Publications

The global energy system is undergoing a structural crisis. At its heart lies the need to restrain climatic change while at the same time dealing with energy security in an era of rapidly growing demand. The widening gap between rising demand for energy and limited resources of oil and gas has, together with speculation, increased fuel prices to record levels. This in turn has raised the spectre of a recession. These combined challenges pose a significant threat to international economic and political stability. The current make-up of the European Union, with its flagging institutional reform owing to the Irish No vote, is ill-equipped to deal with these challenges. An outdated Nice treaty that does not reflect the new realities of an EU with 27 members is impeding effective decision-making, thereby undermining the EU’s role in a rapidly changing international system that is increasingly being shaped by rising powers such as China, India and Russia. The urgency for institutional reform is quite clear to everyone. Nevertheless, in times like these the EU cannot limit itself to institutional reform alone.

What europe must understand is that its real leadership ambition should concentrate on being the first to create a low carbon economy. the real breakthrough for climate policy will not come through diplomacy. Rather, the breakthrough will come as countries learn to understand that saving the climate will help save their economies and safeguard their security.

Plans to increase the penetration of renewable electrical generation into the United States face a number of challenges. The country needs a super-grid which overlays the existing high voltage transmission system, connecting the country from coast to coast and allowing thousands of MW to be transferred over hundreds of miles. A single authority, in this case federal, needs to assert overall control of transmission line siting in the United States.

It is now well established that action to avoid dangerous climate change must take place according to the principles of ‘responsibility and capability’, and the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) subscribes to this view. Morally and in political terms developed countries should lead global mitigation by making significant domestic emissions reductions.

Niklas Höhne and Sara Moltmann from Ecofys compares the distribution of emission allowances under the GDRs framework with other well established proposals.

The world has moved beyond simple acknowledgement that climate change and environmental degradation pose significant risks to humanity and the planet’s ecosystems. In recognition of the increased vulnerability of billions of people, mostly in the developing world, Northern donors have pledged billions of dollars in new financial commitments. Those funds are to be delivered through no fewer than a dozen new environmental funding mechanisms seeking to mitigate these risks and to help the most vulnerable to adapt to coming societal and environmental changes.

The deep divide over nuclear power is nearly as old as its commercial use. The early dreams of its proponents have faded, whereas the high risks have remained, as well as the danger of misuse by military interests. Terrorism has introduced a dramatic, concrete threat. Global warming and the finite nature of fossil fuels do not dispel the major safety issues associated with nuclear power, and the ‘accident-proof’ reactor has remained an unfulfilled promise now for decades.

The deep divide over nuclear power is nearly as old as its commercial use. The early dreams of its proponents have faded, whereas the high risks have remained, as well as the danger of misuse by military interests. Terrorism has introduced a dramatic, concrete threat. Global warming and the finite nature of fossil fuels do not dispel the major safety issues associated with nuclear power, and the ‘accident-proof’ reactor has remained an unfulfilled promise now for decades.

The deep divide over nuclear power is nearly as old as its commercial use. The early dreams of its proponents have faded, whereas the high risks have remained, as well as the danger of misuse by military interests. Terrorism has introduced a dramatic, concrete threat. Global warming and the finite nature of fossil fuels do not dispel the major safety issues associated with nuclear power, and the ‘accident-proof’ reactor has remained an unfulfilled promise now for decades.

The deep divide over nuclear power is nearly as old as its commercial use. The early dreams of its proponents have faded, whereas the high risks have remained, as well as the danger of misuse by military interests. Terrorism has introduced a dramatic, concrete threat. Global warming and the finite nature of fossil fuels do not dispel the major safety issues associated with nuclear power, and the ‘accident-proof’ reactor has remained an unfulfilled promise now for decades.