The second half of the 2000s witnessed a sharp decrease in total deforestation rate in the Brazilian Amazon. In only five years, the pace of forest clearings dropped from an alarming peak of approximately 27,000 km2 in 2004 to about 7,000 km2 in 2009. While the numbers sound like good news for conservation efforts in Brazil, many wonder what led to such a dramatic decline in deforestation. What were the underlying forces driving this sudden change in behavior? With the Brazilian Ministry of Environment currently conducting the second revision of its strategic Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Deforestation in the Legal Amazon (PPCDAm), the answer to this question will be useful to policymakers in Brazil, as well as in other countries.
Deforestation slowdown in the Brazilian Amazon – prices or policies?
Clarissa Costalonga e Gandour, March 2012
Federal energy incentives such as tax breaks and loan programs are the subject of vigorous public debate. This attention is at least in part due to the politics surrounding the failure of the solar manufacturer Solyndra (which received a $500 million government loan), the cost to government of tax incentives for oil and gas production when industry profits are at all-time-highs, and the level of government debt. However, the debate is also a part of a broader national conversation about the appropriate role of government – and in particular about the role of the federal government in the supply and use of energy.
This role is of particular interest to us here at CPI: energy generation and use in the U.S. is responsible for the lion’s share (87%) of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions which contribute to global climate change. We’re interested in how federal policy is influencing these emissions, and how well it’s working.
Last month, the CPI climate finance team, led by Dr. Barbara Buchner, held outreach events with some of the key actors in climate finance.[1] From these discussions, I identified three major challenges to increasing the amount of funding for low-emissions, climate-resilient projects. Needless to say, the CPI climate finance team intends to focus on these areas over the course of this year.
Last week, scores of utility executives, state energy regulators, technology developers and financiers gathered in Scottsdale, Arizona to confront one simple question: What do we need to do to expand the use of renewable energy in the U.S.?
The meeting was the first in a series of events organized by the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) and other organizations. The events are designed to explore strategies, opportunities, challenges and barriers for expanding the use of renewable energy in the U.S. The event was a rare opportunity for leaders of the utility, regulatory, technology and finance worlds to engage in a frank discussion about a shared challenge.
Did you know… that the US has a trade surplus with China in solar energy tech?
Kath Rowley, February 2012
Photo by flickr user theregeneration
I didn’t. Just one of many interesting things I learned at the China-US climate update event at Brookings on 2 February.
CPI-Beijing Director Qi Ye presented key findings from CPI’s Annual Review of Low Carbon Development in China. It’s always good to be reminded of how much China is doing, and not-so-good to be reminded of how much further they (and the world) have to go before we’re on a low carbon path. China’s CO2 emissions from energy have more than doubled since 2000, and more than trebled since 1990. Back in 1990, China’s emissions were less than half of the US’s. By 2009, China’s emissions were one third higher. And the gap is growing fast. China needs the most environmentally and cost effective portfolio of policies it can devise to turn this trajectory around.
Mark Muro from Brookings spoke about US energy policy. Not good news. He identified four key requirements for decarbonising the energy sector: regulation, stable demand for clean energy, finance, and continuous innovation. How’s the US doing? It has a partial and shaky policy framework (though some states are doing well), this is not catalysing strong demand, the whole development chain for clean energy is hard to finance (and with federal incentives expiring, the industry is heading into another bust), and while the US still has enviable early stage innovation systems, without sustained investment its innovative capacity will slip. “Other than that, we’re doing fine.”
The American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE)’s webinar last month on Security, Sustainability, and Renewables was the latest in a series of recent renewable energy policy discussions to highlight growing interest in the emerging opportunities for the renewable sector to work with the U.S. military. Interest in military applications of renewables have risen at least in part due to federal policy uncertainty. The impending expiration of several renewables incentives (such as the Recovery Act’s tax grant program and the production tax credit for wind) along with the budget constraints arising from the political impasse over government spending and debt suggest the real possiblity of significantly lower direct federal government support for renewable technology R&D and deployment. As a result, there is growing interest in looking for ways to improve the efficiency of existing renewable policies as well as looking for opportunities for hedging against possible removal of support (see for example, the work of the Bipartisan Policy Center on more efficient subsidies for renewables).
The San Jose Mercury News published an op-ed by CPI’s Executive Director Thomas Heller about the shape of future international climate negotiations in a rapidly developing world:
The world has changed significantly since climate talks began two decades ago in Rio. It is no longer shaped by two rival superpowers. New economies — China, India, Brazil, Korea, Indonesia — have grown in size and standing.
These new players define their political and economic status in the global order without relation to the old poles of developed and developing, state and market, the West and the Rest. Pushed by a will to lead instead of follow and enabled by the public spending that comes with fast economic growth, these new players increasingly are implementing their own policies, blazing the path that any international accord will ultimately reflect.
The recent meeting of APEC produced, among other things, a non-binding agreement that the APEC bloc countries would, by 2035, reduce energy intensity levels by 45% from 2005 levels. While this agreement has received only a modest coverage, some analysts have suggested that the agreement could be an important example for future international agreements and would, if followed, lead to significant decreases in energy consumption and Carbon emissions. Upon closer inspection, the agreement is really only a codification of Business As Usual (BAU) and serves to demonstrate some of the challenges of using energy intensity as a metric. The agreement also highlights some of the politics behind negotiating some of these types of targets.
This interview is from SEE magazine on newsstands in Brazil. Translated from the Portuguese by Climate Policy Initiative.
Thomas C. Heller, Stanford Law Professor, one of the world's most renowned advisors in environmental policy, says that emerging countries will lead the transition to a more sustainable economy
The new world order is green
Veja, January 13, 2012
Professor Thomas C. Heller, Climate Policy Initiative and Stanford University, is one of the world’s most influential experts on environmental policy. A member of the UN panel of experts who estimated the effects of climate change and shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore, Professor Heller has been asked to assist in the formulation of sustainability programs in ten out of ten emerging countries. His pragmatic approach is music to the ears of governments in Brazil, China, and Indonesia. The Chinese plan to reduce carbon emissions and the Brazilian law that cut transfers of federal funds to municipalities that deforest are examples of programs that Climate Policy Initiative, a nonprofit institution founded by Heller and funded by financier George Soros supported. Professor Heller says: “It is up to the emerging countries to lead the transition to a new world order where being sustainable will be a tremendous competitive advantage.”