Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Writing team
- Foreword
- Preface
- List of acronyms and abbreviations
- Part I Climatic trends
- Part II Defining ‘dangerous climate change’
- Part III Equity issues
- Part IV Mitigation and adaptation approaches
- 11 Low-carbon energy technologies as mitigation approaches
- 12 Economic approaches and instruments
- 13 Geopolitics and governance
- 14 Adapting to the unavoidable
- Part V Meeting the challenge
- Index
- Plate section
- References
11 - Low-carbon energy technologies as mitigation approaches
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 April 2011
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Writing team
- Foreword
- Preface
- List of acronyms and abbreviations
- Part I Climatic trends
- Part II Defining ‘dangerous climate change’
- Part III Equity issues
- Part IV Mitigation and adaptation approaches
- 11 Low-carbon energy technologies as mitigation approaches
- 12 Economic approaches and instruments
- 13 Geopolitics and governance
- 14 Adapting to the unavoidable
- Part V Meeting the challenge
- Index
- Plate section
- References
Summary
‘The only engine big enough to impact Mother Nature is Father Greed: the Market. Only a market, shaped by regulations and incentives to stimulate massive innovation in clean, emission-free power sources can make a dent in global warming.’
Introduction
The joint climate and development imperatives described in the previous chapters demand a strong, immediate and sustained response. As outlined in Chapter 8, the global community has approximately four decades to implement a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the order of 90%.
The transition to a low-carbon/low-emissions economy will likely take many forms and be played out on local, national and regional levels as well as on the global stage (Chapter 13). While little has so far been done to initiate this transition, a diverse suite of existing and near-term technologies exist that can be components of regionally tailored low-carbon energy mixes, and which can underpin an aggressive expansion of energy efficiency worldwide. The challenge is, in effect, one of inventing and implementing a new energy economy in around four decades; i.e. in a fraction of the time it took to build the entire current industrial energy infrastructure.
A new ‘triple bottom line’ is therefore needed: one that is low-carbon, high-growth and job-creating. To further increase this challenge, this must be achieved in not only a few small segments of the global population, but also widely across industrialised and developing nations – from household and village scales, to national and regional economies.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions , pp. 281 - 316Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011
References
and (eds.) (2010). Geological Repository Systems for Safe Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuels and Radioactive Waste. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2007). A Low-Carbon Fuel Standard for California Part 1: Technical Analysis. Berkeley, CA: UC Berkeley Transportation Research Sustainability Center.Google Scholar
, and (2005). Mortality and greenhouse gas impacts of biomass and petroleum energy futures in Africa. Science, 308, 98–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2009). Thermoelectrics in biomass stove systems. Presented at the UN-ASEAN Next Generation Cook Stove Workshop. 18 November, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok.
(2008). Nuclear Power's Role in Generating Electricity. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Budget Office, p. 28.Google Scholar
, , and (2009). Economic and environmental evaluation of compressed-air cars. Environmental Research Letters, 4, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2010). Getting the carbon out of transportation fuels. In Global Sustainability: A Nobel Cause, eds. , , , and . Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 307–18.Google Scholar
and (1999). The economics of energy market transformation programs. The Energy Journal, 20, 15–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2007). A cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction. The Mckinsey Quarterly, February.Google Scholar
(2010). Roadmap 2050: A Practical Guide to a Prosperous, Low Carbon Europe. Den Haag, The Netherlands: European Climate Foundation, http://www.roadmap2050.eu/downloads.html.Google Scholar
, , et al. (2006). Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science, 311, 506–08.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2009). Toward a low-carbon economy: Municipal financing for energy efficiency and solar power. Environment, 51, 22–32.Google Scholar
and (1997). A pressurized water reactor design for plutonium incineration: Fuel cycle options. Nuclear Technology, 117, 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2010). Beyond fuelwood savings: Valuing the economic benefits of introducing improved biomass cookstoves in the Purhépecha region of Mexico. Ecological Economics, 69(12), 2598–2605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2009). Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the U. S. Economy. New York, NY: McKinsey & Company.Google Scholar
, , et al. (2009). Effects of US maize ethanol on global land use and greenhouse gas emissions: Estimating market-mediated responses. BioScience, 60, 223–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2009). Deliberately small reactors and the second nuclear era. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 51, 589–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2009a). Quantification of carbon savings from improved biomass cookstove projects. Environmental Science & Technology, 43, 2456–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2009b). Proyecto MEDEC ‘México: Estudio Sobre la Disminución de Emisiones de Carbono’, Colombia: Banco Mundial, Mayol Mediciones.Google Scholar
and (2009). Commentary: The transition from ICVs to PHEVs and EVs. In Betting on Science: Disruptive Technologies in Transport Fuels. USA: Accenture, pp. 219–20.Google Scholar
and (2005). Reversing the incredible shrinking energy R&D budget. Issues in Science & Technology, Fall, 84–88.Google Scholar
and (2007). Energy myth 11 – Energy R&D investment takes decades to reach the market. In Energy and American Society – Thirteen Myths, eds. and . The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 289–310.Google Scholar
and (2004). Assessing the costs of electricity. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 29, 301–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004). Putting Renewables to Work: How Many Jobs Can the Clean Energy Industry Generate?Berkeley, CA: University of California, Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory.Google Scholar
, , et al. (2007). Energy and greenhouse impacts of biofuels: A framework for analysis. OECD Research Roundtable: Biofuels: Linking Support to Performance. Berkeley, CA: University of California – Institute of Transportation Studies.Google Scholar
, , and (2008). Securing a Clean Energy Future: Opportunities for States in Clean Energy Research, Development, & Demonstration. Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association.Google Scholar
(2004). Science for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy.Google Scholar
and (1999). Underinvestment: The energy technology and R&D policy challenge. Science, 285, 690–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) (2007). Feed-In Tariffs: Accelerating the Deployment of Renewable Energy. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
and (2007). U.S. energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion. Energy Policy, 35, 746–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2009). Proper accounting for time increases crop-based biofuels' greenhouse gas deficit versus petroleum. Environmental Research Letters, 4, 024001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1997). Report to the President on Federal Energy Research and Development for the Challenges of the Twenty-First Century. Washington, D.C.: President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology.Google Scholar
, , , and (2005). Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-ton Annual Supply. US Department of Energy and US Department of Agriculture.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2009). Renewables Global Status Report 2009 Update. Paris: Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century.Google Scholar
, et al. (2008). How America can look within to achieve energy security and reduce global warming. Reviews of Modern Physics, 80 S1–S109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2007). If the shoe FITs: Using feed-in tariffs to meet U.S. renewable electricity targets. The Electricity Journal, 20, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2009). Risk perception, ambiguity, and nuclear-waste transport. Southern Economic Journal, 75, 781–97.Google Scholar
, , et al. (2008). Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science, 319, 1238–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2008). Co-benefits of climate mitigation and health protection in energy systems: Scoping methods. Annual Review of Public Health, 29, 11–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2007). The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1997). Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
(2009). Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2009. n.p.: United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
(2004). Renewable Energy: Wind Power's Contribution to Electric Power Generation and Impact on Farms and Rural Communities. Washington, D.C.: US Government Accountability Office.Google Scholar
, and (2010). Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: How many jobs can the clean energy industry generate in the US?Energy Policy, 38, 919–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2007). Annual Report on U.S. Wind Power Installation, Cost, and Performance Trends: 2006. Washington, D.C.: US Department of Energy – Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.Google Scholar
(2009). The Energy Access Situation in Developing Countries. A Review Focusing on the Least Developed Countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme, Environment and Energy Group.Google Scholar