First, the world, including the US, has woken up to climate change and the need to cut CO2. Here in Europe, a quarter of emissions come from the transport sector, which is heavily reliant on oil. EVs (electric vehicles) offer a marginal improvement in emissions even when the electricity used is fossil generated; with an ever-increasing share of renewable electricity in the mix, that saving becomes dramatic. At the same time, our energy security is improved by shifting away from oil. Moreover, the 2008 EU Directive on Renewable Energy Sources requires 10% of energy for transport to be from renewables by 2020 – a target which sustainable biofuels alone could and should not be expected to reach.
But political arguments cannot in themselves drive change. The technology has to be right too. Recent innovations in battery technology have liberated electric vehicles, extending their range way beyond city limits. The technological debate now revolves around charging – particularly how best to do high-powered rapid charging and enable pit stops at service stations to take less time than a cup of coffee. Charging technology needs to be compatible across the European single market and preferably internationally. In the European Parliament, we have been critical of the European Commission for its slowness in coming forward with standardisation and interoperability requirements.
Getting it right on charging regimes is particularly important. Most regular charging would tend to be overnight but there is a world of difference in demand terms between plugging in at 6pm during the evening peak and using smart technology linked with pricing incentives to ensure that charging takes place during the demand trough in the small hours of the morning. Smart charging effectively transforms electric vehicles into electricity storage units – enabling full use to be made of renewable electricity sources generating night and day.
Getting it right on charging is also key to wooing consumers. If charging an electric vehicle takes longer than filling a fuel tank, EVs are likely to remain confined to the city, categorised as commuter vehicles or run-about second cars. Better Place, already operating in Denmark, offers a very different way of extending the EV range. On the Better Place business model, consumers purchase a car but merely lease the battery, which is screwed accessibly to the underside of the chassis. If the battery is flat it can be rapidly swapped for a fully-charged one.
Research suggests that conquering consumer anxiety about being left stranded remains one of the major challenges for EV promoters. A recent survey by Eurobarometer revealed that a mere 6% of respondents would purchase a more ecological car to save energy and help the environment. Tax breaks and other financial support schemes can be persuasive but may not be enough to overcome some of the emotion attached to the purchasing of a car. The fact that modern EVs offer a superior driving experience in terms of quietness and acceleration is likely to be important for many potential owners. EVs now on the production line, such as the Nissan Leaf being made in Sunderland, will help shed the "Noddy car" image which EV's have traditionally suffered from. And as oil prices continue their inexorable rise, EVs look more and more attractive for any car owner concerned about day-to-day running costs.
Electric vehicles are not the complete solution to greening transport – that requires strategic planning to reduce congestion and the need for travel. But a technology shift that offers lower CO2 emissions, lower running costs, less air and noise pollution and more efficient management of electricity demand definitely has a future.
Moving to a carbon neutral society is one of the most feverously debated topics in Europe and the world. But despite much talk, the transition is rather sluggish and a lot more needs to be done. A case in point is a climate policy tracker launched by WWF and environmental consultancy Ecofys last week, according to which only a third of policies needed to achieve the EU's 2050 goals are in place today. So what can we do to speed up the transition to a carbon neutral future?
One of the first things that needs to be addressed but is often overlooked is energy efficiency. Energy savings is the most cost-efficient way of cutting our greenhouse gas emissions, a so-called low hanging fruit. Yet even the Commission admits that out of the three targets set in the Energy and Climate Change Package back in 2008 (20% less carbon emissions, 20% renewables and 20% cut in energy demand), the energy efficiency target is the one that is most likely going to be missed. Therefore we must put more efforts into tackling energy demand, not least because reducing the amount of energy we use will automatically lead to an increased share of renewables in our energy mix.
Another important aspect to address is our infrastructure. Most transmission and distribution lines we use today were built many decades ago, in the age of big coal and nuclear power plants, and are simply not designed to cope with the increasing amount of renewable energy fed into the grid from dispersed and often micro-generation sources. Upgrading the grid should thus be our priority, ensuring adequate transmission and distribution systems, tackling the issue of energy storage and equipping the grid infrastructure with latest smart technology. The latter is particularly crucial if we want to decarbonise our transport, which currently accounts for a quarter of all carbon emissions, as this smart technology will path the way to the uptake of electric vehicles.
What is equally important are robust funding mechanisms. Upfront funding is needed to improve energy efficiency in buildings, which account for around 40% of all our carbon emissions. More funding should also be made available for the Strategic Energy Technology Plan, which is a key project launched by the Commission to accelerate demonstration and deployment of current low carbon technologies to ensure they help us meet our 2020 targets.
Dynamic labelling of energy-using products is also an area where more action is needed. The current Eco-design Directive is behind schedule and requires revision. It is understandable that this is bound to be a slow process, but there does need to be more impetus at a European level in order to speed up the process.
Ultimately, the EU should think outside its own box and recognise that the US and China are doing much more than us to accelerate their own transition to a carbon neutral society at the moment . We should therefore step up all our efforts if we still want to be on par with other countries in the future.
Reaping the Benefits of Offshore Wind Energy
Photography by KeithMarshall
In this light, offshore wind energy, concentrated mainly in the North Sea region, represents a huge untapped potential to meet the EU’s climate and energy targets. Abundant offshore resources over-strip the onshore capacity limited to EU territory, and can potentially meet up to 60% of the projected electricity demand in the EU by 2020 according to the European Environment Agency (EEA). In the UK alone, the Government’s ambitious plans to develop its vast offshore wind potential in the Crown Estate waters can supply the country with one quarter of its electricity by 2020.
This article appeared in the Global Politics Magazine.
Industrial biofuels are at the centre of the UK’s action plan for renewable fuels, as outlined by the previous Labour government (and unlikely to be changed by the new coalition). This decision is undoubtedly fuelled by what is happening at EU level, where biofuels are high on the political agenda thanks to their ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance the Union’s energy security. But as much as they are popular, industrial biofuels are also deeply controversial. In fact, four NGOs even sued the European Commission for its reckless attitude to their sustainability criteria.
( Read more... )This article was published on the ActionAid UK blog.
How (un)sustainable are biofuels?
Biofuels have been a largely contested issue for a number of years. They are at the top of the European Union’s agenda at the moment after the European Commission was sued by four environmental NGOs for muffling evidence on biofuels’ sustainability last month. Some leaked documents suggest that turning peatlands into palm plantations to produce biofuels would get a green light under the new sustainability criteria to be presented by the EU’s executive later this year, which has outraged environmental groups.
Biofuels first made headlines in 2007/2008, when they were widely blamed for the rising food prices at the time, as they diverted cultivated land from growing crops. Later analysis, however, indicated that a number of causes – namely an unprecedented drought in Australia, increasing meat consumption in developing countries and rising oil prices – were equally responsible.
Biofuels can indeed contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and thus mitigating climate change, to enhancing energy security and to stimulating innovation and jobs. Transport is responsible for more than 20% of all carbon emissions and accounts for the vast majority of oil exports in the EU, therefore the Commission’s keenness to promote biofuels is understandable. In its Renewable Energy Directive, it has set the target of 10% of road transport fuel coming from renewable sources by 2020. According to the latest Commission report, biofuels can contribute up to 5.6% without compromising global biodiversity.
This article appeared on Euractiv.
Electric cars: world saviors or just another shambles?
This article appeared in the Queue magazine.
The electric car has been in our lives for centuries, literally. It was more than a hundred years ago when the first fleet of electric vehicles hit the streets of
Recently, with oil prices reaching their unprecedented peak just before the recession and ‘in vogue’ environmental concerns about climate change, the electric car is once again at the top of the political agenda. But will this revival last? Or will it slip into the shadows as with all previous attempts? And, ultimately, is the electric car the panacea to our environmental and energy security quandaries?
A shambles that can lead to Plan B
After 10 days of almost painfully tiresome diplomacy, the Copenhagen Climate Conference resulted in a rather fruitless accord. The text is merely 3 pages long and was submitted in the early morning hours of 19th December by the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa. European Commission President Barroso declared that he could not hide his disappointment, as did many other world leaders. If the aim was to deliver a global, ambitious, comprehensive and legally binding agreement, then it can surely be concluded that the final outcome is a complete fiasco.
The current Copenhagen Accord:
- Does not commit its signatories to any legally binding targets
- In fact, it does not contain any targets as to emissions reduction, neither long-term nor mid-term
- It fails to set a stable carbon price for investments in low-carbon technologies to expand
- It fails to create a comprehensive framework to include all industries (with some loopholes as to whether shipping and aviation, which contribute 5% of all global emissions, are included)
- More importantly, it fails to bridge the gap between developing and developed countries which is crucial in order to tackle the global climate change crisis unilaterally
- And on almost every point agreed, it lacks detail as to operation, financing, monitoring, etc.
The article was published on Euractiv.
Nord Stream pipeline project
Not so united after all
What the recent developments in the Nord Stream project reveal about the current EU energy policy
The Nord Stream pipeline will bring gas from the Russian port of Vyborg along the Baltic seabed to the German town of Greifswald. It will pass through Finnish, Swedish, Danish and German territorial waters and bypass, albeit conspicuously, the Baltic States and Poland. In fact, experts agree that it would be much more economically viable to build it through the territories of Eastern European countries, but that would defy the principal objective of this pipeline. The Kremlin is adamant to sidestep its Eastern European neighbours, deeming them to be unreliable transit countries, and deliver gas directly to the shores of its old energy partners among which Germany takes an exceptional place.
( Read more... )
Can the EU keep up with the mounting expectations?
For the period 2000-2008, melting
The
In total, sea levels are rising by about 3mm per year, principally because seawater expands as it warms.
Indeed, Arctic temperatures are now higher than at any time in the last 2,000 years. Evidence from ice cores, tree rings and lake sediments confirms that the
While the Earth is getting steadily warmer, the international community is not even close to a comprehensive global agreement on climate change, with many politicians attempting to lower expectations ahead of the
EU leaders have repeatedly underlined the need for member states to take a leading position in fighting climate change, calling on all parties to “inject a new momentum” into the process and emphasising the need for a legally binding agreement building on the
The EU has itself committed to a 30% reduction by 2020 compared to 1990 levels, provided that other developed countries commit themselves to comparable reductions and that developing countries contribute according to their responsibilities and capabilities.
( Read more... )
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=91.7){kind=small}
