growth Rates by Energy Source, 2004-2009
World Wind Capacity, 1996-2008
World Solar PV Capacity, 1990-2009
Concentrating Solar Power (CSP), 2009
World Solar Water Heating Capacity, 1995-2007
Renewables as a Share of Electricity Generation, 1990-2008
Global Electricity from Renewables, 2002-2008
Cost of New U.S. Power Generation, 2008
CO2 Emissions per capita, select countries
Renewable Electricity in Germany, 1990 – 2007
CO2 Emissions Avoided with Renewable Energy in Germany
Wind Capacity, Top 10 Countries, 2009
Landmass vs. Wind Capacity (MW), Germany and Continental U.S. (2007)
Solar PV Production by Country/Region, 2000-2008
Solar PV Capacity, Top Six Countries, 2009
Photovoltaic Solar Resource: United States and Germany
Global Potential of Renewable Resources
Solar Potential
U.S. Electricity Generation by Source: Worldwatch Scenario 2030
Energy Transitions: 2000 – 2100
Worldwatch 5-Phase Design of Low-Carbon Growth Strategies
Worldwatch’s Energy Roadmaps
Worldwatch’s Energy Roadmaps, Example: Dominican Republic

[You can find the  full presentation here]

Nur Europa kann Can’tcun verhindern

 newspaper article  Comments Off on Nur Europa kann Can’tcun verhindern
Nov 252010
 
Und jährlich grüßt das Murmeltier. Der nächste Klimagipfel steht an. Jedes Jahr Ende November trifft sich die Welt, um über das Schicksal ihres Planeten zu entscheiden. Die Chairs der unterschiedlichen Arbeitsgruppen legen ihre Vertragsentwürfe vor, im Plenum versichern sich die Staaten ihres guten Willens, die Umweltorganisationen stellen ihre Forderungen, und am Ende der zwei Wochen fliegen die Umweltminister für den finalen Showdown ein und entscheiden: wenig Konkretes.

Doch ganz so einfach ist es nicht. Es geht ja doch vorwärts, wichtige Einigungen sind erzielt worden, nur eben insgesamt viel zu langsam. Um dem Klimawandel tatsächlich Einhalt zu gebieten, da ist sich die Wissenschaft weitgehend einig, darf die globale Erwärmung zwei Grad Celsius in diesem Jahrhundert nicht übersteigen. Für die Industriestaaten heißt das: Reduzierung um bis zu 90 Prozent. Noch immer ist ein Inder für weniger als ein Sechstel der Emissionen eines Durchschnittseuropäers verantwortlich. Doch der Ausstoß steigt in fast allen Ländern weiter an.

[Weiter zu meinem Gastbeitrag in der Wiener Zeitung]

Energie rinnovabili: a che punto è il mondo?

 magazine article, newspaper interview, Uncategorized  Comments Off on Energie rinnovabili: a che punto è il mondo?
Nov 142010
 

Intervista ad Alexander Ochs, direttore del Climate & Energy Program del Worldwatch Institute.

di Alessandra Viola

La domanda energetica mondiale nel 2030 può essere ridotta di un terzo semplicemente puntando sull’efficienza.  E la metà della rimanente domanda potrà essere garantita dalle rinnovabili, con una diminuzione delle emissioni di gas serra pari al 52%.  Ma a patto che modifichiamo il nostro stile di vita. 

Ochs_Oxygen_Interview_112010

Vent’anni di tempo per dimezzare le emissioni globali di gas serra e provvedere alla metà del consume energetico mondiale con le rinnovabili.  O sarà un disastro.  Vent’anni per contenere il global warming entro livelli accettabili per il Pianeta, ma anche vent’anni per essere tutti un po’ più felici.  Detta così sembra un’enormità, una cosa assurda o al meglio semplicemente un’utopia.  Al Worldwatch Institute di Washington però fanno sul serio.  E nello State of the World 2010, insieme al rapport Renewable Revolution, hanno messo a punto uno scenario future tutt’altro che campato in aria.  Secondo le nostre proiezioni, che sono diverse da quelle elaborate dall’Agenzia internazionale per l’energia e che abitualmente si usano come scenario di riferimento- spiega Alexander Ochs, direttore del Climate & Energy Program del Worldwatch Institute- la domanda energetica mondiale nel 2030 può essere ridotta di un terzo semplicemente puntando sull’efficienza.  E la metà della rimanente domanda energetica, sempre nel nostro scenario, potrà essere garantita dale rinnovabili con una diminuzione delle emissioni di gas serra pari al 52%.  Naturalmente, a patto che introduciamo un efficace sistema di regolamentazione e modifichiamo il nostro stile di vita: se ognuno dei 6,8 miliardi di abitanti della Terra conducesse una vita simile a quella di un nordamericano medio, il Pianeta sarebbe già collassato.

[Read the full article published in Oxygen 11 (10/2010): “Green Power”]

India’s new leadership on energy

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on India’s new leadership on energy
Nov 052010
 

DelhiWorkshop_2010from: Worldwatch Connect Newsletter Nov. 2010

Worldwatch’s Director of Climate and Energy, Alexander Ochs, recently returned from a trip to India more optimistic than ever about India’s role as a global leader in sustainable development.  Through numerous meetings and discussions with governmental and non-governmental representatives from the Indian energy sector, Ochs advanced the work of Worldwatch’s India Program and laid the groundwork for future partnerships. And he returned with hope and enthusiasm both for India’s promise for innovative leadership and Worldwatch’s potential role in this transition.

This optimism is due in large part to what Ochs observed as a dramatic shift in attitude and approach towards energy resources and economic development in India.  For the past two decades, India has shared the belief with much of the World’s developing nations that they held the right to support development with fast and cheap energy resources. Much like the United States, United Kingdom, or Germany, India would have an industrial age of rapid development supported by abundant and easily-utilized resources like coal and oil, with some regrettable but necessary negative impact on the local and global environment. The  prime goal needed to be quick development at whatever ecologic expense. While this remains a widely-held paradigm, it is no longer driving the dialogue amongst a large portion of India’s policymakers and business leaders. Today, India chooses to take an active role as one of the biggest global energy markets.

Continue reading »

Was vom Ehrgeiz übrig blieb

 newspaper article  Comments Off on Was vom Ehrgeiz übrig blieb
Nov 032010
 

Barack Obama versucht, Lösungen für die drängendsten Probleme der USA zu finden. Doch gegen Tea Party, Fox News und die Nein-Fraktion des Volkes hat er keine Chance. Von seinen hehren Zielen ist wenig übrig geblieben.

Es hatte alles so schön begonnen, im Herbst 2008. Die Hoffnung auf Veränderung, die Barack Obama damals bei den amerikanischen Wählern geweckt hatte, sie wurde von vielen Menschen weltweit geteilt, und gerade auch von jenen, die einen Wandel der US-Umweltpolitik herbeisehnten. Immerhin hatte Obama die Erderwärmung und die Energiepolitik zu wichtigen Themen seiner Wahlkampagne gemacht. Stets aufs Neue tat er seine Überzeugung kund, dass diejenige Nation, die im Wettbewerb um neue Energietechnologien vorn sein werde, auch die Weltwirtschaft in diesem Jahrhundert anführen würde. Einmal im Weißen Haus, erklärte der neu gewählte Präsident, dass nur wenige Herausforderungen für Amerika und die Welt dringender seien als der Klimaschutz, und dass seine Präsidentschaft ein neues Kapitel im Klimaschutz einleiten werde. Von diesem Ziel ist nur wenig übrig geblieben.

Freilich, es gab wichtige Erfolge. Dazu zählen die 60 Milliarden Dollar, die das Konjunkturpaket von 2009 für die Förderung von Energieeffizienz und erneuerbaren Energien vorsieht; ebenso die erste Verschärfung der Verbrauchsstandards für US-Autohersteller seit mehr als drei Jahrzehnten; und schließlich ein Entscheid des Obersten Gerichtshofs, der der amerikanischen Umweltbehörde das Recht zuspricht, klimaschädliche Treibhausgase über das Luftreinhaltungsgesetz zu beschränken. Doch genau Letzteres ist nur eine Notlösung, denn zur großen Enttäuschung der Umweltschützer ist die Verabschiedung eines umfassenden Klima-und Energiepakets im Kongress gescheitert. Dieses hätte wesentlich weitreichendere Schritte enthalten sollen: ein nationales Emissionshandelssystem mit verbindlichen Reduktionszielen, sowie klare, ambitionierte Ziele für erneuerbare Energien und Energieeffizienz.

[Gastbeitrag in der Sueddeutschen Zeitung]

Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in China: Current Status and Prospects for 2020

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in China: Current Status and Prospects for 2020
Oct 202010
 

Over the past few years, China has emerged as a global leader in clean energy, topping the world in production of compact fluorescent light bulbs, solar water heaters, solar photovoltaic (PV) cells, and wind turbines. The remarkable rise of China’s clean energy sector reflects a strong and growing commitment by the government to diversify its energy economy, reduce environmental problems, and stave off massive increases in energy imports. Around the world, governments and industries now find themselves struggling to keep pace with the new pacesetter in global clean energy development.

WW.report181

Chinese efforts to develop renewable energy technologies have accelerated in recent years as the government has recognized energy as a strategic sector. China has adopted a host of new policies and regulations aimed at encouraging energy efficiency and expanding renewable energy deployment. Taking lessons from its own experience as well as the experiences of countries around the world, China has built its clean energy sector in synergy with its unique economic system and institutions of governance. At a time when many countries still struggle with the aftermath of a devastating financial crisis, the Chinese government has used its strong financial position to direct tens of billions of dollars into clean energy— increasing the lead that Chinese companies have in many sectors.

Among other initiatives, the Chinese government has taken strong action to promote renewable energy, establish national energy conservation targets, and delegate energysaving responsibilities to regions. Key legislative actions include the national Renewable Energy Law, which entered into force in January 2006, the national Medium and Long-Term Development Plan for Renewable Energy, launched in September 2007, and the Medium and Long-Term Energy Conservation Plan, launched in November 2004.

Although per capita energy use in China remains below the international average, it is growing very rapidly, spurred recently by the infrastructure-intensive government stimulus program launched in late 2008. Even with efficiency advances, demand for energy is expected to continue to rise in the coming decades. Chinese energy consumption is currently dominated by coal, and the major energy-consuming sector is industry. Improving the efficiency of energy use and enhancing energy conservation will be critical to ease energy supply constraints, boost energy security, reduce environmental pollution, “green” the economy, and tackle the climate challenge.

[Please find more on this Worldwatch report 181 which I co-authored with a group of Chinese and US experts, here]

From Flop’enhagen to Can’tcun? US climate policy before the mid-term elections and the UN summit

 magazine article  Comments Off on From Flop’enhagen to Can’tcun? US climate policy before the mid-term elections and the UN summit
Oct 202010
 
mp3 download

co2_climateIt all started so nicely. The hope for change that Barack Obama had raised among American voters was felt by citizens worldwide, including those yearning for a change in US environmental policy. After all, Obama had made global warming and energy policy important cornerstones of his campaign. Once in the White House, the newly elected President explained that “few challenges facing America – and the world – are more urgent than combating climate change” and that his “presidency will mark a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change.” Repeatedly he stressed that “the nation that wins this competition [for new energy technologies] will be the nation that leads the global economy.”

What’s left, as we approach mid-term elections in Obama’s first administration, is a very mixed bag.  There have been important successes, including over $60 billion that were earmarked for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009; the first tightening of Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency standards in three decades; and the federal Environmental Protection Agency ‘s “Endangerment Finding” that recognizes, as a follow-up of the Supreme Court ruling Massachusetts et al. vs. EPA, that the  agency  has the right to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. To the great disappointment of the environmentalists, however, comprehensive climate and energy legislation, including a market-based system with mandatory economy-wide emission targets as well as strong incentives for the employment of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy technologies, has not been passed.

The situation that has unfolded over the last 1 ½  years is almost absurd. A White House and all involved secretaries and agencies support strong climate policy; a majority of the public wants effective climate action; a thorough climate and energy bill finally passed the House; and then there is also majority support for climate legislation in the Senate – albeit this majority is not filibuster-proof. The Senate’s leadership was unable to get 60+ votes. And here the story ends for now. A minority of 40+ Senators puts a hold on domestic legislation and shuts a historic window of opportunity.

[This article appered in Bridges vol. 27, October 2010. Read the rest of the article here: http://www.ostina.org/content/view/5229/1390/]

Low Carbon Development in India: Challenges and Opportunities

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Low Carbon Development in India: Challenges and Opportunities
Sep 132010
 

Discussion paper by Shakuntala Makhijani and Alexander Ochs

In preparation for its September 13, 2010 workshop bringing together leaders in Indian low carbon development, Worldwatch conducted interviews with twenty top experts in the field to gain a sense of the current state of thinking and frame the debate for the event. The set of questions were aiming at insights from ten issue areas: challenges to low carbon growth, whether low carbon development is in India’s interest, emissions pathways, the National Solar Mission, the National Mission on Enhanced Energy Efficiency, policies for sustainable business models, opportunities in infrastructure, technology and IPR, international competitiveness and finally international leadership. For better illustration of the arguments given, we added a table on future emission scenarios as well as a summary of the government’s National Action Plan on Climate Change to this document.

Download the full paper [HERE}.

China may cap-and-trade before US

 blog, online report  Comments Off on China may cap-and-trade before US
Sep 062010
 

While the US Senate has backed off on climate legislation, China is considering launching emissions-trading programmes within five years, write Alexander Ochs and Haibing Ma.

Just when leaders in the United States Senate admitted to abandoning their plan of issuing a federal climate bill by the end ofTianjin_port_cap-and-trade_thumbthis year, top Chinese officials were discussing how to launch carbon-trading programmes under their country’s next (12th) Five-Year Plan (2011-2015). Serving as China’s overarching social and economic guidance, Five-Year Plans consistently lay out the most crucial development strategies for this giant emerging economy. Once included in the plan, carbon trading will be viewed as part of China’s national goals and will be domestically binding. This occurred most recently with the country’s 2010 energy-intensity target, which called for a 20% reduction from 2005 levels and was disaggregated into provincial and local targets, with local officials held accountable for achieving them.

In short, China seems to be accelerating full-throttle toward a low-carbon economy. Chinese policymakers have been eyeing a domestic emission-trading scheme for a while. In August 2009, National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) deputy director Xie Zhenhua announced that China would launch a pilot carbon-trading programme in selected regions and/or sectors — basically the same message now discussed for the Five-Year Plan. On one hand, this reiteration demonstrates that the Chinese government is seriously considering such a market-based mitigation mechanism; on the other hand, the fact that the programme’s status is still in discussion one year later shows that putting cap-and-trade into action might be not be so easy in China either.

[Read our full article on Chinadialogue]

Implications of a Low-Carbon Energy Transition for U.S. National Security

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Implications of a Low-Carbon Energy Transition for U.S. National Security
Aug 302010
 
Yttrium, a rare earth element
Yttrium, a rare earth element
Climate change and the secure supply of energy are among the biggest challenges of the twenty-first century. The problem is immense: While global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are still on the rise, they will have to be halved by the middle of this century in order to prevent the most dangerous effects of global warming. And while energy-related emissions are already responsible for the largest share of GHG emissions, global energy demand is estimated to rise by 50 percent or more between now and 2030.

Climate change and energy security can be seen as Siamese twins insofar as they can only be sustained with concern for one another: 80 percent of global energy supply is produced from fossil fuels which, in the United States, Europe, Japan and other important U.S. ally countries, are increasingly imported and therefore are at the core of their increasing energy dependence. The burning of fossil fuels also emits CO2, and energy-related CO2 emissions are responsible for about 60 percent of man-made climate change.

The security impacts of climate change and our dependence of fossil fuels have been much debated. It is in the national interest of the United States to address both issues vigorously. There has been little academic and political discussion, however, about the security impacts of a transition of our economy to one that is built on a low-carbon energy foundation. What are the foreseeable material input demands and what human capacities are needed for such a transition? This paper addresses these questions under a particular scenario in which the United States commits to GHG reductions as party to an international climate change agreement.
 

 [Please find the full version of this draft policy paper here. Comments are highly appreciated]