Alternative Energies

Discussion: As well as seeking alternative fuels, should we be changing our entire transportation culture?

Related Content:

Live Debate: Can Europe de-carbonise transport?

The issue: The COP15 conference was widely seen as a setback for the EU. The agreement that was reached fell short of the global deal to replace the Kyoto protocol that the EU had sought.

What lessons should the EU draw from Copenhagen? Can the EU still be a driving force in global climate politics? Should the EU continue to push for a global agreement, or should it consider other options, such as bilateral agreements? Should it even take unilateral action, as advocated by some European stakeholders, and increase its emissions reduction target from 20% to 30% without waiting for the US and China to follow? Is a global deal still possible, and when might it be reached?

These are just some of the questions that Comment:Visions invites you to debate with a panel of senior EU decision-makers and stakeholders.

Discussion: After COP 15, who or what will drive the push towards developing clean energy?

Related Content:

Live Debate - After Copenhagen: the next steps

The COP15 conference was widely seen as a setback for the EU. The agreement that was reached fell short of the global deal to replace the Kyoto protocol that the EU had sought.

The summit also revealed the limits of EU influence. The EU, which had been instrumental in getting the Kyoto protocol agreed, was unable to shape a deal in Copenhagen, outmanoeuvred by the US and China.

What lessons should the EU draw from Copenhagen? Can the EU still be a driving force in global climate politics? Should the EU continue to push for a global agreement, or should it consider other options, such as bilateral agreements?

These are just some of the questions that Comment:Visions invites you to debate with a panel of senior EU decision-makers and stakeholders.

Related Content:

Programme - After Copenhagen, the next steps

The Earth’s atmosphere is the result of billions of years of geological activity and interaction with living organisms. Until recently, the stability of its composition has been something we have taken for granted.

The climate change conference in Copenhagen ended without a binding global agreement on curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

So, if governments cannot agree on measures to mitigate climate change, who then will provide the incentives and initiatives and perhaps more importantly the finances, that are needed? A growing number of leaders are beginning to look to the private sector to provide solutions. With regard to climate change, is it business to the rescue?

Discussion: Are commercial partnerships between science and industry the best way to reduce GHG emissions?

Related Content:

Live Debate - After Copenhagen: the next steps

Live Debate - Can Europe de-carbonise transport?

Discussion: As the first decade of the 21st Century closes, can we be pleased with the progress we have made in the development of energy efficiency and the mitigation of climate change?

Related Content:

None...

The emission of greenhouse gases has been the heart of the matter in environmental discourse throughout its growth and development. For as long as the science has told us that the levels of greenhouse gases in the earth atmosphere are damaging the planet, political attempts to reach agreement on a reduction of emissions have been ongoing.

In this month’s Comment Visions we travel to Norway to talk to a man whose career has involved studying the changing nature of our planet. Dr Pal Prestud is an ecologist and serves as the Director of the Centre for Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo. His work has focused on the Polar Regions, which have acted as an early warning system for the sort of climatic changes greenhouse gases are driving.

Discussion: How must society adapt to rapid climate change to minimise severe upheaval?

Related Content:

None...

European leaders agreed in March 2007 that the European Union should aim to get 20% of its energy from renewable sources and 10% of transport fuel from biofuels by 2020. By the time the European Commission presented its renewable energy proposal in January 2008, the goal had shifted to an objective of 10% of transport fuels from renewable sources, rather than biofuels. The shift was significant, and in the final legislation, agreed in December 2008, the European Parliament and national governments added further green safeguards and incentives to promote other forms of clean transport, such as electric vehicles.

In less than two years the political mood had changed from quiet confidence in biofuels to hesitancy studded with caveats and qualifications, reflecting growing concern over the environmental credentials of biofuels and their impact on food prices. Conservationists fear that mass production of energy crops could lead to damaging changes to land use resulting in higher carbon emissions and lost biodiversity. Last year’s dramatic rise in food prices also triggered doubts about the potential social costs of energy crops, from organisations such as the World Bank.

But some fear that the tide has turned too far against biofuels, arguing that they still hold out the promise of greener energy and reduced dependency on fossil fuels. Although biofuels are still at an early stage, a second, third or even fourth generation of biofuels might yet deliver undisputed environmental benefits, it is argued.

Against this controversy, this debate will look at the future of biofuels in Europe. How big will be their place in Europe’s energy mix? What benefits can they bring? How can they be produced in a sustainable way? Is the EU taking the right approach or being too cautious? How does the debate affect relations with biofuel-producing countries outside the EU?

Related Content:

Programme - A greener future with biofuels?

Programme - Food, Fuel and Biodiversity

The perennial question of what transport will look like in the future has been replaced, in recent years, with a far more important and urgent question; how will this transport be powered? As fossil fuels dwindle and new technology becomes necessary rather than desirable, how we get from A to B is climbing up the global political agenda.

No form of transport is as critical in this debate as the motor car. The internal combustion changed the way we live, but its power source is running dry so this month Comment Visions meets Dr Paul Nieuwenhuis, an academic, adviser, environmentalist and car enthusiast.

In this fascinating and wide-ranging interview Dr Nieuwenhuis discusses how local energy resources will lead to different solutions for different places, how cars will be built differently in the future and even proposes the idea of a world without car dealers!

Discussion: Are we doing enough to ensure a rapid and smooth transition to carbon neutral transport systems this century?

Related Content:

Live Debate: Can Europe de-carbonise transport?

Unterhaching is a town of around 25,000 people a few kilometers south of Munich, Germany. In most respects it is typical of small towns in Europe, except for one thing, it has built and now operates its own power generating station using hot water from deep within the Earth’s crust.

The idea first arose in the 1990’s and over the following decade the town secured the venture capital and the engineering resources to drill down three-and-a half kilometers to tap into a permeable limestone layer containing hot water. The drilling was successful and a pump house was built – in effect, a mini power station – where the thermal water is used to generate 3.4 megawatts of electricity a year.

The Geothermie Unterhaching project provides a perpetual sources of energy that is virtually free of greenhouse gas emissions – entirely owned and operated by the town.

Discussion: Should local communities be encouraged to develop their own sustainable solutions, such as geothermal energy, to power generation?

Related Content:

None...

Discussion: What role should nuclear technology play in our future energy mix?

Related Content:

None...