1 out of 11: The IEA’s New Report Card on Climate Change and Clean Energy

From The IEA:

While progress is being made on renewable energy, most clean energy technologies are not being deployed quickly enough, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said today in an annual progress report presented to ministers and representatives of nations that together account for four-fifths of global energy demand.

The report, Tracking Clean Energy Progress, highlighted the rapid progress made in some renewable technologies, notably the solar panels easily installed by households and businesses (solar PV) and in onshore wind technologies. In fact, onshore wind has seen 27% average annual growth over the past decade, and solar PV has grown at 42%, albeit from a small base. Even more impressive is the 75% reduction in system costs for solar PV in as little as three years in some countries. This serves as evidence that rapid technology change is possible. Unfortunately, however, the report concludes that most clean energy technologies are not on track to make their required contribution to reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and thereby provide a more secure energy system.

“We have a responsibility and a golden opportunity to act,” said IEA Deputy Executive Director Ambassador Richard H Jones. “Energy-related CO2 emissions are at historic highs; under current policies, we estimate that energy use and CO2 emissions would increase by a third by 2020, and almost double by 2050. This would likely send global temperatures at least 6°C higher. Such an outcome would confront future generations with significant economic, environmental and energy security hardships – a legacy that I know none of us wishes to leave behind.”

…

The report offers three over-arching policy recommendations for changing this status quo and moving clean-energy technologies to the mainstream market:

• First, level the playing field for clean energy technologies. This means ensuring that energy prices reflect the “true cost” of energy – accounting for the positive and negative impacts of energy production and consumption;
• Second, unlock the potential of energy efficiency, the “hidden fuel” of the future. Making sure that energy is not wasted and that it is used in the best possible way is the most cost-effective action and must be the first step of any policy aimed at building a sustainable energy mix’
• Finally, accelerate energy innovation and public support for research, development and demonstration. This will help lay the groundwork for private sector innovation, and speed technologies to market.

Check out the rest of the article here.

Related: 

• ‘We can have safe, sustainable energy’

Infographic source: IEA via The Guardian

‘Learn How to Combat Climate Change Denial’…  from a Comic Strip

(Source: New York Times)

Climate change denial explained… in three short minutes

In this video clip science historian Naomi Oreskes talks with skeptic Nick Minchin about the driving force behind climate denial:

aversion to the political and economic implications of climate change leading to a rejection of the science. 

Oreskes is co-author of the must-read book ‘Merchants of Doubt’ and recipient of the 2011 Climate Change Communicators Award.* Minchin served as a cabinet minister and senator in Australia from 1993 to 2011.

(*H/T Climate Adaptation) 

(Source: Skeptical Science via YouTube)

Writer Chris Turner explains the “two way to level the energy playing field” in his MNN article, ‘What have we learned about cheap energy?’ 

(‘Renewable Electricity Generation in Germany’ graph: Volker Quaschning via Clean Technica)

Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist Tom Toles highlights the increasing futility of denying the reality of human driven climate change. In this case, the “extremely early blooming of cherry trees” in Washington, D.C. is an example. More here, here, here,here, and here.  

(Cartoon source: Washington Post via Go Comics)

Worth Watching: ‘Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Opportunity and Inaction’

A few weeks ago the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions hosted another edition of their thought-provoking and solutions-focused series of talks. This time around it featured Mike Hulme, Professor of Climate Change at the UK’s University of East Anglia, tackling one of the key questions of our time:

Scientists worldwide agree about the main causes of climate change, so why can’t the international community come to consensus on workable solutions?

Hulme explains that the answer requires that we:

look beyond science and to connect with “people’s worldviews, beliefs and values” in the search for policy and societal solutions.

His book, ‘Why We Disagree About Climate Change’, was recognized as one of the top science and technology books of 2009 by the Economist magazine.

More here.

(Image credit: Wikipedia)

‘$4 Gas?’ 

(Source: Ed Stein Ink)

From The Guardian:

The inner workings of a libertarian thinktank working to discredit the established science on climate change have been exposed by a leak of confidential documents detailing its strategy and fundraising networks.

Desmogblog, which broke the story, said it had received the confidential documents from an “insider” at the Heartland Institute, which is based in Chicago. The blog monitors industry efforts to discredit climate science.

…

The papers indicate that discrediting established climate science remains a core mission of the organisation, which has received support from a network of wealthy individuals – including the Koch oil billionaires as well as corporations such as Microsoft and RJR Tobacco.

The documents confirm what environmental groups such as Greenpeace have long suspected: that Heartland itself is a major source of funding to a network of experts and bloggers who have been prominent in the campaign to discredit established science.

Heartland is anxious to retain its hold over mainstream media outlets, fretting in the documents about how Forbes magazine is publishing prominent climate scientists such as Peter Gleick. “This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate and it is important to keep opposing voices out,” Heartland documents warn.

Heartland operates on a range of issues besides the environment. But discrediting the science of climate change remains a key mission. The group spends $300,000 on salaries for a team of experts working to undermine the findings of the UN climate body, the IPCC.

Check out the rest of the article here. 

(Cartoon credit: Tom Toles via Go Comics)

Things to Build: The Green Economy 

. Here’s a short video of world leaders talking about the opportunities and importance of shifting to a green economy. The UNEP’s Green Economy Initiative defines a green economy as:

one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. In its simplest expression, a green economy can be thought of as one which is low carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive.

More here.