Associated Press
NEW YORK — Former President Bill Clinton said Tuesday that the success of the alternative energy movement is hampered by a lack of financing. His comments came as world leaders attending his annual philanthropic conference expressed fears about rising seas.
The ex-president's three-day Clinton Global Initiative for VIPs with deep pockets began Tuesday with a frank discussion about addressing global climate challenges, co-hosted by Mexican President Felipe Calderon and South African President Jacob Zuma.
There was a sense of frustration among the world leaders over the failure to create a legally binding world agreement on carbon emissions.
"We have seen much less progress than we hoped for," said Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg.
Pointing to Germany's successful creation of solar energy jobs as a model for other nations to emulate, Clinton said the main issue with green energy is a lack of proper funding.
"This has to work economically," he said. "You have to come up with the money on the front end."
Clinton's talk of renewable energy financing comes as Republicans are criticizing the Obama administration for awarding billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies for such projects, including a $528 million loan to a now-bankrupt California solar panel maker.
Fremont, Calif.-based Solyndra filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection earlier this month and laid off its 1,100 employees. It was the first renewable energy company to receive a loan guarantee under a stimulus law program to encourage green energy and was frequently touted by the Obama administration as a model.
Rising seas are a matter of life and death for small island nations, Zuma said.
"Not theoretical, not in the future, now," he said. "And they can't understand why we're failing to realize that."
Noting that the Kyoto Protocol on climate change is set to expire next year, Calderon said progress must be made toward establishing new rules at the United Nations convention on climate change in Durban, South Africa, in November.
Calderon said he is concerned that the world's economic problems are overshadowing the need for action on climate change.
"Last year we had the worst rains ever in Mexico, and this year we are living with the worst drought ever in Mexico," he said. "I know that the world has a lot of troubles, but we are still facing the most challenging problem for human kind in the future, and that is climate change."
Sheikh Hasina, prime minister of Bangladesh, said rising seas would submerge one-fifth of her country, displacing more than 30 million people. Clinton said the next countries most likely to be affected by climate change are places that are inland and hot — such as Mali, a landlocked nation in western Africa.
"A few years ago, after the south Asian tsunami, I spent a lot of time in the Maldives," Clinton said. "I think it's quite possible that the Maldives won't be here in 30 or 40 years."
Clinton said Caribbean nations are microcosms of the problems associated with combating climate change. Every Caribbean nation should be energy-independent, he said, by generating solar, wind and geothermal energy.
"But only Trinidad has natural gas," Clinton said. "Everybody else imports heavy oil to burn old-fashioned generators at high cost."
Other leaders who participated in Tuesday's panel included European Commission President Jose Barroso, Slovenian President Danilo Turk, Tillman Thomas, the prime minister of Grenada, and Cisse Mariam Kaidama Sidibe, the prime minister of Mali.
Last year's GCI conference generated nearly 300 new commitments valued at $6 billion to tackle major global issues from poverty and disease to climate change.
This year, the conference is happening during an especially rancorous debate in Washington over government spending. Earlier this month, President Barack Obama scrubbed a clean-air regulation that aimed to reduce health-threatening smog, yielding to bitterly protesting businesses and congressional Republicans who complained the rule would kill jobs in America's ailing economy.
"We've got to somehow involve the imagination of ordinary people," Clinton said. "They have to understand that this is not a burden, it's an opportunity."
Other panels on the first day of the conference touched on subjects ranging from women and jobs in technology fields to the challenges and opportunities facing the world's increasingly urbanized population living in a growing number of cities.
In a discussion on disaster preparedness, speakers emphasized the needs for preventative action such as improved building standards to mitigate the impact of hurricanes and earthquakes. They also spoke about how to best help when a disaster does occur, in terms of the public outpouring of donations and goodwill that usually follows.
It's important for people to realize what can really help, like cash donations, and what isn't as useful, like medications that end up not being usable or clothes that victims of disasters don't want or can't use, said Valerie Amos, Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator for the United Nations. When well-meaning people send things that aren't usable, aid agencies can waste precious time and money disposing of them.
"Let's really check what's needed and make sure we're helping rather than being part of the problem," she said.
___
Associated Press writer Deepti Hajela contributed to this report.
—Copyright 2011 Associated Press
Thursday, 22 September 2011
Carbon capture progress has lost momentum, says climate change agency
Meeting of senior ministers in Beijing hears that CCS is being left behind due to financial crisis and weakening political will
Jonathan Watts
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 22 September 2011 15.40 BST
The financial crisis and fading government support for climate action have seriously eroded global plans to capture and store carbon, the International Energy Agency warned on Thursday.
Sequestration – the disposal of greenhouse gases underground rather than into the atmosphere – was supposed to account for one-fifth of the world's emissions reductions under the agency's roadmap for keeping global temperature rise within two degrees celsius by the end of the century.
But delegates including the US energy secretary Steven Chu heard at a meeting, held in Beijing, that the global temperature is on course to rise by 3.5 degrees, due to poor progress on both carbon capture and storage, the acceptance of a carbon price and other carbon-cutting efforts.
IAE deputy executive director Richard Jones told the meeting, hosted by the Washington-based Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, that this would wreck havoc on human well-being. He added that time was running out to avoid this scenario because of slow progress on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).
"Every year that passes makes it more difficult," Jones said. "With current policies, CCS will have a hard time [being] deployed ... There is less of a global push for climate action, and tighter government finances."
According to the agency's figures, global energy demand has more than doubled in the past 40 years and even with the most favourable assumptions will grow another 35% by 2035, which will take carbon dioxide emissions above 35 gigatonnes per year.
Projects to capture and bury a major chunk of that are behind schedule and finding it harder to secure funds.
To reach the two degree goal, the agency estimates that there will have to be 1,500 CCS large-scale projects around the world by 2035. Until now, however, only 74 large scale projects have been announced and the trend is in the wrong direction.
"We're seeing a decline in new projects due to a softening global economy and an uncertain carbon price," said Brad Page, the head of the Australia-based Global CCS Institute.
Outside Europe, few countries have set a price for carbon. Australia's government is now trying to do just that, and is expected to set a level of about $23 per tonne of carbon.
This alone will not be enough. US energy secretary Steven Chu told the meeting that the price of carbon would have to be $80 a tonne for CCS to be economically viable with current technology.
But, he continued, the US has yet to even set a price, which makes it difficult for companies to invest and financial institutions to make loans to CCS projects.
"The US needs a price on carbon sooner rather than later," said Chu. "This is something where we are losing time. It is very important that we get moving."
The US has 24 CCS projects – more than any other country – but they are mostly for enhanced oil extraction, which is more economical but has a relatively limited capacity for carbon sequestration.
Delegates said other forms of CCS need more state support to get going, but cash-strapped governments are backing away from financial commitments. Industry representatives said the sector was plagued by delays, doubts and weak policy support.
"Too many projects have fallen by the wayside," said Jeff Chapman, chief executive officer of the CCS Association of the UK. The UK has set aside £1bn for a demo contract, but has yet to award it to the single remaining project still in the running to win a government competition for the funding. The coalition has also committed to building three more CCS plants, one of which will be a gas power station, but has not said where the funding will come from.
China has soared through the global economic crisis with double-digit economic growth, but it is cautious about taking the lead with expensive CCS technology. Adoption by the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter is crucial as China is expected to account for one-third of the global growth in emissions over the next 25 years.
According to the International Energy Agency's plan to keep carbon dioxide in the atmosphere under 445 parts per million, China should have 270 major CCS projects by 2035. So far it has six at the planning stage. Xie Zhenhua, vice chairman of the powerful National Development and Reform Commission said carbon capture and storage was a "last resort" for China.
With little political and financial capital behind CCS, however, its prospects are diminishing. Delegates said commodities firms – who are profiting from the rise in energy prices – should step in.
"Time has been lost as a result of the financial crisis. No one can deny that," said Martin Ferguson, who called on mining companies to make a greater financial contribution to the development of CCS technology. "Coal companies must look at themselves as beneficiaries of the rise in the price of coal."
Jonathan Watts
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 22 September 2011 15.40 BST
The financial crisis and fading government support for climate action have seriously eroded global plans to capture and store carbon, the International Energy Agency warned on Thursday.
Sequestration – the disposal of greenhouse gases underground rather than into the atmosphere – was supposed to account for one-fifth of the world's emissions reductions under the agency's roadmap for keeping global temperature rise within two degrees celsius by the end of the century.
But delegates including the US energy secretary Steven Chu heard at a meeting, held in Beijing, that the global temperature is on course to rise by 3.5 degrees, due to poor progress on both carbon capture and storage, the acceptance of a carbon price and other carbon-cutting efforts.
IAE deputy executive director Richard Jones told the meeting, hosted by the Washington-based Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, that this would wreck havoc on human well-being. He added that time was running out to avoid this scenario because of slow progress on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).
"Every year that passes makes it more difficult," Jones said. "With current policies, CCS will have a hard time [being] deployed ... There is less of a global push for climate action, and tighter government finances."
According to the agency's figures, global energy demand has more than doubled in the past 40 years and even with the most favourable assumptions will grow another 35% by 2035, which will take carbon dioxide emissions above 35 gigatonnes per year.
Projects to capture and bury a major chunk of that are behind schedule and finding it harder to secure funds.
To reach the two degree goal, the agency estimates that there will have to be 1,500 CCS large-scale projects around the world by 2035. Until now, however, only 74 large scale projects have been announced and the trend is in the wrong direction.
"We're seeing a decline in new projects due to a softening global economy and an uncertain carbon price," said Brad Page, the head of the Australia-based Global CCS Institute.
Outside Europe, few countries have set a price for carbon. Australia's government is now trying to do just that, and is expected to set a level of about $23 per tonne of carbon.
This alone will not be enough. US energy secretary Steven Chu told the meeting that the price of carbon would have to be $80 a tonne for CCS to be economically viable with current technology.
But, he continued, the US has yet to even set a price, which makes it difficult for companies to invest and financial institutions to make loans to CCS projects.
"The US needs a price on carbon sooner rather than later," said Chu. "This is something where we are losing time. It is very important that we get moving."
The US has 24 CCS projects – more than any other country – but they are mostly for enhanced oil extraction, which is more economical but has a relatively limited capacity for carbon sequestration.
Delegates said other forms of CCS need more state support to get going, but cash-strapped governments are backing away from financial commitments. Industry representatives said the sector was plagued by delays, doubts and weak policy support.
"Too many projects have fallen by the wayside," said Jeff Chapman, chief executive officer of the CCS Association of the UK. The UK has set aside £1bn for a demo contract, but has yet to award it to the single remaining project still in the running to win a government competition for the funding. The coalition has also committed to building three more CCS plants, one of which will be a gas power station, but has not said where the funding will come from.
China has soared through the global economic crisis with double-digit economic growth, but it is cautious about taking the lead with expensive CCS technology. Adoption by the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter is crucial as China is expected to account for one-third of the global growth in emissions over the next 25 years.
According to the International Energy Agency's plan to keep carbon dioxide in the atmosphere under 445 parts per million, China should have 270 major CCS projects by 2035. So far it has six at the planning stage. Xie Zhenhua, vice chairman of the powerful National Development and Reform Commission said carbon capture and storage was a "last resort" for China.
With little political and financial capital behind CCS, however, its prospects are diminishing. Delegates said commodities firms – who are profiting from the rise in energy prices – should step in.
"Time has been lost as a result of the financial crisis. No one can deny that," said Martin Ferguson, who called on mining companies to make a greater financial contribution to the development of CCS technology. "Coal companies must look at themselves as beneficiaries of the rise in the price of coal."
Vast reserves of shale gas revealed in UK
Huge natural gas field in north-west England revealed, but environmentalists alarmed at controversial fracking method
• Interactive: How shale gas works
• Shale gas fracking – Q&A
Terry Macalister
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 21 September 2011 21.35 BST
The huge scale of a natural gas field discovered under the north-west of England has been revealed, potentially revolutionising the UK's energy outlook and creating thousands of jobs, but environmental groups are alarmed at the controversial method by which the gas is extracted.
Preliminary wells drilled around Blackpool have uncovered 200 trillion cubic feet of gas – equal to the kind of recoverable reserves of big energy exporting countries such as Venezuela, according to Cuadrilla Resources, a small energy company which has the former BP boss Lord Browne on its board. It said up to 800 more wells might be drilled in the region, creating 5,600 jobs and promising a repeat of the "shale gas revolution" that swept the US, sending local energy prices spinning downwards.
Even if only a relatively small fraction of gas could be exploited, it could trigger a rush of drilling in other parts of the UK at a time when Britain is running out of North Sea reserves.
But Cuadrilla's extravagant claims have alarmed environmentalists and unnerved supporters of wind power. Green groups are opposed to the hydraulic fracturing – "fracking" – process by which the gas is unlocked from shale rock, pointing out it remains banned in parts of the US and France over fears that water aquifers could be contaminated.
The process involves drilling a well then pumping in millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals under high pressure. The pressure fractures underground shale deposits and opens fissures that enable natural gas to flow more freely out of the well. For each frack, 80-300 tonnes of chemicals may be used, critics claim.
The natural gas industry does not have to disclose the chemicals used, but scientists have identified volatile organic compounds such as toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and benzene, the latter of which is a strong carcinogen.
A 2010 US documentary film, Gasland, showed homeowners setting fire to the water coming out of their taps, such was the volume of methane contained in the water. The flames were said to be the result of nearby fracking operations contaminating the water supply, but the oil industry has denied this.
Mark Miller, chief executive of Cuadrilla, said he was enormously encouraged by the potential of the Lancashire region, which appeared to have the same potential as the best shale gas producing areas in Texas. He said it was not possible to say what the exact amount of recoverable reserves would be without further drilling and he admitted 200 trillion cubic feet was a very large number
"Typical extraction rates in the US on a well by well basis would be between 10% and 30% [of the reserves in place] but it all depends on the number of wells we drill," he added. About 400 wells could be expected as a conservative estimate, he said, with up to 800 in the licence area between Blackpool and Southport over the next 15 years.
Cuadrilla, which used the fracking process five times on the first well but has since stopped, said it was drawing up a plan to be handed over to Department of Energy and Climate Change shortly. "We won't carry forward [any further fracking] till DECC has seen the report and is happy about public safety," said Miller.
A video by Cuadrilla Resources explaining the fracking process
The shale gas finds are largely due to new technology being used to produce the wells, and oil companies are busy looking for new discoveries in places as far afield as Poland and China.
Shale gas represents a potential problem for governments trying to reduce CO2 emissions, as there are significant emissions when it is burned. However, it is also a potentially much cheaper alternative to wind and solar power, which both currently require public subsidies.
The environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth said it remained totally opposed to any more fracking until the safety and environmental impact was fully understood. "We are also worried that a new shale gas goldmine would take money away from renewables," said a spokeswoman.
The Co-operative, which is championing renewables in its new retail energy business, also expressed concerns about the upbeat statements coming out of Cuadrilla, which is partly owned by the Australian oil services group AJ Lucas.
"On the face of it, new natural gas finds appear to be good news, but the government must not be seduced by this without considering all the impacts of shale gas extraction," said Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-operative group.
Blackpool oil shale reserves. Photograph: guardian.co.uk
"That is why we are calling for a moratorium on any further exploitation of shale gas, which will allow the wider environmental concerns to be fully exposed and addressed."
• Interactive: How shale gas works
• Shale gas fracking – Q&A
Terry Macalister
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 21 September 2011 21.35 BST
The huge scale of a natural gas field discovered under the north-west of England has been revealed, potentially revolutionising the UK's energy outlook and creating thousands of jobs, but environmental groups are alarmed at the controversial method by which the gas is extracted.
Preliminary wells drilled around Blackpool have uncovered 200 trillion cubic feet of gas – equal to the kind of recoverable reserves of big energy exporting countries such as Venezuela, according to Cuadrilla Resources, a small energy company which has the former BP boss Lord Browne on its board. It said up to 800 more wells might be drilled in the region, creating 5,600 jobs and promising a repeat of the "shale gas revolution" that swept the US, sending local energy prices spinning downwards.
Even if only a relatively small fraction of gas could be exploited, it could trigger a rush of drilling in other parts of the UK at a time when Britain is running out of North Sea reserves.
But Cuadrilla's extravagant claims have alarmed environmentalists and unnerved supporters of wind power. Green groups are opposed to the hydraulic fracturing – "fracking" – process by which the gas is unlocked from shale rock, pointing out it remains banned in parts of the US and France over fears that water aquifers could be contaminated.
The process involves drilling a well then pumping in millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals under high pressure. The pressure fractures underground shale deposits and opens fissures that enable natural gas to flow more freely out of the well. For each frack, 80-300 tonnes of chemicals may be used, critics claim.
The natural gas industry does not have to disclose the chemicals used, but scientists have identified volatile organic compounds such as toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and benzene, the latter of which is a strong carcinogen.
A 2010 US documentary film, Gasland, showed homeowners setting fire to the water coming out of their taps, such was the volume of methane contained in the water. The flames were said to be the result of nearby fracking operations contaminating the water supply, but the oil industry has denied this.
Mark Miller, chief executive of Cuadrilla, said he was enormously encouraged by the potential of the Lancashire region, which appeared to have the same potential as the best shale gas producing areas in Texas. He said it was not possible to say what the exact amount of recoverable reserves would be without further drilling and he admitted 200 trillion cubic feet was a very large number
"Typical extraction rates in the US on a well by well basis would be between 10% and 30% [of the reserves in place] but it all depends on the number of wells we drill," he added. About 400 wells could be expected as a conservative estimate, he said, with up to 800 in the licence area between Blackpool and Southport over the next 15 years.
Cuadrilla, which used the fracking process five times on the first well but has since stopped, said it was drawing up a plan to be handed over to Department of Energy and Climate Change shortly. "We won't carry forward [any further fracking] till DECC has seen the report and is happy about public safety," said Miller.
A video by Cuadrilla Resources explaining the fracking process
The shale gas finds are largely due to new technology being used to produce the wells, and oil companies are busy looking for new discoveries in places as far afield as Poland and China.
Shale gas represents a potential problem for governments trying to reduce CO2 emissions, as there are significant emissions when it is burned. However, it is also a potentially much cheaper alternative to wind and solar power, which both currently require public subsidies.
The environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth said it remained totally opposed to any more fracking until the safety and environmental impact was fully understood. "We are also worried that a new shale gas goldmine would take money away from renewables," said a spokeswoman.
The Co-operative, which is championing renewables in its new retail energy business, also expressed concerns about the upbeat statements coming out of Cuadrilla, which is partly owned by the Australian oil services group AJ Lucas.
"On the face of it, new natural gas finds appear to be good news, but the government must not be seduced by this without considering all the impacts of shale gas extraction," said Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-operative group.
Blackpool oil shale reserves. Photograph: guardian.co.uk
"That is why we are calling for a moratorium on any further exploitation of shale gas, which will allow the wider environmental concerns to be fully exposed and addressed."
Will hydrogen cars ever take off?
Hydrogen cars promise zero tailpipe emissions - but they first require an expensive network of refuelling points
It's something of a chicken-and-egg scenario. Which needs to come first: the hydrogen car, or the hydrogen refuelling point?
Honda believes the latter. This week it (with the help of BOC) unveiled the first open-access hydrogen refuelling facility in the UK at its factory in Swindon. And yet, to date, not one hydrogen-powered car – not even Honda's FCX Clarity - has ever been sold in the UK. All the vehicles we have seen so far have been demonstration models.
And here in lies one of the great challenges for advocates of hydrogen cars. To even get the technology to first base, you must first install an extensive network of refuelling points across the country, or at least across the major conurbations. At least electric vehicles can be charged via a conventional power socket should a public recharging point not be available or convenient.
The extensive cost of building such infrastructure can be estimated when you learn that this single facility at Swindon was built with a regeneration grant of £250,000 from the (soon-to-be-axed) South West England Regional Development Agency. (Professor Kevin Kendall, in the video above, states that "we can expect 30-40 such stations in England by 2015".)
And you can see from the underwhelming adoption of LPG-powered vehicles in the UK - despite their significantly lower fuel costs compared to petrol and diesel - the problems that can persist if you don't build a truly comprehensive network of refuelling points. The perception quickly builds that the technology is a hassle and not as convenient as "conventional" fuels, which, for many people, still over-rides financial considerations.
Electric vehicles are going through these birthing pangs right now as the race quickens to install as wide and diverse a network of recharging options as possible. Savvy innovations such as PlugSurfing, which utilises smart phones to let drivers locate and, crucially, share private charging points, should help to pick up the pace of adoption. But hydrogen vehicles seem to have the further handicap of being totally reliant on bespoke, dedicated refuelling points.
In the US, the Obama administration has gone noticeably cold on the idea of hydrogen cars. Earlier this year, Byron McCormick, the former director of General Motors' hydrogen fuel cell team, resigned from a federal hydrogen technology advisory committee due to government cuts in funding for hydrogen vehicles. "I just feel sad they'll be proven so very wrong by history," he said in his resignation email.
But which side of history do you think hydrogen cars will ultimately end up? Putting to one side the albeit important question of how you produce hydrogen as a fuel in a low-carbon manner, is it worth the epic investment required to install refuelling points across the country before any cars can be driven in earnest? And, if so, who should foot the bill?
It's something of a chicken-and-egg scenario. Which needs to come first: the hydrogen car, or the hydrogen refuelling point?
Honda believes the latter. This week it (with the help of BOC) unveiled the first open-access hydrogen refuelling facility in the UK at its factory in Swindon. And yet, to date, not one hydrogen-powered car – not even Honda's FCX Clarity - has ever been sold in the UK. All the vehicles we have seen so far have been demonstration models.
And here in lies one of the great challenges for advocates of hydrogen cars. To even get the technology to first base, you must first install an extensive network of refuelling points across the country, or at least across the major conurbations. At least electric vehicles can be charged via a conventional power socket should a public recharging point not be available or convenient.
The extensive cost of building such infrastructure can be estimated when you learn that this single facility at Swindon was built with a regeneration grant of £250,000 from the (soon-to-be-axed) South West England Regional Development Agency. (Professor Kevin Kendall, in the video above, states that "we can expect 30-40 such stations in England by 2015".)
And you can see from the underwhelming adoption of LPG-powered vehicles in the UK - despite their significantly lower fuel costs compared to petrol and diesel - the problems that can persist if you don't build a truly comprehensive network of refuelling points. The perception quickly builds that the technology is a hassle and not as convenient as "conventional" fuels, which, for many people, still over-rides financial considerations.
Electric vehicles are going through these birthing pangs right now as the race quickens to install as wide and diverse a network of recharging options as possible. Savvy innovations such as PlugSurfing, which utilises smart phones to let drivers locate and, crucially, share private charging points, should help to pick up the pace of adoption. But hydrogen vehicles seem to have the further handicap of being totally reliant on bespoke, dedicated refuelling points.
In the US, the Obama administration has gone noticeably cold on the idea of hydrogen cars. Earlier this year, Byron McCormick, the former director of General Motors' hydrogen fuel cell team, resigned from a federal hydrogen technology advisory committee due to government cuts in funding for hydrogen vehicles. "I just feel sad they'll be proven so very wrong by history," he said in his resignation email.
But which side of history do you think hydrogen cars will ultimately end up? Putting to one side the albeit important question of how you produce hydrogen as a fuel in a low-carbon manner, is it worth the epic investment required to install refuelling points across the country before any cars can be driven in earnest? And, if so, who should foot the bill?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
