D espite the complexity

associated with climate

change, the European

Union should move ahead in an

aggressive fashion to ratify as well as

persuade other countries to ratify,

the Kyoto Protocol on Climate

Change according to many speakers

at a recent high-level conference of

leading European politicians, indus-

trialists, and environmentalists in

London. Don Smith reports.

The speakers at the conference,

organized by the Royal Institute for

international Affairs (RIIA), were in

near unanimous agreement that by

moving ahead now, the EU would

benefit in economic as well as political

terms with Olivier Deleuze, Belgian

Minister of Energy and Sustainable

Development, stating, “First movers

will find that they gained a competi-

tive advantage in energy efficiency and

technological innovation.”

Moreover, many speakers noted the

important role that renewable energy

oto

would necessarily play in the context of

reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

There was also recognition that the rat-

ification of Kyoto would significantly

impact the world’s businesses. Finally, a

sensitive question that was touched on

in many speeches and presentations,

but for which there were no immediate

answers, was what the US government’s

reaction to climate change might be

bearing in mind the I 1 th of September

terrorist attacks. Earlier this year, the

Bush Administration indicated its

strong opposition to ratifying the

Kyoto Protocol.

‘Climate change: an issue of enormous proportions’ The need for the EU to move ahead

was highlighted by Kjell Larsson,

Swedish Environment Minister, who

said, “In view of its complexity, univer-

sality, longevity and necessity, climate

change policy is really a challenge of

enormous proportions. It requires

enduring decisiveness and real multilat-

eral cooperation. The only existing

instrument for this is the Kyoto

Protocol.” Mr Larsson also pointed out

that the role of the private sector in

addressing climate change was essential:

“Governments can create frameworks

and various incentives, but it is the pri-

vate sector that will have to shape

tomorrow’s technologies and see the

business opportunities ahead.”

According to Robert Napier, Chief

Executive of the World Wide Fund for

Nature-UK, “The Kyoto Protocol is

really the only game in town. If we

don’t get the Kyoto Protocol ratified

by the [UN World Conference on

Sustainable Development] next

autumn, I’m not sure we’ll have any

good news at the conference. It all

comes down to the political commit-

ment to deliver action.”

The role of renewable energy The crucial role that renewable ener-

gy will play in the effort to address

climate change was highlighted by

Mr Deleuze, who stated, “Climate

change and the transition to a sus-

tainable energy economy is the most

urgent and important test of the

industrialised countries’ willingness

to change their unsustainable pat-

terns of production and consump-

tion, as they pledged to do in Rio in

1392.” Noting the ELI’s commit-

ment to addressing climate change,

Mr. Deleuze pointed to the 7

September 2001 adoption by the

European Parliament and the

Council of Energy Ministers of a

Directive on the promotion of elec-

tricity produced from renewable

energy sources in the internal electric-

ity market. In particular, he said the

Directive was designed to influence

the supply side of the energy sector so

as to cut down on greenhouse gas

emissions. “The overall objective the

Directive sets for electricity produced

from nonrenewable sources is to

reach 22% of gross electricity con-

sumption by 2010; this means 12%

of total gross domestic energy con-

sumption,” Mr. Deleuze said.

Similarly, investment in renewable

energy was described as an absolute

“key” to dealing with emissions, said

Robert Napier, Chief Executive of

WWF-UK.

Several speakers noted rhat a move

from a carbon-based economy to a

renewables-based economy would also

directly address the matter of energy

security, an issue which was of particu-

lar significance in light of the continu-

ing uncertainty about the on-going

availability of cheap and accessible oil

from the Middle East. “Recent days

have put a new emphasis on security.

How do you reduce energy demand?

How do you increase renewables?”

36 November/December 2001 RE www.re-focusnet

CONFERENCE REPORT

asked Gerd Leipold, Executive

Director of Greenpeace International.

Mr. Leipold also noted that for an

investment of $40 billion, green ener-

gy could be brought to 500 million

people.

Kyoto’s impact on business The eventual ratification of the Kyoto

Protocol will have an enormous

impact on business. James Cameron,

of counsel to the law firm of Baker &

McKenzie, said “When Kyoto is rati-

fied it will confirm that businesses are

acting in a ‘carbon-constrained’ econo-

my.” He went on to say, “There is a

segment of business which would

dearly like a uniform standard such as

will flow from Kyoto.” If the US does

not ratify Kyoto and does not take

domestic action on greenhouse gas

issues, many global businesses will feel

“uncomfortable” according to Mr.

Cameron. “People will want to look at

ways to insure that EU businesses

don’t pay a larger price than American

businesses if the US doesn’t ratify

Kyoto. Simply put, global businesses

can’t afford to take a US-centric

approach, however. Global businesses

ought to be a significant force to make

sure that the EU and US don’t get too

far apart.”

Several attendees from the business

sector privately echoed Mr. Cameron’s

sentiments, and said that it was essen-

tial for their businesses to have one

common set of standards rather than

tW0. Moreover, both acknowledged

the concern that if US businesses were

able to operate by a lower set of stan-

dards, whilst EU and other countries’

businesses operated by a higher set of

standards the result would likely be

significant market and price distor-

tions.

US climate change policy Many speakers and panelists wondered

whether the events of 11 September

might alter the US government’s posi-

tion on issues of multilateral impor-

tance, such as climate change, bur

there was much hesitancy to reach any

final conclusions.

Robert T. Watson, Chairman of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change said, “No one knows whether

this will lead to a change in the US.

US continues to take climate change seriously Two representatives of the US government who addressed the Royal Institute

for International Affairs’ Climate Change Conference said that notwithstand-

ing criticism of the US position as well as the 1 Ith of September events, the

Bush Administration continued to view the climate change issue with the

utmost of concern. Despite these comments, however, the mostly European

audience seemed rather unconvinced of the US’s stance.

John Beale, Deputy Assistant Administrator at the US Environmental

Protection Agency, said, “The US takes climate change very seriously. Some

have suggested we are not concerned by it, but that’s simply not correct. We

think it needs a global and long-term approach.” Mr. Beale reiterated Bush

Administration policy on Kyoto saying, “We don’t believe it will solve the prob-

lem plus it will hurt the US economy.” Mr. Beale also addressed the impact of

the terrorist attack: “Since September 1 lth, our priorities have shifted.

Climate change had been at the top of the priority list and it was being dis-

cussed in on-going Cabinet level sessions. Now that will change.” In a simi-

lar fashion, Harlan T. Watson, Senior Climate Negotiator and Special

Representative for the US State Department, said, “Before September 1 Ith,

few areas received more attention than climate change. The President has

asked for new ways to address this complex issue, and the Cabinet review is still

in progress.”

While both representatives received a cordial reception from the mostly

European audience, and many gestures of goodwill were expressed by the audi-

ence members to the American people in the wake of the terrorist attack, the

general feeling among attendees was that the US was not committed to Kyoto

or anything close to Kyoto. Comments from the audience, as well as from

other speakers, indicated that there was much disappointment in the US’s

unwillingness to join the process. Moreover, a number of representatives of

global businesses privately expressed concern that by deciding to stay out of the

Kyoto Protocol, the US was making it more difficult for global businesses to

operate on “a level playing field.” A high ranking EU official also privately

said, “We simply don’t see how the US can adopt Kyoto anyway in the context

of the Bush Administration’s proposed energy plan.” However, there was also

a feeling expressed that now was not the right time to press the US on becom-

ing more involved.

There was an expressed hope, however, that the Bush Administration might

be more willing to be flexible in the wake of the terrorist attacks, with several

people noting that President Bush had in recent weeks been actively engaged

in a global coalition building effort rather than the “go-it-alone” philosophy

that defined the first eight months of his administration.

tiany are optimistic that the coopera-

ive work on issues of terrorism may

pill over to climate change.” Mr.

>arsson, Swedish Environment

vIinister, sounded a similar hopeful

entiment: “Let me add some thoughts

,elated to the present action to combat

errorism. We are all committed to

:ounter these threats. And it must be

L multilateral effort with a central role

br the United Nations and other mul-

ilateral institutions. Maybe this can

)pen up new avenues also for the cli-

nate negotiations.”

Tom Spencer, Executive Director

br the European Centre for Public

iffairs and a former Member of the

<uropean Parliament, cautioned that

the policy implications of the terrorist

attack might not be seen for a year.

He did note, however, that the US’s

need for policy, diplomatic, and mili-

tary cooperation may “fundamentally

change the emotional relationship

between the US and the rest of the

world.” On the other hand, John

Drexhage, Director of Climate

Change for the International Institute

for Sustainable Development in

Canada wondered whether the events

of 11 September might mean that cli-

mate change would not be a priority

in the US.

Notwithstanding the past reluctance

on the part of the US to ratify Kyoto,

the key may be to continue to keep the

November/December 2001 RE: Cb~1i.i”” www.re-focus.net 37

CONFERENCE REPORT

door open to US involvement.

“Climate change is a global problem.

Consequently, how do you bring the

US on board even if it’s at a later date?”

asked Chris Boyd, Senior Vice President

Environment and Public Affairs for

L;afarge, a large international building

construction materials company.

The next steps for the EU In more practical terms, Margot

Wallstrom, the EU’s Environment

Commissioner, told the European

Parliament in September that the next

steps in the EU ratification process

would involve the preparation of three

documents that will be presented by

the European Commission to the

European Parliament and Council by

the end of 200 I : l A ratification proposal for the

Kyoto Protocol that will include a

Council decision on the burden

sharing among the Member State’s

of the Community’s overall 8%

reduction target;

l A communication on a cost-effec-

tive implementation strategy for

reducing greenhouse gas emissions

in the EU, based on the final

report of the Commission’s

European Climate Change

Programme;

l A proposal for a framework direc-

tive on an EU-wide emission trad-

ing scheme as a core element in a

cost-effective Kyoto implementa-

tion strategy.

In large measure, the speakers at

the conference seemed convinced

that with or without US involve-

ment, the EU’s role in the climate

change debate provided an historic

opportunity for European leadership

to play the decisive role in defining

the road ahead. “Can Europe com-

ply with its Kyoto obligations?”

asked Belgian Energy and

Sustainable Development Minister

Deleuze. “Yes, we can fulfill our

commitments, provided we act in a

coordinated and determined manner

internally like we have on the inter-

national scene.” Furthermore,

Michael Grubb, Associate Fellow at

the RIIA and professor of climate

change at Imperial College said,

“There are many respects where the

Kyoto Protocol can be delivered and

not hurt the European economy.

That is an important part of the

underpinning of the EU approach.”

Finally, Mr. Grubb offered another

compelling reason why continued EU

leadership on climate change was crit-

ical: “Climate change, and how to

address it, may be an emerging issue of

European identity, particularly in

northern Europe. The consequence of

not going ahead in a determined fash-

ion might effectively be bad because

some might indeed ask, ‘Why is there

an EU?“’

The conference “Delivering

Kyoto: Could Europe do it?” was

organised by FUIA and was held in

London from 1-2 October 2001.

For further details of this and other

similar events please contact: The

Royal Institute of International

Affairs, Chatham House, 10 St

James’s Square, London SWlY 4LE,

UK; tel: (+44) 20 7957 5700;

www.riia.org

2 0 0 2 GLOBAL WINDPOWER Conference & Exhibition

2 - 5 April 2002 CNIT - La Defense - Paris - France

Organised by:

With the collaboration ar numerous national associatio;; representing countries worldwide and the wind industry.

Further info: www.ewea.org/src/offshore.htm

Conference & papers: Bruce Douglas T: + 32 2 546 19 40 F: + 32 2 546 19 44 info@ewea.org

Deadline for papers: 16th Nov 2001

Exhibition: Emmanuel De Smeth I-’ - T: + 32 2 722 82 38 F: + 32 2 7228240 edesmeth@aimsbru.be 1

3 w

II

I

Upcoming issues of Refocus will cover a wide range of topics of interest to the renew- able energy community. If your company or organization is active in any areas directly related to renewable energy, the editor would be happy to learn of your developments.

Contact: Paul Spencer, Editor. Refocus, The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1 GB, England

Tel: +44- 1865-843648; Fax: +44-1865-843971; p.spencer@eIsevier.co.uk

Contact: lngrid Gardner, The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1 GB, England

Tel: +44- 1865-84308 1; Fax: +44-1865-843971; i.gardnev@elsevier.co.uk

38

New Reader Enquiry Service No. 211. Go to www.re-focusnet to make your enquiry.

November/December 2001 RE* / ; 1 www.re-focus.nct