Search

Begin New Search Topic Green Technology

11. Reboot: Framework for a New American Industrial Policy

Author:
Martijn Rasser, Megan Lamberth, Hannah Kelley, and Ryan Johnson
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
This paper presents an initial framework for a new American industrial policy, a blueprint for what is needed to ensure the United States has the vision, goals, plans, and resources for an era of sustained strategic competition. The concept, informed by an overarching national technology strategy and a supply chain resilience strategy, is the initial contribution in a larger effort to provide policymakers with a comprehensive toolkit to navigate competition with China and engage with countries around the world, friend and foe alike.4 To provide tangible real-world examples of a new sensible American industrial policy and to illustrate how policies would vary by sector and over time, subsequent reports will detail what a new American industrial policy would look like in action for three key sectors: biotechnology, semiconductors, and green technologies.
Topic:
Economy, Green Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, Biotechnology, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China, North America, and United States of America

12. Reimagine: Clean Energy Technology and U.S. Industrial Policy

Author:
Jonas Nahm
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Historically, the United States has been the largest public investor in clean energy research and development (R&D). U.S. research institutions and private firms continue to hold a technological lead in many next-generation technologies that could make the transition away from fossil fuels cheaper and more efficient. Such technologies include next-generation solar photovoltaic technologies, advanced battery chemistries, and software to manage complex energy systems, including those with high penetrations of wind energy. Although the United States was an early leader in clean energy R&D and continues to make major technological advances, it has, over time, fallen behind in the commercialization and manufacturing of the technologies developed domestically. This study reviews U.S. industrial policy for clean energy sectors and argues that other economies have more frequently used proactive industrial policies to support the development of domestic clean energy technology industries. Too often, the United States has not mounted an equivalent industrial policy response. The U.S. government has instead focused more narrowly on funding the invention of new technologies and, intermittently, supported domestic markets for clean energy technologies through federal and state programs. Such policies have included, for instance, federal R&D grants for universities, research institutes, and the private sector, as well as subsidies and regulations to support the growth of clean energy markets at the federal and state level. This U.S. approach to encouraging the growth of domestic clean energy industries has assumed that market failures primarily exist in innovation. Since firms cannot in all cases reap all the gains from investments in the development of new technologies, they are likely to underinvest in innovation, creating a need for governments to supplement private-sector investments in R&D. The U.S. approach to clean energy industrial policy also assumes that investments in R&D will eventually spur the growth of domestic industries if combined with sufficient market demand. Yet U.S. industrial policy has not addressed key institutional shortcomings in segments of clean energy supply chains that are not well supported domestically, particularly in scaling new technologies to mass manufacturing. As a consequence, many technologies developed with public R&D funding failed to reach domestic mass production, as firms were unable to make the investments required to bring the technologies to market domestically. The report develops four recommendations to improve the competitiveness of domestic clean energy industries. First, the United States should establish a state development bank that could fund domestic manufacturing projects in sectors, such as clean energy, that have struggled to raise financing from U.S. financial institutions. The scarcity of capital for clean energy manufacturing has prevented domestic startups from raising the financing required to commercialize and produce their technologies domestically. Second, the U.S. government should ramp up investments in vocational training programs that would meet the workforce needs of growing clean energy manufacturing sectors. Third, the federal government should set stable regulatory requirements and binding targets for clean energy markets as part of a national strategy for competitiveness in clean energy sectors. This would reduce uncertainty injected by the intermittent and fragmented nature of current government support for clean energy sectors and create incentives for the private sector to invest in domestic supply chains for clean energy technologies. Fourth, the United States should limit the use of trade restrictions as industrial policy tools and instead focus on improving the competitiveness of domestic clean energy firms through proactive industrial policies. Trade restrictions can limit the ability of domestic clean energy firms to source materials, parts, and components through global supply chains; may lead to increased prices in ways that can harm domestic clean energy service industries; and obstruct the climate diplomacy needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. At the moment, geopolitical shifts, strategic competition with China, and the ripple effects of the war in Ukraine provide a political opening for the consistent deployment of more ambitious industrial policies. The United States should use this opportunity or risk falling behind other economies, including those in Europe, that have made the development of domestic clean energy supply chains central elements of their response to climate change.
Topic:
Green Technology, Industry, Research and Development, and Energy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

13. The portfolio of economic policies needed to fight climate change

Author:
Olivier Blanchard, Christian Gollier, and Jean Tirole
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
Climate change poses an existential threat. The authors argue that carbon pricing and green research and development (R&D) support are good economics, but their implementation can be improved. Even if carbon prices are generalized and given more substance, green R&D is still likely to be smaller than needed. Much more money must be spent on it than is now the case, and this money must be properly allocated in order to have an impact. Moreover, done well, other policies, such as standards, bans, and targeted subsidies, can be good economics. But they have often been incoherent and their implementation is delicate. The authors also argue that domestic and international compensation is key to the acceptability of efficient policies. Finally, although a country’s emissions will not materially alter the course of climate change, individual countries can still show the way ahead: They can develop technologies that can be used by other, poorer, countries. They can provide leadership/momentum on global agreements and on the need to fund climate change policies in developing economies.
Topic:
Climate Change, Economy, Green Technology, Carbon Emissions, and Research and Development
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. Who Benefits from Tunisia's Green Hydrogen Strategy?

Author:
Aida Delpuech
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
As the global energy sector sought to revamp itself over recent years, several countries around the world have joined a race toward green hydrogen –labelled “energy of the future”. Unlike grey hydrogen, made by fossil fuels (natural gas) and a significant source of greenhouse gases,1 2 green hydrogen is generated by electrolysis whereby water is split using electricity from renewable energy sources. The combustion of 1kg of this gas produces almost four times more energy than one kilogram of gasoline.3 In 2021, the production of green hydrogen produced represents only 5% of the 94 million tons of overall produced hydrogen globally.4 However, this quantity is bound to rise, given the various strategies developed in the post-Covid economic recovery plans or by strategies to power Europe with alternatives to Russian gas.5 While a global market for green hydrogen is being shaped, Tunisia launched in early 2022 the development of its very own national strategy for green hydrogen to be finalized by 2024. The country has already announced that it will prioritise export6 of this green fuel over local use.7 “Promoting green hydrogen, a growing market in today’s world, is very important to Tunisia,” affirmed GIZ, 8 the Tunisian government’s lead partner in this strategy development project. Although the Tunisian Ministry of Energy has made green hydrogen one of its projects of high importance, civil society, scientists, and potentially affected communities have so far been left out of all conversations. Hence, the country misses a chance to map out eventual risks, environmental and social concerns and to address emerging concerns from the outset. The large-scale production – powered by solar and wind energy megaprojects – requires vast mobilization of several types of resources along the entire production chain of this fuel. When the Ministry of Energy asserts that: “these projects do not entail obvious negative impacts on the environment,” nothing is less verified than such statement. Current discussions focus mainly on Tunisia’s position in this emerging global market, but they rarely touch on the social and environmental costs of this type of major projects. Nonetheless, multiple studies9 were published more recently, warning of the impact of these projects on natural resources – water, land, etc. – in countries heavily affected by climate change. In addition, the benefit of this new sector is questionable in terms of Tunisia’s climate commitments. To this day, the country depends as much as 97% on Algerian gas to produce electricity10 and the energy transition has stagnated. However, it plans to export the bulk of the green hydrogen potentially produced on Tunisian soil mainly to Europe, This was confirmed in interviews and meetings in the context of this report While green hydrogen is a more preferable alternative than more polluting options, its mass production would primarily benefit the energy needs of Europe. This raises another fundamental issue as it is replicating an extractivist model oriented towards international export markets and build on the overexploitation of natural resources. To develop a green hydrogen production strategy, Tunisian authorities along with their European partners, namely Germany, seek to prolong the exploitation of resources of neighbouring countries without sufficiently considering the energy needs of locals, the social and environmental risks, the fact that Tunisia is a water stressed country or the financial debt resulting from such investments.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Green Technology, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
Africa and Tunisia

15. Green Defence: the defence and military implications of climate change for Europe

Author:
Ben Barry and Shiloh Fetzek
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
Climate change is a national security threat to Europe. It is an accelerator of conflict and requires European forces to adapt accordingly. Concurrently, armed forces can help mitigate climate change by reducing their greenhouse-gas emissions. For states that plan to reduce carbon emissions, decarbonisation of armed forces without disarming will be a challenge. This new report assesses not only the implications for European armed forces of operating in climate changed worlds, but also the opportunities for reducing carbon footprint from new technologies. It assesses the challenges of implementing the necessary changes to military operations, training and capability and identifies success factors for this essential transformation.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, Environment, Science and Technology, Armed Forces, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
Europe

16. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from State-Owned Enterprises: A Preliminary Inventory

Author:
Alex Clark and Philippe Benoit
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
State-owned enterprises (SOEs) play a major role in the production of goods and services across many of the world’s largest economies, particularly in electricity generation, oil and gas, and heavy industry. SOEs (defined in this report as companies for which 50 percent or more of voting shares are held by a government) are also major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The governments that control these SOEs are also signatories to the Paris Agreement on climate change. State ownership provides these governments with a major direct point of control over the climate and energy outcomes of these companies, both in terms of reducing emissions and directing future investment into low-carbon technologies and infrastructure. Improving the measurement of SOEs’ contribution to both national and global-level emissions provides important information to help understand to what extent SOEs should be targeted and to design strategies to maximize their potential role in the broader energy transition. This report provides an accounting of direct emissions associated with SOEs globally. It is challenging to comprehensively identify every SOE, as the total is estimated at well over 100,000. In addition, most identified SOEs do not disclose their emissions nor are estimates of these emissions available in the public domain. Despite these limitations, data compiled for this report covering almost 300 major SOEs suggest that SOEs globally are responsible for at least 7.49 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e) annually in direct (Scope 1) emissions. While the true scale of SOE-related emissions is likely to be substantially higher, particularly when accounting for national oil companies and iron and steel manufacturers that do not currently report their emissions, this figure is over 1 GtCO2e greater than various previous estimates, and larger than the total annual emissions of any country except China.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Global Focus

17. Tallying Updated NDCs to Gauge Emissions Reductions in 2030 and Progress toward Net Zero

Author:
James Glynn, Kristin Smith, Melissa Lott, Lilly Yejin Lee, Jordan Shenhar, and Pekun Bakare
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
The Paris Agreement included two particularly crucial innovations for supporting greenhouse gas emissions reductions: a voluntary, bottom-up nationally determined contribution (NDC) and a ratchet mechanism. The latter change meant that, in the run-up to the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Glasgow last fall, countries prepared updated NDCs—specific commitments to reduce emissions by 2030—that outlined their increased ambition. After the adoption of the Glasgow Climate Pact, many observers have focused on what these NDCs, as well as countries’ pledges to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by certain dates, could mean for the world’s ability to limit global temperature rise to well below 2° Celsius—the central goal of the Paris Agreement. But another critical question remains: how would these targets and ambitions drive near-term emissions reductions. Understanding the answer can provide insights to investors, utilities, or others with decision time horizons of 10–15 years and that wish to align with net-zero ambitions. This report, part of the energy systems modeling program at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, aims to assess the alignment between updated NDCs and current net-zero pledges for policy makers and industry leaders to gain insight into their own national and corporate decarbonization outlooks. It considers all classes of NDCs, including: 1) percentage reduction in emissions relative to a historical base year level, 2) percentage reduction compared to a 2030 business-as-usual scenario, and 3) reduction in emissions intensity of gross domestic product. It presents an estimate of the percentage reduction in greenhouse gases (GHGs) from 2015 to 2030 for all commitments outlined in NDCs for countries that also have a net-zero target. Overall, this analysis finds that the NDCs of economies with 2050 net-zero pledges would lead to a 27 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2030, relative to 2015. However, countries with post-2050 net-zero pledges are projected to increase their emissions by 10 percent between 2015 and 2030, lowering the net global emission reduction to 9 percent over this period.
Topic:
Environment, Green Technology, Carbon Emissions, and Decarbonization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

18. International Political Economy and Sustainable Finance: Assessing the EU’s Green Deal and UNCTAD’s Green New Deal

Author:
Johannes Jager
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contexto Internacional
Institution:
Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:
Sustainable green finance is often promoted as an innovative tool to deal with environmental problems. This paper assesses policy proposals at the level of the EU and UNCTAD’s Green New Deal, specifically regarding its suggestions in the field of sustainable finance. It provides a theoretical framework in the tradition of critical political economy and combines a global perspective with regulation theory in order to assess different strategies in the area of sustainable finance. The respective proposals and initiatives can be considered as possible blueprints for hegemonic strategies within different contexts. However, the analysis suggests both proposals, although substantially different and representing different entities in the international political economy, fail to provide a systematic answer to the problems of a highly unequal over-use of natural and environmental resources at a global level.
Topic:
Political Economy, Finance, Green Technology, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

19. We Will Build the Future: A Plan to Save the Planet

Author:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Abstract:
Under the leadership of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America – People’s Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP), Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research partnered with 26 research institutes from around the world to draft A Plan to Save the Planet. This living, evolving document puts forward a vision for the present and the immediate future centred on twelve key themes: democracy and the world order, the environment, finance, health, housing, food, education, work, care, women, culture, and the digital world. Dossier no. 48 includes and elaborates on the Plan and lays out our orientation, principles, and horizon.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Regional Cooperation, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Harnessing EU-Kenya renewable energy relations for a bright future

Author:
Akash Ramnath and Louise Van Schaik
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Unlike many of its neighbours, Kenya is progressing towards universal electrification from 100% renewable sources as set out by the country’s Vision 2030 Agenda. This feat, however, does not mean that there are not areas for improvement of its energy profile, especially around grid resilience, energy access and mitigating fluctuating supply and volatile prices. The EU stands poised to help this strengthening, not only due to the bloc’s leading presence in the Kenyan energy transition, but also because of growing geopolitical competition in Africa. The EU aims to beat its competitors in the field of green technologies. Moreover, as part of the external dimension of the European Green Deal the EU aims to avoid further carbon lock-ins, strengthen the ability of countries like Kenya to meet their Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement and boost the EU’s international influence and visibility. This policy brief enumerates opportunities and offers recommendations for the evolution of EU-Kenya relations in the field of renewable energy.
Topic:
European Union, Green Technology, Renewable Energy, and Resilience
Political Geography:
Kenya, Africa, and Europe