Progress towards Sustainability

We are at a pivotal moment in history. The decisions we make now about how we generate energy will echo down the coming centuries. For one hundred years we have relied upon fossil fuels to build an industrial society unequalled in history. Now we have a new task: to continue supplying power to maintain growth, while at the same time reducing the greenhouse gas emissions which threaten rapid climate change. Many scientists say we have only a few years to accomplish this transition.

Discussion: What would it take to really speed up the transition to a carbon neutral society?

Related Content:

Live Debate: Not in my backyard? Can Europe win public acceptance for low-carbon infrastructure projects?

As the European Commission is in the process of finalising its new transport white paper, a strategic document that will set the tone of EU transport policy for a decade, controversy about the sustainability of biofuels remains.

One of the goals of future EU policy will be to decarbonise the transport sector by 2050. Whereas electricity is seen to be the future of urban and short distance mobility, liquid fuels are likely to remain an essential part of rural and long-distance mobility. Biofuels have long been perceived to have an important role to play in the transition towards low-carbon transport. However, doubts have been cast about the carbon footprint of biofuels, in particular when it comes to conventional biofuels made from corn, wheat, sugar and palm oil. The potential impact of biofuels on food security is a further point of debate.

The uncertainty about the contribution of biofuels to reducing CO2 emissions was reflected in the agreement on the directive on the promotion of renewable energy. EU leaders originally intended to include a target of 10% of biofuels in transport by 2020. However the final text only mentioned 10% of ‘energy from renewable sources’ in transport.

One of the main elements of the Directive was the inclusion of mandatory sustainability criteria for biofuels in order to protect forests, wetlands and other areas of high conservation value. It allows for a voluntary certification scheme for biofuels, which would also apply to imports.

The directive also foresees that the Commission should review the impact of indirect land use change – that is, the notion that biofuels production can displace existing agricultural activities, creating indirect emissions elsewhere. The Commission is required to report the European Parliament and Council by the end of 2010, reviewing the impact of indirect land use change effects on greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels and addressing ways to minimise that impact.

The question of indirect land use change (iLUC) remains a divisive issue, over which Commission departments have not been able to agree. There is evidence that iLUC risks can be mitigated by introducing better agricultural practices. Others actors are calling for iLUC penalty factors to be added to the greenhouse gas calculations for biofuel feedstocks to reflect iLUC risk. The Commission launched a public consultation in July 2010, to get external feedback on the studies it has carried out or commissioned thus far.

What will be the place of biofuels in the future energy mix of Europe’s transport sector? Can a transition to low-carbon transport happen without biofuels? What can be done to prevent or mitigate the negative impacts of indirect land use change?

* * *

Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Jennifer Rankin, energy and environment reporter, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion

•    Jens Rohde MEP, coordinator of the ALDE group on the ITRE committee
•    Hans van Steen, head of unit, regulatory policy and promotion of renewable energies, DG energy, European Commission
•    Thomas Gameson, director government and public affairs Europe, Abengoa Bioenergy
•    Jos Dings, director, Transport & Environment
•   Jeremy Woods, lecturer in bioenergy, Imperial College London

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by Luis Scoffone, vice-president, alternative energies, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

Discussion:

Related Content:

None...

A member of the Comment:Visions team attended the GovNet Communication’s Science and Innovation 2010 Conference at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre in Westminster, London on 16 June. The theme of the event was the need to address the way the UK supports its science and technology talent and turning the support into economic growth...Read more

We are in Freiburg, a city of around 220,000 people, a city which committed itself to green energy 20 years ago. What do the city fathers think will be the future of energy in the next 20 years? Freiburg has already reduced its GHG emissions by a substantial amount. Freiburg encourages the use of solar and methane gas which generates base load electricity  (which is on all the time). The suburb of Vauban is vehicle free, people willingly have given up their cars for bicycles. How could Freiburg become a model of energy efficiency that every city in the world can learn from.

Discussion: By how much should we expect renewables to replace fossil fuels over the next 20 years?

Related Content:

Programme: Energy: the Next 20 Years Part 1.

Live Debate: After Copenhagen: the next steps

The great task of the 20th Century was the creation of industrial might, the 21st Century’s challenge is climate change.

Renewable energy’s contribution to our energy creation must grow, we are told, because we must reduce emissions of
greenhouse gases, or risk a climate catastrophe. And yet, we expect to have electricity available all the time
which renewable energy sources do not provide. What then will we rely on to provide base load power?

The next 20 years are critical in establishing a new energy mix that will provide constant electricity and still reduce emissions.

Discussion: By how much should we expect renewable energy to replace fossil fuels over the next 20 years?

Related Content:

None...

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 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...

Discussion: What can we do to ensure that generations to come have a sustainable future?

Related Content:

None...