Search

Begin New Search Topic Green Technology

41. A Contextual Analysis of Green Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises/Local Green Enterprises in Uganda

Author:
Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE)
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE)
Abstract:
The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) dominate Uganda's economy. They play a pivotal role in production and supply chains, value addition, technology transfer, development and innovation. MSMEs, underpin the country's competitiveness, employment, income and wealth creation and if greened and well harnessed, they have a big potential to facilitate transitioning to an inclusive transformative growth trajectory.The report contributes to a better understanding of the sustainable financial architecture and how it affects the activities and priorities of LGEs in Uganda. It is hoped that the report will guide informed discussions at local and national levels and feed into the development of sustainable finance policy instruments, laws, support systems and standards that improve investment climate for LGEs and consequently promote the greening of MSMEs.
Topic:
Development, Economy, Green Technology, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
Uganda and Africa

42. The Environmental Impact of Syria’s Conflict: A Preliminary Survey of Issues

Author:
Roba Gaafar
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The Syrian conflict has had devastating human and economic consequences, but it also greatly damaged the environment in the country. This paper provides a preliminary survey of a set of environmental challenges that impose significant health, social and economic costs, including air pollution, deforestation, soil and vegetation degradation, and water depletion, and suggests green solutions for post-conflict relief and reconstruction.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Health, Conflict, Green Technology, and Pollution
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

43. Environmentalism After Decentralization: The Local Politics of Solid Waste Management in Tunisia

Author:
Lana Salman
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Ten days before the end of 2020, Mustapha Laroui, then Minister of Environment and Local Affairs, was dismissed from his post on suspicion of corruption. Laroui served in Tunisia’s ninth post-revolution government, headed by Hishem Mechichi who also kicked him out of office. He was arrested the same day. The scandal that ended Laroui’s career in government concerns facilitating the transfer of 282 containers equivalent to 480 tons of Italian waste to Tunisia via the port of Sousse.1 The full extent of the scandal was revealed after the investigative TV show “Al Haqa’eq al Arba‘a” (the four truths) ran an episode on 2 November 2020 uncovering the scale of the problem. Twenty-three additional suspects were arrested and questioned in relation to the scandal, including the director of the National Agency for Waste Management (ANGED), who was later released, and a Tunisian diplomat based in Naples. Though it made the news in November, the imported waste had been sitting in the port of Sousse since early 2020. Reports indicate that the deal that brought southern Italian waste to the Tunisian shore was signed between the export-oriented Tunisian firm Soreplast and the Naples-based Italian firm Sviluppo Risorse Ambientali Srl. Contrary to the media narrative – whereby Soreplast had allegedly imported post-industrial plastic waste to process, recycle, and export – the formal contract indicates that the objective was the permanent elimination of the waste in Tunisia, with a price tag of 48 euros/ton, not to exceed 120,000 tons per year, for a total value of 5 million euros. Dirty scandals haunt Tunisia’s solid waste management sector. An investigative report published by Nawaat2 in May 2015 focused on the rampant corruption in the management of the country’s largest controlled landfill, the landfill of Borj Chakir in the municipality of Sidi Hassine, a southern suburb of Tunis with a number of working-class neighbourhoods (quartiers populaires).3 A pithy summary describes the situation: solid waste management is a highly lucrative sector where opacity and corruption are not only endemic but also institutionalized. The report exposes the rigged public tendering process which enabled the French company PIZZORNO Environnement headed by François Léotard to win the contract for the management of the Borj Chakir landfill because of Léotard’s friendship with ousted president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. The infractions were reported in a 350-page investigation prepared by Abdelfattah Amor, 4 which addresses corruption and embezzlement affairs across sectors perpetrated by the authoritarian regime and its cronies. The creation of ANGED in 20055 as a public non-administrative agency responsible for solid waste management (henceforth SWM) seems to have facilitated institutionalized corruption in the sector. Starting in the 1990s with the acceleration of neoliberal policies, a veneer of awareness-raising campaigns to create environmentally conscious citizens hid institutionalized corruption in SWM from public view. Labib (figure 1) was the emblem of these campaigns. The environment mascot whose statues filled roundabouts across Tunisia is associated with the RCD (Constitutional Democratic Rally), the one-party-state of the authoritarian regime. After the revolution, most of these statues were vengefully destroyed in protest. Those still standing are a reminder of the powerful ideas the authoritarian regime ingrained in citizens’ minds about the environment, and which encompass two elements: aesthetics (decorating public spaces with statues) and moral uprightness, measured in terms of conforming to a specific behaviour, such as not littering. Framed like this, environmental protection was a personal moral responsibility rather than a societal political-economy question related to patterns of consumption, the inevitable waste these patterns create, and ways of disposing of the produced waste. Nonetheless, Labib did help raise awareness about environmental protection. Although the removal of most of these statues is a break from the authoritarian regime, no awareness-raising efforts have replaced the mascot.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Green Technology, Local, and Waste
Political Geography:
Africa and Tunisia

44. How can activists best advance environmental reforms in MENA?

Author:
Rory Quick
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Decarbonising the current energy system does not secure a sustainable future if challenges beyond carbon emission are ignored and the economic model which continues to exacerbate the challenges we face is not rectified. Genuine environmental reform requires an intersectional approach, one which does not just patch over problems but instigates reform. The socio-political and environmental crises we face are symptoms of the same problem and must be treated as such. In order to reach a sustainable future, policies should resolve current issues without creating or exacerbating existing challenges. If there is a reason for social movements to exist, it is to challenge dominant values as flexible and changeable and to offer alternative ways to live. Across the MENA region, there are growing calls - from experts and activists - for reform in the region to simultaneously deal with wider socio-political issues whilst decarbonizing energy systems. In the MENA region, states are preoccupied with developing renewable energy (RE) at large scale. Examples include Morocco’s Ouarzazate Noor Solar Plant and Dubai’s Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Solar Park. This is an extension of the existing energy model. Megaprojects are political as much as economic projects. They support exclusionary political regimes and enable states to strengthen existing socio-political systems, and thus further reduce the political autonomy of the individual. Energy megaprojects are projections of state centralization, as they require no input from the localities in which they are placed. They therefore actively reduce political freedom. An alternative model - the decentralised RE model - allows for ownership and operation of RE to remain in the communities where it operates. Solar and wind technology is scalable, whereas previous technology was not. This allows for the creation of an energy system that is not only sustainable but also democratically owned and designed, and socially just. A decentralised system, whereby individuals have a direct say in how their energy systems operate, is vital in ensuring energy justice is achieved alongside climate justice.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Political Activism, Reform, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, North Africa, and MENA

45. Green Hydrogen in a Circular Carbon Economy: Opportunities and Limits

Author:
Zhiyuan Fan, Emeka Richard Ochu, Sarah Braverman, Yushan Lou, Griffin Smith, Amar Bhardwaj, Jack Brouwder, Colin McCormick, and Julio Friedmann
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
As global warming mitigation and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction become increasingly urgent to counter climate change, many nations have announced net-zero emission targets as a commitment to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Low-carbon hydrogen has received renewed attention under these decarbonization frameworks as a potential low-carbon fuel and feedstock, especially for hard-to-abate sectors such as heavy-duty transportation (trucks, shipping) and heavy industries (e.g., steel, chemicals). Green hydrogen in particular, defined as hydrogen produced from water electrolysis with zero-carbon electricity, could have significant potential in helping countries transition their economies to meet climate goals. Today, green hydrogen production faces enormous challenges, including its cost and economics, infrastructure limitations, and potential increases in CO2 emissions (e.g., if produced with uncontrolled fossil power generation, which would be hydrogen but would not be green). This report, part of the Carbon Management Research Initiative at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, examines green hydrogen production and applications to understand the core challenges to its expansion at scale and the near-term opportunity to enable deployment. An analysis using Monte Carlo simulations with a varying range of assumptions, including both temporal (i.e., today versus the future) and geographical (e.g., the US, the EU, China, India, Japan) factors, anticipates emissions intensity and costs of producing green hydrogen. The authors evaluate these production costs for different scenarios as well as associated infrastructure requirements and highlight near-term market opportunities and policies to motivate development of the green hydrogen industry.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Green Technology, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Global Focus

46. Green Giants? China’s National Oil Companies Prepare for the Energy Transition

Author:
Erica Downs
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
On September 22, 2020, China’s leader, Xi Jinping, made a surprise announcement about China’s climate ambitions during remarks to the United Nations General Assembly. He stated that China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases (GHGs), aims to achieve carbon neutrality before 2060. Xi also said that China’s GHG emissions would peak before 2030, a slight revision to China’s pledge under the Paris Climate Agreement to peak emissions around 2030. China’s new climate targets spurred the country’s three major national oil companies (NOCs)—China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), China Petrochemical Corporation (Sinopec Group), and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC)—to strengthen their climate ambitions. PetroChina (the flagship subsidiary of CNPC), which had already set a goal of achieving near-zero emissions by 2050, intends to peak its carbon emissions by 2025. Sinopec Corp. (the flagship subsidiary of Sinopec Group) also aims to peak its carbon emissions by 2025 and to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. CNOOC Ltd. (the flagship subsidiary of CNOOC) plans to reduce its GHG emissions by 16 percent between 2020 and 2025 and aims to peak its carbon emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality before 2060. This report, part of the China Energy and Climate Program at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, provides a baseline for understanding how China’s NOCs are responding to climate change. It examines the activities the three companies identified as part of their emerging energy transition strategies before Xi unveiled the carbon peaking and carbon neutrality targets, and why they didn’t do more. The report then assesses the implications of China’s new climate ambitions for its NOCs and lays out their preparations to date for supporting Xi’s 2030 and 2060 pledges.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Oil, Natural Resources, Infrastructure, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
China and Asia

47. Promoting Energy for Development in a World Accelerating to Net-Zero: Roundtable Report

Author:
Hon Xing Wong, Jonathan Elkind, Philippe Benoit, and Aashna Aggarwal
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
On September 14, 2021, Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL) and Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP) co-hosted a high-level virtual roundtable on energy for development and climate objectives, the first of a series of discussions focusing on the intersection between these two policy priorities. Among the roundtable participants were senior leaders representing major international organizations, development finance institutions, civil society, philanthropic foundations, academia, youth activists, and energy and finance industries. Convened a week before the United Nations (UN) High-Level Dialogue on Energy—the first in 40 years—the virtual roundtable occurred at a time when the focus of many decision makers around the globe was on accelerating climate change mitigation to fulfill the goals of the Paris Agreement. Amid this sense of urgency to accelerate decarbonization, the roundtable served as a timely reminder of energy’s role in alleviating poverty and promoting growth. With 2.6 billion people (more than a third of the world’s population) lacking access to clean cooking and almost 760 million people (roughly 10 percent of the world’s population) lacking access to electricity, bridging the energy gap by 2030 should remain at the top of the global agenda.[1] Energy access is essential for economic development, especially for the 9.1–9.4 percent of the world that still lives in extreme poverty (defined as living on less than $1.90 per day).[2] Moreover, the role of energy extends beyond basic access: it is critical to generating broad-based economic growth to lift people out of poverty and enable quality healthcare, education, gender equity, food security, and other benefits enjoyed by middle-class populations worldwide. Roundtable participants discussed options to promote energy for development and climate change mitigation, considering matters of policy, finance, and technology. This report summarizes the roundtable discussion and presents participants’ key questions. The discussion occurred on a not-for-attribution basis under the Chatham House rule.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Energy Policy, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
Global Focus

48. The Impact of ESG on National Oil Companies

Author:
Luisa Palacios
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
The rise of ESG investing—investment focused on environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and corporate governance—in the 21st century has created significant pressures on oil companies. Some shareholders of international oil companies (IOCs) have pressed them to pay closer attention to ESG goals and diversify their business models away from hydrocarbons and into other sources of energy amid efforts to address greenhouse gas emissions.[1] National oil companies (NOCs)—which currently control about 50 percent of the world’s oil production—have different corporate mandates than their IOC peers that might imply a more complicated relationship with ESG goals. NOCs are mainly owned by governments in the developing world, and thus face vastly different demands than IOCs answering to private sector shareholders.[2] But different does not mean NOCs do not or will not feel pressure to address ESG issues. Given NOCs’ significant share of global oil production—and the fact that this share may increase as IOCs diversify—the pressures they face and changes they make could have a significant impact on the future of the oil and gas industry as well as countries’ abilities to meet climate goals. During the November 2021 COP 26 meetings in Glasgow, Saudi Arabia and India became the latest countries with strong NOCs to pledge to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in the next decades.[3] This commentary examines how the ESG agenda is impacting NOCs through the ecosystem of organizations and principles that have emerged from the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement as well as from investors and regulators in global financial markets. The piece then describes the three components of the ESG framework in relation to NOCs and the challenges of accurately measuring adherence to them due to insufficient standardization of metrics and the variety of reporting frameworks. Also, because environmental, social, and governance competence are not strictly related to one another, companies may be strong in some areas and weak in others, making it difficult to evaluate their ESG performance as a whole.[4] Finally, while ESG pressures are coming alongside discussions about the energy transition and climate change, ESG assessments do not evaluate companies’ energy transition plans, even if some aspects of ESG scores might provide insights about them. The commentary pays special attention to the importance of corporate governance for national oil companies in achieving overall ESG goals, given the key differences between their ownership structure and that of private sector companies working in the oil industry.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Oil, Natural Resources, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
Global Focus

49. Advancing Corporate Procurement of Zero-Carbon Electricity in the United States: Moving from RE100 to ZC100

Author:
Melissa Lott and Bruce Phillips
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
Corporate pledges to purchase renewable electricity have led to significant new solar and wind capacity investments and driven down the carbon intensity of the power sector in the United States. Participating companies have increasingly procured this power, many with a goal of procuring quantities that are equal or proportional to the amount of electricity that they consume at their facilities on an annual basis.[1] Corporate buyers can reap many benefits from renewables procurement, including hedging against power price fluctuations and enjoying positive brand association, helping them meet shareholder demands around climate or other environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals. However, the reality is that commitments to buy 100 percent renewable electricity may not equate to a company actually reducing its power carbon footprint to zero. This report from Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy quantifies the mismatch between companies’ contracted variable renewable electricity (VRE) and their actual use of electricity to highlight the degree to which these companies still rely on a partially fossil-fueled power grid to bridge the gap. A modeling exercise and analysis done in collaboration with The NorthBridge Group reveals a significant shortfall between electricity demand and VRE supply, leaving companies that contract for 100 percent renewables to in fact draw between 20 percent and 50 percent[2] of their annual electricity from the regional electric grid, depending on their location, demand profile, and mix of contracted renewable supplies. This disparity presents a number of challenges to corporations that wish to achieve deep decarbonization and are unable to curtail operations to match renewable energy supplies. There are several approaches to get closer to a true zero-carbon power footprint. Installing storage capacity either on-site or at the power plant to provide stored electricity when renewables are not sufficient, such as with a battery,[3] is one option. However, this only reduces the minimum shortfall by half, requiring a customer to continue to rely on electricity from the regional electric grid for 10 percent to 28 percent of its annual load.[4] Resolving the shortfall by procuring extra renewable power (e.g., to 150 percent of annual electricity demand with renewables) can drive costs up substantially without closing the gap.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Green Technology, Carbon Emissions, and Decarbonization
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

50. Comparing a Clean Electricity Standard and a Carbon Tax

Author:
Peter Marsters, John Larsen, Ben King, Hannah Kolus, and Whitney Herndon
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
As the United States commits to accelerating decarbonization as part of global efforts to combat climate change, the policies it enacts will govern its chances of success. These international ambitions are balanced against domestic realities: the effect of net-zero greenhouse gas strategies on households and the broader economy. Comparing different policy options against one another in terms of specific outcomes, such as emissions abatement and financial impact on consumers, is a useful exercise for policy makers. Because US congressional proposals have focused on two potential policy routes—an economy-wide price on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, and a sector-by-sector approach that starts with a clean electricity standard—this report models outcomes for these scenarios. A carbon tax and clean electricity standard (CES) are similar policies in some ways. Both have the potential to drive large emissions reductions from the US power sector and beyond. If the CES is designed to be technology-neutral with tradable credits for clean electricity generation, both policies would operate as market-based mechanisms to encourage such generation. They also differ in significant ways, and this report, part of the Carbon Tax Research Initiative at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, uses energy system modeling to zero in on those differences to enable policy makers to better understand the advantages and drawbacks of each policy tool. A variety of constructions even within a single tool—particularly a CES—can be employed. What type of generation is eligible for credit in a CES and how much credit each resource receives, for example, are in part products of political and policy trade-offs. For comparison purposes with an economy-wide carbon tax, this report primarily focuses on a single crediting approach that most closely resembles the incentives new and existing electric power generators could receive under a carbon tax (and is similar to the CES included in the Clean Energy Innovation and Deployment Act of 2020). And for CES comparison purposes, the authors construct a carbon tax pathway that closely approximates the annual and cumulative electric power CO2 emissions of the CES. Given the equal emissions-reduction ambitions of the two policies modeled in this report, the greatest trade-offs come down to price increases and revenues. The carbon tax raises consumers’ electricity price more than the CES does, but also raises significant revenues that could be used, among other purposes, to offset increases in consumers’ energy-related bills.
Topic:
Green Technology, Tax Systems, Electricity, Renewable Energy, Carbon Tax, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America