Sometimes it looks as if the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change have bet large amounts of money against themselves on the success of climate negotiations.

"Are we done yet?” Poland has hardly been an enthusiastic actor in UNFCCC negotiations (Source: IISD.ca)

Countries are now engaged in an excruciatingly slow race to reach an agreement by 2015, which would for the first time commit both the developed and the developing world under “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force” (ah, the beauty of UNFCCC language…), in order to meet the goal of 2 degrees warming by the end of the century, the “safe” limit that was agreed upon at the 2009 Copenhagen summit.

Given what’s at stake, and the inefficiencies inherent to the UN process, you’d think that the world’s nations would make sure that not a minute is lost in the talks. And yet, after a Qatari Presidency that left everyone with the vivid memory of conference chairman Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah literally hammering out a last-minute deal, Poland has been designated to host the 19th annual Conference of the Parties (COP19) next October.

It may not be obvious, at first sight, why Poland hosting the climate talks seems like a step backwards. After all, the ambitions around COP19 are not to come up with a global agreement, but rather to make substantial advances on pressing issues in preparation of the Durban Platform deadline, fixed for 2015 (and a very likely French Presidency). But it helps to remember that the last COP on the road to the rather underachieving Copenhagen Conference in 2009 took place in Poznań, which could say something about the capacity of a Polish COP Presidency to pave the way for ambitious deal-making. These fears, of course, are not enough to dismiss Poland as a valuable host. What weighs heavier is that the country does have a history of blocking progress in climate negotiations, particularly at the European Union level.

Read the rest of this entry

The English version of this blog is available here.

Por Cinthya Alfaro Zúñiga

Al ser costarricense y becario de investigación para Worldwatch Institute/INCAE, me brindó mucha satisfacción asistir al 21 Foro Regional de la Alianza en Energía y Ambiente con Centroamérica(AEA) que tuvo lugar en Costa Rica a principios del mes de marzo. El objetivo principal de la AEA es brindar financiamiento para proyectos de energía renovable, sin embargo también busca desarrollar capacidades al explorar diversos temas como las diferentes tecnologías energéticas, las políticas requeridas para una implementación exitosa y los obstáculos y oportunidades regionales por medio de diálogo entre las partes involucradas.

Worldwatch e INCAE presentan la primera fase del proyecto “El Futuro de la Energía Renovable en Centroamérica” en Costa Rica en Marzo.

Bajo el título de “Biogás y Eficiencia Energética en Centroamérica”, el más reciente Foro reunió a un grupo de 200 expertos, desarrolladores de proyectos, representantes gubernamentales, financistas y el público en general. Los ponentes se refirieron a temas como la contribución a la reducción de emisiones de carbono por parte de las políticas de eficiencia energética y de la energía renovable. Otros tópicos importantes incluyen el estado de la eficiencia energética y del biogás en Centroamérica, así como un recorrido por los proyectos de la AEA en ambos temas.

La actividad de tres días contó con ponentes de la Agencia de Cooperación Alemana (GIZ), el Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE), la Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), el Banco Centroamericano de Integración Económica (BCIE), y el Worldwatch Institute, entre otros.

Read the rest of this entry

By Wenna Wang and Haibing Ma

Source: EIA | Distribution of China's shale gas basins.

On June 27^th, 5 shares of shale gas reached their daily limits at Shanghai Composite Index, the largest stock market in China, lifting the whole Oil & Gas sector above the otherwise decreasing Chinese stock market. This was stimulated by a signal from the nation’s Ministry of Land and Resources: the second round of shale gas exploration rights is expected to open for bidding in September, and this time it will be open to private investors.

Shale gas, which is natural gas found in hydrocarbon rich shale formations, is one of the most important unconventional sources of natural gas and represents a rapidly expanding trend in onshore gas exploration and production today. The deposits are mainly extracted through hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. Though it is not an ideal alternative to conventional energy sources, shale gas can be a key to energy independence and a lower carbon footprint, since it produces 43 percent and 30 percent less carbon dioxide emissions than coal and oil per thermal unit produced, respectively. However, not everything about shale gas is an improvement, as its extraction process may contaminate ground water and release volatile compounds into the soil, while the use of shale gas will still lead to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The main mining techniques used for extraction, horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, have been linked to various problems like water shortages, groundwater contamination, methane gas seeps, micro-earthquakes and coal fires. Sample surveys show that methane concentrations were 17-times higher on average (19.2 mg/L) in shallow wells located in active drilling and extraction areas than in wells located in non-active areas (1.1 mg/L on average). In addition, there are studies showing properties with shale gas wells were valued down due to the fracturing.

Read the rest of this entry

New policies in Central America are connecting small-scale renewable energy users to the grid—but not in the direction you might expect.

Net metering policies allow owners of small-scale distributed renewable energy systems to feed power produced by their installations back into the grid. Under net metering, utility customers who own such systems can install a bi-directional meter that records both incoming and outgoing power and calculates the net difference. If customers produce more electricity than they use, they receive compensation from the utility company, often in the form of avoided costs or by receiving a pre-selected payment per kilowatt-hour (kWh).

Solar project in Esterillos. Source: Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad

Net metering is a low-cost, low-risk policy and has been successfully implemented in many countries around the world. The right of utility customers to produce renewable energy and connect their systems to a distribution network – in conjunction with other polices that promote renewables such as tax concessions and financial assistance —is helping individuals and communities to introduce renewables into the grid on a small scale. In Central America, Panama, Costa Rica, and Guatemala have already introduced net metering policies to promote renewable energy deployment.  

Read the rest of this entry

For the seven countries of Central America—Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama—a transition to renewable energy and low-carbon technologies is imperative. In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, a robust renewable energy industry can stimulate the growth of clean energy manufacturing and help address regional problems such as an energy supply deficit, low rural electrification, and poverty.

Yet despite abundant renewable energy resources—including wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal—Central America remains highly dependent on imported oil, fossil fuel-based electricity, and unsustainable large hydropower. In the 1990s, deregulation of regional electricity markets opened the power sector to private investments, but it also paved the way for a surge in fossil fuel-based capacity, as most governments did not consider policies to promote renewables during the early stages of these reforms.

Solar panels used by Alimentos Campestres to dry fruits and vegetables. Source: Alimentos Campestres.

As the region’s economies expand, led by strong growth in Panama, energy demand is expected to surge. As a result, these countries will only become more vulnerable to high and fluctuating energy costs from imported oil.

Read the rest of this entry

Last week I wrote about the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new proposed standard for carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from fossil fuel power plants. The long-awaited regulation would limit emissions to 1,000 pounds of CO₂per megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity produced, essentially guaranteeing that no new coal power plants will be built in the U.S. without carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies.

Almost 30 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions come from coal power plants. Image source: epa.gov

In an effort to minimize opposition to the proposed standard, the EPA emphasized the limited negative impact on industry, as utility companies are already choosing to invest in natural gas rather than coal plants for new capacity. This is due mostly to abundant new reserves of relatively cheap shale gas extracted through hydraulic fracturing.

So just how accurate are the EPA’s claims that the proposed regulation is in line with industry business-as-usual? Other projections of future coal plant construction support the overall claim that the industry was already moving away from investing in new coal power.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projected there would be “virtually no new coal in [the] reference case [scenario] following several CCS demos.” The EIA reports that there are 9.3 gigawatts (GW) of new coal capacity currently planned by 2015, and none thereafter. Nearly all of this new capacity will be built within the next 12 months and will therefore be exempt from the proposed CO2 standards. Any plants scheduled to begin construction in more than a year will need to include CCS technologies in order to comply with the 1,000 pounds of CO₂ per MWh limit of the proposed EPA regulation. Power plant emissions can be averaged over a 30-year period to meet the regulations, so it is also possible for power producers to build coal plants in the near-term provided they install CCS systems in the future.

Read the rest of this entry

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed the country’s first federal standard regulating carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from power plants last week. The introduction of a carbon standard has been long-awaited by the environmental community, and many groups are applauding the proposed rule as an important first step by the U.S. government to tackle climate change.

EPA promotes the clean air and health benefits of carbon regulation on the agency homepage. Image source: epa.gov

The carbon emission standard – which limits emissions to 1,000 pounds of CO₂ per megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity produced – will apply to future fossil fuel-fired power plants with an installed capacity greater than 25 megawatts (MW); plants that are currently operating or that will begin construction in the next 12 months are exempt.

The average natural gas plant in the U.S. emits between 800 and 850 pounds of CO₂ per MWh, safely within the proposed standard. The average coal plant, on the other hand, emits 1,768 pounds of CO₂ per MWh, which would exceed the standard. However, these existing plants will not be affected by the regulation, and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson further emphasized that there are currently “no plans” to place standards on CO₂ emissions from existing plants, including future modifications that could increase their emissions. However it is likely that the EPA will regulate carbon emissions from existing power plants at some point down the road, and the proposed standard for new sources is a vital step to ensuring that this will occur.

Read the rest of this entry

The public transportation system in Medellín, Colombia, has proven to be one of the most successful transit systems in the world. It not only reduces the city’s energy consumption and carbon footprint, making the city more environmentally sustainable, but also drives positive social and economic change for Medellín as a whole.

Medellín metro system. (Source: http://www.colombia.travel/en/international-tourist/multimedia/photo-gallery/medellin)

Medellín received the 2012 Sustainable Transport Award from the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. ITDP is a global consortium of organizations that works with cities worldwide, mainly in developing countries, to provide solutions for their public transportation systems, tackling carbon emissions, poverty, and social inequality. The previous award winners are Guangzhou, China, in 2011 and Ahmedabad, India, in 2010.

Read the rest of this entry

Last Sunday marked the first anniversary of an unprecedented catastrophe that struck northern Japan. On March 11, 2011, a tsunami—triggered by a major earthquake—swept into the area surrounding the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station, disabling the cooling capabilities of three of the plant’s oldest reactors. In the days and weeks that followed, as workers struggled to cool and dismantle the plant, reactors 1, 2, and 3 went into meltdown. A series of explosions and fires led to the release of radioactive gas, and fears of contamination ultimately prompted the evacuation of approximately 100,000 people from the immediate area; some 30,000 may never be able to return to their homes.

The Fukushima Daichi Nuclear Power Plant, 25 March 2011 (Source: econews)

The first anniversary of this horrific event—the worst nuclear disaster since the Chernobyl accident in 1986—is a time to commemorate the more than 20,000 people who died in the initial earthquake and tsunami, as well as the courage of those who risked radioactive exposure to regain control of the plant and prevent further calamity. But it is also a time to look forward—to examine what we have learned from Fukushima and what it means for the future of energy in Japan and around the world.

A “moment of opportunity” for Japan

In the aftermath of the meltdown, the Japanese public turned decidedly against nuclear power, marking a pronounced change in a nation that was once one of the world’s most committed proponents and producers of civilian atomic energy. Japan has been using nuclear power since the 1960s, and in 2010 it generated 30 percent of its electricity from nuclear plants. In the past year, however, the vast majority of nuclear facilities in Japan have been shut down for routine maintenance or “stress tests” and have not yet been reopened. Today, all but two of Japan’s commercial reactors have been shut down, with the last one scheduled to go offline as early as April. The country has also abandoned any existing plans to build new reactors.

Read the rest of this entry

In the fall of last year, the U.S. State Department permit review for construction of the Keystone XL pipeline by energy company TransCanada gained significant attention in the media and political debates. If built, this pipeline would move bitumen, thick and heavy oil, from the Canadian province of Alberta through the American Midwest to oil refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas. In October, hundreds of environmentalists, including famously outspoken NASA scientist James Hansen, and Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, were arrested for civil disobedience while protesting the pipeline outside the White House. With climate change and clean energy as major drivers, environmentalists have focused on the Keystone XL pipeline protests as a means of preventing the transportation of oil to consumers and ultimately the extraction of tar sand.

TransCanada’s planned and existing oil pipelines (source: The Economist)

Tar sand is a mixture of bitumen, sand, clay, and water, which must be processed and refined to extract oil from the surrounding substances. Roughly twenty percent of the U.S. crude oil imports are from Canada, much of which is derived from tar sands. In order to satisfy the steady U.S. demand for oil, TransCanada plans to build the Keystone XL pipeline to extend the existing pipeline system and transport bitumen to U.S. refineries. The Keystone XL pipeline has been a source of disagreement for several years between environmental groups and the oil industry. The main environmental concerns are threats to water quality from potential pipeline leaks and increased greenhouse gas emissions from burning and extracting the bitumen. In a well-to-wheel analysis, tar sands emit roughly ten to forty five percent more greenhouse gases than standard petroleum.

Pipeline supporters counter that the Keystone XL pipeline would provide the U.S. with a steady supply of oil from a politically stable nation.  Proponents also argue that constructing the pipeline would create thousands of American jobs. Amid all the controversy, a Rasmussen poll found that fifty three percent of likely American voters at least somewhat support construction of the pipeline. 

Read the rest of this entry