Search

Begin New Search Topic Energy Policy Publication Year within 5 Years

71. Comparing Government Financing of Reactor Exports: Considerations for US Policy Makers

Author:
Matt Bowen and Alec Apostoaei
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
Decarbonizing the world’s energy supply by 2050 will require financing low-carbon energy projects at a cost of upwards of trillions of dollars. Nuclear energy is one of the few dispatchable low-carbon energy resources, and studies by the International Energy Agency have estimated a possible doubling of nuclear power as part of scenarios for achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury. Large, capital-intensive projects such as nuclear power plants can be challenging for some countries to finance, however. As a result, countries wishing to build nuclear reactors look for attractive financing from supplier nations in the form of loans and equity. This report, part of wider work on nuclear energy at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, compares the financing terms offered between 2000 and 2021 by the world’s major exporters of nuclear power plants: Russia, France, the Republic of Korea (ROK), China, and the United States. Russia dominated this period, with 11 reactors connected to power grids in six countries, in part due to the attractive state-backed financing offers it made. At the beginning of 2022, Russia had 13 of its reactors under construction in other countries, more than all other countries’ reactor exports combined. The US government has been actively developing advanced reactor technologies, partly with the intention of exporting them to other countries to help them address their energy and environmental goals. However, for numerous reasons, the US government has not financed a new US reactor export in decades, even though the US Export-Import Bank (EXIM) and the new International Development Financing Corporation (DFC) are capable of supporting exports of this scale. Given the recent absence of US financing, this report analyzes the earlier activities of EXIM related to nuclear energy and their relevance for potentially reviving such financing efforts in the near or medium term. A key factor shaping reactor vendor competitions is a nuclear arrangement by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in which France, the ROK, and the United States are members but China and Russia are not. This arrangement places limitations on OECD members regarding key loan terms for their reactor exports, including minimum interest rates and loan repayment terms, that can put them at a disadvantage compared to state-owned vendors from Russia and China. The arrangement does not restrict equity investments in reactor exports, posing an additional disadvantage for private vendors in the United States as they compete with larger, state-owned vendors in France and the ROK. As other countries develop their civil nuclear energy programs or begin new ones, the US government will need to decide whether it will assist in financing US reactor exports. The federal government has a variety of potential rationales for doing so, including creating jobs, assisting other countries in overcoming their energy and environmental challenges, and limiting Chinese and Russian influence. On the other hand, financing from EXIM or the DFC will come with financial risk, as some individual projects may not have successful outcomes.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Carbon Emissions, Decarbonization, and Nuclear Energy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

72. Electrification on the Path to Net Zero: A Comparison of Studies Examining Opportunities and Barriers in the United States

Author:
Margaret Cook, F. Todd Davidson, and Harrison Fell
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
There is a strong and growing consensus that a simultaneously growing and decarbonizing electricity sector is necessary to meet declining greenhouse gas emissions targets. Rallying cries to “electrify everything” have captured the focus of many headlines and policy forums in recent years. However, there are important questions that remain unanswered about the electrify everything movement, including the technical, social, and political feasibility of the approach, as well as the affordability and equitability of implementation. While reducing emissions is paramount in mitigating the negative impacts of the energy system to the environment and human health, it is also critical that changes to energy infrastructure are both socially and politically acceptable, as well as affordable to help ensure an economically vibrant future. These nuanced dynamics are not easily articulated in public forums regarding the goal to electrify everything. A more detailed assessment of the problem might discover a better path forward. This report, part of the Power Sector and Renewables Research Initiative and Energy Systems Modeling Analytics program at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, in conjunction with IdeaSmiths, examines eight recent major US studies on the topic. Six of the studies focus on strategies and pathways to a net-zero energy system and two assess the value of electrification and expanded transmission networks. This work serves to compare their assumptions and results. The authors’ purpose in analyzing the studies was threefold. First, the report explores the degrees of electrification in the United States that might be needed to achieve net-zero pathways as well as where and how electrification could occur under model assumptions. Second, it examines the relative roles of variable generation resources (e.g., wind and solar), energy storage (both short- and long-duration), and firm low-carbon power (e.g., natural gas with carbon capture, nuclear, hydro, and geothermal) in the energy transition to meet increasing levels of clean electricity demand. Finally, the report examines the barriers that could hinder both increased electrification and decarbonization of the pivotal power sector. By examining and comparing the studies and scenarios within them, the authors were able to identify shared themes resulting in robust insights that can be useful in informing policy makers and guiding other decision-making processes. Broad recommendations across studies include: (1) decarbonizing electricity; (2) electrifying end uses; (3) lowering energy demand; and (4) increasing transmission, distribution, and energy storage infrastructure. Seven major barriers to expanding electrification include challenges around: (1) the pace of transition, (2) technology advancement, (3) infrastructure siting, (4) equipment cost, (5) supply chains, (6) human capital/jobs, and (7) public support. To attain the various decarbonization goals analyzed in these studies, federal, state, and/or local regulators would need to implement an array of policies to accelerate the pace at which clean energy technologies are deployed. While the studies generally do not compare specific policies but rather the least-cost path(s) to achieving certain decarbonization targets, none of their reference scenarios indicate the energy sector will decarbonize fast enough to meet emissions targets without additional policies.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Electricity, Decarbonization, and Net Zero
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

73. Deep Borehole Disposal of Radioactive Waste: Next Steps and Applicability to National Programs

Author:
Peter Swift and Andrew Newman
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
Deep borehole disposal of high-level radioactive waste has been proposed repeatedly and in multiple countries over the last several decades, but the concept remains unproven in the field. A straightforward research, development, and demonstration test program could provide answers to basic questions about the viability of the concept. This program would involve the construction of two or perhaps more boreholes to test disposal concepts using surrogate, nonradioactive waste. Field tests would focus on the engineering and operational feasibility of deep borehole disposal, the availability of favorable rock types at depth, appropriate designs for waste forms and waste packaging, and the long-term performance of borehole repositories. Because of the scale of the project, it might best be undertaken as an international collaboration, perhaps led by the US Department of Energy but with participation from multiple national programs to ensure it meets a wide range of needs. Mined geologic repositories, which have been the preferred approach for permanent disposal of high-level radioactive wastes for most national programs for many decades, will likely remain the preferred disposal option for countries with large inventories of commercial spent nuclear fuel. If deep borehole disposal can be demonstrated as a viable concept, however, it may be an attractive alternative disposal option for countries with small inventories of materials requiring permanent geologic isolation. For example, national programs with limited amounts of waste from research or medical isotope production reactors may not need to incur the cost of a full-scale mined repository. Other countries may find borehole disposal a useful option for permanently disposing of small quantities of waste that could otherwise pose security risks, including both fissile materials and high-activity sealed radioactive sources used in industrial and medical applications. For programs committed to disposing of large inventories of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste in mined repositories, deep boreholes may provide options for prompt disposal of small volumes of specialty wastes that may otherwise have to wait for repository construction. This report reviews the borehole disposal concepts proposed to date, identifies potentially suitable waste forms worldwide, and proposes a field-testing program that could resolve many remaining technical questions and inform future programmatic decisions. The report also summarizes the potential benefits of borehole disposal in terms of public acceptance, cost, and security.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Nuclear Waste, Nuclear Energy, and Borehole
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

74. Energy and Geo-Economics: Evidence Underpinning Russian Intervention in Syria

Author:
Nada El Abdi
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Since September 2015 and the Russian military intervention in the country, the interests in Syria have been numerous and of great importance for the actors involved in this conflict. The interests in Syria are numerous and of great importance for the actors involved in this conflict. Russia, like the Allies and opponents of the Bashar Al-Assad regime, is fighting for geopolitical, geo-economic, or ideological reasons. The Middle East region finds itself shaken by the sharp resurgence of a confrontation between actors allied to the United States, other allies of Russia, and this Syrian crisis thus impacts the geopolitical configuration of the region. This paper presents an analysis of the Russian intervention strategy in Syria. We argue that Russia intervened in Syria to strengthen the already existing Russian-Syrian alliance, to curb extremist proliferation, and to take advantage of Syria's strategic position. The objective is to determine the reasons for the Russian military intervention in Syria related to energy and geo-economic interests. The Russian intervention in Syria was an ideal opportunity to draw closer to several powerful states in the region and a way to benefit from positive spin-offs on its arms market and hydrocarbon road plans. Despite the risks and costs associated with defending the Syrian regime, Moscow has secured its political and economic power in the Middle East.
Topic:
Economics, Energy Policy, Geopolitics, Military Intervention, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Middle East, and Syria

75. Commercialisation contracts: European support for low-carbon technology deployment

Author:
Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Many of the technologies that can help the European Union become a net-zero emissions economy by 2050 have been shown to work but are not yet commercially competitive with incumbent fossil-fuel technologies. There is not enough private investment to drive the deployment of new low-carbon alternatives. This is primarily because carbon prices are neither high enough nor stable. There are a number of benefits from the deployment of low-carbon technologies that private firms do not factor in. These include the benefits of decreasing industry-wide costs over time, and the global climate benefits from the development of low-carbon technologies within the EU that can subsequently be exported. The result is an investment level below the socially optimal value in the EU. Commercialisation contracts could be implemented as a temporary measure to remove the risk associated with uncertain carbon prices for ambitious low-carbon projects. The aim of the contracts would be to increase private investment to the socially optimal level. Contracts would be allocated through auctions in which fixed prices for abated emissions over a fixed duration would be agreed on a project-by-project basis. On an annual basis, public subsidies amounting to the difference between the agreed carbon price and the actual EU carbon price would be provided to investors, depending on the total carbon emissions abated. As long as EU carbon prices are low, investors would receive larger subsidies to ensure their competitiveness. Contracts would be auctioned at EU level. This would generate increased competition compared to national auctions, leading to more efficient outcomes and preventing fragmentation of the single market. From about €3 billion to €6 billion would be provided to the main industrial emitting sectors annually, with the amount reducing as the EU carbon price rises and low-carbon technologies become competitive without subsidy.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Science and Technology, Investment, Trade, Carbon Emissions, and Decarbonization
Political Geography:
Europe

76. Navigating through hydrogen

Author:
Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Hydrogen is seen as a means to decarbonise sectors with greenhouse gas emissions that are hard to reduce, as a medium for energy storage, and as a fallback in case halted fossil-fuel imports lead to energy shortages. Hydrogen is likely to play at least some role in the European Union’s achievement by 2050 of a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target. However, production of hydrogen in the EU is currently emissions intensive. Hydrogen supply could be decarbonised if produced via electrolysis based on electricity from renewable sources, or produced from natural gas with carbon, capture, and storage. The theoretical production potential of low-carbon hydrogen is virtually unlimited and production volumes will thus depend only on demand and supply cost. Estimates of final hydrogen demand in 2050 range from levels similar to today’s in a low-demand scenario, to ten times today’s level in a high-demand scenario. Hydrogen is used as either a chemical feedstock or an energy source. A base level of 2050 demand can be derived from looking at sectors that already consume hydrogen and others that are likely to adopt hydrogen. The use of hydrogen in many sectors has been demonstrated. Whether use will increase depends on the complex interplay between competing energy supplies, public policy, technological and systems innovation, and consumer preferences. Policymakers must address the need to displace carbon-intensive hydrogen with low-carbon hydrogen, and incentivise the uptake of hydrogen as a means to decarbonise sectors with hard-to-reduce emissions. Certain key principles can be followed without regret: driving down supply costs of low-carbon hydrogen production; accelerating initial deployment with public support to test the economic viability and enable learning; and continued strengthening of climate policies such as the EU emissions trading system to stimulate the growth of hydrogen-based solutions in the areas for which hydrogen is most suitable.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, European Union, Carbon Emissions, Decarbonization, and Hydrogen
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

77. A whole-economy carbon price for Europe and how to get there

Author:
Ottmar Edenhofer, Mirjam Kosch, Michael Pahle, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Putting carbon pricing at the centre of the EU climate policy architecture would provide major benefits. Obtaining these benefits requires a uniform, credible and durable carbon price – the economic first-best solution, however, several preconditions required to attain this solution are not yet met. This paper proposes a sequenced approach to ensure convergence of the policy mix on the first-best in the long run.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, European Union, Carbon Tax, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Europe

78. The geopolitics of the European Green Deal

Author:
Mark Leonard, Jeremy Shapiro, Jean Pisani-Ferry, Simone Tagliapietra, and Guntram B. Wolff
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The European Green Deal is a plan to decarbonise the EU economy by 2050, revolutionise the EU’s energy system, profoundly transform the economy and inspire efforts to combat climate change. But the plan will also have profound geopolitical repercussions. The Green Deal will affect geopolitics through its impact on the EU energy balance and global markets; on oil and gas-producing countries in the EU neighbourhood; on European energy security; and on global trade patterns, notably via the carbon border adjustment mechanism. At least some of these changes are likely to impact partner countries adversely. The EU needs to wake up to the consequences abroad of its domestic decisions. It should prepare to help manage the geopolitical aspects of the European Green Deal. Relationships with important neighbourhood countries such as Russia and Algeria, and with global players including the United States, China and Saudi Arabia, are central to this effort, which can be structured around seven actions: Help neighbouring oil and gas-exporting countries manage the repercussions of the European Green Deal. The EU should engage with these countries to foster their economic diversification, including into renewable energy and green hydrogen that could in the future be exported to Europe. Improve the security of critical raw materials supply and limit dependence, first and foremost on China. Essential measures include greater supply diversification, increased recycling volumes and substitution of critical materials. Work with the US and other partners to establish a ‘climate club’ whose members will apply similar carbon border adjustment measures. All countries, including China, would be welcome to join if they commit to abide by the club’s objectives and rules. Become a global standard-setter for the energy transition, particularly in hydrogen and green bonds. Requiring compliance with strict environmental regulations as a condition to access the EU market will be strong encouragement to go green for all countries. Internationalise the European Green Deal by mobilising the EU budget, the EU Recovery and Resilience Fund, and EU development policy. Promote global coalitions for climate change mitigation, for example through a global coalition for the permafrost, which would fund measures to contain the permafrost thaw. Promote a global platform on the new economics of climate action to share lessons learned and best practices.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, European Union, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Europe

79. Small states’ security strategies need an international energy dimension: What can be learned from the Danish Nord Stream and Baltic Pipe negotiations?

Author:
Trine Villumsen Berling
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:
Denmark encountered a number of unforeseen obstacles when negotiating the Nord Stream and Baltic Pipe gas pipelines, and the country ended up standing exposed and alone. A better politics of energy alliances and better strategic preparation are key lessons for small states like Denmark when dealing with the problematic combination of security and energy. RECOMMENDATIONS: Small states should include energy in strategic documents pertaining to foreign and security policies, as energy is a tool in the security toolbox of the great powers. Self-sufficiency in energy does not mean that a country is shielded from the dynamics of international energy. Small states should strive to build enduring political alliances focused on energy. Small states should prioritise sending experts to the NATO Centre of Excellence for Energy Security in order to stay on top of the international security situation concerning energy.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Energy Policy, Environment, Oil, Natural Resources, European Union, Gas, and Minerals
Political Geography:
Europe, Denmark, and Baltic States

80. The Geopolitics of Renewable Hydrogen

Author:
Nicola De Blasio and Fridolin Pflugmann
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The transition to a low-carbon energy system will likely shake up the geopolitical status quo that has governed global energy systems for over a century. Policymakers need to rethink the role their country could play in a new energy world. Renewables are widely perceived as an opportunity to shatter the hegemony of fossil fuel-rich states and democratize the energy landscape. Virtually all countries have access to some renewable energy resources (especially solar and wind power) and could thus substitute foreign supply with local resources. Our research shows, however, that the role countries are likely to assume in decarbonized energy systems will be based not only on their resource endowment but also on their policy choices. Renewable hydrogen is enjoying growing political and commercial momentum as a versatile and sustainable energy carrier with the potential to play a key role in the global transition to a low-carbon economy; and it is often described as the ‘missing link’ in global decarbonization—especially for energy intensive sectors where emissions are hard to abate and electrification is not the preferred solution, such as steel production, high-temperature industrial heat, shipping, aviation, and heat for buildings. But making renewable hydrogen a significant part of the world’s future energy mix will require defining new and innovative national and international policies while developing appropriate market structures aimed at spurring innovation along value chains; scaling technologies while significantly reducing costs; and deploying enabling infrastructure at scale. Success is possible, but this transformational effort will require close coordination between policy, technology, capital, and society to avoid falling into the traps and inefficiencies of the past. Renewable hydrogen can be used for both mobility and stationary applications. As a sustainable mobility energy carrier, it can power fuel-cell electric vehicles or be the base for synthetic fuels. In stationary applications, it can be used to store renewable energy, both at utility scale or off-grid, providing backup to intermittent renewable energy sources and serving as a carbon-free heating source. From a geopolitical perspective, whether future renewable hydrogen energy systems will be as concentrated as today’s oil and gas supply or decentralized like renewables is strongly related to future market structures, technology, and enabling infrastructure availability.
Topic:
Security, Energy Policy, Science and Technology, Geopolitics, Renewable Energy, and Hydrogen
Political Geography:
Global Focus