Mon, May 25, 2009 page11

• Hopes fade as US energy chief criticized

  ON THE SPOT: Steven Chu arrives in Europe to discuss climate change amid decisions in the US that have led many environmentalists to call him ‘contradictory and illogical’

  • THE GUARDIAN
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  US Secretary of Energy Steven Chu (朱棣文) will fly to Europe this week for talks that will be crucial in the global battle against climate change. The 61-year-old physicist will hold key discussions with energy ministers from G8 nations in Rome before traveling to London to take part in a debate with other Nobel prize winners on global warming.

  The arrival of Chu, who won the award for physics, comes as the scientist-turned-politician finds himself under fire from environmentalists over decisions he has made about the US’ campaign to fight global warming. Green groups have accused him of being “contradictory and illogical” and of failing to demonstrate sufficient dynamism in establishing a new, low-carbon approach to transport and power-generation in the US.

  In recent weeks, Chu — who was appointed energy secretary by US President Barack Obama in December — has revealed that he is no longer willing to block the construction of new coal-powered electricity plants in the US despite widespread opposition from green groups and despite having said, initially, that he would not permit their construction.

  Environmental campaigners object vociferously to coal plants — which atmosphere scientist James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, recently labeled “factories of death” in an article he wrote for the Observer — because of their high carbon emissions.

  In addition, Chu has called for a slowdown in the development of hydrogen-powered vehicles in the US and slashed funding for new projects by 60 percent.

  “We asked ourselves, is it likely in the next 10 or 15, or even 20 years that we will convert to a hydrogen car economy?” Chu said. “The answer, we felt, was no.”

  On top of these controversial pronouncements, Chu has eliminated funding for a project to build a nuclear waste store at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Instead of storage, he has backed the construction of fast neutron reactors that could burn long-lived waste. Such a move, which would require a major expansion of the US nuclear industry, has horrified ecology groups.

  Yet most US eco-campaigners were overjoyed by Chu’s appointment last year. They saw his arrival as the start of a new, enlightened approach to the issues of global warming and the environment. But recently many have been angered by Chu’s actions, a point stressed by Damon Moglen from Greenpeace USA.

  “We are getting very concerned. Professor Chu is a good man and a good scientist, but the science on global warming is clear and he should be guided by the science, not the politics,” Moglen said. “It is out of the question that the US should agree [to] new power stations for burning coal — the dirtiest fuel. Our targets on emissions are too low anyway — and there is no way we will meet even those low targets if we allow more coal to be burned.”

  The US has some of the planet’s largest coal reserves, in Montana, and Chu insists coal must remain an essential energy source although he has also allocated US$2.4 billion for research into reducing greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants.

  Chu has also argued that he is merely being pragmatic and that he is still enthusiastically committed to the cause of cutting US carbon emissions.

  “As someone very concerned about climate I want to be as aggressive as possible but I also want to get started,” he told the BBC. “And if we say we want something much more aggressive on the early timescales that would draw considerable opposition and that would delay the process for several years.”

  IT’S BUSH’S FAULT

  The problem for the slight, soft-spoken energy secretary — and the rest of the Obama administration — is that the US isolated itself over the issue of climate change for eight years under former president George W. Bush. As a result, opposition to the idea of reducing carbon emissions has become entrenched in the US.

  Obama has indicated he wants the US to cut its greenhouse gas emissions significantly but has left it to Congress to pass the necessary legislation. However, the energy industry continues to lobby politicians fiercely in the US and the forthcoming climate and energy bill faces considerable hurdles.

  At the same time, the US is coming under increasing diplomatic pressure — particularly from Europe — to take a lead in the current round of global negotiations which are aimed at cutting carbon emissions throughout the developed and developing.

  The next round of these talks will begin in Bonn, Germany, next Monday, and will reach a climax in December when world leaders will gather in Copenhagen to ratify an international agreement that will replace the current Kyoto climate change deal.

  With Obama committed to the idea of tackling climate change, many world leaders are now looking to the US to set a lead and to persuade emerging industrial giants such as China and India to agree to a tight, effective new climate change deal in Copenhagen. But the US itself faces major problems in cutting its carbon output.

  While Europe has faced up to the climate problem for more than a decade and has reduced its output of greenhouse gases significantly, the US has continued to pump more and more carbon into the atmosphere.

  “Its output is now so high, the US cannot now turn round and get that down to anything like the baseline figure being established by Europe for the end of the next decade,” a UK diplomat said.

  As a result, the US is seeking to ease that baseline figure — from its 1990 output to its equivalent, but far greater figure in 2005. This would mean the US would not have reduce its carbon emissions too radically for the next 10 years.

  “That would be acceptable only if the US pledges it will make far greater cuts in the succeeding decades and reduces its output, proportionally, to the same final level as the rest of the world,” the source said.

  The move would ease criticism of future climate deals at home in the US but will cause significant irritation among many negotiators in Europe and other parts of the world. Chu will have to tread a careful path.

  For his part, the physicist has shown himself to be a pragmatist rather than an ideologically bound administrator and has softened many of his previous hard stances over green issues. Even solar power, he says, is still far too expensive to compete with conventional power plants. At the same time, Chu has been quick to outline plans for reducing carbon dioxide emissions through energy efficiencies. He estimates that better buildings could cut energy use in the US by roughly one-third. Even modest changes in building stock could bring energy reductions of 10 percent.

  In other key measures, the US plans a substantial overhaul of the electricity grid with a so-called “smart grid” and is close to allocating US$18.5 billion in government loan guarantees for building the first new nuclear power plants in four decades.

  IN THE LIMELIGHT

  As a political ingenue, Chu admits he was taken aback by his entry to Washington life.

  “I didn’t appreciate how much of a public figure you become,” he said.

  Chu was appointed energy secretary by Obama after serving as director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, a civilian research organization with 4,000 employees and a US$600 million annual budget.

  Previously, he was professor of physics and molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley; but it was his work at Stanford where his research on cooling and trapping atoms with laser light earned him the Nobel.

  As the youngest son in a high-achieving Chinese-immigrant family from Queens, Chu was recently asked by the New York Times if anyone in his family had been impressed when he won the Nobel he replied: “Probably, but who knows? I called my mother up when they announced the Nobel prize, waiting until seven in the morning. She said, ‘That’s nice — and when are you going to see me next?’”

  Chu’s father emigrated from China to study chemical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); his mother studied economics in China and at MIT. One brother, Gilbert Chu (朱築文), is a professor of medicine and biochemistry at Stanford; the other, Morgan Chu (朱欽文), is an intellectual property lawyer in Los Angeles.

  HE’S NO GEEK

  Matt Rogers, a Chu appointee at the energy department, told the Times it would be a mistake to consider Chu merely a science geek.

  “He is a kind man; he is a nice man,” Rogers said. “But he is not a patient man. People are going to have to take a deep breath and realize they’re going to be moving at a much quicker pace than they were used to.”
• Most Popular

  • 1

    LA Dodgers show off World Series rings

  • 2

    Homeless Sudan club defy odds in CAF Champions

  • 3

    Dodgers edge Tigers and Yankees beat Brewers in opening games in the US

  • 4

    Trump announces 32% tariffs on Taiwan

  • 5

    Michkov key as Flyers beat Predators