tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/paris-2015-22624/articlesParis 2015 – The Conversation2021-11-12T09:52:53Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1716802021-11-12T09:52:53Z2021-11-12T09:52:53ZClimate finance for a transition away from coal: a chance to change history in South Africa<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431556/original/file-20211111-21-m7qimq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Aerial photo of a power station and coal stockpile in Johannesburg, South Africa.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the opening days of the <a href="https://unfccc.int/conference/glasgow-climate-change-conference-october-november-2021">COP26</a> international climate conference, a <a href="https://www.gov.za/speeches/presidency-international-partnership-support-just-transition-2-nov-2021-0000">financing partnership</a> was announced between South Africa and a consortium consisting of France, Germany, the UK, the US and the European Union (EU). The partnership aims to support South Africa’s just transition to a low carbon and climate resilient economy and society. Essentially a just transition is one where no one is left behind. </p>
<p>The partnership mobilises an initial R131 billion (US$8.5 billion) over the next three to five years. Some of this in the form of grants and some is concessional debt finance (cheaper than commercial debt).</p>
<p>The partnership is intended to enable a range of outcomes. One is to speed up the process of moving away from carbon in the electricity system. South Africa’s power generation depends mostly <a href="https://www.iea.org/countries/south-africa">on coal</a> and the country has committed to reducing emissions in line with the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a>. It has recently updated its <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/South%20Africa%20First/South%20Africa.pdf">nationally determined contribution</a> to the international emission-reduction effort. Importantly, the finance will support the workers and communities who will be affected as the country moves away from coal.</p>
<p>Another aim is to support a sustainable solution for the South African power <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2021-09-28-climate-deal-could-save-treasury-billions-and-solve-eskom-crisis/">utility’s debt</a> and ensure its long term financial sustainability in the context of power sector reforms.</p>
<p>Finally, the partnership will channel finance towards the development of the electric vehicle and green hydrogen sectors. </p>
<p>A task force including national and international partners will develop the specifics of the support over the coming year.</p>
<p>The announcement made <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-eu-others-will-invest-speed-safricas-transition-clean-energy-biden-2021-11-02/">international headlines</a> and is highly significant for many reasons. The finance offer is large; it has a strong element of justice; it’s not just about a few individual projects; and it’s for a country that has long been shaped around its dependence on coal.</p>
<p>This partnership represents an important opportunity for South Africa at a critical juncture if it is approached strategically and if the domestic politics can be managed. A failure to engage the partnership strategically will squander the moment, resulting in an incremental outcome that won’t unlock the just transition the country so desperately needs. A failure to tame the politics would put the entire flow of finance at risk. </p>
<h2>Significance of the finance</h2>
<p>Pitched at an initial US$8.5 billion, the partnership has the potential to be one of the largest individual climate finance transactions to date. <a href="https://www.greenclimate.fund/about">Large Green Climate Fund</a> transactions hover closer to the US$1-3 billion mark.</p>
<p>Its justice element is important. It has an explicit focus on supporting those who face immediate transition impacts, such as the approximately <a href="https://meridianeconomics.co.za/our-work/financial-support-needs-for-mpumalangas-economic-transition-scoping-study-and-press-briefing-march-2021/">80,000 coal miners</a> and the communities who depend on them. </p>
<p>The partnership envisages that the climate finance will enable an <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/20430795.2021.1972678?tab=permissions&scroll=top">energy sector transition</a>, which is different to the usual focus of climate finance on individual green projects. </p>
<p>Finally, the partnership is significant because it has been announced despite <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2021.1947635">South Africa’s coal legacy and influential incumbents</a>. The country has spent over 100 years building an economy whose competitive advantage is based on coal as its primary energy source. My <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Emily-Tyler-9">research</a> reflects on how much flows from this. The legacy of coal is evident in physical infrastructure, the way the energy sector is organised and the form of <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2021.1947635">energy sector institutions</a>. It influences the way finance flows and power sector contracts are written. And there are powerful groupings who have vested interests in keeping it all this way for as long as possible. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-africas-power-grid-is-under-pressure-the-how-and-the-why-170897">South Africa's power grid is under pressure: the how and the why</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Ironically it is this legacy that enables South Africa to offer the world significant and globally cost-efficient emission reductions as it changes course. South African electricity is the most carbon intensive <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-ten-charts-show-how-the-world-is-progressing-on-clean-energy">in the world</a>. Because renewable energy is now the cheapest form of power supply, decarbonising the country’s electricity supply by accelerating the phase down of the coal fleet will yield a large volume of emission reductions at very low cost, especially compared to more expensive emission reduction options in other sectors and countries. </p>
<p>But the political and institutional challenges to realising this transition are very real.</p>
<h2>Challenges</h2>
<p>The global <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">target</a> of achieving an average of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 is an enormous challenge. It requires rapid and disruptive change as economies and societies globally are decarbonised within three decades. But technology and finance are already driving the transition. This can be seen in the massive decline <a href="https://meridianeconomics.co.za/our-work/a-vital-ambition-determining-the-cost-of-additional-co2-emission-mitigation-in-the-sa-electricity-system-july-2020-for-the-best-quality-display-save-the-file-locally-and-open-it-with/">in the cost</a> of renewable energies and the accelerating <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-26/fossil-fuel-divestment-supported-by-investors-with-39-trillion?srnd=green-finance">shift</a> of financial portfolios to green investments. Global capitalism is now oriented towards a low carbon economy.</p>
<p>As a small open economy, South Africa can neither resist nor control these forces. And the country is in a vulnerable starting position as one of the world’s <a href="https://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/g20report2021">most carbon intensive economies</a>. There is not much time to avoid being economically marginalised as wealthier and nimbler economies mobilise around net zero goals. South Africa will need all the support it can get to keep up with the pace of change.</p>
<p>Fortunately, as studies by the <a href="https://www.nbi.org.za/public-release-of-the-power-sector-decarbonisation-report-from-the-nbi-just-transition-pathways-project-our-future-is-renewable/">National Business Initiative</a> and <a href="https://meridianeconomics.co.za/our-work/a-vital-ambition-determining-the-cost-of-additional-co2-emission-mitigation-in-the-sa-electricity-system-july-2020-for-the-best-quality-display-save-the-file-locally-and-open-it-with/">Meridian Economics-CSIR</a> show, accelerated electricity decarbonisation has two big pluses. It is the cheapest way of providing a reliable electricity supply <a href="https://theconversation.com/myths-and-truths-around-south-africas-recent-renewable-energy-auction-171329">to the economy</a>. And renewables have the shortest lead time to build. So they are the quickest and cheapest way to lift the country out of its <a href="https://www0.sun.ac.za/cst/load-shedding-will-cripple-our-economic-recovery-we-must-bring-renewables-onstream-fast/">current power cut woes</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/myths-and-truths-around-south-africas-recent-renewable-energy-auction-171329">Myths and truths around South Africa’s recent renewable energy auction</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Details</h2>
<p>The just transition partnership announcement has achieved both a political space and an implementation platform (the taskforce) to start working out the support details. These details include the type of financing instruments, what the finance will be used for, the mix of grant and debt, and financing terms and conditions. An initial scope of supported actions, financing sources and terms will be identified within six months, with a full partnership work programme and investment plan outlined within a calendar year. </p>
<p>Currently, there are many <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/20430795.2021.1972678?journalCode=tsfi20">views</a> on what the details could look like. These include Eskom’s Just Energy Transaction, <a href="https://meridianeconomics.co.za/our-work/the-just-transition-transaction-a-developing-country-coal-power-retirement-mechanism/">Meridian Economics’ Just Transition Transaction</a> and the Presidential Climate Commission. </p>
<p>The taskforce will have to work out how to:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>ensure that alternative, attractive and sustainable economic livelihoods are created in the regions that have depended on coal</p></li>
<li><p>prioritise spending on activities that will help to fundamentally re-orientate South Africa’s energy sector as opposed to only achieving incremental change</p></li>
<li><p>ensure that the grant and concessional finance components of the partnership are used to leverage rather than crowd out commercial investment</p></li>
<li><p>achieve a transition pace aligned with South Africa’s international climate commitments.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-africas-troubled-power-utility-is-being-reset-ceo-sets-out-how-168097">South Africa's troubled power utility is being reset: CEO sets out how</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Politics</h2>
<p>But if the technical details are formidable, a recent <a href="https://www.news24.com/fin24/economy/south-africa/mantashe-calls-on-africa-to-unite-against-coercion-by-global-anti-fossil-fuel-agenda-20211109">address</a> by the Minister of Minerals and Energy, Gwede Mantashe, demonstrates that the domestic politics are even more so. In direct opposition to Ramaphosa’s vocal support of the partnership and decarbonisation trajectory, Mantashe argued that South Africa should continue to exploit its coal resources, suggesting that the partnership is an attempt to pressurise the country to conform to an international agenda that is not in the country’s best interest. </p>
<p>Despite the economic realities of a global energy transition well under way, and the increasingly obvious technical, economic and social failings of South Africa’s coal-based energy system, the political challenges to leaving the coal legacy path are clear.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171680/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emily Tyler consults to Meridian Economics, a think tank working in the climate - energy - finance space in South African and internationally, and received a National Research Foundation bursary for one year of her PhD studies on approaching climate policy in South Africa through the lens of critical complexity thinking.</span></em></p>Pitched at an initial US$8.5 billion, the partnership has the potential to be one of the largest individual climate finance transactions to date. But can a just transition be achieved?Emily Tyler, Honorary Research Associate African Climate and Development Institute, University of Cape TownLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1706792021-10-26T14:40:38Z2021-10-26T14:40:38ZPasha 129: Africa’s climate concerns and the way forward<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428546/original/file-20211026-21-59jnc7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">GettyImages</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Many African countries are under significant stress from climate change. Increasing emissions of greenhouse gases are putting the world on a path towards unacceptable warming and this has particularly <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-africas-challenges-must-steer-the-climate-change-conference-169740">serious implications</a> for the continent. The projected changes in climate are likely to have devastating impacts on agriculture and food security, human health and water supplies. </p>
<p>Greenhouse gases are the main cause of climate change. Human activities such as mining for fossil fuels, cutting down forests and farming livestock all contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Though Africa emits the least of these emissions, the continent is most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. </p>
<p>It is critical for countries to acknowledge pledges they made at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015. Countries must reduce greenhouse gas emissions, strengthen climate adaptation and resilience and scale up financial support for climate action. </p>
<p>In today’s episode of Pasha, Portia Adade Williams, a research scientist at the CSIR-Science and Technology Policy Research Institute, and Victor Ongoma, an assistant professor at the Université Mohammed VI Polytechnique, discuss what African countries must do to adapt and to mitigate the effects of climate change. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-africas-challenges-must-steer-the-climate-change-conference-169740">COP26: Africa's challenges must steer the climate change conference</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Photo:</strong>
“A view of a submerged Roberts Camp after the unprecedented rise of water levels in Lake Baringo. The flooding situation in Rift Valley lakes, exacerbated by climate change, has led to displacement of thousands of people from their homes and work.” By James Wakibia/SOPA Images/LightRocket via <a href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/view-of-a-submerged-roberts-camp-after-the-unprecedented-news-photo/1235971114?adppopup=true">Getty Images</a></p>
<p><strong>Music</strong>
“Happy African Village” by John Bartmann, found on <a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/John_Bartmann/Public_Domain_Soundtrack_Music_Album_One/happy-african-village">FreeMusicArchive.org</a> licensed under <a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/">CC0 1</a>.</p>
<p>“African Moon” by John Bartmann, found on <a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/John_Bartmann/Public_Domain_Soundtrack_Music_Album_One/happy-african-village">FreeMusicArchive.org</a> licensed under <a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/">CC0 1</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170679/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
African countries are playing their part in fighting climate change but western nations need to come to the party.Ozayr Patel, Digital EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1704912021-10-26T14:24:09Z2021-10-26T14:24:09ZFive climate change messages from the African continent<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428527/original/file-20211026-27-k5hf3x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Youth environmental activists take part in a walk to demand for Climate Justice in Kenya. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Brian Ongoro/AFP via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The outcome of the global climate change conference, <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">COP26</a>, and the world’s willingness to take the tough decisions necessary to contain global warming, will have bigger consequences for Africa than for most other continents. It is in Africa that the impact is already most destabilising. </p>
<p>And yet the continent’s 54 countries will struggle to make themselves heard. The critical negotiations will, as usual, be between the big economies; the US, EU, China, India. </p>
<p>A recent conference jointly hosted by the Royal African Society, International Crisis Group and Africa Confidential on <a href="https://royalafricansociety.org/event/climate-conflict-demography-in-africa/">Climate, Conflict and Demography in Africa</a> sought to give African countries a louder voice. It identified <a href="https://royalafricansociety.org/climate-conflict-and-demography-in-africa-conference-summary-of-co-chairs-conclusions/">five key messages</a> for African governments, some for them to take to COP26, others for them to take home and act on themselves. Each needs attention if African governments are to be able to mitigate, adapt to and manage climate change in the coming critical decade.</p>
<p><strong>Measure change</strong></p>
<p>African countries need to measure the scale of environmental change better, to understand what is happening. The continent is already on the front line of the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280367/">impact of climate change</a>, despite having contributed almost nothing to the problem. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-africas-challenges-must-steer-the-climate-change-conference-169740">COP26: Africa's challenges must steer the climate change conference</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Increasingly erratic patterns of rainfall have caused both droughts and floods across southern Africa, devastating tropical storms including <a href="https://www.oxfam.org/en/after-storm-one-year-cyclone-idai">Cyclone Idai</a> hit Mozambique in 2019, while locust swarms caused desperate food shortages in the Horn of Africa. </p>
<p>Combined with rapid <a href="https://qz.com/africa/1099546/population-growth-africans-will-be-a-third-of-all-people-on-earth-by-2100/">population growth</a> in many African countries, pressure on both natural and human resources has steadily increased. Shortages of farmable land, intensifying urbanisation and growing competition between <a href="https://pubs.iied.org/10208iied">farmer and herder communities</a> all put strain on traditional mechanisms for managing local conflicts. </p>
<p>These strains need to be measured, so African communities can prepare better to manage the changes. Countries with existing expertise must help.</p>
<p><strong>Put pressure on emitters</strong></p>
<p>African governments’ top priority at COP26 must be to pressure the big emitters of carbon to take faster action to slow and stop climate change. The US, Europe, China and India need to speed up their transition out of fossil fuels. If Africans focus simply on getting more money, they will still have to pay for climate change in terms of the consequences. </p>
<p>The stresses that climate change brings can very quickly worsen existing social, economic and political tensions and turn them into violent conflict. There is evidence that this is already happening around <a href="https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/climate-change-and-violent-extremism-lake-chad-basin-key-issues-and-way-forward">Lake Chad</a>, in <a href="https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/sahel/b154-le-sahel-central-theatre-des-nouvelles-guerres-climatiques">the Sahel</a> and in <a href="https://www.eip.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/csen_policy_paper_climate_change_and_security_in_the_horn_of_africa.pdf">the Horn of Africa</a>. </p>
<p><strong>Money matters</strong></p>
<p>Of the <a href="https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/100_billion_climate_finance_report.pdf">US$100 billion per year pledge</a>, confirmed in Paris, only a fraction has been delivered. Few African governments have the financial or administrative resources to undertake the scale of mitigation and adaptation action necessary to manage the pressures created by climate change.</p>
<p>This lack of resources and capacity also explains why Africa attracts a disproportionately small percentage of available climate finance, <a href="https://www.afdb.org/fr/news-and-events/africa-must-not-be-short-changed-by-climate-finance-says-expert-panel-at-cop24-18884">only around 3%</a>. With too few credible or eligible projects to attract investors, they tend to put the money elsewhere. So multilateral agencies and foreign governments must help too.</p>
<p><strong>Coordinate efforts</strong></p>
<p>African governments themselves must take a whole-of-government approach to tackling climate change. Too many leave it to the environment ministry and fail to mobilise all departments -– finance, defence, transport, energy, industry -– to take the necessary actions. A lack of resources does not absolve them from policy incoherence. </p>
<p>It is <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-whats-the-point-of-this-years-un-climate-summit-in-glasgow-167509">domestic political pressure</a> on national governments more than international obligations or summits that will decide how far countries are willing to go to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. </p>
<p>Public pressure on climate issues themselves is often weak in Africa, but the practical consequences –- the increased conflict, the political discontent –- speak louder than words. Governments would be wise to listen and start making changes.</p>
<p><strong>Target investment</strong></p>
<p>The money itself needs to be invested in the right things: a fair energy transition, education to develop the skills needed for climate response, and action to sustain biodiversity, forests and the natural environment by making it economically viable for the people who live there. </p>
<p>African countries certainly need to invest wherever they can in renewable energy. But that alone will not solve the “energy starvation” that is inhibiting development and worsening poverty and conflict on the continent, as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WSqIU97W4Q">Nigerian Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo</a> argued at our conference. Developed countries, including China, can better afford to transition more swiftly to cleaner power and need to support Africa’s own efforts to do the same.</p>
<p>What happens in Africa rightly concerns the whole world. The conference in Glasgow will provide an invaluable platform for African countries. What they say as equal members of the global community should be listened to. Real action is more urgent for African countries that those that can better cope with the environmental stresses and political strains that climate change causes. If people can no longer find a living in their own countries, they will have little choice but to move elsewhere, or be pushed into conflict that will risk spreading to neighbouring regions. So it is in everyone’s interests to support African countries in addressing its climate challenges.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170491/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicholas Westcott is director of the Royal African Society, a not-for-profit charity. </span></em></p>Five aspects need attention if African governments are to be able to mitigate, adapt to and manage climate change in the coming critical decade.Nicholas Westcott, Research Associate, Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy, SOAS, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1190192019-06-18T19:16:46Z2019-06-18T19:16:46ZFrance and Britain in a race for carbon neutrality by 2050<p>The long-running rivalry between France and Britain has entered a new era: who will decarbonise the fastest. As the UK government announced on June 11 that it had committed to a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/11/theresa-may-commits-to-net-zero-uk-carbon-emissions-by-2050">net zero emissions target for 2050</a>, the French parliament is currently working on a <a href="http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/15/projets/pl1908.asp">draft energy and climate bill</a> that has the same target for 2050.</p>
<p>In both cases, the net zero objective ramps up earlier targets. In France, it would replace one set by a 2015 energy transition law, which targeted a <a href="https://theconversation.com/debat-non-lobjectif-de-neutralite-carbone-pour-2050-nest-pas-un-recul-90893">75% cut in greenhouse-gas emissions</a> by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. In the UK, net zero for 2050 replaces a previous target of an 80% reduction over the same period; it was introduced in the law on June 12. The increased ambition is the result of advice from the UK’s <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contribution-to-stopping-global-warming/">Committee on Climate Change</a> (CCC), the country’s independent advisory body.</p>
<p>France and the UK are the largest countries so far to set such an ambitious objective in legislation. <a href="https://theconversation.com/transition-ecologique-et-competitivite-industrielle-lexemple-suedois-63122">Sweden</a>, Denmark and Norway have already adopted the legal objective of carbon neutrality, but with the use of international emissions-trading mechanisms.</p>
<p>The French project and the recommendation of the CCC in UK do not include this type of mechanism, although the UK government announced it reserves the right to use credits. Other countries – such as Ethiopia, Costa Rica, Bhutan, Fiji Islands, Iceland, Marshall Islands and Portugal – have also announced plans for carbon neutrality by 2050 in strategic documents but without legislative scope.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">2018 report</a> of the IPCC indicates that to stabilise global warming at 1.5°C, net emissions at the global scale must reach zero by 2050; and by 2070 for 2°C.</p>
<p>Emissions of other greenhouse gases must also be significantly reduced to maintain these trajectories. The CCC report also shows that neutrality of “all greenhouse gases” by 2070 is compatible with the 1.5°C trajectory. This means that the 2050 net zero emissions goal for all greenhouse gases is more ambitious than the global trajectory compatible with 1.5°C warming.</p>
<h2>Comparing emissions on both sides of the Channel</h2>
<p>France and the United Kingdom share many characteristics. They have similar populations, comparable levels of development and their territorial greenhouse-gas emissions are similar – <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-statistics">7 tCO₂ per inhabitant</a> for the United Kingdom and <a href="https://citepa.org/fr/activites/inventaires-des-emissions/secten">6.7 tCO₂ per inhabitant</a> for France in 2017.</p>
<p>Emission trajectories since 1990 have been decreasing overall, with a larger decrease for the UK from a higher level in 1990. This is mostly due to the transition away from coal-fired power plants for electricity, as well as a significant catch-up in waste management.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=165&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=165&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=165&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=207&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=207&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279978/original/file-20190618-118501-hehcil.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=207&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">C. Guivarch and C. Le Quéré, based on data from CITEPA (France) and BEIS (RU)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Emissions from the industrial sector are decreasing significantly and similarly in both countries. According to CCC’s analysis, this decline in the United Kingdom can be explained by changes in economic structure, improved energy efficiency and a reduction in the carbon intensity of the energy mix.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=168&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=168&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=168&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=211&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=211&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279979/original/file-20190618-118535-1eu50ty.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=211&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">C. Guivarch and C. Le Quéré, based on data from CITEPA (France) and BEIS (RU)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Emissions from the building sector have declined over the past 10 years in both countries, with larger decreases in the United Kingdom. In contrast, emissions from the transport sector have stagnated in both countries, with a slight decrease in the United Kingdom and an increase in France since 1990.</p>
<p>However, important differences exist in agriculture and carbon sinks. Agriculture is economically more important in France, emitting twice as much carbon much as in the United Kingdom. Carbon sinks, which are largely based on the increase in carbon stored in forests, are also more significant in France. Emissions reduction in both sectors are comparable.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=162&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=162&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=162&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=203&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=203&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279980/original/file-20190618-118535-11vrwmr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=203&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">C. Guivarch and C. Le Quéré, based on data from CITEPA (France) and BEIS (RU)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One important difference concerns emissions from international transport. Aviation and maritime transport emissions are not included in the reporting to the United Nations under the Paris Agreement. The UK’s net zero objective includes these emissions, while France’s current draft energy bill does not.</p>
<p>If the other sectors follow the projected reduction pathways, emissions from aviation, which are relatively low for the time being, will be responsible for the majority of remaining emissions in 2050. They will therefore have to be offset by carbon sinks or other CO<sub>2</sub> extraction mechanisms, requiring a significant increase in the number of sinks (see figure below, based on data from the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/789811/Final_greenhouse_gas_emissions_tables_2017.xlsx">United Kingdom</a> and <a href="https://www.citepa.org/fr/activites/inventaires-des-emissions/ccnucc">France</a>).</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=167&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=167&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=167&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=210&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=210&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279982/original/file-20190618-118514-tquin5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=210&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">C. Guivarch and C. Le Quéré, based on data from CITEPA (France) and BEIS (RU)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>“Hidden” emissions</h2>
<p>In their 2050 net zero objectives, France and the United Kingdom do not include so-called “imported” emissions – those associated with consuming products and services from abroad.</p>
<p>Including these imported emissions, the carbon footprints of both nations reach <a href="http://www.ecologique-solidaire.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/Projet%20strategie%20nationale%20bas%20carbone.pdf">11 tCO₂/inhabitant/year</a> for France and <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uks-carbon-footprint">11.9 tCO₂/inhabitant/year</a> for the United Kingdom.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=177&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=177&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=177&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=222&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=222&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/279983/original/file-20190618-118501-1x88qeo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=222&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">C. Guivarch and C. Le Quéré, based on data from CITEPA (France) and BEIS (RU)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>After accounting for products consumed abroad (“exported” emissions), emissions from the trade balance are very high and have risen since the mid-1990s (see figure opposite) with a possible slowdown since 2005 in the United Kingdom and since 2011 in France. These emissions are difficult to control, they are nevertheless the responsibility of consumers.</p>
<p>While France’s draft energy and climate law states that these emissions must be controlled, it gives no quantitative targets. In the UK, the CCC recommendation is that these emissions should decline in response to certain efficiency measures, but recognizes that these emissions can only be reduced to zero when global emissions reach this threshold.</p>
<h2>Time is running out</h2>
<p>The United Kingdom has managed to rapidly reduce its emissions over the past decade, which are now close to the French level. This rapid decrease was recommended and monitored by the Committee on Climate Change, which has prioritized the decarbonisation of electricity production that underlies that of other sectors. Today, both countries are at a point where emissions must decrease rapidly in the coming decades to reach their net zero targets by 2050.</p>
<p>A shared challenge is initiating and accelerating the transition in sectors that are tough to decarbonise because, compared with the energy sector, emissions are more diffuse – particularly transport and buildings.</p>
<p>The Haut Conseil pour le Climat, of which we are both members, was created in late 2018 and directly inspired by the UK CCC. There is no magic policy package that will lead nations to net zero emissions in 2050. The UK example demonstrates, and France acknowledges, the need for an independent advisory group that is focused on the long-term to support and guide the transition in the coming decades.</p>
<p>The French Haut Conseil will assess the implementation of France’s national low-carbon strategy and propose course corrections where necessary, while taking into account the socio-economic impacts of the transition on households and businesses as well as environmental impacts. Its first report will be made public on June 25.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119019/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Céline Guivarch is part of the team of authors of the 6th IPCC report. She is a member of the French High Council for Climate Change. Céline Guivarch has received funding from the European Commission, the Ministry of Ecological and Solidarity Transition, the French Environment and Energy Management Agency, the French Environment and Energy Management Agency, the International Energy Agency, the World Bank, EDF, Renault, the "Modélisation prospective pour le développement durable" chair and the Institut pour la mobilité durable. It is a member of the "Weather and Climate" association.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Corinne Le Quéré is President of the High Council for Climate Change. For her research on the carbon cycle, she has received funding from the European Commission, the Royal Society of the United Kingdom, the Natural Environment Research Council (UK).</span></em></p>By enacting a legislative framework to achieve carbon neutrality, France and the United Kingdom are making a difference in the fight against climate change.Céline Guivarch, Économiste au Cired, directrice de recherche, École des Ponts ParisTech (ENPC)Corinne Le Quéré, Royal Society Research Professor, University of East Anglia, University of East AngliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1168962019-05-12T20:15:42Z2019-05-12T20:15:42ZAustralia’s major parties’ climate policies side-by-side<p>The majority of Australians see climate change as the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/08/australians-overwhelmingly-agree-climate-emergency-is-the-nations-number-one-threat?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other">number one threat to national interests</a>. However in 2018 Australia was ranked 55th out of 60 countries in a <a href="https://www.climate-change-performance-index.org">Climate Change Performance Index</a>.</p>
<p>Research from the University of Melbourne found if all countries’ climate action was as inadequate as Australia’s, the world would be on track for <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07223-9">4°C warming</a>.</p>
<p>With an election on Saturday, lets dig into the major parties’ climate policies, and see how they track against Australia’s Paris commitments. </p>
<hr>
<h2>Liberal</h2>
<p>The Liberal Party introduced the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/climate-solutions-package">Climate Solutions Package</a> in February 2019. The package includes a range of measures, but most notably a continuation of the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), which remains the coalition’s key climate policy. </p>
<p>The Climate Solutions Fund includes another $2 billion to be used for ERF auctions until 2030. The package does not include any plan to increase renewables beyond the current 23.5% 2020 target.</p>
<p>The package also retains Australia’s current emissions reduction target of 26%-28% below 2005 levels by 2030. This target falls far short of what is required to meet the Paris climate agreement goals. </p>
<hr>
<h2>Labor</h2>
<p>Labor has released a <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/media/1692/labors_climate_change_action_plan.pdf">Climate Change Action Plan</a> that leads with a renewable energy target of 50% electricity generation by 2030, household rebates for solar batteries, and investment in energy efficiency.</p>
<p>Labor will extend the existing “safeguard mechanism” to function as a pollution cap for industry, while the agriculture sector will participate in a revived Carbon Farming Initiative.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/fixing-the-gap-between-labors-greenhouse-gas-goals-and-their-policies-115550">Fixing the gap between Labor's greenhouse gas goals and their policies</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Labor’s climate target will commit Australia to emission reductions of 45% on 2005 levels by 2030, and to reach net zero emissions by 2050. </p>
<p>Labor’s policy document states this target is informed by advice from the independent Climate Change Authority (CCA), yet the CCA’s <a href="http://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/files/files/Target-Progress-Review/Targets%20and%20Progress%20Review%20Final%20Report.pdf">2015 targets review</a> concluded Australia’s fair share of a global target for 2°C was an emissions reduction of between 40-60% below 2000 levels by 2030. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1126722018378805255"}"></div></p>
<p>The CCA review pre-dated the adoption of the Paris Agreement in December 2015, which raised global ambition to keep warming “well below 2°C” and ideally below 1.5°C. The CCA 2015 targets review can therefore be considered out of date, so Australia’s fair contribution to the Paris climate agreement would have to sit at the upper end of (if not above) the 40-60% range.</p>
<p>Labor’s target is still inadequate from a global perspective and would not put Australia on track to meet its Paris commitments. But it is a big step forward from our current targets, and would at least bring Australia in line with the inadequate action pledged by the rest of the world – current global pledges put the world <a href="https://climateactiontracker.org/global/temperatures/">on track for 3°C warming</a>.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Greens</h2>
<p>The Greens are the only political party in Australia with climate policies that put forward targets that would enable us to meet our international obligations according to the science.</p>
<p>They have an emissions reduction target of 63-82% by 2030 and a trajectory to get emissions to net-zero by 2040. The <a href="https://greens.org.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/Greens%202019%20Policy%20Platform%20-%20Renew%20Australia.pdf">Greens manifesto calls for a total transition away from fossil fuels</a>.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Cost of climate (in)action</h2>
<p>The Liberals claim their climate policies meet our climate commitments “<a href="https://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2019/02/25/meeting-our-climate-commitments-without-wrecking-economy">without wrecking the economy</a>” and have released <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/new-modelling-to-unleash-explosive-row-over-climate-change-costings-20190501-p51j5e.html">economic modelling</a> suggesting Labor’s 45% target will cost the economy billions. </p>
<p>This modelling has been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/06/modelling-that-shows-labors-climate-policy-could-cost-500bn-is-ridiculous">widely debunked</a>, and <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/media/1878/2019_labor_fiscal_plan.pdf">Labor’s budget costings</a> show climate policies to have a cost of around $800 million to 2023.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1126482722401206272"}"></div></p>
<p>Labor in its manifesto emphasises the “<a href="https://www.alp.org.au/media/1692/labors_climate_change_action_plan.pdf">devastating costs</a>” climate change will have for the Australian economy over the long term, and points out that the cost of not acting on climate change must also be factored in. Research in 2018 estimated the <a href="https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2018EF000922">global cost of 4°C warming</a> would eventually reach US$23 trillion per year, costing Australia A$159 billion every year.</p>
<p>In light of the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/summary-for-policy-makers/">IPCC report on the urgency of limiting warming to 1.5°C</a>, this may be a more salient point than the year on year costs of implementation of any near-term climate policy.</p>
<h2>What are other countries doing?</h2>
<p>Far greater ambition is required from all nations, including Australia, for the world to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. The UN has invited Paris Agreement signatories to submit revised national targets in 2020. </p>
<p>Several countries are raising their national climate commitments. The <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/media/1692/labors_climate_change_action_plan.pdf">UK Parliament has just declared a climate emergency</a> and has been advised by its independent <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/">Committee on Climate Change</a> to adopt a target of net-zero emissions by 2050. </p>
<p>The European Union has set an emission reductions target of <a href="https://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-strategy-2050/news/eu-parliament-votes-for-55-emissions-cuts-by-2030/">55% by 2030</a> and the EU Parliament has endorsed a <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-resilient-energy-union-with-a-climate-change-policy/file-mid-century-zero-emissions-strategy-for-the-eu">net-zero climate target for 2050</a>.</p>
<p>Nearer to home, on Wednesday the New Zealand prime minister introduced the <a href="https://www.mfe.govt.nz/have-your-say-zero-carbon">Zero Carbon Bill</a>, which calls for net-zero carbon-dioxide emissions by 2050, and creates a legal obligation to plan for supporting New Zealand towns and cities, business and farmers to adapt to increasingly severe storms, floods, fires and droughts caused by climate change.</p>
<p>While all of these actions are far more ambitious than Australia’s targets, <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/summary-for-policy-makers/">the IPCC</a> found net-zero emissions will need to be reached earlier than 2050 for a chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C without overshoot (overshoot risks potentially irreversible ecosystem loss).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/keeping-warming-below-1-5-is-possible-but-we-cant-rely-on-removing-carbon-from-the-atmosphere-68421">Keeping warming below 1.5℃ is possible - but we can't rely on removing carbon from the atmosphere</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So far no developed nation is taking seriously the <a href="http://civilsocietyreview.org/files/COP24_CSO_Equity_Review_Report.pdf">equity considerations of the Paris Agreement</a>, which require financial and technology support to help developing countries both reduce emissions and adapt to the already severe consequences of climate change. </p>
<p>Limiting warming to well below 2°C and aiming for 1.5°C as required by the Paris Agreement will indeed require that fossil fuel use declines to zero over the next few decades. This is a trajectory that governments around the world – the UK, the EU, NZ and others – are beginning to acknowledge. </p>
<p>If Australia sees more of the same in terms of climate policy we will inevitably continue our dismal track record of inaction – with devastating consequences.</p>
<p><br></p>
<hr>
<p><em>A version of this article has been co-published in <a href="https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/">Pursuit</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/116896/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Dooley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Here’s how the coalition, Labor and the Greens stack up against the Paris targets.Kate Dooley, Research fellow, Climate and Energy College, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1045162018-12-17T13:29:50Z2018-12-17T13:29:50ZShould we engineer the climate? A social scientist and natural scientist discuss<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249460/original/file-20181207-128196-1nndt5c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/planet-earth-made-plasticine-hand-1091290106?src=dyFDiT31ZB0pJoIgWUgHPQ-2-17">Ekaterina Karpacheva/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This is an article from <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/head-to-head-62019">Head to Head</a>, a series in which academics from different disciplines chew over current debates. Let us know what else you’d like covered – all questions welcome. Details of how to contact us are at the end of the article.</em></p>
<p><strong>Rob Bellamy</strong>: 2018 has been a year of unprecedented weather extremes around the world. From the hottest temperatures <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/07/23/japan-soars-to-its-highest-temperature-ever-recorded-106-degrees/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a201a9ecfcc0">ever recorded</a> in Japan to the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45093636">largest wildfire</a> in the history of California, the frequency and intensity of such events have been made much more likely by human-induced climate change. They form part of a longer-term trend – observed in the past and projected into the future – that may soon make nations desperate enough to consider <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-you-need-to-get-involved-in-the-geoengineering-debate-now-85619">engineering the world’s climate deliberately</a> in order to counteract the risks of climate change. </p>
<p>Indeed, the spectre of climate engineering hung heavily over the recent United Nations climate conference in Katowice, <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/cop24-62779">COP24</a>, having featured in several <a href="https://seors.unfccc.int/seors/reports/events_list.html?session_id=COP%2024">side events</a> as negotiators agreed on how to implement the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement, but left many worried that it <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46582265">does not go far enough</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Matt Watson</strong>: Climate engineering – or geoengineering – is the purposeful intervention into the climate system to reduce the worst side effects of climate change. There are two broad types of engineering, <a href="https://theconversation.com/cant-we-just-remove-carbon-dioxide-from-the-air-to-fix-climate-change-not-yet-45621">greenhouse gas removal</a> (GGR) and <a href="https://theconversation.com/blocking-out-the-sun-wont-fix-climate-change-but-it-could-buy-us-time-50818">solar radiation management</a> (or SRM). GGR focuses on removing anthropogenically emitted gases from the atmosphere, directly reducing the greenhouse effect. SRM, meanwhile, is the label given to a diverse mix of large-scale technology ideas for reflecting sunlight away from the Earth, thereby cooling it.</p>
<h2>An engineered future?</h2>
<p><strong>RB</strong>: It’s increasingly looking like we may have to rely on a combination of such technologies in facing climate change. The authors of the recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/ipcc-1-5-report-heres-what-the-climate-science-says-104592">IPCC report</a> concluded that it is possible to limit global warming to no more than 1.5°C, but every single one of the pathways they envisaged that are consistent with this goal require the use of greenhouse gas removal, often on a vast scale. While these technologies vary in their levels of maturity, none are ready to be deployed yet – either for technical or social reasons or both.</p>
<p>If efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by transitioning away from fossil fuels fail, or greenhouse gas removal technologies are not researched and deployed quickly enough, faster-acting SRM ideas may be needed to avoid so-called “climate emergencies”.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1070262272835141633"}"></div></p>
<p>SRM ideas include installing mirrors in Earth’s orbit, growing crops that have been genetically modified to make them lighter, painting urban areas white, spraying clouds with salt to make them brighter, and paving mirrors over desert areas – all to reflect sunlight away. But by far the best known idea – and that which has, rightly or wrongly, received the most attention by natural and social scientists alike – is injecting reflective particles, such as sulphate aerosols, into the stratosphere, otherwise known as “stratospheric aerosol injection” or SAI.</p>
<p><strong>MW</strong>: Despite researching it, I do not feel particularly positive about SRM (very few people do). But our direction of travel is towards a world where climate change will have significant impacts, particularly on those most vulnerable. If you accept the scientific evidence, it’s hard to argue against options that might reduce those impacts, no matter how extreme they appear.</p>
<p>Do you remember the film <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/jan/06/127-hours-review">127 Hours</a>? It tells the (true) story of a young climber who, pinned under a boulder in the middle of nowhere, eventually ends up amputating his arm, without anaesthetic, with a pen knife. In the end, he had little choice. Circumstances dictate decisions. So if you believe climate change is going to be severe, you have no option but to research the options (I am not advocating deployment) as broadly as possible. Because there may well come a point in the future where it would be immoral not to intervene.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OlhLOWTnVoQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>SRM using stratospheric aerosols has many potential issues but does have a comparison in nature – active volcanism – which can partially inform us about the scientific challenges, such as the dynamic response of the stratosphere. Very little research is currently being conducted, due to a challenging funding landscape. What is being done is at small scale (financially), is linked to other, more benign ideas, or is privately funded. This is hardly ideal.</p>
<h2>A controversial idea</h2>
<p><strong>RB</strong>: But SAI is a <a href="https://theconversation.com/time-is-running-out-on-climate-change-but-geoengineering-has-dangers-of-its-own-107732">particularly divisive idea</a> for a reason. For example, as well as threatening to disrupt regional weather patterns, it, and the related idea of brightening clouds at sea, would require regular “top-ups” to maintain cooling effects. Because of this, both methods would suffer from the risk of a “termination effect”: where any cessation of cooling would result in a sudden rise in global temperature in line with the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. If we hadn’t been reducing our greenhouse gas emissions in the background, this could be a very sharp rise indeed.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/time-is-running-out-on-climate-change-but-geoengineering-has-dangers-of-its-own-107732">Time is running out on climate change, but geoengineering has dangers of its own</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Such ideas also raise concerns about governance. What if one powerful actor – be it a nation or a wealthy individual – could change the global climate at a whim? And even if there were an international programme, how could meaningful consent be obtained from those who would be affected by the technology? That’s everybody on Earth. What if some nations were harmed by the aerosol injections of others? Attributing liability would be greatly contentious in a world where you can no longer disentangle natural from artificial. </p>
<p>And who could be trusted to deliver such a programme? Your experience with the <a href="http://www.spice.ac.uk/">SPICE</a> (Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering) project shows that people are wary of private interests. There, it was concerns about a patent application that in part led to the scientists calling off a test of delivery hardware for SAI that would have seen the injection of water 1km above the ground via a pipe and tethered balloon.</p>
<p><strong>MW</strong>: The technological risks, while vitally important, are not insurmountable. While non-trivial, there are existing technologies that could deliver material to the stratosphere. </p>
<p>Most researchers agree that the socio-political risks, such as you outline, outweigh the technological risks. One researcher remarked at a Royal Society meeting, in 2010: “We know that governments have failed to combat climate change, what are the chances of them safely implementing a less-optimal solution?”. This is a hard question to answer well. But in my experience, opponents to research never consider the risk of not researching these ideas. </p>
<p>The SPICE project is an example where scientists and engineers took the decision to call off part of an experiment. Despite what was reported, we did this of our own volition. It annoyed me greatly when others, including those who purported to provide oversight, claimed victory for the experiment not going ahead. This belies the amount of soul searching we undertook. I’m proud of the decisions we made, essentially unsupported, and in most people’s eyes it has added to scientists’ credibility.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MdJkPB2B-V0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Moral hazard</h2>
<p><strong>RB</strong>: Some people are also worried that the promise of large-scale climate engineering technologies might delay or distract us from reducing greenhouse gas emissions – a “moral hazard”. But this remains to be seen. There are good reasons to think that the promise (or threat) of SRM might even galvanise efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<p><strong>MW</strong>: Yes, I think it’s at least as likely that the threat of SAI would prompt “positive” behaviour, towards a sustainable, greener future, than a “negative” behaviour pattern where we assume technology, currently imaginary, will solve our problems (in fact our grandchildren’s problems, in 50 years time).</p>
<p><strong>RB</strong>: That said, the risks of a moral hazard may not be the same for all climate engineering ideas, or even all SRM ideas. It’s a shame that the specific idea of stratospheric aerosol injection is so frequently conflated with its parent category of SRM and climate engineering more generally. This leads people to tar all climate engineering ideas with the same brush, which is to the detriment of many other ideas that have so far raised relatively fewer societal concerns, such as more reflective settlements or grasslands on the SRM side of things, or virtually the entire category of greenhouse gas removal ideas. So we risk throwing the baby out with the bathwater.</p>
<p><strong>MW</strong>: I agree with this – somewhat. It’s certainly true all techniques should be given the same amount of scrutiny based on evidence. Some techniques, however, often look benign but aren’t. Modifying crops to make them more reflective, brightening clouds, even planting trees all have potentially profound impacts at scale. I disagree a little in as much as we simply don’t know enough yet to say which technologies have the potential to reduce the impacts of climate change safely. This means we do need to be thinking about all of these ideas, but objectively. </p>
<p>Anyone that passionately backs a particular technology concerns me. If it could be conclusively proven that SAI did more harm than good, then we should stop researching it. All serious researchers in SAI would accept that outcome, and many are actively looking for showstoppers.</p>
<p><strong>RB</strong>: I agree. But at present there is very little demand for research into SRM from governments and wider society. This needs to be addressed. And we need broad societal involvement in defining the tools – and terms – of such research, and indeed in tackling climate change more broadly.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-you-need-to-get-involved-in-the-geoengineering-debate-now-85619">Why you need to get involved in the geoengineering debate – now</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The question of governance</h2>
<p><strong>MW</strong>: <a href="http://www.ice911.org/">Some people think</a> that we should just be getting on with engineering the climate, whereas others feel even the idea of it should <a href="http://www.etcgroup.org/content/global-manifesto-against-geoengineering">not even be discussed</a> or researched. Most academics value governance, as a mechanism that allows freedom to explore ideas safely and there are very few serious researchers, if any, who push back against this. </p>
<p>A challenge, of course, is who governs the governors. There are strong feelings on both sides – scientists either must, or cannot, govern their own research, depending on your viewpoint. Personally, I’d like to see a broad, international body set up with the power to govern climate engineering research, especially when conducting outdoor experiments. And I think the hurdles to conducting these experiments should consider both the environmental and social impact, but should not be an impediment to safe, thoughtful research.</p>
<p><strong>RB</strong>: There are more proposed frameworks for governance than you can shake a stick at. But there are two major problems with them. The first is that most of those frameworks treat all SRM ideas as though they were stratospheric aerosol injection, and call for international regulation. That might be fine for those technologies with risks that cross national boundaries, but for ideas like reflective settlements and grasslands, such heavy handed governance might not make sense. Such governance is also at odds with the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions/ndc-registry">bottom-up architecture</a> of the Paris Agreement, which states that countries will make nationally determined efforts to tackle climate change. </p>
<p>Which leads us to the second problem: these frameworks have almost exclusively arisen from a very narrow set of viewpoints – either those of natural or social scientists. What we really need now is broad societal participation in defining what governance itself should look like.</p>
<p><strong>MW</strong>: Yes. There are so many questions that need to be addressed. Who pays for delivery and development and, critically, any consequences? How is the global south enfranchised - they are least responsible, most vulnerable and, given current geopolitical frameworks, unlikely to have a strong say. What does climate engineering mean for our relationship with nature: will anything ever be “natural” again (whatever that is)? </p>
<p>All these questions must be considered against the situation where we continue to emit CO₂ and extant risks from climate change increase. That climate engineering is sub-optimal to a pristine, sustainably managed planet is hard to argue against. But we don’t live in such a world. And when considered against a +3°C world, I’d suggest the opposite is highly likely to be true.</p>
<p><em>If there’s a specific topic or question you’d like experts from different disciplines <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/head-to-head-62019">to discuss</a>, you can:</em></p>
<ul>
<li><em>Email your question to josephine.lethbridge@theconversation.com</em> </li>
<li><em>Tell us on Twitter by tagging @ConversationUK with the hashtag #HeadtoHead, or</em> </li>
<li><em>Message us on Facebook.</em></li>
</ul><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104516/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rob Bellamy receives funding from V. Kann Rasmussen Foundation and the ClimateWorks Foundation for research on the Greenhouse Gas Instruments and Policies (GRIP) project and from the Swedish Energy Agency for research on the Premises for Bio-energy with Carbon Capture and Storage project. He has previously received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council and Arts and Humanities Research Council for research on the Climate Geoengineering Governance (CGG) project.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Watson received funding from EPSRC, NERC and STFC to lead the SPICE project (<a href="http://www.spice.ac.uk">www.spice.ac.uk</a>) in 2010.</span></em></p>Nations may soon be desperate enough about global warming to consider deliberately engineering the world’s climate.Rob Bellamy, Presidential Fellow in Environment, University of ManchesterMatthew Watson, Reader in Natural Hazards, University of BristolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/898822018-01-28T19:48:09Z2018-01-28T19:48:09ZUS withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: can states lead the fight to reduce carbon emissions?<p>On June 1, 2017, the United States – the world’s <a href="http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/">second biggest greenhouse-gas (GHG) producer</a> after China – announced that it intended to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/01/donald-trump-confirms-us-will-quit-paris-climate-deal">withdraw from the Paris Agreement</a>. Should they do so, they will not only refuse to reduce their emissions, but they’ll also cease contributing financially to help developing countries adapt to climate change and participate in the mitigation effort. </p>
<p>The US had committed to reduce its GHG emissions by 25% to 28% by 2025 compared to 2005, which is equivalent to 5 Gt CO<sub>2</sub>-eq. less per year. They also pledged to allocate $3 billion to the <a href="http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/green_climate_fund/items/5869.php">Green Climate Fund</a> to help developing countries, and have already contributed $1 billion. However, they will no longer participate after the current commitment period, ending in 2018. Paris Agreement signatories have overall committed to a $100 billion contribution per year up to 2025.</p>
<p>In fact, the withdrawal from the agreement cannot be notified officially before November 4, 2019, and will only be effective one year after notification. Nevertheless, Donald Trump’s announcement was clear: at the federal level, decisions made by the previous administration on climate change mitigation are not going to be applied, starting from 2017.</p>
<h2>Wider negative consequences</h2>
<p>The context around this policy change is wider, however: the United States will not constrain their emissions, whereas other main emitters will. Lower emissions are mainly achieved by reducing use of fossil fuels, leading to a lower price for the latter at the world level. As a consequence, the US will even be encouraged to consume more fossil energy and to slow the pace of transition to less GHG-intensive energy sources, increasing their emissions all the more. In addition, the most constrained industries in signatory countries may relocate to the United States. Our simulations show that, because of these two effects (the former being quantitatively larger than the latter), by leaving the Paris Agreement, the United States would emit 2.3 Gt CO<sub>2</sub> more – the equivalent of all CO<sub>2</sub> emissions by India and Brazil in 2011 – than if they had respected their commitment. This corresponds to 218 Mt more than in a world without any agreement. At the world level, US withdrawal increases carbon leakage of the Paris Agreement by 40%, going from 5.1 to 7%.</p>
<p>The withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, by preventing the implementation of a carbon tax (or any other equivalent measure) to limit CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, allows the United States to increase their production by 0.17% in 2030, corresponding to 37 billion USD. However, this figure does not take into account potential impacts of climate change on production (e.g., extreme events impact on agricultural production, or conversely, carbon fertilization), nor externalities of production technologies on the environment or human health.</p>
<p>One of the instruments often considered to reduce carbon leakage is a <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/8341b644-ef95-11e6-ba01-119a44939bb6">border carbon adjustment</a> (BCA). It consists in taxing imports from unconstrained countries on the basis of the GHG emissions they cause, for instance using the same carbon price as in the importing country. If all Paris Agreement signatories were to impose such a tax on imports from the United States, it would reduce US exports by 104 billion USD in 2030 (-3%), but would only negligibly impact US emissions (-115 Mt, equivalent to -1.7%). This low impact is due to the fact that US production is mainly oriented toward its sizable domestic market. In addition, the BCA would have a negligible effect on the GDP of signatory countries. Put differently, a border carbon adjustment would only be a political signal to the United States with small environmental or economic effects.</p>
<h2>States can take the lead</h2>
<p>President Trump’s announcement does not completely prevent any US federal policy against climate change – in particular it does not preclude policies supporting environment-friendly innovation – but the hope mainly lies on what American states are willing to do, independently from the federal government. States still have the possibility to regulate high-emissions sectors, in particular power production and transportation. They can impose carbon prices, electricity prices, taxes on gasoline use … and constrain energy-generation processes. Some states are already engaged in self-determined GHG reductions. For example, nine north-eastern and mid-Atlantic states are part of the <a href="https://www.rggi.org/">Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative</a>, with an objective to limit CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the power sector. California participates in the <a href="http://www.wci-inc.org">Western Climate Initiative</a> along with Canadian provinces, to limit by 2020 its GHG emissions to the level observed in 1990. </p>
<p>In response to President Trump’s announcement, several states (16 as of today, representing 23% of total US emissions) formed the <a href="https://www.usclimatealliance.org">United States Climate Alliance</a> and committed to uphold the US objectives of the Agreement within their borders. The UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change, Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, wrote to the UN Secretary General to ask UNFCCC Parties to <a href="http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/jerry-brown-and-michael-bloomberg-launch-americas-pledge-in-support-of-paris/">acknowledge subnational commitments</a>, from states, cities, businesses and civil society, as a parallel submission to the Paris Agreement. Some of these actors are also making their pledges to the UN platform <a href="http://climateaction.unfccc.int/">NAZCA</a>, which brings together commitments to climate action by actors other than sovereign states.</p>
<p>The American states making commitments are not the largest emitters (they represent 23% of U.S. emissions, but 42% of U.S. GDP), and their abatement costs (the cost of decreasing emissions by one additional unit of CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent) are often higher compared to other states. Nevertheless, despite the fact that they cannot compensate a lack of federal commitment, their actions send a strong signal to the international community and the rest of the United States. They may also be able to construct new economic models accounting for climate externalities. </p>
<h2>Supporting mitigation efforts</h2>
<p>Other signatories of the agreement should support these actions, for example, by inviting states to join existing carbon markets. They will also have to find new financial resources to achieve the Green Fund objectives, as supporting mitigation and adaptation in developing countries is a major concern for both climate change and development. Mitigation actions may also be facilitated by technological advances, such as the sharp decrease in the cost of renewable energies. In the end, the transition to non-fossil fuel energy sources will happen, but at a slower pace than with a strong federal commitment.</p>
<p><strong>Impact of the Paris Agreement, the U.S. withdrawal and retaliatory BCA in 2030</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=129&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=129&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=129&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=162&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=162&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201346/original/file-20180109-36043-105jmft.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=162&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>GDP and Exports are labelled in 2011 USD billion; CO<sub>2</sub> emissions are in million tons. Variations in percentage change represent the difference between the considered scenario and a world where no climate mitigation agreement is enforced (“Ref.”). Three scenarios are considered, in addition to this reference scenario: the “NDC” scenario (for “Nationally Determined Contributions”), in which all Paris Agreement initial signatories achieve their emissions reduction commitments; the absence of the U.S. of this agreement (“Withdrawal” scenario) ; as well as a potential reaction of other signatories of the agreement through a carbon tax on their imports from the U.S. (“BCA” scenario, for “Border Carbon Adjustment”). Authors calculations</em>.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>For more details, see the <a href="http://www.cepii.fr/CEPII/en/publications/lettre/abstract.asp?NoDoc=10449">Lettre du CEPII N°380</a> (in French)</em>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89882/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>With the US announcement that it would withdrawl from the Paris Accord, several American states are mobilizing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.Jean Fouré, Économiste, CEPIICecilia Bellora, Economiste, programme "Politiques commerciales", CEPIILicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/787802017-06-02T15:05:34Z2017-06-02T15:05:34ZTrump’s decision to quit the Paris Agreement may be his worst business ‘deal’ yet<p>Donald Trump’s decision to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/trump-paris-climate-agreement.html">withdraw from the Paris Agreement</a> is certainly a blow for the global climate regime. But it is primarily a bad deal for the US. It is bad for America’s economy, its global leadership, and its non-climate policy goals. The good news is this: global efforts to tackle climate change will survive without the US.</p>
<p>Though Trump claimed the agreement was “unfair” and against American interests, what he doesn’t realise is that climate policy is good business. Already now, <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/01/25/u-s-solar-energy-employs-more-people-than-oil-coal-and-gas-combined-infographic/#772f9bd52800">twice as many people</a> are employed in the US renewables industry as are in coal, oil and gas. </p>
<p>The Paris goal of limiting global warming at 2°C also means <a href="http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/Perspectives_for_the_Energy_Transition_2017.pdf">US$120 trillion</a> will need to go into energy supply, infrastructure and appliances between now and 2050. This is twice the current rate of investment, and the bulk of it will be in low-carbon energy. </p>
<p>Thus far the US has enjoyed an edge in technology, along with many other Western countries. But, given Trump’s opposition to climate action, other nations will now be more hesitant to source from American companies and to engage in joint ventures. This means job losses and possibly even a loss in global technology leadership. </p>
<p>Put differently, climate policy is where the very “tremendous deals” could have been struck that Trump would like to see for US companies, businesses and consumers. Leaving Paris means letting go on these opportunities. Measured by <a href="http://inspire.irena.org/Pages/default.aspx">low-carbon patent applications</a>, the EU, Japan and China are well positioned to step in. Jobs that might be “brought back” in the Rust Belt’s heavy industry and mining will not compensate for the opportunities foregone in renewables – the growth area of the future.</p>
<h2>No longer a global leader</h2>
<p>Trump’s decision is another blow to US soft power. While a mighty war machinery certainly helped America exert global leadership over the past century or so, such “hard power” was always combined with attractive ideas and standards which built momentum for the country’s policies. To be sure, the US <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1248757.stm">refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol</a> in 2001 had already dealt a serious blow to its climate leadership. But it was the Obama administration that together with China pushed the subsequent Paris Agreement over the finish line by ratifying it. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172070/original/file-20170602-20596-17za0rw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Solar power in the Mojave desert, California.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">trekandshoot / shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>With this climate pullout the US is on the verge of saying goodbye to its global leadership based on soft power. What’s left are gunboats and tanks – and an $18 trillion economy the US leadership now thinks about in classic realpolitik terms. </p>
<p>This will clear the way for others to take the lead. China has a strong interest in greening its economy as turns into <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/world/asia/china-renewable-energy-investment.html">the world’s prime low-carbon investor</a>. The EU sees an opportunity to advance its position as the globe’s climate champion and to capitalise on its own well-developed low-carbon industry. Both economies – representing roughly US$30 trillion of GDP – have the economic and political clout to push for global change, even in the absence of the US. </p>
<p>Other nations will join in, as they will want to profit from the economic opportunities coming with a transition toward low carbon. India, for instance, the world’s third largest CO₂ emitter, has pledged <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/02/asia/india-paris-agreement-trump/index.html">its commitment to the common agreement</a> and the global governance principles underpinning it.</p>
<h2>Climate action is linked to many other policies</h2>
<p>Finally, global agreements never live in a policy vacuum. To the contrary, they are always embedded in broader deals that brought them about. Regional or bilateral trade agreements, for instance, are often linked to labour or environmental standards. Now the US has quit Paris, partnering countries might be tempted to retaliate. High level <a href="http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-climatechange-schulz-idINA5N1I601T">European politicians</a> have already suggested the EU consider restricting market access for American goods, in order to avoid “unfair competition” arising from lower standards in the US. </p>
<p>Links like these mean the US will find it a lot harder to get agreements – or “deals” – done in the future, even if they do not have much to do with environmental protection. Security cooperation comes to mind here, among other, which the current administration cares much about.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=314&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=314&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=314&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172065/original/file-20170602-20575-1fvy5ol.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cotton fields and wind farms, west Texas.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sarah Fields Photography / shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What’s the way forward? To be sure, the US quitting Paris does not mean the country returns to the coal-based economy of old. Renewables have reached grid-parity prices in many instances – and low-carbon energy has become a multi-billion dollar industry. Big companies have called for the US to <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-05-31/musk-leads-ceos-full-court-press-on-paris-as-trump-weighs-exit">remain in the agreement</a> because of that. Even Texas, the oil-rich Lone Star State, is now a prominent <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/texas-leads-us-in-use-of-renewable-energy/3565024.html">producer of clean energy</a>. Thanks to renewables and a surge in shale gas production, US emissions are now <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/540ebb0c-0a60-11e7-ac5a-903b21361b43">back down to 1992 levels</a> – and Trump will not be able to change that trajectory.</p>
<p>Let’s make no mistake though: the absence of US leadership, policy clout and climate finance will be felt, and the US leaving the Paris Agreement is bad news for the global climate regime. But it is much better than America staying in and pushing for renegotiation of the entire agreement. This would have meant years of deadlock and lingering, with no global action on climate policy. </p>
<p>The beauty of Paris is its bottom-up approach: each signatory sets its own goals, and defines how it goes about meeting them. So the world can move on – even without America.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78780/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andreas Goldthau does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>However, the global climate regime should survive without the United States.Andreas Goldthau, Professor in International Relations & Director, Centre of International Public Policy, Royal Holloway University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/787272017-06-01T20:03:18Z2017-06-01T20:03:18ZWill the Paris Agreement still be able to deliver after the US withdrawal?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171875/original/file-20170601-25700-1b0xlg9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Arc de Triomphe Is illuminated in green to celebrate the Paris Agreement's entry into force.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Arc_de_Triomphe_Is_Illuminated_in_Green_to_Celebrate_Paris_Agreement's_Entry_into_Force.jpg">U.S. Department of State from United States</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the short term, the United States’ withdrawal from the <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/paris_en">Paris Agreement</a> will certainly have ripple effects globally. But rather than fatally undermine the Paris Agreement, it will likely cause other countries to reaffirm their firm commitment to the full implementation of the climate deal.</p>
<p>We are already seeing this effect in the forthcoming accord between the EU and China on climate and energy, <a href="http://brief.euractiv.com/2017/05/31/the-brief-eu-and-china-will-take-revenge-on-trump-for-ditching-climate-deal/">focused on increasing ambition in the Paris Agreement</a>.</p>
<p>In the White House Rose Garden, US President Donald Trump <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/politics/trump-paris-climate-decision/index.html">said</a> he wanted to start to renegotiate to see “if there’s a better deal”. </p>
<p>“If we can, great. If we can’t, that’s fine,” he added. </p>
<h2>Lessons not learnt from the Kyoto Protocol</h2>
<p>Given the location of today’s announcement, some might be tempted to draw an analogy with the Kyoto Protocol, which President George W. Bush famously repudiated in the White House Rose Garden, following <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/jun/08/usnews.climatechange">pressure from fossil-fuel interests, notably Exxon</a>.</p>
<p>The lessons from this analogy do not flatter the United States. Although the Kyoto Protocol did not meet its full potential as a consequence of US non-participation, countries that engaged actively in its implementation not only succeeded in achieving the emission-reduction targets they set for themselves, but are <a href="http://www.oecd.org/env/Aligning-policies-for-the-transition-to-a-low-carbon-economy-CMIN2015-11.pdf">much better positioned</a> now to take advantage of the necessary transition to a low-carbon future.</p>
<p>As a result of the Kyoto engagement, the European Union’s legislative climate policy framework is now the most comprehensive and far-reaching in the world. The EU now has all the tools needed to deliver the <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/countries/eu.html">greater ambition</a> that will be needed.</p>
<iframe height="600" src="https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/objectives-and-targets-of-eu/embed-dashboard?dashboard=dashboard-01&customStyle=.googlechart_view{margin-left:0px%3B}" width="100%"></iframe>
<p><em>Objectives and targets of EU environmental policies by sector and year
Source:<a href="https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/objectives-and-targets-of-eu#tab-dashboard-01">European Environment Agency</a></em></p>
<p>Learning from the Kyoto experience, China, Korea, Mexico, Chile and other developing countries are now putting in place emissions-trading systems that will generate the cost-effective emission reductions of the future.</p>
<p>By choosing the Rose Garden for this second announcement, the Trump White House is only underscoring that the lessons from past mistakes may not have not been learnt.</p>
<h2>Ceasing implementation will halt the decline in US emissions</h2>
<p>Of immediate importance is that President Trump said the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris accord ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution (NDC).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.climateactiontracker.org/">The Climate Action Tracker</a>, a tool that tracks the emissions commitments of countries along with their reported actions to reduce them, evaluated the consequences of the US not implementing its NDC, as Trump has done by rescinding, or attempting to rescind many of the Obama era climate policies. </p>
<p>The assessment <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_2017-05-15_Briefing_India-China-USA.pdf">shows</a> that it will lead to a halt in the necessary decline of US emissions.</p>
<p>Beyond emissions there is the issue of international finance to help countries cope with climate change. President Trump claimed that <a href="http://www.greenclimate.fund/home">the Green Climate Fund</a>, presently capitalised with US$10 billion, “is costing the United States a vast fortune.” </p>
<p>The facts say otherwise. The few billion the US has committed is far from being a vast fortune. The US so far has delivered one third of its US$3 billion pledge. The largest contributor per capita is Sweden. Other major contributors like Germany or Japan have also delivered one-third to half of their pledge by now. </p>
<p>For the record the GCF was set up to give a special focus to societies and communities most vulnerable and least capable to cope with the rising impacts of climate change - least developed countries, small island developing states and Africa. </p>
<p>The Fund has received over US$10 billion in <a href="http://www.greenclimate.fund/partners/contributors/resources-mobilized">contributions from 44 countries</a>, regions and cities, including nine developing countries who themselves are highly affected by climate change impacts already occurring in their countries.</p>
<h2>The US could be left behind</h2>
<p>The world of 2017 is a very different place from what it was in 2001. Back in 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol was adopted, the US accounted for 19% of global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and 20% of the world economy (measured in GDP MER) whereas China accounted for only 12% and 7% respectively. By 2015, when the Paris Agreement was adopted, China had grown to become <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/03/breakthrough-us-china-agree-ratify-paris-climate-change-deal">the largest emitter</a> (23%) and the largest economy (17%), with the USA accounting for a proportionately lower share of global emissions (13%), and a smaller share of the world economy (16%).</p>
<p>India, a rising power of the 21st century, had nearly doubled its relative economic weight over this period (from 4% to 7% of the world economy). Both China and India are now seizing the future, working to bend their emissions pathways while growing their economies and creating thousands of green jobs through massive investments in renewable energy and plans to <a href="https://cleantechnica.com/2017/04/21/india-considers-100-electric-vehicles-2030/">move towards electric vehicles</a> by the end of the next decade.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171870/original/file-20170601-25658-2zupm9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Leadership and economic growth is now finding a new center of gravity – one in which the US risks being left further and further behind.</p>
<p>The scientific understanding of climate change and its effects on natural systems, human societies and economies has also progressed immensely since 1997 and engaged much larger communities including regions, cities and businesses.</p>
<p>Climate change is emerging as a geopolitical issue alongside more traditional geopolitical concerns and, depending on how a country deals with its role and the problem, its geopolitical standing is affected. <a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/05/31/the-convenient-disappearance-of-climate-change-denial-in-china/">China has begun to move into the space, tentatively, but nevertheless with effect</a>.</p>
<p>In other words, the US is less important and less fundamental than it used to be in the sphere of climate policy action.</p>
<p>However, in some places, it may empower climate-change denialists to call for a slowdown on action, or even to support the deployment of so-called “clean coal”.</p>
<p>But, such risks appear limited at this stage. Russia, for example, has yet to ratify the Paris Agreement, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/russia-paris-agreement-climate-change-donald-trump-us-decision-global-warming-moscow-putin-a7766481.html">but has recently signalled</a> that it will continue to support the implementation of the Agreement.</p>
<p>Public opinion in many parts of the world may also be invigorated in favour of strong climate action, as a positive effect of the much-elevated attention for climate change as a global problem in the press and social media.</p>
<h2>Employment in the renewable energy industry is growing</h2>
<p>US emissions have been declining since 2015. Trump’s Executive Order aimed at rescinding US domestic measures <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/countries/usa.html">will result in flatlining emissions at around present levels for the next 5 to 10 years</a>.</p>
<p>Because of the decline in renewable energy and battery-storage prices, natural gas displacing coal, as well as ongoing actions in states such as California implementing the <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_2017-05-15_Briefing_India-China-USA.pdf">Obama-era Clean Power Plan, methane controls and motor vehicle standards</a>, it seems unlikely that US emissions would increase again before 2030.</p>
<p>It is also clear that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/29/trump-promised-to-bring-back-coal-jobs-that-promise-will-not-be-kept-experts-say/">Trump’s promises to the coal-industry workforce cannot be met</a>. Coal use and mining is projected to continue declining because of changes in the energy markets, including <a href="http://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/IEEFA-2017-US-Coal-Outlook-ShortTerm-Gains-Will-Be-Muted-by-Prevailing-Weaknesses-in-Fundamentals_JAN-2017.pdf">lower natural-gas prices and overwhelming competition on price from renewables</a> and storage.</p>
<p>On the other hand, employment in the renewable-energy industry is <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26052017/infographic-renewable-energy-jobs-worldwide-solar-wind-trump">growing rapidly in the United States (and around the world), and far exceeds that in coal mining</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/BUw79SKjIrS","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_RE_Jobs_Annual_Review_2017.pdf">latest review by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)</a> shows rapid growth of employment in the US renewable energy sector, now employing approximately 800,000 people.</p>
<p>The increase in employment in solar energy alone over the past three years is more than twice the total number of jobs in the coal mining industry in the United States <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26052017/infographic-renewable-energy-jobs-worldwide-solar-wind-trump">(which are declining)</a>. This remarkable development contains a lesson and a guide for the future: maintaining the growth of job opportunities requires a continued rollout and expansion of renewable energy. If this does not happen, job opportunities will be lost.</p>
<h2>A goal more difficult to meet but more unity</h2>
<p>President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, combined with the repeal of domestic actions resulting in halting the decline in US emissions, will likely make it more difficult and costly overall to meet the Paris Agreement temperature goal of holding warming well below 2°C, and limiting it to 1.5°C.</p>
<p>If sustained, the additional US emissions, above the levels that would have occurred with the full implementation of the Obama-era package of climate policies, could add an additional warming of about to 0.1 to 0.2°C by 2100. This will need to be compensated by larger and faster reductions by others than would otherwise be necessary.</p>
<p>In the longer term, the Paris Agreement temperature goals are likely not be able to be met unless the US rejoins global efforts within the next five to ten;years, so <a href="http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n9/abs/nclimate3096.html">that globally aggregated CO₂ emissions can be reduced to zero by around mid-century</a>.</p>
<p>Working against the fossil fuel–driven Trump agenda are profound market developments in renewable energy and battery storage, affecting demand for coal-fired power along with the oil demand depressing effects of the ramping up of electric vehicle production.</p>
<p>The effects of rapidly reducing prices of renewable energy technology and <a href="http://www.utilitydive.com/news/is-battery-energy-storage-at-a-turning-point-for-us-utilities/440055/">battery storage</a> are far-reaching and <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/44ed7e90-3960-11e7-ac89-b01cc67cfeec">some argue, may be unstoppable</a>. <a href="https://www.lazard.com/media/438038/levelized-cost-of-energy-v100.pdf">Recent industry assessments show that the levelized cost of electricity from many renewable technologies is now lower than gas or coal in the USA</a>. <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/stunning-new-lows-in-solar-and-battery-storage-costs-13929/">Last week in Arizona, for example, solar and battery storage beat gas power on price for peaking electricity, possibly for the first time anywhere</a>. More broadly, the ongoing cancellation of planned coal-power plants in <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/countries/india.html">India</a>, <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china.html">China,</a> <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/japan-taiwan-korea-accelerate-demise-thermal-coal-market-97057/">Japan, South Korea, Taiwan</a> and other places is indicative of the market transformation that is beginning. </p>
<p>This dynamic of reducing renewable energy and storage technology prices driving displacement of fossil-fuel power sources will play a very large role in determining the ultimate positive or negative fallout of US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the negociations that Trump seems to want to impose. </p>
<p>In reaction to the uncertainty about US intentions, the EU and China are coming closer together on climate and energy, united around the implementation of the Paris Agreement.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"870325593971273730"}"></div></p>
<p>Many more countries are also beginning to realise the great risks and costs that climate change will bring unless global warming is limited. In Marrakech, over forty-five countries belonging to the <a href="http://www.thecvf.org/">Climate Vulnerable Forum</a> committed to <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/renewable-energy-target-climate-united-nations-climate-change-vulnerable-nations-ethiopia-a7425411.html">100% renewable energy goals</a> and are beginning to work on how to achieve this.</p>
<h2>Risks and negotiations ahead</h2>
<p>Nevertheless, there will be countries, political parties, and fossil-fuel interests that will attempt to use US withdrawal to advance a climate-denialist agenda, or at the least seek ways to defend the market dominance of fossil-fuel industries.</p>
<p>It can be expected that a US withdrawal may lead a number of countries to lag in ramping up their climate pledges (NDCs or Nationally Determined Contributions) under the Paris Agreement or go slow on implementing policies.</p>
<p>Another risk that will be exacerbated by the US withdrawal relates to the large global pipeline of coal-plant proposals, which – if built and operated – would curtail any chance of holding warming well below 2°C and limiting to 1.5°C.</p>
<p>Coal is projected to grow rapidly in India, Southeast Asia, Turkey, parts of the Middle East and Africa. It will take concerted diplomatic leadership, as well as courageous domestic action to ensure that this does not come about. Such a task would be difficult even with the US in the Agreement, but a US withdrawal has made it a little harder.</p>
<p>One of the questions now is to know if the US president can find a way to engage any new negotiations. </p>
<p>The longer the US remains idle the harder it will be for all of us. So what are the prospects of the US rejoining the agreement?</p>
<p>Looking beyond the next 3 to 4 years, rising levels of public concern and anxiety over climate change, the accelerating employment from the renewable-energy industry give grounds for optimism. </p>
<p>If Trump doesn’t come back to the Agreement, we will have to wait 2020 to see what happens. A new president coud seek to reenter the climate deal quickly to catch up with the market leaders, likely <a href="http://brief.euractiv.com/2017/05/31/the-brief-eu-and-china-will-take-revenge-on-trump-for-ditching-climate-deal/">China, the EU</a> and India, and to recover its <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/trump-paris-end-of-the-american-century-ec5ee0742f8a">political</a>, technological and economic leadership that will be squandered by the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.</p>
<p>With this outlook in mind and with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/us/california-engages-world-and-fights-washington-on-climate-change.html">California taking a strong lead</a>, many states, municipalities, companies and civic society are expected to move ahead with climate action over the next few years, and if successful the US may well be in a position to catch up quickly once the Trump period passes.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78727/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bill Hare is a Director of Climate Analytics, a nonprofit climate science and policy institute. Climate Analytics receives research and project funding from philanthropies, governments and international organisations on climate science, impacts and policy. Sources of funding include the German Government’s (BMUB) International Climate Initiative, Climate Works Foundation, the European Climate Foundation, European Commission Research funds, the UK Government's Climate Development Knowledge Network. Bill Hare is directing the IMPACT Project, which provides scientific, policy, analytical and strategic support, capacity building and advice for delegations from small island states and least developed countries in international climate negotiations.</span></em></p>Like president George W. Bush before him, Donald Trump made the announcement from the White House Rose Garden, showing that Republican governments have failed to learn past lessons.Bill Hare, Director, Climate Analytics, Berlin; Adjunct Professor, Murdoch University, Perth; Visiting scientist, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact ResearchLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/780962017-05-23T01:17:44Z2017-05-23T01:17:44ZThe world would be better off if Trump withdraws from the Paris climate deal<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/170462/original/file-20170523-7361-3pp7kn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has argued the US should stay in the Paris climate agreement. But for the rest of the world, a US exit is better than staying reluctantly. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Carlos Barria/Reuters</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The conventional wisdom that the United States should remain under the Paris Agreement is wrong. A US withdrawal would be the best outcome for international climate action.</p>
<p>With Trump <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/447783/will-trump-stay-paris-climate-accord">set to decide on the matter</a> after this week’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/may/22/taormina-spotlight-sicily-g7-donald-trump">G7 meeting</a>, his aides are split on the issue. Chief strategist Steve Bannon heads the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-climate-idUSKBN17T2JS">faction pushing for an exit</a>. Secretary of State and former ExxonMobil chief executive Rex Tillerson has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2017/live-updates/trump-white-house/confirmation-hearings-trump-speaks-and-vote-a-rama-analysis-and-updates/tillerson-says-u-s-should-maintain-seat-at-table-at-paris-climate-talks/?utm_term=.145689009f4c">argued</a> for the US to retain a “seat at the table”.</p>
<p>It is within the <a href="https://www.c2es.org/docUploads/legal-note-could-future-president-reverse-us-approval-paris-agreement.pdf">president’s power</a> to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and perhaps even the <a href="http://unfccc.int/2860.php">United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change</a> (UNFCCC), which has overseen global climate diplomacy for some 25 years. </p>
<p>In a <a href="http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nclimate3309">commentary published in Nature Climate Change</a> today, I argue that a US withdrawal would minimise risks and maximise opportunities for the climate community. Simply put: the US and the Trump administration can do more damage inside the agreement than outside it.</p>
<p>There are four key, interconnected risks related to US participation in the Paris Agreement: that the US will miss its emissions target; that it will cut climate finance; that it will cause a “domino” effect among other nations; and that it will impede the UN negotiations. </p>
<h2>Money and emissions are all that matter</h2>
<p>The first two risks are unaffected by withdrawal. The Paris Agreement doesn’t require the US to meet its current emissions reduction pledge, or to provide further climate finance to developing countries. The agreement is procedural, rather than binding; it requires a new, tougher climate pledge every five years, but actually hitting these targets isn’t mandatory. </p>
<p>The US will probably miss its climate target regardless. It would <a href="http://climateactiontracker.org/countries/usa.html">need more than just Obama’s Clean Power Plan</a> to hit its goal of reducing emissions by 26-28% on 2005 levels by 2025. And now that Trump has decided to <a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-exit-of-paris-climate-accord-strengthens-china-and-europe-78653">roll back those policies too</a>, US emissions are set to <a href="http://www.luxresearchinc.com/news-and-events/press-releases/read/trump-presidency-could-mean-34-billion-tons-more-us-carbon">increase through to 2025</a>, rather than decrease. </p>
<p>The same goes for international climate funding, which will be cut under the “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/budget/fy2018/2018_blueprint.pdf">America First</a>” budget plan. That includes funds previously earmarked for the <a href="http://www.greenclimate.fund/home">Green Climate Fund</a>, which has so far raised US$10 billion in climate aid. The US was to provide <a href="http://www.greenclimate.fund/partners/contributors/resources-mobilized">US$3 billion</a> but has donated just <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/18/barack-obama-transfers-500m-to-green-climate-fund-in-attempt-to-protect-paris-deal">US$1 billion so far</a>. The remaining money is almost certainly not coming. </p>
<h2>Domino effect?</h2>
<p>The third risk is the domino effect: that US actions could inspire others to delay climate action, renege on their targets, or withdraw. But there is little evidence to suggest that the US dropping out will trigger other nations to follow suit. </p>
<p>The closest historical parallel is the Kyoto Protocol, which the US signed but never ratified. When President George W. Bush announced that the US would not ratify the treaty, others rallied to the protocol’s aid and pushed through the <a href="http://unfccc.int/land_use_and_climate_change/lulucf/items/3063.php">Marrakech Accords</a> in 2001, to strengthen Kyoto’s rules. </p>
<p>What’s more likely to cause a domino effect is US domestic behaviour, rather than any potential withdrawal from the Paris deal. Other countries are more likely to delay or free-ride on their pledges if they see the US miss its target, revealing how weak the Paris Agreement really is.</p>
<p>Paris has little aside from inspiring public pressure and long-term low-carbon investment patterns. Neither pressure nor the “investment signal” is likely to work if a renegade US shows that Paris is an empty global show-and-tell regime. Investors and the public are likely to lose faith in an agreement that can visibly do nothing to constrain a climate laggard. </p>
<p>The fourth risk is that the US will act as a spoiler in international climate talks. This requires membership. If the US remains in the agreement it will retain a veto in the negotiations. </p>
<p>The negotiations are at a crucial juncture. The so-called “Paris Rulebook”, which details how exactly the agreement will be fulfilled, is being negotiated, with plans for it to be adopted in 2018. </p>
<p>The US could use its voice and veto to water down the rules. It might even stall and overload negotiations by demanding amendments to the Paris Agreement, as Energy Secretary Rick Perry <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/26/politics/rick-perry-paris-climate/">has suggested</a>. A US that has credibly threatened to withdraw may have even more diplomatic clout going forward. </p>
<p>Considered in this light, giving the former head of ExxonMobil a “seat at the table” is a terrible idea. </p>
<h2>New opportunities</h2>
<p>A US withdrawal, on the other hand, could create new opportunities, such as renewed European and Chinese leadership. In the wake of the 2016 US election, former French presidential nominee Nicholas Sarkozy raised the idea of applying a <a href="http://en.rfi.fr/france/20161114-sarkozy-proposes-carbon-tax-us-goods-if-trump-scraps-paris-climate-pact">carbon tax</a> of 1-3% on US imports. In a time of rising protectionist policies, particularly in the US, carbon border tariffs may become more politically palatable. </p>
<p>A US dropout would also be an ideal opportunity for a rising China to stamp its mark on an international issue. It would give both China and the European Union a chance to jump even further ahead of the US in the renewable energy markets of the future. </p>
<p>The EU previously showed leadership in the absence of the US to revive the Kyoto Protocol and forge ahead with renewable energy. This time Europe <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-china-and-europe-should-form-the-worlds-most-powerful-climate-bloc-69211">could do so</a> with the support of another great power. </p>
<p>Such cooperation could take numerous forms. One simple way would be for the two to put forward a stronger joint <a href="http://www.oxfordclimatepolicy.org/publications/documents/Sino-European_Leadership_Strategy_Note.pdf">climate pledge</a>. This could be strengthened by uniting their respective carbon trading schemes and applying a common border carbon tariff. </p>
<p>Trade measures and an <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14693062.2016.1176007?journalCode=tcpo20">EU-China climate bloc</a> will be far more effective than Paris ever could have been. Yet none of these possibilities is likely to become reality without the diplomatically drastic move of US withdrawal. On balance, it is clear that a US climate exit is preferable to remaining. </p>
<p>It is worth stressing here the difference between pulling out of the Paris Agreement and withdrawing from the UNFCCC. The latter is far more dramatic, and more likely to trigger a domino effect. It would also mean the US would no longer be legally bound to report on its emissions and actions to the international community. It would become a complete climate pariah. </p>
<p>A future president could easily rejoin Paris through an executive agreement. In contrast, re-ratifying the UNFCCC might require a vote in the US Senate, which has become more partisan and divided since the convention was first ratified in 1992. However, withdrawal from the UNFCCC would lessen the threat of US obstruction, as it would lose its veto in the wider negotiations and be even more politically ostracised. </p>
<p>Despite this, the same basic risk-opportunity calculus applies. The domino effect may be more likely, but overall a withdrawal is still preferable. </p>
<h2>Participation is a red herring</h2>
<p>Wanting the US to remain is a short-sighted, knee-jerk reaction. The international community should be much more worried about the real domestic actions of the US, rather than whether it is symbolically cooperating internationally. </p>
<p>The international community appears to be <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/04/trump-paris-climate-deal-europe-238004">mortally afraid</a> that the US will make the largely symbolic gesture of quitting Paris. Yet there was less concern when Trump rolled back domestic climate measures. </p>
<p>EU Climate Commissioner Miguel Arias Cañete <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/a7e28b3e-2fe8-11e7-9555-23ef563ecf9a">recently stated</a> that Paris allows for the continued use of fossil fuels and provides the flexibility for a “new US administration to chart its own path”.</p>
<p>Is this really a worthwhile message to send to the White House: that blatantly violating the purpose and spirit of the Paris Agreement is fine, as long as you are still cooperating on paper? It is disturbing that symbolism has apparently become more important than action. </p>
<p>Policy, not participation, needs to be the focus of criticism. Otherwise Paris will prove itself to be nothing more than a diplomatic fig leaf.</p>
<p>While Paris may be weak, international climate action can still be strong. The shock of Trump’s withdrawal could make international action stronger by allowing emboldened leadership to blossom elsewhere.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78096/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Kemp has received research funding from the Australian and German governments. </span></em></p>If the US stays in the Paris deal but misses its targets, the deal could look like a sham. But if Trump carries out his threat to withdraw, the US veto would be gone, and other nations might step up.Luke Kemp, Lecturer in International Relations and Environmental Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/679732016-12-09T10:20:37Z2016-12-09T10:20:37ZPlanet Earth’s adventure into cities cements its position as a pioneer of environmental film<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148654/original/image-20161205-14312-1sbwfx9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">BBC/Planet Earth II</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With its depiction of sublime landscapes and unique creatures in a manner unsurpassed by other documentary series, <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/planet-earth-ii-33284">Planet Earth II</a> has been wowing millions over the last six weeks. Conversations overheard on the bus or in the supermarket queue have frequently featured prancing flamingos or those infamous snakes: a whole new generation have been introduced to the wonders of the natural world.</p>
<p>Planet Earth first debuted ten years ago, as Al Gore’s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/">An Inconvenient Truth</a> attempted to engage the public on the urgency of solving global warming. Meanwhile, David Attenborough was fascinating Planet Earth’s audience with stories about endangered species and remote places – trying to raise environmental awareness with a very different approach.</p>
<p>Although the format of the second series remains the same, subtle changes in the way storylines are presented hint at how the way we see the natural world has evolved, even over a decade. The climate of the conversation in Planet Earth II is a strong reminder of what we can lose and what we have already lost.</p>
<p>Nowhere is this more evident than the choice of habitat for the last episode in the series: cities. The portrayal of animal life in the cities is certainly an attempt to reinforce the concern on how human activities and manufactured landscapes have a strong and permanent impact on the natural world. In doing so, these new tales of animal life open the conversation on environmental risks and highlight the importance of preserving the wonders of our planet like never before.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/148656/original/image-20161205-14315-1dh94fm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The new habitat.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">BBC/Planet Earth II</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The Day After Tomorrow</h2>
<p>Ten years ago environmental awareness was at unprecedented levels. “Serious” documentaries such as An Inconvenient Truth came hot on the heels of climate disaster movies such as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/">The Day After Tomorrow</a>. The media’s will to produce content that would change public perception of environmental risk, especially climate changes, seemed to be at its highest.</p>
<p>A decade on, we seem to be in a similar period. But the format has, to some extent, changed. <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x/full">Studies from psychology and communication</a> have proven that fictional stories have a great impact on the public, sometimes even more than documentary format.</p>
<p>Planet Earth, despite being an iconic documentary series about nature, also has features of fiction. There is some distance between the environments chosen in Planet Earth and the artificial cityscapes that pepper the globe, something that many savour in the series. And accompanied by an original score by Hans Zimmer, Oscar winner and composer of music for acclaimed films such as Gladiator and The Dark Knight Rises, the starring animals in these landscapes can appear as superheroes. Each scene captures characteristics common to both humans and wildlife: love, family, parental instinct, fights for domination and survival.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Rv9hn4IGofM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But rather than opting for an apocalyptic rhetoric or messages of fear, which usually belong to environmental documentaries, Planet Earth employs a “positive” narrative that, <a href="http://scx.sagepub.com/content/30/3/355.short">according to some studies</a>, can generate a bigger impact on the public and sometimes lead to individual action. If you’ve found yourself egging on an iguana from the safety of your sofa or terrified about the fate of an antelope, then you’ve identified with Planet Earth’s characters. Along with this identification, it is hoped, comes a shift in our perception of the environment and the issues surrounding our planet.</p>
<h2>Human animals</h2>
<p>Planet Earth’s fairytale rendition of animals adapting to a fast changing environment also provide us with a chance to reflect on one of the most important questions about environmental risks: how can we, too, adapt to climate change?</p>
<p>Cleverly distancing itself from climate change documentaries such as Leonardo di Caprio’s newly released <a href="http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/before-the-flood/">Before the Flood</a>, Planet Earth chooses not to mention the words “climate change”, or make specific references to the issue, leaving the viewers to draw their own conclusions. This practice is evident in moments where the show depicts lands destroyed by fire or changing weather patterns, leaving us wondering the human footprint is to blame.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/149277/original/image-20161208-31352-1w0m61a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Monkeys loving city life.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">BBC NHU/Fredi Devas</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This trend culminates in the episode with wilderness cleverly embedded itself in some urban environments – not without consequences for some species. While monkeys enjoy life in the crowded markets of Mumbai and hyenas are shown as having a unique rapport with citizens, little turtles get confused between the moonlight and the blinding lights of the buildings, struggling on the tar of the road rather than reaching the sea through the shore. On the other hand, strong falcons take advantage of the heat and wind around Manhattan’s skyscrapers in order to calibrate their flights. </p>
<p>In a moment when, even after the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/paris-agreement-23382">Paris agreement</a>, solutions of climate change remain uncertain, Planet Earth II highlights the situation of our planet at present, rather than its catastrophic end in the future through apocalyptic visuals. This successful recipe has established Planet Earth as one of the most powerful and original formats in environmental documentary.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67973/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michela Cortese previously received funding from Welsh Government for research on visual communication of renewable energy.</span></em></p>Rather than opting for an apocalyptic rhetoric or messages of fear, Planet Earth employs a ‘positive’ narrative that can generate a bigger impact.Michela Cortese, Associate Lecturer, Bangor UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/667072016-11-13T09:08:10Z2016-11-13T09:08:10ZThe new normal: one year since terror attacks, Paris is a city afraid and divided<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145577/original/image-20161111-9083-xbbick.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/elpadawan/9462080682/sizes/l">ElPadawan/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It has been one year since <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-terror-attacks-france-now-faces-fight-against-fear-and-exclusion-50703">the attacks on November 13, 2015</a> chilled all Parisians – Muslim, Christian, Jewish and secular alike – to the core. In <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34818994">coordinated attacks</a> on a football match and a music concert, 130 innocent civilians <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/20/world/europe/Paris-terror-victims-list.html?rref=collection%2Fnewseventcollection%2Fattacks-in-paris&action=click&contentCollection=europe&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection&_r=0">lost their lives</a>, and hundreds more were injured. The immediate impacts were obvious: police began <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/20/paris-attacks-manhunt-two-suspects-still-at-large">a manhunt</a> for suspects which would lead all the way to Brussels, and French President François Hollande imposed a nation-wide state of emergency which <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36842311">remains in place</a> to this day. </p>
<p>Further atrocities <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33288542">have occurred across France</a>, from Rouen in the north to Nice in the south. But Paris has been the symbolic and geographical centre of such attacks – and they have transformed the city in ways which are still coming to light.</p>
<p>Paris is a global hub for business, arts, diplomacy and culture, and the wider region is home to more than <a href="https://www.citypopulation.de/France-iledeFrance.html">12m people</a>. As with other large cities that have experienced terror attacks, such as London and New York, life simply had to go on. But it is not the same as before. Parisians have had to settle into a bizarre “new normal”, where daily routines are interrupted by unfamiliar sights, sounds and inconveniences.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most obvious change has been the introduction of the huge security programme, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/15/paris-attacks-operation-sentinelle-soldiers-patrolling-streets-france-safer">“Operation Sentinelle”</a>: a major military deployment in civilian areas to complement France’s <a href="http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20150908-vigipirate-frances-temporary-anti-terror-plan-celebrates-20th-birthday">“Plan Vigipirate”</a> terror alert system. As a result of these measures, Paris has seen the largest deployment of military personnel since the second world war. </p>
<p>Of the 10,000 soldiers deployed nationally, more than 6,500 are based in the Paris metropolitan area. Parisians have had to adjust to the sight of military uniforms patrolling subway stations, museums, major streets and religious sites. While these troops were deployed to support police and reassure civilians, they have also served as a constant reminder that life has not fully returned to normal. </p>
<p>If anything, the atmosphere of the city has grown tense, and residents have become jumpy. Parisians have expressed shock at the growing frequency of evacuations due to suspicious packages and vehicles – these were not widespread before the recent wave of attacks. This sense of unease has manifested in unexpected ways.</p>
<h2>Safe schools</h2>
<p>One of the more disturbing new measures has been the decision to allow Parisian high school students to smoke on school premises. This behaviour has been banned since the early 1990s, but schools are anxious to prevent groups of students gathered outside high school gates from becoming targets. </p>
<p>Students have also been briefed on what to do in the event of a terrorist attack or incursion into school territory. During a recent research trip for <a href="http://lames.cnrs.fr/spip.php?article622&lang=fr">a new project in France</a>, the parents of Parisian school children have told me that their children were instructed to hide under their desks and remain silent, if the alarm is raised that a heavily armed terrorist is rampaging through their high school. This has deeply shocked them. </p>
<p>The lycée holds a special space in French life, as a place for children to experiment with their identities, have teen romances and grow up. This securitisation of school spaces curtails the sense of innocence which once accompanied education in France. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=373&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=373&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=373&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145588/original/image-20161111-9083-1tp04iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lycée on lock down.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/marsupilami92/6166106079/sizes/l">marsupilami92/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of course, there are inequalities between the prestigious institutions on the left bank, and the crumbling, ineffective schools in the poorer Parisian suburbs where I have done much of <a href="http://etn.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/05/19/1468796815587007">my research</a>. And indeed, bullying is a terrible problem <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37505349">right across the spectrum</a>. </p>
<p>But these measures mark a significant shift in the way parents, teachers and students regard the lycée: they have gone from seeing it a safe space, to a target for political violence. The students, however, are apparently not as concerned by this as their parents. Many simply haven’t experienced less troubled times: for them, this is normal. </p>
<h2>On the periphery</h2>
<p>The suburbs on the outskirts of Paris have changed just as much as the centre. While extra security has been deployed to reassure residents in Paris proper, the interventions in areas such as Saint Denis in the north, and Vitry to the south, have had a rather different effect. </p>
<p>The communities which live in these areas tend to be poorer, and have higher numbers of migrants, than <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/31/the-other-france">the rest of the city</a>. In the wake of the Paris attacks, they have experienced an intensification of longstanding difficulties, where those of north and West African origin <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/23/new-research-shows-that-french-muslims-experience-extraordinary-discrimination-in-the-job-market/">are denied jobs</a>, treated with suspicion, and subject to <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-attacks-nice-radicalisation-idUSKCN0ZY25A">outright hostility</a>. </p>
<p>While <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-banlieues-seeds-of-terror-isis/">reports suggest that</a> these sites of poverty and high numbers of migrants are the origin of the recent wave of attacks, the overwhelming majority of residents – whether Muslim or not – have <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/2ce716d6-7e48-11e6-bc52-0c7211ef3198">no sympathy for terrorism</a>. </p>
<p>Yet these same communities have overwhelmingly been targeted with extra-judicial powers: individuals have been wrongly confined to house arrest, detained in prison and had their lives and business <a>ruined as a result</a>. One shop keeper was detained because someone known to associate with extremists was a regular customer at his shop. </p>
<p>Sadly, there have been several moments when this hostility has tipped over into civilian life. For instance, earlier this year two Muslim women <a href="http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/europe/123953-160829-paris-restaurateur-in-hot-water-after-islamophobic-tirade-caught-on-video">were ejected</a> from a cafe by the owner, who was filmed telling them that “all terrorists are Muslim, and all Muslims are terrorists”. Around France, the “burkini ban” has further fuelled anti-Islamic sentiment, with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/11/cannes-mayor-bans-burqinis-beachwear-must-respect-secularism">some claiming</a> the garment expresses an “allegiance to terrorist movements”. </p>
<p>Both sides of Paris – a city of <a href="http://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745631257">unparalleled inequality and marginalisation</a> across Western Europe – are suffering from the effects of this “new normal”. Civilians, politicians and scholars must know that the way to over these attacks is not to “protect” one side of the city from another. The memory of the Muslim victims of terrorism in France, and those further afield in throughout Europe, the Middle East and Asia, remind us that we all need protection from the small number of people seeking to bring violence and bloodshed into our daily lives.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66707/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joseph Downing does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Boots on the ground, schools on high alert and more hostility toward Muslims and migrants – this is daily life for Parisians.Joseph Downing, Guest Lecturer, European Institute, London School of Economics and Political ScienceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/569342016-03-31T04:24:52Z2016-03-31T04:24:52ZParis set a benchmark in the battle against climate change. What now?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116634/original/image-20160329-13698-s39sw8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">South Africa has a long way to go to make a fair contribution to the global goals set out under the Paris Agreement.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This article is a foundation essay. They are longer than usual and take a wider look at a key issue affecting society.</em> </p>
<p>It’s been a few months since the <a href="http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf">Paris Agreement</a> wrapped up. On April 22, it will be signed by numerous heads of state. The agreement sets crucial goals to limit global temperature increases, and specific goals in three areas – mitigation, adaptation and finance. </p>
<p>Many expected the conference to be a talk shop with not many effective results. Obviously it’s too early for any tangible results to be seen – but the agreement has many positive points.</p>
<p>The long-term goal of limiting temperature increases to 2°C – or a second, more ambitious target of 1.5°C – guides the agreement. Mitigation includes a long-term goal – early peaking, balancing emissions and sinks. The accompanying decision indicates that emissions need to be reduced from 55 gigatonnes (Gt) to 40Gt in 2030, a massive gap of 15Gt. </p>
<p>A new global adaptation goal aims to increase countries’ adaptive capacity and resilience. There are also aims to achieve a finance increase to US$100 billion per year post 2020. </p>
<p>These goals are clearly put in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication.</p>
<h2>Why what happened in Paris is different</h2>
<p>The Paris Agreement fulfilled the promise, from the 2011 Durban Climate Change Conference, of a regime applicable to all under the <a href="http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf">United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change</a>. The world has finally moved beyond a divide into two groups, the developed and developing countries. Bitter battles were often fought along these lines. Paris reflects differentiation, acknowledging that the world is not the same. But it acknowledges the need to move beyond old divisions and to take action. It expresses differences more subtly, notably on mitigation and finance.</p>
<p>The Paris Agreement encodes a bottom-up approach. If the <a href="http://unfccc.int/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/items/1678.php">Kyoto Protocol’s</a> targets were top-down, a defining feature of the Paris Agreement is that <a href="http://www.mapsprogramme.org/wp-content/uploads/Paper_Thoughts-choice-of-INDC.pdf">nationally determined contributions</a> will add up to the global response. Proposals to take global emissions budgets and divide them across countries were rejected. Adaptation, loss and damage are much more prominent in the Paris Agreement than in previous climate agreements.</p>
<p>Countries’ adaptation plans are mandatory, with a clear emphasis on implementation. Countries should regularly communicate to the international community what they are doing on adaptation, in different forms. Prior to Paris, 88% of the <a href="http://www.wri.org/indc-definition">Intended Nationally Determined Contributions</a> included adaptation. The US and EU – with 28 member states – submitted adaptation undertakings. Together, plans and communications will significantly strengthen the information base on adaptation.</p>
<p>Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) on mitigation are obligations of conduct that require domestic measures to achieve objectives. They will be strongly reviewed. Reporting and review is strengthened at individual country level, and the global stock-take will inform further mitigation targets. Longer-term strategies from all parties are encouraged.</p>
<p>The Paris Agreement says all countries should strive to formulate long-term low greenhouse gas emission strategies. South Africa has a peak, plateau and decline trajectory range in its national policy, and put forward mitigation strategies for 2025 and 2030 in Paris. In the next round, it will be expected to include longer-term goals, even if aspirational, for 2050.</p>
<p>A global stock-take will consider mitigation, adaptation and support every five years, based on equity and science, to inform what more needs to be done.</p>
<p>Increasing ambition is crucial because the sum of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions is insufficient to keep us on track for the 2°C limit. The outcome of the stock-take will inform countries’ next actions, support and international co-operation. This global review will consider the collective effort, in the light of equity and science – that is, are we all doing enough, and are our efforts shared fairly?</p>
<p>Transparency is perhaps the strongest feature of the Paris Agreement. The framework applies transparency to both action and support, with the latter needing work. Common modalities will allow flexibility for those developing countries that have less capability to improve reporting and review over time.</p>
<p>The Paris Agreement is a treaty in all but name; it is a legally binding agreement. The nature of obligations within the treaty differ – some are binding and others not. </p>
<p>It is mandatory for each country to communicate mitigation NDCs every five years and to pursue domestic measures to achieve the NDC objectives. Individual financial contributions by developed countries are not binding. Delivering on promises of finance and scaling up overall investment flows will be closely watched – particularly by those who need support. A mandatory review of obligations is expected to strengthen action over time, setting out obligations of conduct and achieving objectives in the case of mitigation. Everyone is expected to do better in each round – what is called “progression”.</p>
<p>It is important to bring more actors into more creative spaces, ensuring a catalytic function for the Convention and perhaps changing it internally. Paris makes further processes complementary to text-based negotiations. It links multiple actors in more creative spaces. This means the agreement might enable action at national level, with many other actors, and allow for international cooperation on cleaner energy.</p>
<h2>What might the agreement mean for South Africa?</h2>
<p>The Paris Agreement is characterised by much broader participation than the Kyoto Protocol was. Much more will be required for South Africa, together with all other countries, to regularly communicate contributions. These contributions will be nationally determined. But they will be subject to strong international review at the individual and collective level. This applies across mitigation, adaptation and support, in slightly different ways.</p>
<p>On mitigation, the Paris Agreement has individual mitigation obligations. The nationally determined mitigation contributions are obligations of conduct. South Africa must prepare and communicate successive mitigation contributions and is obliged to pursue domestic measures to achieve these objectives.</p>
<p>The objective of the mitigation part of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions submitted prior to Paris was built around the peak, plateau and decline emissions trajectory range. The country will have to show what measures – carbon tax, carbon budgets, low-emissions electricity plan, renewable programme, transport policies and others – it will pursue to achieve peak, plateau and decline.</p>
<p>This information will be reported and reviewed every two and five years. South Africa submitted its first biennial update report in 2014, and it will submit another in 2016. From 2020, the scope will be broader, including adaptation as an option and mandatory reporting on support received.</p>
<p>On mitigation, national inventory reports are required every two years, as is tracking of progress in implementing and achieving mitigation contributions. Every five years, information on adaptation, mitigation and support will be reviewed collectively in a global stock-take. South Africa must take into account what all countries are doing together, and set more ambitious national contributions.</p>
<p>One means of increasing ambition will be to look beyond what national governments can do on their own. Cities are at the front-lines of adaptation and mitigation, businesses have much to contribute and civil society makes a crucial contribution.</p>
<p>Paris sent clear policy signals for more renewable energy and less use of fossil fuels. Much of the focus on renewables was in India, China and Brazil. But a preamble paragraph acknowledges the importance of universal access to sustainable energy, in Africa in particular, through the enhanced deployment of renewable energy.</p>
<p>With South Africa’s connections to the three countries mentioned above, the renewable plans and support for an <a href="http://newsroom.unfccc.int/clean-energy/advancing-of-africa-renewable-energy-initiative/">African Renewable Energy Initiative </a> from African heads of state and partner countries, its prospects of playing a key role in the expansion of renewables on the continent seem bright.</p>
<p>We will only fully appreciate what the Paris Agreement means for the country in the coming months and years. But already we know enough to acknowledge that Paris, while far from perfect, marked an important and positive change towards climate action. Paris moved decisively into a world where all countries, developed or developing, take climate action.</p>
<p>But a tough road lies ahead. South Africa will have to redouble its efforts to implement its national climate policy, and to make a fair contribution to the global goals set out under the Paris Agreement.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/56934/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Harald Winkler works for the Energy Research Centre(<a href="http://www.erc.uct.ac.za/">http://www.erc.uct.ac.za/</a>) or ERC, at the University of Cape Town (UCT). He has been a member of the SA delegation to the climate negotiations under the UNFCCC from 2003 to 2015. ERC has in the past received funding from the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for analytical support. This article is written in his personal capacity, does not represent the views of ERC, UCT or DEA and no benefit will accrue to any organisation.</span></em></p>The Paris Agreement marks an important step towards climate change mitigation – one in which developed and developing countries alike take action.Harald Winkler, Professor and Director of the Energy Research Centre, University of Cape TownLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/526572015-12-30T19:50:34Z2015-12-30T19:50:34ZWas 2015 such a terrible year? And what will 2016 look like?<p>Well Santa has come and gone, at least for the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/11518702/Mapped-What-the-worlds-religious-landscape-will-look-like-in-2050.html">largest proportion </a>of the world’s population. And, as we reach the end of the year, it is inevitably time to review recent trends and the prospects for 2016.</p>
<h2>By many standards, 2015 has been a terrible year</h2>
<p>The war in Syria and Iraq worsened as the number of war casualties <a href="http://sn4hr.org/blog/category/victims/death-toll/">grew</a> and its consequences spread. First, to Europe’s shores, with horrendous attacks on Paris at the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-kind-of-toughness-we-need-now-36037">beginning</a> and near the <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-the-war-with-is-enters-a-new-stage-50709">end</a> of the year. And then it spread to America with the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/12030160/California-shooting-Multiple-victims-reported-in-San-Bernardino-live.html">attack</a> in San Bernardino.</p>
<p>The flow of refugees fleeing from the Middle East, Afghanistan and Eritrea became a tidal wave as the number of internally displaced persons and refugees reached an all-time <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/558193896.html">high</a>. Some European governments, like <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/08/germany-on-course-to-accept-one-million-refugees-in-2015">Germany</a>, found their soul when it came to accepting these refugees. Others lost <a href="http://wpo.st/nW5y0">theirs</a> – if they ever had one. </p>
<p>Back in the US, some used their presidential campaign as an opportunity to tap the kind of nativist impulse that periodically <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-it-time-america-finally-took-a-chance-on-syrias-refugees-47452">overwhelms the country</a> when its national security is threatened. Many Republicans supported <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/10/poll-finds-republican-support-for-donald-trumps-ban-on-muslims-coming-to-u-s/?_r=0">banning Muslims</a> from entering the United States. Others favored registering those already domiciled.</p>
<p>As all this was happening, the world’s governments <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/26/world/middleeast/us-foreign-arms-deals-increased-nearly-10-billion-in-2014.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share">sold more arms</a> than ever. And US-Chinese relations became increasingly <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/16/world/asia/us-navy-commander-implies-china-has-eroded-safety-of-south-china-sea.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share">tense</a> over the revelation that China was building islands in the South China Sea. </p>
<h2>But there have been some bright spots</h2>
<p>We should remember that wasn’t all bad news. America’s <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-cuba-reach-agreement-to-establish-formal-diplomatic-relations-1435702347">rapprochement</a> with Cuba has potentially eradicated one of the few remaining vestiges of the Cold War. And while the jury is still out, the <a href="https://www.armscontrol.org/pressroom/press-release/2015-07-14/P5-Plus-1-Nations-and-Iran-Reach-Historic-Nuclear-Deal">P5+1 agreement</a> with Iran offers the prospect that the West will avert a damaging conventional war. </p>
<p>More importantly, the number of people living in extreme poverty declined again, <a href="http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/poverty.shtml">falling to 14% in 2015</a>, from nearly 50% a generation ago. And the international community reached an <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/13/paris-climate-deal-cop-diplomacy-developing-united-nations">environmental agreement</a> in Paris. While critics may rightly contend that it is inadequate, in the words of <a href="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/l/laotzu137141.html">Lao Tzu</a>, “the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.” </p>
<p>Finally, if the Nigerian president is to be believed, Boko Haram has been “<a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35173618">defeated</a>,” at least technically. If true, and that is a big “if,” it offers some inspiration for all those governments dealing with radicalism and terrorism.</p>
<h2>What of last year’s predictions?</h2>
<p>At this time last year, I offered my <a href="https://theconversation.com/around-the-world-in-2015-the-big-stories-predicted-35842">predictions</a> for 2015. </p>
<p>I suggested that the US would increase its ground force combat military presence in Iraq and Syria. That proved <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/world/middleeast/us-increases-special-operations-forces-fighting-isis-in-iraq.html">true</a>. I also predicted that the war would come to Europe and that Europe would join the war – although France and Britain have stuck to an air war so far, and not ground troops as I suggested. I predicted that American relations with Russia would worsen, which they <a href="http://www.eurasianet.org/node/76136">have</a>; and that the number of migrants and refugees fleeing to Europe would grow – as they did, with more than a <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911">million</a> arriving. I also predicted that the major powers would reach a deal with Iran. Finally, I suggested that the dollar would strengthen against other major currencies. It <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/05/business/dollars-surge-against-other-currencies-weighs-down-united-states-economy.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-5&action=click&contentCollection=Business%20Day&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article">did</a>.</p>
<p>But before I get too impressed with myself, I should note that my long shots proved to be – well, long shots. Benjamin Netanyahu is still in power and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has remained in a quagmire. North Korea is as isolated and threatening as ever. And, with the exception of Cuba, the jury is still out on improved US relations with Latin America – although the election of new right wing governments in <a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/11/mauricio-macri-elected-argentinas-next-president">Argentina</a> and <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/venezuela-opposition-win-and-dethrone-nicolas-maduro-after-17-years-of-socialist-rule-a6762946.html">Venezuela</a> suggests that may materialize.</p>
<p>And I missed so many other major stories.</p>
<p>So what of 2016? Here are five possible story lines.</p>
<h2>A muddled, fragile agreement, of sorts, is reached in Syria – one that excludes the Islamic State</h2>
<p>It is the turn of the year and still the season of goodwill, So let’s start off with an optimistic, if some would say unrealistic, prediction. An agreement will be reached. It is presaged by a growth in violence as all parties push to secure more territory before it takes effect. And it may vaguely mention power transition. But it promises that some day there will be an election, which Bashar Al-Assad will win because – sadly – he has more domestic <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/bashar-al-assad-has-more-popular-support-than-the-western-backed-opposition-poll/5495643">support</a> that his critics are willing to acknowledge. Any ceasefire is repeatedly broken. Long shot? ISIS will informally, de facto, respect the deal because it faces defeat if it continues its efforts to expand.</p>
<h2>The US will accept some Syrian refugees – but deport many more Hispanic immigrants</h2>
<p>President Obama has made it clear that he will accept more Syrians – even in what are pathetically small numbers – despite proposed <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/260782-house-defies-obama-approves-bill-halting-syrian-refugees">congressional legislation</a> that seeks to do the opposite. </p>
<p>One nice thing about being in your last year in office is that you can often ignore <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/poll-majority-americans-oppose-accepting-syrian-refugees-n465816">public opinion</a>, as the president wants to do in admitting these refugees. But administration officials from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency have made it just as clear that they intend to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/25/us/politics/us-plans-raids-in-new-year-to-fight-surge-in-border-crossings.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share">round up and deport</a> many more undocumented families, hoping to discourage a renewed surge in illegal border crossings. </p>
<p>Obama may want to go down in history as a president who was gracious in <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/obama-syrian-refugees/417222/">accepting</a> the Syrians. But his treatment of Latin Americans will certainly add to his reputation as the great deporter, having done so to nearly two million people in total and more people in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/us/more-deportations-follow-minor-crimes-data-shows.html">2014</a> than any president in American history. The only good news for Democrats is that the presidential candidates will be able to separate themselves from his policy by heavily criticizing him for his actions.</p>
<h2>The Arctic will become the new frontier</h2>
<p>The pressure to drill for oil in the Arctic may have lessened as prices have fallen. But global climate change means there is no prospect of the refreezing of huge swathes of the Arctic any time soon. So the Arctic is becoming <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-the-arctic-melts-the-us-needs-to-pay-attention-35578">an increasingly important waterway</a> and its abundant natural resources are all the more accessible. The Russians realize this. So they are militarizing their presence in the Arctic. And they are constructing a new generation of <a href="http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/russia-and-china-in-the-arctic-is-the-us-facing-an-icebreaker-gap/">super-nuclear icebreakers</a> to ensure they have access to the Arctic’s waters. </p>
<p>In contrast, the US is woefully <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-the-arctic-melts-the-us-needs-to-pay-attention-35578">underprepared</a> to engage in the region. It does have an embryonic policy. But as President Obama’s visit to the Arctic’s fringes made clear, it is primarily an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/opinion/mr-obamas-urgent-arctic-message.html">economic and environmental</a> one. Not a military, one. America, for example, has no comparable icebreakers to those being developed by the Russians.</p>
<p>The remaining member states of the Arctic Council are worried by Russia’s behavior – and <a href="http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/why-is-the-plan-near-alaska/">China is lurking</a> as it recognizes the significance of these emergent seas lanes to its global trade. It would be nice to think a grand agreement could be reached on how to reconcile every side’s interests. But <a href="https://theconversation.com/under-the-sea-russia-china-and-american-control-of-the-waterways-50442">evidence about disputes</a> stretching from the South China Sea to the Black Sea suggests that is unlikely. </p>
<p>Watch for maps of the Arctic Circle on your TV screens soon.</p>
<h2>Closer to home – Donald Trump will not be the Republican candidate</h2>
<p>There is a long history of loud populists who know how to tap into the minority of voters in democracies who resort to nativism when they feel economic insecurity and who feel free to express racist impulses. They look for a powerful leader. Broderick Crawford depicted such a persona beautifully in the movie of Robert Penn Warren’s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041113/">All the King’s Men</a>. </p>
<p>But a recent <a href="http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2311">poll</a> suggests that half of American voters say they would be embarrassed to have Donald Trump as president. It reveals that he has the highest unfavorability rating of any candidate among prospective voters, and that other candidates are closing the gap on his lead among Republicans.</p>
<p>Trump may yet win in Iowa. But Iowa’s Republicans have proved very bad at picking presidential nominees. Their last two picks were Rich Santorum and, before that, Mike Huckabee.</p>
<p>Indeed, the American system is built to withstand the kind of buffeting caused by Trump’s kind of candidacy. And as the Republican field narrows, and Americans actually begin to focus on the presidential election, many senior <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opinion/no-donald-trump-wont-win.html">analysts</a> believe that Trump’s star will wane. Indeed, despite his astonishing self-promotion and evident triumphalism, if held today, Trump would <a href="http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-would-do-better-hillary-2016-race-against-trump-national-poll-finds">lose an election </a>to either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders handily. Many Republican voters, if only because of their loathing of Hillary Clinton, want to back a winner. </p>
<p>I am not imprudent enough to suggest who the Republican candidate will be. In may be a centrist such as Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio or, as the Democrats would prefer, a more radical Republican such as Ted Cruz. But I suspect that Trump’s momentum will abruptly halt as the long primary process unfolds.</p>
<h2>But yes, Hillary will be the Democratic candidate – and will be elected president</h2>
<p>There it is. I said it. There is nothing like putting your reputation on the line in print. Despite her immense baggage and no shortage of possible trip wires between now and election day, I believe Clinton will be the first female president. America’s shifting demographics favor her, given the continued Republican missteps in alienating America’s growing minority electorate. And if elected, her foreign policy will be a little more robust and muscular than Barack Obama’s – signaling a return to forthright American leadership, rather than a <a href="http://www.iiss.org/en/publications/survival/sections/2015-1e95/survival--global-politics-and-strategy-october-november-2015-3ec2/57-5-11-reich-and-dombrowski-d455">strategy of sponsorship</a>. This will mean a greater military engagement in the Middle East; more negotiations with the Russians and the Chinese on a variety of issues; and more money spent on America’s diplomatic services, a key component of what Clinton has referred to as “<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/3/hillary-clinton-smart-show-respect-even-enemies/">smart power</a>.” She will use husband Bill as foreign emissary, generating the kind of goodwill that Barack Obama enjoyed in Europe and Africa in the early days of his presidency.</p>
<p>Then again, I left Britain in the early 1980s believing that Margaret Thatcher would only last a year or two as Britain’s prime minister. She was Britain’s longest serving prime minister of the twentieth century. So you can be forgiven for dismissing that prediction.</p>
<p>I conclude on a more joyful note. May 2016 bring us all health, prosperity and love – and the time to enjoy them all.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/52657/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Well Santa has come and gone, at least for the largest proportion of the world’s population. And, as we reach the end of the year, it is inevitably time to review recent trends and the prospects for 2016…Simon Reich, Professor in The Division of Global Affairs and The Department of Political Science, Rutgers University - NewarkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/524312015-12-16T19:29:00Z2015-12-16T19:29:00ZNo climate policy is perfect: here’s how to choose the best one<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106235/original/image-20151216-25630-7jai62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">What should we do about carbon? </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Coal image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Australian government has pledged to the global community to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-post-2020-climate-target-not-enough-to-stop-2c-warming-experts-45879">26-28% below 2005 levels</a> by 2030. The <a href="http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf">Paris Agreement</a> suggests that this and other countries’ pledges will need to be strengthened if average global temperature increases are to be kept below 2°C. </p>
<p>In 2016, likely an election year, attention must and will turn to how these pledges will be kept.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/publications/factsheet-emissions-projections-2015-16">Recent projections</a> from the Australian government indicate that we are on track to meet the 2020 target - a reduction of 5% below 2000 levels. The current government’s climate change policies are contributing to this outcome. </p>
<p>But they will need to be re-engineered to meet the 2030 target. The Labor Party is consulting on a 2030 target of <a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-pledges-45-emissions-cuts-by-2030-but-the-science-says-more-is-needed-51386">45% reductions</a> and will need to develop a policy that reflects its commitment to emissions trading and an aspiration of 50% renewable electricity.</p>
<p>Bipartisan support is essential for whatever mechanisms are adopted. Companies will not make long-term investments to reduce their emissions unless they are confident that policies are stable. To date, they have been anything but.</p>
<h2>Choosing a good climate policy</h2>
<p>The challenge for policymakers across the political spectrum is to construct a credible emissions reduction policy framework that satisfies multiple, sometimes conflicting, criteria. </p>
<p>A policy that may be ideal from a theoretical economic perspective may be too complex to secure political or community support. The criteria are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>credibility: ability to meet current and future targets</p></li>
<li><p>political viability: capacity to evolve from current policy settings and achieve bipartisan support</p></li>
<li><p>flexibility: ability to adjust for changes in targets, political and technological developments</p></li>
<li><p>adaptability: potential to move towards an economy-wide market-based scheme</p></li>
<li><p>public acceptability: ability to be understood and accepted by the community</p></li>
<li><p>low cost.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>In a Grattan Institute <a href="http://grattan.edu.au/report/post-paris-australias-climate-policy-options/">working paper</a> published this week we assess six policy alternatives that could do the job. These are cap and trade emissions trading, carbon taxation, intensity baseline emissions trading, emissions purchasing, regulation, and tradeable green certificates. None of the plausible policies fulfils all of the criteria.</p>
<h2>The who’s who of climate policy</h2>
<p>A <strong>cap and trade scheme</strong> meets many of the criteria. In a cap and trade scheme, the government releases a “capped” number of permits which carbon emitters must purchase. Demand for the permits drives the price of carbon. It is relatively easy to link a cap with an emissions reduction target and then expand in the future. Economists generally favour this approach to deliver lowest cost reductions. </p>
<p>However, it is complex to design and this creates challenges in terms of political support and public acceptance, as happened in the US in 2009 and in Australia with Kevin Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in 2008-9.</p>
<p>A <strong>carbon tax</strong> has the advantage of simplicity with a clear, explicit price on emissions, and is likely to drive low cost emissions reduction. </p>
<p>However, it can be difficult to set the tax level to meet a particular emissions target, and to establish a way of reviewing the price. And carbon taxes, like cap and trade schemes, impose costs on businesses that are passed on to consumers through higher prices. </p>
<p>The likely fatal flaw with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-tax-axed-how-it-affects-you-australia-and-our-emissions-28895">carbon tax</a> is simply its name. This was illustrated starkly in 2013 when the Labor government’s fixed price on carbon provided a winning strategy for opposition leader Tony Abbott. He successfully labelled it as a carbon tax thereby severely damaging Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s credibility.</p>
<p><strong>Intensity baseline and credit schemes</strong>, like cap and trade and carbon taxes, have the advantage of delivering low cost emissions reduction through a market mechanism but with less impact on prices. Intensity baseline and credit schemes set a limit (the “baseline”) on the carbon emissions per unit of output, such as tonnes per megawatt hour of electricity. Carbon emitters must pay for carbon produced above the baseline. </p>
<p>This type of policy was successfully applied in New South Wales from 2003 to 2012. It could be effective in the electricity sector, but is harder to extend into sectors with more uniform emissions intensity.</p>
<p>The Federal Government has successfully applied an <strong>emissions purchasing scheme</strong>, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-does-todays-direct-action-reverse-auction-work-40152">Emissions Reduction Fund</a>, to deliver cut emissions by 100 million tonnes at a cost of around A$13 per tonne. Funding from the government’s budget avoids direct price effects, but more stringent targets would require much bigger budget allocations, and this would likely become problematic.</p>
<p>Governments can <strong>directly regulate</strong> emissions reductions, an approach that the US has taken. Regulation can be effective in specific sectors such as applying emissions standards to vehicles, but becomes onerous if used as an economy-wide policy. The cost of reducing emissions through regulation is also likely to be higher than under market mechanisms.</p>
<p>Finally, <strong>tradeable green certificate</strong> schemes have been applied to the electricity sector in the UK and many US states. In Australia, the Renewable Energy Target has delivered emissions reductions in, the absence of a carbon price, at a moderate cost of around A$40 per tonne. However it doesn’t work as a broader policy.</p>
<p>The challenge to policy makers is significant and will be highly politicised. The task is to find solutions to the limitations of an individual policy, or to combine policies that collectively satisfy the criteria.</p>
<p>Our report in 2016 will contribute to this search. For example, it may be possible to build an emissions trading scheme on the core of the current government’s policies to meet the central principles of both the government and the Labor Party. There is much at stake.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/52431/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Through his superannuation fund, Tony Wood owns shares in energy and resources companies that could benefit from changes in relevant government policies. </span></em></p>Things we know: we need a bigger climate target. Thing we don’t: how to reach it.Tony Wood, Program Director, Energy, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/510512015-12-03T18:53:48Z2015-12-03T18:53:48ZSea level rise is real – which is why we need to retreat from unrealistic advice<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103991/original/image-20151202-14470-1b8hckt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In the aftermath of 2012's deadly Hurricane Sandy, New York launched a US$20 billion plan to defend the city against future storms as well as rising sea levels.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/shankbone/8139676602/in/photolist-dpgYgL-dqicHx-dqTtZX-dpgTrF-doUvuJ-dpcF32-dq4Vwn-dpgQ8a-ds3EdU-dpbZjJ-dqTRT3-dt3Kr7-dp27up-dptDEw-dq1Mgu-dq1M8J-dq1McQ-dpvrMZ-dq4VyH-dpBr3D-dqFS29-dsLUc3-dq1BH2-ffYCde-dtnD3j-dpDt8f-dtn963-dphzd9-dtnDs3-dpgWJx-dr5fQg-dtaJYK-dpcFLg-dtaK1e-drHFBA-dpcFZk-dBX8RL-e15PGF-dp2y2D-dq1LX9-dpbZF5-dBxWSe-dtmnQ8-dph611-dtmv7p-dtaVJh-dtmzFq-dtaVDs-dtaVJN-dtaK12">David Shankbone/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Coastal communities around the world are being increasingly exposed to the hazards of <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-make-sense-of-alarming-sea-level-forecasts-45655">rising sea levels</a>, with global sea levels <a href="https://theconversation.com/sea-level-is-rising-fast-and-it-seems-to-be-speeding-up-39253">found to be rising faster</a> over the past two decades than for the bulk of the 20th century.</p>
<p>But managing the impacts of rising seas for some communities is being made more difficult by the actions of governments, homeowners – and even some well-intentioned climate adaptation practitioners.</p>
<p>Coastal adaptation policies usually carry political risk. One of the main risks is when communities end up divided between those wanting a response to the growing risks of coastal flooding, and those more concerned about how their own property values or insurance premiums might be hit in the short-term by such action. For some, the biggest threat is seen to be from sea level rise adaptation policies rather than sea level rise itself.</p>
<p>Some organisations and governments have side-stepped the political risk by commissioning or preparing adaptation plans – but then not implementing them. </p>
<p>A colleague of mine describes this as the “plan and forget” approach to coastal adaptation. It’s all too common, not only here in Australia but internationally. And it can be worse than completely ignoring the risk, because local communities are given the impression that the risk is being managed, when in fact it is not.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wZXbpBEfojU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Catalyst program examines past and future sea level rise.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions’</h2>
<p>Coastal adaptation researchers and practitioners (and I’m one of them) must reconsider some of the common recommendations typically contained in coastal adaptation studies. </p>
<p>In my experience, well-intentioned but poorly considered recommendations – such as advocating for highly urbanised city centres to be relocated inland – prevent many adaptation studies being implemented.</p>
<p>Relocating buildings and other built infrastructure further away from the coast to reduce or eliminate the risk of flooding might sound like a sensible, long-term option, and indeed it is in some cases. </p>
<p>But too often, the advice given to “retreat” or relocate established, highly built-up city blocks makes little economic or practical sense. Such advice can be inconsistent with well-established engineering disaster risk reduction frameworks such as Engineers Australia’s <a href="https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/shado/Learned%20Groups/National%20Committees%20and%20Panels/Coastal%20and%20Ocean%20Engineering/climate_change_adaptation_guidelines.pdf">Climate Change Adaptation Guidelines in Coastal Management and Planning</a>.</p>
<p>Much to the chagrin of many in the coastal adaptation science community, cities and owners of major coastal facilities around the world are voting with their feet – largely rejecting coastal retreat recommendations in favour of coastal protection.</p>
<h2>Major cities choosing defence, not retreat</h2>
<p>New York is perhaps the best example of governments and individuals alike choosing protection rather than retreat.</p>
<p>In October 2012, Hurricane Sandy left behind a trail of destruction of more than <a href="http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/costliesttable.html">US$71 billion</a> in the United States. In New York alone, <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/recovery/downloads/pdf/sandy_aar_5.2.13.pdf">43 people were killed</a>.</p>
<p>In June 2013, then <a href="http://www.mikebloomberg.com/news/mayor-bloomberg-outlines-how-to-protect-nyc-against-climate-change/">Mayor Mike Bloomberg</a> said rising temperatures and sea levels were only making it harder to defend New York, warning:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We expect that by mid-century up to one-quarter of all of New York City’s land area, where 800,000 residents live today, will be in the floodplain. If we do nothing, more than 40 miles of our waterfront could see flooding on a regular basis, just during normal high tides.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yet even after acknowledging that threat, New York’s response wasn’t to retreat. Instead, the mayor launched a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/nyregion/bloomberg-outlines-20-billion-plan-to-protect-city-from-future-storms.html">US$20 billion plan</a> to protect the city with more flood walls, stronger infrastructure and renovated buildings. As that <a href="http://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/sirr/SIRR_singles_Lo_res.pdf">“Stronger, More Resilient New York”</a> plan declared: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We can fight for and rebuild what was lost, fortify the shoreline,
and develop waterfront areas for the benefit of all New Yorkers. The city cannot, and will not, retreat.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Similarly, none of the winners of <a href="http://www.rebuildbydesign.org/">Rebuild By Design</a> – an international competition to make New York and surrounding regions more resilient to coastal inundation – focused on retreat strategies. In fact, some involve intensifying urban areas that were under water during Hurricane Sandy.</p>
<p>In the worst hit areas, even when given the choice of a <a href="http://stormrecovery.ny.gov/ny-rising-buyout-and-acquisition-programs">state buy-out scheme</a> relatively <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/nyregion/new-yorks-storm-recovery-plan-gets-federal-approval.html">few New Yorkers</a> chose to <a href="http://citylimits.org/2015/10/14/sandy3-nyc-not-pulling-back-from-the-waters-edge/">leave</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1pW5MZFU0E8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">PBS Newshour looks at how New York and other world cities can better protect against rising seas and storm surges.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Although not directly related to climate change, the Japanese response to the devastating 2011 tsunami is another telling example. </p>
<p>There, some residents did choose to relocate to higher ground. However, the government did not relocate major facilities inland, including the Fukushima nuclear facility. Instead, Japan will spend US$6.8 billion to form a <a href="http://www.sciencealert.com/japan-is-building-a-400-km-sea-wall-to-protect-against-tsunamis">400-kilometre-long chain of sea walls</a>, towering up to <a href="http://phys.org/news/2015-03-japan-opts-massive-costly-sea.html">four storeys high</a> in some places.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AXhjXkd5O7U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In Melbourne, Australia, four local councils from <a href="http://abm.org.au/">the Association of Bayside Municipalities</a> worked on the science-based <a href="http://abm.org.au/adaptationproject/">Port Phillip Bay Coastal Adaptation Pathways Project</a> to systematically identify the most effective adaptation responses. That project highlighted the effectiveness of accommodating and reducing flooding through established engineering approaches.</p>
<p>For example, the project concluded that while the popular Southbank waterfront in the City of Melbourne is likely to see even more common and extreme flooding in the coming decades, “<a href="http://abm.org.au/adaptationproject/whatsb.html">retreat is not necessary</a>”.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104189/original/image-20151203-22464-97lpks.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Yarra River flows through the heart of Melbourne, in Australia, with Southbank on the left.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/rreeve/21777486105/in/photolist-zbpiUn-zkkTfL-AHhm2J-y2NkfY-ACQ5XT-zDB3Qc-zJsMiS-AEikLb-AEiqys-zX3pqR-zX3p4P-yZ6C49-zBaUrH-z64hm5-yeiQ8J-ywCVLv-yeiF7Y-yehsRj-ywCMKv-ydUEpA-xhJaGa-yeYjkC-vv5weB-wjokqG-w9BCRT-uH8BaY-uvPL59-uL5VZd-uNpDwn-tzpruH-yjvB8u-wSz1SU-wdsD1D-wakJxd-wasmFT-uWvhPE-vwApxc-vbV5ob-uqyrh1-uddvZF-tCyp9G-tX9Z9H-shETGL-rxqTr6-sodm4u-snZ4gN-rttaeP-sqfcDn-tyWF1z-rwByRL">R Reeve/Flicker</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>More practical advice is crucial for greater action</h2>
<p>Coastal adaptation studies and plans need to be based on practical, defensible and implementable recommendations.</p>
<p>That means climate adaptation practitioners need to refrain from recommending that major urbanised coastal centres be relocated further inland in coming decades, unless that really is the only viable option.</p>
<p>Instead, I think we can achieve more by concentrating more on how lower- and medium-density coastal communities can adapt to higher sea levels. This is a more challenging problem, as economic analyses can produce very different recommendations depending on which so-called “<a href="http://economicstudents.com/2013/06/global-warming-externalities-and-government-failure/">externalities</a>” are included or left out in the analysis. </p>
<p>On the same note, adaptation studies that make recommendations without considering the impacts to present-day home-owners, or how adaptation plans are financed, can also be unhelpful.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74863/original/image-20150315-7058-l65n7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Florida, USA, photographed from space – one of many highly urbanised coastal areas around the world needing to adapt to rising seas.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/84000/84737/iss041e074232_lrg.jpg">NASA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Good adaptation strategies need to acknowledge the real political risks involved with any change involving people and property. Along with making recommendations, they also need to lay out an implementation plan showing how individual and community concerns will be taken into account.</p>
<p>So far the climate models have done a good job in estimating the likely future sea levels. The same cannot be said for our adaptation responses. </p>
<p>But if you’re looking for examples of how we can be better prepared for growing sea level risks, initiatives such as the <a href="http://abm.org.au/adaptationproject/">Port Phillip Bay Coastal Adaptation Pathways Project</a> and the <a href="https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/climatechange/adaptation.html">Queensland Climate Adaptation Strategy</a> (currently under development) seem to be heading in the right direction.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51051/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Gibbs receives funding from multiple state and local government sources and private industry to provide advice and expert witness services on coastal management including climate adaptation. Mark is also a Non-Executive Director of Green Cross Australia, and an Adjunct Professor at the Griffith Centre for Coastal Management.
This article was not commissioned by any entity, and solely reflects the individual views of the author.</span></em></p>Managing the impacts of rising seas for some communities is being made more difficult by the actions of governments, homeowners – and even some well-intentioned climate adaptation experts.Mark Gibbs, Director: Knowledge to innovation, Queensland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/515192015-12-01T14:46:10Z2015-12-01T14:46:10ZWhy struggling economies have a stake in COP21<p>With 190 states taking part in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/paris-2015-climate-summit">Paris climate talks</a>, there are clearly some for whom the outcome matters more than others. There are the small states, such as Kiribati and the Marshall Islands, for which a deal to reduce global emissions and curb climate change is a <a href="http://www.euractiv.com/sections/climate-environment/small-island-states-set-example-large-polluters-ahead-cop-21-316523">matter of survival</a>. Then there are the big players, such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/too-big-to-fail-china-pledges-to-set-up-landmark-emissions-trading-scheme-48214">China</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-the-us-heads-to-climate-talks-it-seeks-a-plan-to-trust-but-verify-49420">the US</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-climate-talks-russia-will-use-its-huge-forests-as-a-bargaining-chip-49386">Russia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-2015-time-for-the-eu-to-reclaim-role-as-a-global-climate-player-49093">the EU</a>, upon which a deal will rely. </p>
<p>But there are a number of states taking part for which economic crisis at home is their overriding concern. Within the EU bloc, in countries such as Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal the on-going economic turmoil is of enormous importance.</p>
<p>These countries are all still suffering from the fallout of austerity measures imposed by the EU. Since the start of the eurozone crisis, the Greek economy has <a href="http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/gdp">shrunk by 25%</a>, the Spanish <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/spains-economic-growth-accelerates-in-fourth-quarter-1422606139">by 15%</a>, while the Italian and Portuguese economies seem <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2015/nov/13/eurozone-gdp-growth-figures-france-germany-greece-live#block-5645af08e4b0560d97993a69">unable to recover</a> and sustain positive growth levels. Meanwhile, domestic demand in these countries is not enough to accelerate economic growth. Similarly, investment is very thin on the ground, as their enfeebled institutions cannot guarantee that investors will get their money back. </p>
<h2>Green growth prospects</h2>
<p>An agreement on climate change could assist these countries with managing their economic problems and reinventing their economies as environmentally friendly ones. Massive investment in solar and wind energy for example could protect them from highly volatile coal, oil and gas prices. Technological advancements in these renewable energy sources now make this possible as new and improved materials have reduced the cost of investment and <a href="http://static.newclimateeconomy.report/TheNewClimateEconomyReport.pdf">improved the performance of wind and solar energy</a>. What is more, such investment would lead to new jobs and industries and enable some, especially Greece and Spain, to control <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/20/spains-improving-economy-is-not-reaching-everyone">their high unemployment rates</a>. </p>
<p>The sins of the past do not leave much room for optimism on this front, however. It seems that the institutions in these four countries, weakened by deregulation, corruption and judicial bias, lack the ability to implement a series of environmental measures needed to combat climate change effectively. Data on environmental violations in these countries support this view. </p>
<p>Over the last year alone, Italy was <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/02/us-italy-environment-idUSKCN0JG1AJ20141202#ZkIWdXJ1q9DwilZF.97">fined a record €40m</a> for failing to properly manage the dumping of illegal waste; Greece was <a href="http://www.ekathimerini.com/202545/article/ekathimerini/news/greece-slapped-with-new-eu-fine-for-lax-waste-management">charged €10m</a> for lax waste management; Spain was dragged to the EU Court of Justice <a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5354_en.htm">for the same reason</a>; while Portugal <a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-589_en.htm">has been accused</a> of inadequate wastewater treatment. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=307&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=307&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103882/original/image-20151201-21714-1yhqiwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=307&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Providing energy and growth: solar panels in northern Spain.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/123502522@N02/13898686786/in/photolist-nbbpmN-4buTMd-4mT12h-4dUWPg-75oZ7T-75oW7K-75p22n-5eWz72-75sT15-75oYPF-75sTaq-aaHv8A-4mNWdk-75oUxB-75sMKY-75sU7f-75p1Pg-75oZZk-75sTBE-75p1vK-75sTiA-75oZRp-75p2ka-75p2et-75sTT3-75sUth-zkrK">James Moran</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Not just the usual suspects</h2>
<p>But it’s not just the economically weak countries who are struggling to enforce the necessary measures to combat climate change. The same might hold true for the European Commission and other EU member states, which are better placed to enforce climate change legislation than Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain. Weak economic growth across the eurozone might force countries with fragile GDP rates, such as the Netherlands, France, Belgium and Finland to seek less ambitious targets too.</p>
<p>Questions have also <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-2015-time-for-the-eu-to-reclaim-role-as-a-global-climate-player-49093">been asked</a> about the commitment of the EU as a whole to tackling climate change. The European Commission’s emphasis on growth under Jean-Claude Juncker’s leadership and the merging of the climate change department with that of energy under a new vice-president for Energy Union indicate that climate change <a href="http://environmentaleurope.ideasoneurope.eu/2015/04/16/existential-crisis-european-union-austerity-paris-2015/">might not be a priority</a>.</p>
<p>If we combine the EU’s economic problems with other equally important matters, such as the continuing <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/refugee-crisis">refugee crisis</a> and recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/paris-attacks-2015">terrorist attacks</a>, many EU member states will be preoccupied at this climate conference. The bloc’s ability to promote a transition towards low-carbon economies might therefore be limited. </p>
<p>This contradicts the EU’s ambitious funding program, <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020">Horizon 2020</a>, which has the goal of transforming the economy through responsible research and innovation. It also casts doubt on the prevalent narrative in the EU which focuses on austerity measures as the catalyst for future growth. </p>
<p>Not only has austerity stifled growth, but it has also prevented the EU from effectively managing the many issues it currently faces and assuming its role as leader in the international political arena. A stronger focus on the goals of COP21 would not only have a wider benefit, but sustainable investment could also help kickstart Europe’s economies too.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51519/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kostas Iatridis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>COP21 is an opportunity for countries like Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal to reinvent their economies along environmentally friendly and sustainable lines.Kostas Iatridis, Lecturer in Business and Society , University of BathLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/491552015-11-25T19:05:35Z2015-11-25T19:05:35ZIndonesia: fires threaten to send even modest climate ambitions up in smoke<p>At the Paris climate negotiations, Indonesia will bring to the table a target of an unconditional 29% emissions reduction by 2030, increasing to 41% on condition of international assistance. </p>
<p>Indonesia’s emission reduction plan (or <a href="http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/INDC/Published%20Documents/Indonesia/1/INDC_REPUBLIC%20OF%20INDONESIA.pdf">Intended Nationally Determined Contribution</a>) is therefore slightly higher than its 2009 commitment to reduce emissions by 26% by 2020. </p>
<p>There are three problems with Indonesia’s INDC. The target is not ambitious; the plan is incoherent; and with the recent massive forest fires in Indonesia that have yet to be accounted for in the INDC it does not accurately reflect emissions for Indonesia. </p>
<p>Such a problematic INDC would affect the global efforts to adequately tackle climate change, since Indonesia is one of the biggest carbon emitters in the world. The forest fires have pushed the country into the <a href="http://mashable.com/2015/10/29/indonesia-peat-fires-largest-emitter/#ZwKx5fJKYEqm">top ranks of global greenhouse gas emitters</a>. </p>
<h2>Unambitious target</h2>
<p>Each countries’ INDCs will determine whether the world can achieve a global target to reduce carbon emissions that can slow down global warming, limiting it to no more than 2°C relative to the pre-industrial era.</p>
<p>Is Indonesia’s target ambitious enough so that when compared with other countries’ INDCs it can achieve this global target? Not really. </p>
<p>For Indonesia to meaningfully contribute to the global target, Indonesia’s emissions should be stable or decrease even when the nation’s economy grows. The latest assessment from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggests this way of decoupling GDP growth from emissions growth to be ideal. However, Indonesia may find that difficult to do given that its economies depend on high emission sectors such as agriculture, forestry and energy. </p>
<p>At the moment, Indonesia does aim to decouple its GDP growth and emission rate increase, but only through relative decoupling, through which emissions rate increase is expected to be lower than GDP growth. </p>
<p>In relation to the global target as informed by climate science, the 29% emissions reductions target is not ambitious enough. Furthermore, with the depth of Indonesia’s problems, especially with the recent forest fires, Indonesia’s target should be higher.</p>
<h2>Incoherent plan</h2>
<p>Indonesia’s climate plan is not coherent. There are no proper relations between different actions, sectors and parts of planning process such as between the allocated budget and mitigation actions. </p>
<p>The incoherence is largely due to a problematic process in producing the INDC. </p>
<p>The 29% target was first produced by the Indonesia Development and Planning Board (Bappenas) using scientifically sound calculations. However, Bappenas was not participative in their process. They involved only a very limited circle of agencies and did not consult with regional governments, the private sector and NGOs. Transparency was lacking in the process and modelling. </p>
<p>The advisory board for Indonesia’s ministry of environment and forestry who prepared the country’s INDC used the result of these calculations to produce the INDC document. The advisory board’s process was more participative. They included more stakeholders to take part in their climate plan.</p>
<p>However, they took the number that Bappenas produced - 29% emissions reductions - from its modelling, and stripped the relations, assumptions and data that Bappenas used to come to that number. As a result, the INDC document entails rich inputs but these are not always connected and even contradict each other. </p>
<h2>Forest fires</h2>
<p>With these problems, Indonesia’s INDC should be revised. With the recent massive forest fires in Indonesia, the INDC should be more honest and include realistic simulations of peat-land management.</p>
<p>Deforestation and land use activities are Indonesia’s largest source of carbon emissions. Indonesia is the top exporter of palm oil. To expand plantations of oil palms, farmers often use the slash-and-burn techniques to open new plantations. With this year’s El Niño, with temperatures rising above the 1997 levels, the fires were some of the worst of recent times. At one point daily emissions in Indonesia surpassed emissions from the entire US economy as a result of the fires.</p>
<p>The fires will become a critical pretext for the Paris negotiations. They may increase the level of ambition of countries to do more. The issue of forest fires may also spur other countries to help more because the scale of the impact was enormous both for Indonesia and the international community.</p>
<h2>Indonesia’s position in the negotiations</h2>
<p>At the moment Indonesia seems yet to be prepared for the Paris 2015 negotiations. We have yet to see a specific agenda that Indonesia would like to bring to the table.</p>
<p>This is partly due to the recent organisational change after president Joko Widodo took office last year.</p>
<p>Under former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, the focal point for climate change negotiations was the National Council for Climate Change (DNPI). This council often prepared working groups to discuss different negotiation themes, such as financing, transfer of technology, adaptation, and others, ahead of the conference. </p>
<p>Joko Widodo merged the council into the Ministry of Environment and Forestry under a new directorate that oversees climate change. This ministry established the aforementioned Advisory Board. </p>
<p>With the new structure, the new directorate and advisory board did not have enough time to organise working groups that are able to undertake proper preparations. As a result, just days before the negotiation, we have yet to have a so-called Indonesia position for various issues on climate change action.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49155/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sonny Mumbunan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Indonesia’s problematic climate plan will make it difficult for the country to achieve its target to reduce emissions.Sonny Mumbunan, Economist and research scientist at the Research Centre for Climate Change, Universitas IndonesiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/512102015-11-25T11:25:01Z2015-11-25T11:25:01ZExplainer: what is solar thermal electricity?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102997/original/image-20151124-18264-36vkb9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Desert troughs.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/69471202@N07/6317443431/in/photolist-aCisif-qfpeL1-aCfxQt-aCigaq-aCfzGK-aCirFo-aCfMDT-q1fQh8-qhvntB-qhFeU2-aCidjo-aCijvC-aCijYC-aCfMRx-aCim5j-aCicP9-aCfxcz-aCiczw-aCfH5k-aCihfh-aCiehm-aCimXQ-aCiuiJ-aCitn7-e4Ssox-aCfACV-aCfN66-aCicf9-aCfKPK-aCieRd-aCfw8e-aCfyF2-aCfLZp-aCigXY-aCifk9-aCitAQ-aCidZW-aCfKBB-aCfL5R-aCfLsp-aCfNUn-aCfExp-aCfFCK-aCibHW-aCfzfR-aCfA4X-aCfGtK-dNMH2j-7WbYh7-cRQro3">Green Prophet</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A large solar thermal electricity plant <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34883224">will soon begin operating</a> near Ouarzazate, Morocco, which will reportedly bring energy to a million people when fully complete. But what is solar thermal electricity and how does it differ from the method used to generate power from the solar panels you might be more familiar with?</p>
<p>The Moroccan plant uses large mirrors in the form of parabolic troughs (as in the picture above) to concentrate sunlight onto a fluid flowing through a pipe at the focal point of the trough – where all the light is reflected; a parabola is used because this shape focuses the incoming beam to a single line. </p>
<p>The heat collected from this process generates steam, which can be used in a conventional steam turbine system to make electricity. In contrast to the <a href="http://siser.eps.hw.ac.uk/research/solar-thermal/low-solar-thermal-energy">low-temperature solar thermal systems</a> that are used for air or water heating in domestic or commercial buildings, these solar thermal electricity plants operate at high temperatures, requiring both concentrated sunlight and a large collection area, making the Moroccan desert an ideal location.</p>
<p>This is an alternative approach to the <a href="http://www.nrel.gov/learning/re_photovoltaics.html">more widely used “photovoltaic”</a> technology for producing electricity from sunlight. In a photovoltaic system, the sunlight is absorbed in the photovoltaic device (commonly called a solar cell) and energy is passed to electrons in the material, converting the solar energy directly into electricity. Sometimes, solar thermal electricity and photovoltaics are portrayed as competing technologies and, while this may be true when deciding on the way forward for a specific site, in general they are complementary, using solar energy as extensively as possible. </p>
<h2>Ability to store energy</h2>
<p>Currently, the main advantage of a solar thermal electricity system is the ability to store heat which can be used later to generate electricity. This allows the system, at least in part, to disconnect electricity generation from solar energy collection for periods in time. This addresses one of the most challenging aspects of the widespread use of solar energy: variability due to changing weather conditions and, of course, the period of darkness in each 24-hour period when no solar energy is available. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103047/original/image-20151124-18230-1773oi2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The usual PV sort.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/big-stew/20072316232/in/photolist-wzHSiN-5osbAu-abmSBd-aFf55C-abj4NX-aFbgUZ-fLPte3-54SkCz-9LkEjb-cbaitb-8N26oV-7dPMk8-77NYU3-gXXFsU-phCnoG-dH1sn6-6wpzBL-dH6Lz1-9iYu4L-7iVBZh-eFJdWh-7H911c-h7ELtU-8KqkEq-8KngZD-6Htihq-qFGqU3-3eczkW-76utcD-a1S32L-evi2Wf-5Dvpjw-aCYkQJ-fjMegc-rdudfN-7yWYyn-aoktwC-7HcUry-azjNdG-7EMViv-61Aj7V-bL32Nk-pfCqc3-8KqkF9-7iRKwz-ysPFAs-54WqEN-6nYpqN-54WtGb-av4SSL">Stewart Donohoe</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For efficient storage, the system generally uses a molten salt with a high melting temperature, typically around 500-600°C, which is heated by the solar energy. Most recent plant designs have integrated storage, including the plant in Morocco, which reportedly can store enough heat for <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/26/morocco-poised-to-become-a-solar-superpower-with-launch-of-desert-mega-project">three hours of generation</a> at the rated power level each evening. As the plant increases in size from this first phase, more storage will be possible. In comparison, for a photovoltaic system to generate outside sunlight hours, electricity would need to be stored in a battery or alternate system, and this is generally less efficient.</p>
<h2>Some disadvantages</h2>
<p>There are disadvantages to the solar thermal electricity system. First, it requires direct sunlight, since it is not possible to concentrate the diffuse light that is scattered by the atmosphere. This means these systems are restricted to locations where there is a high proportion of clear days, such as Morocco. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103045/original/image-20151124-18230-1r62pl7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">You can’t put a solar thermal plant just anywhere.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/toffiundkamera/8576258417/in/photolist-e4RyQr-pV6GW4-yxK2ZS-dJtd2e-dNc4WK-zNpNDY-xTj1V1-9eQHbE-4ndAW2-gdgTQN-p7CvPz-bBvUhA-mA8aG-6bjzJx-8aTP8b-7umKGB-8ptP2e-8ptSBV-5QwQbj-pokYSP-5QwQdw-96q1sd-5Qsxkg-5zovh8-qhhNp7-bWR2vU-5zotd2-yR7H3k-a2QeiG-mWwSyz-5zsLBN-9eBvmu-dgjscD-qWKuk3-7ecaMV-8px5pU-5zpXSr-5zpY9P-5QsBmZ-5QwPyJ-7s7AUj-8vzSC6-6MnwkD-5QsBfp-j7BAh-vC3X8-vC3Yd-5QwLgN-5QwPvs-suYd9o">Christopher L.</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In contrast, most photovoltaic systems can utilise all sunlight, so are much better suited to a wider range of climates – although concentrating photovoltaic systems, which use lenses or mirrors to focus sunlight onto high efficiency solar cells, also require direct sunlight. </p>
<p>Second, solar thermal systems need to operate at high temperatures, both for steam generation and to ensure high thermal efficiency. This means that the system needs to be physically large to collect all the solar energy required. The photovoltaic system, meanwhile, can be operated efficiently in a range of sizes, from very small (to fit on a domestic roof) to vast (plants rated in the hundreds of megawatts). </p>
<p>Third, solar thermal electricity systems are currently more expensive than photovoltaic systems of a similar size. This is partly due to there being a larger market for photovoltaic systems – <a href="http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/ihs--272-gw-of-solar-installs-from-2016---2019_100021902/#axzz3sQBHk9so">around 180GW of photovoltaics</a> are installed worldwide compared to 5GW of solar thermal electricity (a typical fossil-fuelled power station is around 1GW in size). However, costs can be expected to fall as experience and the size of the market grow.</p>
<p>There are potential challenges, too: ensuring the mirrors accurately track the sun, keeping them clean, and the need for water (for cleaning and in the generation system). But all these aspects are being addressed in the evolution of system designs.</p>
<p>Solar thermal electricity systems are an exciting technology for harnessing solar energy, to sit alongside the low temperature solar thermal systems for heating and the photovoltaic systems for electricity generation in a wide range of applications. Which one of these is the best choice depends on what you want to do with the energy and where the system is going to be located – ultimately, we will need all of them to substantially contribute to the world’s energy supply.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51210/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicola Pearsall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A large solar thermal plant in Morocco will provide energy for 1m people – here’s how it will work.Nicola Pearsall, Professor of Renewable Energy, Northumbria University, NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/509372015-11-24T11:13:22Z2015-11-24T11:13:22ZCarbon capture is essential if coal power is replaced by gas instead of renewables<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102820/original/image-20151123-18271-1u27fjo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C97%2C1920%2C1215&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Gas is the solution to some but not all our problems.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://pixabay.com/en/flame-gas-gas-flame-blue-hot-ring-580342/">magnascan</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For those watching the UK energy sector, barely a week has gone by of late without some kind of drama. A third of the <a href="https://sandbag.org.uk/blog/2015/nov/5/coal-too-old-be-useful/">nation’s coal power stations breaking down</a>, subsidies cut for renewables but available for <a href="https://next.ft.com/content/0f664c78-821b-11e5-8095-ed1a37d1e096">diesel generators</a>, and a <a href="http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2986190/leaked_letter_rudd_admits_25_green_energy_undershoot_misled_parliament.html">leaked letter</a> suggesting renewable targets would be missed. This has led to much criticism at home and <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/22/al-gore-puzzled-by-ukcuts-to-renewable-energy-support">abroad</a>.</p>
<p>No wonder the new Secretary for Energy and Climate Change, Amber Rudd, says she’d like energy policy to be more “boring”. Her <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/amber-rudds-speech-on-a-new-direction-for-uk-energy-policy">recent statement</a> was an opportunity for Amber Rudd to re-establish her credibility. So has the “reset” worked?</p>
<p>Few will disagree with the announcement of a fixed end to coal-fired power generation in 2025. Coal produces the largest proportion (<a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/power-sector-scenarios-for-the-fifth-carbon-budget/">32%</a>) of our electricity supply in 2014, and the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electricity-chapter-5-digest-of-united-kingdom-energy-statistics-dukes">highest levels of greenhouse gas emissions</a>. All plants are over 35 years old, and most were <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electricity-chapter-5-digest-of-united-kingdom-energy-statistics-dukes">slated for retirement by 2025</a>, with policies such as the carbon price and the need to meet the EU Industrial Emissions Directive designed to persuade power generators to switch away from coal. But progress has been slow, and <a href="http://assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/wwf_coal_report_imperial_college_final.pdf">research by Imperial College</a> has even suggested the economics favour keeping at least some coal power running into the 2030s.</p>
<p>So it seems that fixing the judgement day for coal power in the UK is not the bold policy move many are claiming – where other policies are failing, it’s simply another means to achieve the same end. The pressing question is how to replace the power these plants generated. Given the UK’s emission reduction targets, you’d imagine renewables would figure strongly. Instead, the government is suggesting gas power will fill the gap.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102821/original/image-20151123-18271-jrew1n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Coal-fired power stations such as this at Cottam, Nottinghamshire, are on their way out.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3504004">Richard Croft</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How to meet the cost of climate targets</h2>
<p>The Committee on Climate Change (CCC), an independent body established to advise the government, recommends that the emissions intensity of power generation should by 2030 be <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/power-sector-scenarios-for-the-fifth-carbon-budget/">under 100 grammes CO₂ per kWh</a> and much lower still by 2050 in order for a cost-effective pathway for meeting legally binding emissions targets.</p>
<p>Gas produces less than half the greenhouse gas emissions of coal, but at <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/power-sector-scenarios-for-the-fifth-carbon-budget/">365 grammes CO₂ per kWh</a> this is much higher than the target intensity level. For gas to remain in the power generation mix, at least 73% of power generation would need to be virtually zero carbon by 2030. Yet gas-fired power already meets about 30% of the UK’s electricity needs – so this means the country needs to reduce, not increase, the number of gas-fired power stations (specifically, those without carbon capture installed). The CCC estimates that investing in low-carbon technologies rather than gas-fired power throughout the 2020s would <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/power-sector-scenarios-for-the-fifth-carbon-budget/">reduce UK CO₂ emissions by 55m tonnes</a>.</p>
<p>The secretary of state gives no indication as to whether new gas plants will have to be fitted with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Using CCS is widely acknowledged to be the most cost effective way of meeting climate targets, <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/power-sector-scenarios-for-the-fifth-carbon-budget/">estimated to halve the cost</a> of meeting the UK’s 2050 targets. So it’s surprising that CCS barely gets a mention. But in any case, CCS cannot completely remove emissions: capture rates are <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Ricardo-AEA-lifecycle-emissions-low-carbon-technologies-April-2013.pdf">estimated to be 85-90%</a>, and overall reductions (over the whole lifecycle) would be lower. </p>
<p>Given that there is no CCS in commercial operation in the UK yet, with the only planned plant <a href="http://www.power-technology.com/projects/peterhead-carbon-capture-and-storage-ccs-project-scotland/">not expected to be operational before 2020</a>, the government needs to enable rapid acceleration of CCS development – particularly if it is to emphasise gas power.</p>
<h2>It’s not just about electricity</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/POST-PN-0513?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PN513">UK imported 45% of its gas needs in 2014</a> and even with the most optimistic shale gas production figures this will continue for the forseeable future. Biogas will contribute at most <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/POST-PN-0513?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PN513">10% of current demand by 2025</a>.</p>
<p>The extra gas would presumably be liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipped from abroad. Transportation and processing means that LNG has higher overall emissions compared with conventional gas in the range of an additional <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/237330/MacKay_Stone_shale_study_report_09092013.pdf">12-36% greenhouse gas emissions</a>. Increasing use of LNG will increase the overall emissions from using gas energy. It’s estimated that the process of fracking for shale gas would also generate <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/237330/MacKay_Stone_shale_study_report_09092013.pdf">up to 25% higher emissions</a>.</p>
<p>But there are greater problems in decarbonising other energy use sectors. Heating constitutes <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/190149/16_04-DECC-The_Future_of_Heating_Accessible-10.pdf">more than 40% of UK energy use</a>, with transport accounting for another 40%. It is much more difficult to tackle emissions in these sectors. Mass deployment of electric vehicles is a long way off, and for heating there is no competition on performance or cost for a gas boiler. There’s also enormous infrastructure already in place to <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513003625">deliver gas to 84% of homes</a>: were the UK to try and electrify its heating this would require many times more power generation capacity just to meet peak winter demand, that would then lie redundant for the warmer months making it a costly investment. </p>
<p>So the government’s announcement may spell the end of coal-fired power, but says nothing about how to tackle the 80% of the UK’s energy use expected to be more costly and difficult to decarbonise than electricity generation. From Rudd’s statement it seems as if the pressure is off in decarbonising electricity generation. Where does that leave the UK in meeting its legally-binding emissions targets? Perhaps the government should start saving to meet the EU fines and legal costs it will inevitably face when it misses them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/50937/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Louise Carter receives funding for her PhD from the Economic and Social Research Council. </span></em></p>UK’s decision to close coal power plants is really a statement of the obvious, and does nothing to answer the problem of what to do afterwards.Claire Copeland, DPhil Researcher, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.