Renewable energy triggers sharply polarized views. For some, it is a costly white elephant; for others, it is humanity’s savior, promising to emancipate us (and our environment) from the “folly” of fossil fuels. So a hardheaded, credible and, above all, impartial analysis, which would provide a much-needed dose of pragmatism and realism to the debate, is long overdue.
The new report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), involving more than 120 scientists, economists and technology specialists, provides that long-overdue assessment. It adopts a global perspective and reconciles developed and developing countries’ interests, while weighing the broader economic, environmental and social issues at stake.
The summary, signed by representatives of the more than 190 countries meeting this week in the United Arab Emirates, concludes that renewable energy is an increasingly practical and highly promising option. Costs are falling — and are likely to fall even further as innovation accelerates and global demand for energy continues to rise.
The researchers have painstakingly sifted through more than 160 scenarios, including in-depth examinations of four. The most optimistic of these predicts that renewables could account for almost 80 percent of total energy supply by mid-century, thereby cutting greenhouse-gas emissions by about one-third.
Of course, only time will tell whether or not this figure can be reached. Some of the six renewable-energy technologies evaluated, such as those that generate electricity from the ocean, will require more research, development and incubation before they reach commercial maturity. However, others, such as wind, solar and geothermal are in some circumstances already cost competitive — or nearly cost competitive — with fossil fuels.
The IPCC report also underscores what some development experts and economists have been saying for years: Energy choices should take into account wider benefits. Renewables cut air pollution, which is costing the global economy billions of US dollars a year in health-care costs alone. Photovoltaics can be rapidly deployed in rural areas without the need to instal an expensive grid system — Bangladesh is a pioneering case in point. Moreover, we are only just coming to grips with the cooling costs of thermal power plants in terms of finite water resources — let alone the future price of unchecked climate change.
The ball is now firmly in the politicians’ court. The IPCC assessment points out that renewables are already growing. In 2009, installed capacity of wind and photovoltaics increased by more than 30 percent and 50 percent, respectively. However, the really big numbers are unlikely to be reached without the kinds of supportive public policies that have catalyzed the expansion of renewables in countries such as China and Germany.
Smart and forward-looking national policies are imperative. Kenya’s new feed-in tariff has triggered a rapid expansion of geothermal capacity, and, at 300MW, the largest wind-farm project in sub-Saharan Africa.
However, diverse national policies can achieve only so much. International policies, including the lending decisions of the World Bank and regional development banks, must evolve along with the strategies of the UN and bilateral donors.
The importance of moving forward on a new global climate agreement in Durban, South Africa, this year cannot be underestimated. A comprehensive agreement would bring certainty to the carbon markets and strengthen the various mechanisms that are already encouraging renewables in developing economies and pump-priming private-sector investments. The Rio Plus 20 meeting in Brazil next year is another opportunity to spark the transition to a global green economy.
Technical challenges remain: Seamlessly managing an array of very different energy sources will require investment in better national and regional grids. Yet the opportunities — to keep the global temperature rise this century to under 2?C, and to generate decent employment in clean-tech industries for millions of people — far outweigh the challenges. Clean and renewable energy will be an indispensable component of the fight against poverty worldwide.
The IPCC estimates that the costs of triggering a renewable revolution could range from US$3 trillion to more than US$12 trillion between now and 2030. That sounds pricey — and it is. However, fossil-fuel subsidies are currently running at more than US$600 billion a year, with barely a murmur of protest.
The IPCC report has provided a solid, scientific foundation for a low-carbon, resource-efficient future. Governments now have a clearer perspective on how to empower the lives and livelihoods of the world’s 7 billion people (9 billion to 10 billion by 2050), while keeping humanity’s footprint, including climate change, within the planet’s boundaries of environmental sustainability.
Achim Steiner is executive director of the UN Environment Program. Helen Clark, a former prime minister of New Zealand, is administrator of the UN Development Program. Kandeh Yumkella is director-general of the UN Industrial Development Organization.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS