By JAMES HERRON
LONDON—Dangerous climate change will be essentially irreversible within a little over five years, the International Energy Agency said in an annual report urging governments to do what they can to prevent this outcome.
To prevent long-term average global temperatures rising more than two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels—seen as the maximum possible increase without serious climate disruption—immediate, drastic changes to energy and industrial policies are needed, the IEA said in its World Energy Outlook.
Such a shift looks unlikely given current global economic problems and the move away from low-carbon nuclear power in some countries after the recent nuclear disaster in Japan, the IEA said. Promises to invest to curb carbon dioxide emissions have in many cases failed to acquire legislative urgency.
The report also highlights the challenge posed by the rapidly rising use in emerging economies of the fossil fuels, particularly coal, that many scientists believe are a key contributor to climate change.
"The door to reach two degrees is about to close. In 2017 it will be closed forever," Fatih Birol, IEA chief economist, said in an interview.
Carbon-dioxide emissions in 2010 grew by an "almost unprecedented" 5.3% to 30.4 billion metric tons, the IEA said in the report.
"Coal was the biggest source of emissions growth in 2010, primarily driven by use in China and India," it said. This increase capped a decade of booming use of coal, the most readily available fuel in emerging economies, even as concern about climate change grew, the IEA said.
China and India have participated in climate-change negotiations, but have not made binding commitments to curb emissions.
On the world's current trajectory, the long-term increase in average global temperatures will exceed six degrees Celsius, the IEA said, without specifying when it projected that forecast to arrive.
Even if all countries follow through on promises they have already made to curb emissions and invest in clean energy, many of which are threatened by the current economic distress, temperatures will rise by 3.5 degrees Celsius, it said.
An increase of this size would have severe consequences, including a sea level rise of up to two meters—causing dislocation of human settlements—and drought, floods and heat waves that would severely affect food production, rates of disease and mortality, the IEA said.
The IEA uses conclusions from research collated by the United Nations. Most climate scientists agree with the U.N. conclusions, although recent polls show a growing proportion of the public in many countries is skeptical of climate change.
The agency represents the energy interests of many developed economies, but doesn't have a direct role in international climate change negotiations.
Limiting the increase in temperatures to two degrees Celsius, widely seen as the maximum safe increase, would require the reversal of several of the strongest trends in energy consumption.
The use of both coal and oil, which together provided 60% of world energy in 2009, would need to start falling by 2016, the IEA said. Under current trends, coal and oil use are forecast to rise by 60% and 25% respectively from 2009 to 2035.
At the same time, the rate of increase in energy efficiency and the amount of energy generated by wind, wave and solar and nuclear power will have to increase dramatically, the IEA said.
These changes would require an additional $15.2 trillion investment in clean energy by 2035, the IEA said. This cost would be offset somewhat by a $4.6 trillion reduction in the need for investment in fossil fuel production and lower forecasts for oil, gas and coal prices.
In the current political situation, it would be "a very big surprise" if the world managed such a transformation, Mr. Birol said, adding recent moves to curb emissions in Australia and China amount to "putting out a forest fire with a cup of water."
Write to James Herron at james.herron@dowjones.com
Friday, 11 November 2011
UK solar companies take legal action against subsidies cuts
The legal action comes soon after the government's announcement it will cut feed in fariffs from 43p per kWh to 21p
Duncan Clark
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 10 November 2011 17.37 GMT
A coalition of UK solar companies has initiated legal action against the government in response to its plans to more than halve solar subsidies.
The action focuses on the recent announcement by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) to cut the rate paid to householders with solar panels under the feed-in tariff from 43p per kWh to 21p, significantly reducing the attractiveness of the technology to customers and investors.
Decc has said that the new rates will apply from 12 December, just six weeks after the announcement was made and before the consultation on the proposed changes closes on 23 December.
The lawyers acting for the solar companies will argue that the 12 December deadline is unlawful on the grounds that it prejudges the consultation process and is being implemented without adherence to the correct procedures. The lawyers will also argue that the deadline is "unreasonable" because of its impact on the industry and on groups which have spent time and money developing projects that will have to be cancelled if they can't be completed by 12 December.
The coalition – which is working with solicitors at Prospect Law – includes Solarcentury, and a "handful" of other companies that are currently remaining anonymous.
The action will take the form of a judicial review in the high court. Such actions usually take many months, but the court has agreed to expedite the case given the proximity of the contested December deadline. According to Solarcentury, this means that Decc will have to submits its defence by 21 November. The case could appear in court soon after that date.
Jeremy Leggett, founder of Solarcentury, said: "We expected a proper and fair consultation on the review of Fits. We expected to have the time to plan for the next stage of the development of the market. We were all expecting a new tariff from April 2012. Instead we get a ready-made decision which seriously harms the solar industry and everyone in it and gives us less than six weeks to save the businesses we have built up over multiple years."
A Decc spokesperson said: "We're consulting on proposed new tariffs for a reason – to protect consumers from footing the bill for excessive subsidies. This is a live consultation and it will be open for people to comment until 23 December. We can confirm that an application has been made for judicial review of certain aspects of the current consultation, which we shall be defending."
The solar companies involved in the action hope that the court will quash the government's decision to cut the rates from 12 December, but they acknowledge that even if this happens the reduced rates would most likely still be enforced within a few months.
John Faulks, company secretary of Solarcentury, said: "It wouldn't be a massive win. But there's a wider point of principle here about arbitrary government decisions destroying industry."
The government also faces a second legal challenge on the same issue from Friends of the Earth (FoE). The group intends to lodge a judicial review early next week if the government doesn't agree by tomorrow to drop the deadline. Gita Parihar of FoE said that, if the group's legal action goes ahead, she expects the two claims to be heard in court together.
The pressure on the government over its handling of the Fits review will be stepped up this evening in a speech by the John Cridland, director general of the CBI. Addressing the CBI East Midlands Annual Dinner, Cridland is expected to denounce the dramatic cut in solar feed-in tariffs as "the latest in a string of government own goals".
Leaders of the solar industry also met the energy minister, Greg Barker, today but came away fuming. "The government needs to be seen to consult on the feed-in tariffs, but it is clear from this meeting this is all a foregone conclusion," said Daniel Green, chief executive of HomeSun. "Three legal actions against the government are in process. Today's meeting will stimulate more. This is disastrous and irresponsible decision making by the government. The thinking isn't joined up."
He continued: "According to a report from Element Energy to be published in the next few weeks, the Fits cost around £220m yearly but generate £280m in taxes (jobs and VAT). Why cut a programme that is making money and making the green revolution accessible to everyday consumers?"
• Additional reporting by Terry Macalister
Duncan Clark
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 10 November 2011 17.37 GMT
A coalition of UK solar companies has initiated legal action against the government in response to its plans to more than halve solar subsidies.
The action focuses on the recent announcement by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) to cut the rate paid to householders with solar panels under the feed-in tariff from 43p per kWh to 21p, significantly reducing the attractiveness of the technology to customers and investors.
Decc has said that the new rates will apply from 12 December, just six weeks after the announcement was made and before the consultation on the proposed changes closes on 23 December.
The lawyers acting for the solar companies will argue that the 12 December deadline is unlawful on the grounds that it prejudges the consultation process and is being implemented without adherence to the correct procedures. The lawyers will also argue that the deadline is "unreasonable" because of its impact on the industry and on groups which have spent time and money developing projects that will have to be cancelled if they can't be completed by 12 December.
The coalition – which is working with solicitors at Prospect Law – includes Solarcentury, and a "handful" of other companies that are currently remaining anonymous.
The action will take the form of a judicial review in the high court. Such actions usually take many months, but the court has agreed to expedite the case given the proximity of the contested December deadline. According to Solarcentury, this means that Decc will have to submits its defence by 21 November. The case could appear in court soon after that date.
Jeremy Leggett, founder of Solarcentury, said: "We expected a proper and fair consultation on the review of Fits. We expected to have the time to plan for the next stage of the development of the market. We were all expecting a new tariff from April 2012. Instead we get a ready-made decision which seriously harms the solar industry and everyone in it and gives us less than six weeks to save the businesses we have built up over multiple years."
A Decc spokesperson said: "We're consulting on proposed new tariffs for a reason – to protect consumers from footing the bill for excessive subsidies. This is a live consultation and it will be open for people to comment until 23 December. We can confirm that an application has been made for judicial review of certain aspects of the current consultation, which we shall be defending."
The solar companies involved in the action hope that the court will quash the government's decision to cut the rates from 12 December, but they acknowledge that even if this happens the reduced rates would most likely still be enforced within a few months.
John Faulks, company secretary of Solarcentury, said: "It wouldn't be a massive win. But there's a wider point of principle here about arbitrary government decisions destroying industry."
The government also faces a second legal challenge on the same issue from Friends of the Earth (FoE). The group intends to lodge a judicial review early next week if the government doesn't agree by tomorrow to drop the deadline. Gita Parihar of FoE said that, if the group's legal action goes ahead, she expects the two claims to be heard in court together.
The pressure on the government over its handling of the Fits review will be stepped up this evening in a speech by the John Cridland, director general of the CBI. Addressing the CBI East Midlands Annual Dinner, Cridland is expected to denounce the dramatic cut in solar feed-in tariffs as "the latest in a string of government own goals".
Leaders of the solar industry also met the energy minister, Greg Barker, today but came away fuming. "The government needs to be seen to consult on the feed-in tariffs, but it is clear from this meeting this is all a foregone conclusion," said Daniel Green, chief executive of HomeSun. "Three legal actions against the government are in process. Today's meeting will stimulate more. This is disastrous and irresponsible decision making by the government. The thinking isn't joined up."
He continued: "According to a report from Element Energy to be published in the next few weeks, the Fits cost around £220m yearly but generate £280m in taxes (jobs and VAT). Why cut a programme that is making money and making the green revolution accessible to everyday consumers?"
• Additional reporting by Terry Macalister