Suchergebnisse

A new global energy era is emerging, one driven by the confluence of energy security, climate politics and energy equity issues. This 'energy trilemma' is shaping the global political economy of energy, which in turn influences how decisions are made about how energy is provided—referred to as global energy governance. This article analyzes historical and contemporary developments in Central America's power sectors. This is a region that has long been an implementation space for global policy priorities, but has been overlooked by those engaging with the challenges of the energy trilemma. During the 1990s and 2000s, the statist model of energy governance gave way to a market-led model in the Central American isthmus. This led to the privatization of state-owned utilities and the promotion of a regional electricity market. During this period, the dominance of largely hydro-based renewable electricity generation diminished to be replaced by imported fossil fuel-based generation. Oil price increases during the early 2000s highlighted the region's dependence on imports, with some countries turning to energy rationing. Increasingly interventionist state policies, which now seek to reduce oil dependence, improve energy efficiency and expand access to electricity, are being pursued in the region. This interventionist turn reflects the pressures of the energy trilemma, although energy security, particularly the need to reduce dependence on imported oil, remains the most important driver.

Biofuels have transitioned from a technology expected to deliver numerous benefits to a highly contested socio-technical solution. Initial hopes about their potential to mitigate climate change and to deliver energy security benefits and rural development, particularly in the Global South, have unravelled in the face of numerous controversies. In recognition of the negative externalities associated with biofuels, the European Union developed sustainability criteria which are enforced by certification schemes. This paper draws on the literature on stewardship to analyse the outcomes of these schemes in two countries: the UK and Guatemala. It explores two key issues: first, how has European Union biofuels policy shaped biofuel industries in the UK and Guatemala? And second, what are the implications for sustainable land stewardship? By drawing attention to the outcomes of European demand for biofuels, we raise questions about the ability of European policy to drive sustainable land practices in these two cases. The paper concludes that, rather than promoting stewardship, the current governance framework effectively rubberstamps existing agricultural systems and serves to further embed existing inequalities.

In less than a decade, biofuels transitioned from being a socially and politically acceptable alternative to conventional transport fuels to a deeply contested solution. Claims of land grabs, forest loss and food riots emerged to undermine the sustainability rationale that originally motivated their adoption. One of the early controversies to hit biofuels was that of food versus fuel. This framing drew attention not only to the competing uses of land i.e. for food or for fuel, but also to the impacts of consumption on marginalised people, particularly in the global South. While the debate has provided a useful hook on which to hang criticisms of increased demand for biofuels, it also masks a more complex reality. In particular, the multifaceted and global linkages between the stewardship of land, the food sector, and global energy policies. In this paper, we use the debate on food versus fuel as a lens to examine the interdependencies between the multiple end-uses of feedstocks and the multifunctionality of land. Revealing a more nuanced understanding of the realities of agricultural networks, land use conflicts and the values of the people managing land, we argue that the simplification achieved by food versus fuel, although effective in generating public resonance that has filtered into political response, has failed to capture much that is at the heart of the issue.

Biofuel policy has become highly contentious in Europe, driven by the Biofuels Directive (2003/30/EC), which requires that "biofuels or other renewable fuels" constitute 5.75% of the energy content of petrol and diesel sold for transport in member states by 2010. Here we examine the environmental and social sustainability components of the expression of this directive in UK law via the 2008 UK Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO). We find that commercial and energy security priorities have dominated the design of carbon and sustainability performance management under the RTFO. As an environmental management tool, the RTFO is exceptionally weak, being a reporting standard rather than a performance or design standard. While it will in some ways be strengthened by the Renewable Energy Directive (RED), significant concerns remain in relation to the sourcing of biomass for energy under the RED. RTFO certification is of a meta-type, being built upon existing certification and labelling schemes (e.g. the Roundtable on Responsible Soy, Forest Stewardship Council, Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil and others), all of which are more or less contested by NGOs. Yet despite claiming legitimacy from these non- state initiatives, the serious concerns of environment and development NGOs have been largely ignored in regulatory terms. We draw on documentary evidence, interviews and the science in policy literature, notably ideas on regulatory co-production and post-normal science, as well as concepts of regulatory and market legitimacy, to suggest that until critical voices are given a stronger expression in UK and EC biofuel policy, biofuel policy cannot be said to have achieved a social mandate or a durable legitimacy.

This article identifies equity outcomes associated with three biofuel systems in Brazil, Ethiopia, and Guatemala. Acknowledging that winners and losers are socially and politically generated, the article identifies some of the factors behind the distribution of winners and losers along different stages of three sugarcane–ethanol supply chains. Analyzing the outcomes for equity within each case study reveals an uneven distribution that, we argue, is related to the procedure and structure of the given sugarcane–ethanol system, and the recognition of the impacts on different actors within those structures. Increasing equity in sugarcane–ethanol systems will require greater openness in decision-making processes, in order that multiple voices are taken into account in the promotion, production, and consumption of biofuels—particularly those of smaller and less powerful actors.

The UKERC Systems Theme has played an important role in the development of the UK's capacity to think systematically about the future of the energy system. Key tools in this process have been the development of scenarios, and the development and use of the MARKAL energy system model. This project reflects on scenarios and on the use and communication of MARKAL, with a view to informing future UKERC work. Specifically, the project conducted retrospective analysis of pre-UKERC energy scenarios for the UK (published from 1977-2002), examined the scenarios produced by the UKERC systems theme, and studied the use and communication of the UK MARKAL model. The diversity of scenario methods and approaches developed within UKERC is valuable, and should be fostered further. Too narrow a range of techniques and teams developing scenarios would risk constraining the ability of UKERC to open up thinking to a wide range of possibilities, perspectives and framings, which history suggests is important. UKERC scenarios have tended to be dominated by futures in which mitigation goals are met, and in which scenario differences are driven by policy or technology, though there are of course exceptions. As UKERC Phase 3 begins, there is a case for reflecting further on the range and type of uncertainties addressed within energy system scenarios, and the diversity of tools and techniques used to generate them. A core tool of the UKERC systems theme has been the UK MARKAL model. The research undertaken for this project indicates that MARKAL has generally been used and communicated appropriately, in part because of good working relationships between government analysts and UKERC researchers. There are also areas in which there is room for improvement, and UKERC Phase 3 provides an opportunity to learn the lessons from previous experience.

Biofuels represent an opportunity for Brazil to exert global leadership by substantially scaling up the production, consumption, and international trade of bioethanol. Africa represents an ideal venue in which to do this, given its suitable agro-climatic conditions and extensive land area. Brazil has consequently sought to establish bilateral partnerships with African countries, as well as North-South-South trilateral partnerships involving the EU and US. However, empirically grounded assessments of how Brazil's leadership aspirations have unfolded in practice through these partnerships are limited. In this article, we examine Brazil's potential to exert global political leadership, by analyzing its policy-based, structural, and instrumental qualities in making bilateral and trilateral inroads regarding bioethanol production in Africa. Interviews in Brazil, Africa, and Europe suggest that both the bilateral and trilateral avenues have produced meager results. Lack of domestic strategy and vision, economic recession, and a fragmented alliance network have reduced Brazil's capacity to achieve its ethanol diplomacy objectives.

Soybean biomass for biodiesel, produced in Argentina amongst other places, is considered by some to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change when compared with fossil fuel. To ensure that the production of biofuels is 'sustainable', EU institutions and national governments are currently designing certification schemes for the sustainable production of biomass. This paper questions the validity of proposed environmental standards, using the production of Argentine soybean as a case study. The production of soybean production is associated with profound environmental impacts. The use of pesticides induces resistance in weeds, leading to an increase in the quantity and variety of pesticides used. Soil fertility is declining due to intense production and soil demineralisation is addressed by the use of synthetic fertilisers, whose production is energy intensive and whose use generates emissions of N 2 O. The large quantity of substances, sprayed by terrestrial and aerial means, has negative impacts on biodiversity, water, soil, and human and animal health. The intensive production of soybeans also leads to social impacts, including loss of livelihoods and food sovereignty, and a rural exodus. Ultimately, the high demand for soybean is a driver of deforestation and the loss of native habitats that are vital to climate stabilisation. In addition, several studies relate deforestation to the outbreak of vector borne diseases which affect human populations. Emissions from soils have been demonstrated in several studies, but the atmospheric impact of soybean cultivation has not been tested in situ . Some of the models for climate impact (N 2 O emissions etc) are based on in vitro studies, while field data are scarce. The situation, which is outside the control of the EU, has not been sufficiently researched. Furthermore, there are serious questions regarding the enforcement of environmental legislation in production countries, particularly now EU countries are adopting mandatory blending of fuels. The study considers that a certification system will not create the conditions for environmental sustainability. This is exemplified by soy, whose cultivation undermines the climate benefit claimed for soy-based biodiesel. This paper concludes that to certify soy monocultures as sustainable would exacerbate existing climatic and environmental problems.

This report forms a deliverable of the Energy System Development Pathways for Ethiopia (PATHWAYS) project. The project explored pathways for Ethiopia's electricity system to 2065 with the use of open-source energy system models, and developed local capacity to use and build on those models for the country's energy planning and policy decision-support. A participatory methodology was adopted, which engaged local experts and stakeholders in the co-creation of knowledge, through multiple and mixed methods of inquiry typically adopted in fields of engineering and the social sciences. Some of these engagement activities included workshops and interviews that drew upon local expertise to shape the narratives and boundaries on the possible futures for Ethiopia's electricity system, as well as a household survey on energy consumer behaviour. In addition, capacity development workshops were conducted; training students, academics, and staff of the government, not-for-profit and the private sector on the use of the Open-Source Energy System Modelling framework (OSeMOSYS). This report provides the synthesised findings of the project and highlights ways of building on its activities.

The Lancet Countdown: tracking progress on health and climate change was established to provide an independent, global monitoring system dedicated to tracking the health dimensions of the impacts of, and the response to, climate change. The Lancet Countdown tracks 41 indicators across five domains: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation, planning, and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; finance and economics; and public and political engagement. This report is the product of a collaboration of 27 leading academic institutions, the UN, and intergovernmental agencies from every continent. The report draws on world-class expertise from climate scientists, ecologists, mathematicians, geographers, engineers, energy, food, livestock, and transport experts, economists, social and political scientists, public health professionals, and. doctors. The Lancet Countdown's work builds on decades of research in this field, and was first proposed in the 2015 Lancet Commission on health and climate change,1 which documented the human impacts of climate change and provided ten global recommendations to respond to this public health emergency and secure the public health benefits available (panel 1).