European heads of state, energy ministers and the EU are actively debating climate and energy policy at a series of summits in the coming weeks. If the decisions they take are to matter, the leaders must work to understand the changing nature of such policies — and the enormous opportunity that they must seize.
Energy can be a key driver of European competitiveness and the transition to a low-carbon economy, benefiting European businesses and citizens alike, but realizing this promise requires European leaders to provide a vision and act decisively now.
While the developed world may still be wrestling with the fallout of the financial crisis, most emerging economies are already back on a strong growth track. China posted nearly 10 percent growth last year; India was close behind, at 8 percent. Much of that remarkable economic performance is built on the industries of the low-carbon future.
Against this backdrop, should our leaders focus on energy policy from a narrow, nationalist perspective? Or should they connect the dots and frame a vision of a Europe that can compete in a global economy where resource efficiency, clean energies and low-carbon prosperity are the ingredients of success? The future of economic growth is low-carbon growth, so Europe has a stark choice.
Of course, a new competitive landscape will create winners and losers. Creative destruction, the process of innovation described by the economist Joseph Schumpeter, will be at work. Not surprisingly, the loudest voices are heard from companies that face challenges and are among the potential losers. The potential winners, meanwhile, are creating the jobs of tomorrow.
In fact, HSBC estimates that global climate business will total US$2.2 trillion in 2020, and that China’s low-carbon market will overtake that of the US, but not Europe. However, Europe’s -leadership in the environmental field cannot be sustained without the right policy framework. It needs a visionary approach and active engagement on energy issues from its leaders.
Here are seven policy steps that EU heads of state can take to embrace the low-carbon economic future:
One, create an investment-driving, low-carbon EU vision that combines the goal of 80 to 95 percent emissions reductions by 2050 with the prospect of a Europe that leads, and make this vision a tangible and inspiring part of all European governments’ policy orientation;
Two, commit immediately to a 30 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020, and commit to a target for 2030. Only bold target-setting demonstrates a credible commitment to the low-carbon vision and can provide much-needed certainty to businesses and markets. Furthermore, a 30 percent reduction by 2020 is well within reach, as a 17.3 percent reduction against the 1990 baseline was already achieved by 2009;
Three, a consistent, economy-wide price for carbon that effectively mobilizes capital towards technologies of the future is key. The EU’s Emission Trading System remains the cornerstone of Europe’s climate policy, but suffers from the unambitious 20 percent cap, as well as from the lack of complementary policies to increase its effectiveness;
Four, commit to the decarbonization of the power sector as a vital building block of the low-carbon economy. The European Climate Foundation’s Roadmap 2050 shows that full decarbonization of the EU power sector by 2050 is feasible and affordable. Electricity grids are the key infrastructure element that will connect the EU power markets. Public investment must be matched with private capital to accelerate these grids’ deployment;
Five, competitive leadership will not come without substantial increases in reaearch and development commitments. The EU’S Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan) is an excellent, but modest, start, and should be scaled-up;
Six, energy efficiency is often called the “low-hanging fruit” of emissions reduction. However, if it is so easy, why is it not getting done? A firmer commitment to energy efficiency, particularly the rollout of large-scale programs to retrofit the existing building stock, would create large numbers of jobs, expand the market for energy-efficiency products and technologies and reduce energy demand;
Seven, industry would benefit enormously if energy-efficiency standards were demanding and continuously tightened. Nowhere is this truer than in automotive emissions, where the battle for leadership on new power trains — whether electric, hydrogen or biofuel-based — is already upon us. Tougher automotive standards will help the European car industry remain competitive.
An ambitious policy framework that underpins Europe’s energy security and strengthens the single market would also support Europe’s drive toward reduced carbon emissions and low-carbon prosperity. The economic transition would help maintain and strengthen Europe’s competitiveness in a global economy that is increasingly competing on the basis of sustainability and resource efficiency.
The challenge for Europe’s leaders nowadays is to see that the economy, energy, and climate change are interdependent. Only concerted action taken and an integrated policy vision on these issues can give Europe the lead in the twenty-first century.
Jules Kortenhorst is chief executive officer of the European Climate Foundation.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS