Climate Change and Clean Energy

Global food prices have broken yet another record. February prices were 2.2% higher than January, the previous all-time high. February's high was well above the 2008 average when food prices led to riots and hording. Much of this has to do with climate related events - floods in Pakistan and wildfires in Russia. Add to this the recent rise in the price of US oil, which is currently hovering at around $100 a barrel while global prices are closer to the $120 range.

So is now a good time to talk about climate change and clean energy? Unfortunately, a number of people want to avoid the conversation. In doing so we expose ourselves to ever increasing levels of risk and greater instability, both in markets and in countries. The transition to low carbon is happening but not at the scale necessary to meet the challenge. We have to ramp up our efforts if we hope to minimize some of the impacts we're already seeing.

Innovation Nation

I haven't posted since late last year so here's quick recap of 2010: economy in the doldrums; tied with 2005 as the hottest year on record; was also the wettest year on record (which is awkward on a number of levels); the last decade was the hottest on record (with the previous two decades coming in second and third respectively). All and all, not the kind of streak you want to be on.

So what's a possible solution that meets the trifecta of economic recovery, energy security, and climate stability? There's no easy, straightforward answer but a critical element, and one that needs to be ramped up quickly, is the need to embrace a clean energy future. In doing so, you have the opportunity to design new technologies, enable new markets, and most importantly, create new jobs. And it all comes with the additional benefits of a cleaner environment and more secure sources of energy.

Total aside, anyone who can find a poetry blog from 2001 called "Someplace Nice" gets a cookie.

OECD - US Economic Report

Nothing like curling up with a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to ease any insomnia you might suffer from. To be fair the report is actually a great resource for US facts/figures, though I'm not sure about its claim that the US is accountable for only 15% of global emissions. This is far lower than the ~20% figure I've seen in the past (and ~22% for China). You can read the summary here.

A few highlights:

* The climate section of the report is framed in the context of reducing Americans' exposure to risk. It also identifies the corollary benefits of taking action - cleaner air, improved health conditions, enhanced energy/national security due to a reduction in foreign oil imports

* The report makes a very strong case for putting a price on carbon - least cost option, driver of RD&D, etc., and argues that the EPA is a less cost effective tool and unlikely to deliver the necessary emissions reductions

* It calls for passage of US climate legislation but: i) opposes the removal of provisions which do not take the indirect land use effect of bio-fuels into account (i.e., food shortages, increased prices, etc.); ii) opposes the inclusion of BTAs (border tax adjustments), also known as BAMs (Border Adjustment Mechanisms) in US parlance; and iii) suggests limiting offsets so revenues raised can be used as a deficit reduction tool.

I'm not sure what impact the report will have on the US debate, if any. But it's interesting to note that an organization set up to counterbalance OPEC is calling on the US to reduce its emissions and put a greater emphasis on investment in low carbon technology.