Suchergebnisse

After the Soviet breakup, Central Asia has gained importance for several States because of its geographical location and abundance of hydrocarbon reserves. These hydrocarbon reserves are located mainly in three countries: Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Each of them has taken different path regarding its foreign policy and the regulation of investments and participation of external companies and States in its energy sector. Through the development, production and export of their oil and gas reserves, they have pursued a 'multi-vector' policy, consolidating differently their relations with other countries. The main States involved – at different levels and for different reasons – in the oil and gas sector of the Central Asian countries are: Russia, China, United States, European countries, Iran, India and Turkey. Among these players, Russia considers Central Asia still part of its sphere of influence for historical reasons, while it has to deal an increasing presence of Beijing. The Western countries has gained influence particularly in Kazakhstan, but they have no political leverage in Turkmenistan. This working paper provides an overview of the current situation of external players' interests in the oil and gas industry of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The working paper is structured into four different sections. In the first section, the paper gives an overview of the main interests and pillars of external involvement in Central Asia as a region. The other three sections are devoted to provide separately the current status of energy relations between each Central Asian country and external players, starting from the closest countries (Russia and China) to the regional ones (Iran, Turkey and India) until non-regional countries (United States and European countries). During these analysis, investments in the oil and gas sector as well as energy export routes and volumes are highlighted in order to understand the current situation of the energy relations. At the end of each country section, the main trends and interests of the countries in the regional oil and gas sector are outlined.

As decarbonization and climate policy are gaining relevance in the European Union (EU) energy policy, the present paper seeks to present both priorities and challenges for of the EU energy transition. As priorities, we outline the key targets and initiatives proposed and set by the European institutions in relation to the energy matters. The EU identifies renewable energy sources, energy efficiency and reduction of the greenhouse gas (GHG) as the three pillars to achieve its carbon neutrality. The final goal for to the EU energy and climate targets is to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. Nevertheless, since given energy policy is being a "shared competence" between the EU institutions and Member States, each Member State plays a critical role for the achievement of the EU energy transition. Different socioeconomic structures and the energy mix across Europe have caused the implementation process of each EU target to develop at a different pace among European countries. We illustrate this drawing on four countries: Italy, the UK, Germany and Poland. We assess their political commitment to the energy transition and their actions regarding energy transformation. These four countries are only an example of the different pace in the implementation of the EU energy and climate targets. The last part of the paper is devoted to the ambitious plan, called Green New Deal, launched by the present Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen. It sets key priorities, reaffirming European commitments to the energy and climate transition. However, the plan faces significant obstacles. For example, division among Member States (North-South and West-East) might be a factor that could undermine the achievement of the European energy transition, due to multiple and divergent interests (also on the future role of the energy transition in the aftermath of COVID-19 and the resulting economic crisis). Another challenge is constituted by popular opposition, especially from those people that see the energy transition — and consequent economic and industrial transformation — as a potential threat to their well-being and jobs, as the French gilets jaunes show. Lastly, we explain that the European energy transition will impact also its external relations, for example with Russia, proposing how the two blocs can preserve their energy relationship in light of the energy transition, notably through the conversion of natural gas to hydrogen and storing/using the resulting CO2.

As decarbonization and climate policy are gaining relevance in the European Union (EU) energy policy, the present paper seeks to present both priorities and challenges for of the EU energy transition. As priorities, we outline the key targets and initiatives proposed and set by the European institutions in relation to the energy matters. The EU identifies renewable energy sources, energy efficiency and reduction of the greenhouse gas (GHG) as the three pillars to achieve its carbon neutrality. The final goal for to the EU energy and climate targets is to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. Nevertheless, since given energy policy is being a "shared competence" between the EU institutions and Member States, each Member State plays a critical role for the achievement of the EU energy transition. Different socioeconomic structures and the energy mix across Europe have caused the implementation process of each EU target to develop at a different pace among European countries. We illustrate this drawing on four countries: Italy, the UK, Germany and Poland. We assess their political commitment to the energy transition and their actions regarding energy transformation. These four countries are only an example of the different pace in the implementation of the EU energy and climate targets. The last part of the paper is devoted to the ambitious plan, called Green New Deal, launched by the present Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen. It sets key priorities, reaffirming European commitments to the energy and climate transition. However, the plan faces significant obstacles. For example, division among Member States (North-South and West-East) might be a factor that could undermine the achievement of the European energy transition, due to multiple and divergent interests (also on the future role of the energy transition in the aftermath of COVID-19 and the resulting economic crisis). Another challenge is constituted by popular opposition, especially from those people that see the energy transition — and consequent ...

This open access book offers a holistic and interdisciplinary analysis of the energy sector in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region and its ongoing transformation. Taking into account global decarbonization policies, it offers a comprehensive overview of the transition's effects in the region highlighting socioeconomic, geopolitical and cultural aspects. The book is divided into four parts, the first of which illustrates the historical, cultural and socioeconomic heterogeneity of the MENA region. The second part assesses the region's energy sector, with a special focus on the energy mix and consumption evolution at the national level. The third part addresses the geopolitics and geoeconomics of the energy sector in MENA countries, including foreign interference, conflicts, investments and partnerships both related to hydrocarbons and energy transition. Lastly, the fourth part provides overall conclusions and key takeaways on all major aspects addressed by the book, highlighting various paths and strategies for decarbonization in the region.

Hydrogen is currently enjoying a renewed and widespread momentum in the energy market. In the last years, demand for hydrogen has substantially increased worldwide, with several countries developing hydrogen national strategies, and private companies investing in the development of hydrogen related projects. Green hydrogen's environmental sustainability and versatility contribute to its representation as the holy grail of decarbonisation. This working paper challenges this definition, by analysing the historical process which contributed to hydrogen's rise, showing the current uses of hydrogen and the major obstacles to the implementation of a green hydrogen economy, and assessing the geopolitical implications of a future hydrogen society. Particularly, the paper shows that the hydrogen economy is still far from becoming reality. Even though investments in green hydrogen technologies and projects have increased over the last decade, there still remains a high number of unresolved issues, relating to technical challenges and geopolitical implications. Nonetheless, a clean hydrogen economy offers promising opportunities not only to fight climate change, but also to redraw geopolitical relations between states. The energy transition is already taking place, with renewable energies gradually eroding the global energy system based on fossil fuels. A global transformation, set in motion by the need to decarbonise the energy system, will have the potential to redraw international alliances and conflicts. In this context, hydrogen may play a crucial role. By 2050, hydrogen could indeed meet up to 24% of the world's energy needs, thus highly influencing the geopolitical landscape. In this regard, the choice over which pathway to take for the creation of hydrogen value chains will have a huge geopolitical impact, resulting in new dependencies and rivalries between states. Conclusively, if national governments are willing to spur the emergence of a green hydrogen economy, they should heavily invest in research and development, encourage the development of a clean hydrogen value chain, and promote common international standards. Moreover, they should also take into account hydrogen's geopolitical implications. If the hydrogen economy is well-managed, it could indeed increase energy security, diversify the economy, and strengthen partnerships with third countries.

This paper compares the different multi-level climate and energy governance in China, the European Union and the United States. While many comparisons across these three economies exist, they concentrate on comparing the climate and energy "policy instruments" and their results. This paper puts a focus on the importance of institutionalized multi-level governance processes, i.e., the "politics" - the actors and interaction processes inherent in a mode of governance, and the "polities" - the institutional setting. How are priorities and targets decided from both bottom-up and top-down processes? How do the central governments exert control over local authorities and ensure the implementation of their policies? How do the central governments enforce and evaluate the results of the policies? And finally, how do citizens play a role in the multi-level governance in these three blocs? Analysis of multilevel governance highlights the importance of target setting and cadre evaluation in China whereas legislation is the dominant process in the EU and the US.

This paper compares how the pursuit of self-sufficient Lithium-ion battery production by the three main geo-economic players (China, the European Union, and the United States) is unfolding by looking at the electrification of the transport sector. The analysis of this paper uses the concept of energy security and the 4 As outlined by the Asia Pacific Energy Research Center (2007) to outline the availability, accessibility, affordability, and acceptability of Lithium-ion (Li-Ion) batteries for each respective actor. This paper aims to compare the dynamics of each geoeconomic player's EV deployment along these four indicators. Most work in this field assesses the battery strategies of these three geo-economic players individually or focuses on EV deployment from a purely economics perspective. In contrast, this paper attempts to bridge this gap through the framework of energy security to compare how each of the three player's battery strategy connects to broader EV deployment. Adopting this framework allows us to highlight how China's strong industrial policies and generous incentives contrast to the government multilateral alliance-building done in the European Union and the overwhelmingly dominant role of private actors found in the United States.

This paper compares different just transition pathways in China, the European Union and the United States of America by comparing the current state of the coal sector and just transition policies away from coal. How can social justice in the energy transition be achieved under different models of energy governance? Since these three blocs have only made some progress on just transition policies and legislations for workers and communities impacted by the coal phase down or phase out in recent years, there have not been many studies comparing them to each other. The analysis in this paper shows that while all three blocs work towards ensuring the integration of coal workers and coal communities into the clean economy in the process of coal reduction, their approaches to achieving a just transition differ in terms of policy frameworks, financing resources, specific measures and public participation. This paper is part of a series of FEEM working papers of comparison studies of China, the EU and the US in the field of climate and energy.

This work compares the different decarbonization strategies of the power sector in China, the European Union and the United States, by considering the historical evolution of electricity generation and the current situation. Such a comparison is gaining a broader significance when evaluated with an additional level of geographic detail, by comparing European countries, Chinese provinces, and US states. The differences among these geographies highlight the challenges and opportunities of pushing towards low-carbon technologies, by making clear that regional decarbonization will need to address very different local contexts. Moreover, multiple policy and planning levels are involved, and those mechanisms are different in the three blocs being compared. Our analysis shows that these three blocs, although moving towards similar decarbonization targets, are currently at different levels of carbon intensity. The zero-carbon pathway will need to be declined in different local goals, based on the availability of low-carbon resources and the electricity demand. Given the geographical differences between demand and supply, and the likely increase of electricity demand, an improvement of power transmission networks will be essential. This work is part of a series of papers on the geopolitics of the energy transition in China, the European Union and the United States of America.