Surface transportation and the global economy
- Siva Yam, President, United States of America-China Chamber of Commerce
- John Isbell, Global Director of Delivery Logistics, Nike
- Ray Kuntz, Chief Executive Officer, Watkins and Shepard Trucking, On behalf of the American Trucking Associations
- Edward Wytkind, President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
Climate Change as a Security Risk
The German Advisory Council on Global Change (BGU) is hosting a Congressional briefing on Climate Change as a Security Risk that will examine how climate change may overstretch many societies’ adaptive capacities, resulting in destabilization and violence and jeopardizing national and international security. It will also discuss how climate change efforts could unite the international community if it recognizes global warming as a threat to humankind and adopts a dynamic and globally coordinated climate policy. The briefing will be held on Tuesday, April 1, from 3:00-4:30 p.m. in Room 2255 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. For more information contact Mario-Ingo Soos at [email protected].
Bangkok Climate Change Talks
Three months after the landmark agreement on a road map towards strengthened international action on climate change reached in Bali, Indonesia, the next round of negotiations shifts to the neighboring country of Thailand and its capital, Bangkok. The talks are taking place between 31 March to 4 April 2008 at the United Nations Conference Centre (UNCC) of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).
The climate change talks in Bangkok will convene sessions of both the Ad hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (first session) and the Ad hoc Working Group on further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (first part of the fifth session), during which Parties need to advance the Bali Road Map agreed last December.
Parties agreed at Bali to formally launch negotiations on enabling the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention. These negotiations need to conclude in an agreed outcome by the end of 2009.
The challenge is to design a future agreement that will successfully halt the increase in global emissions within the next 10-15 years, dramatically cut back emissions by 2050, and do so in a way that is economically viable and politically equitable worldwide.
The Bangkok meeting of the Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention needs to map out how to tackle this enormous challenge and begin by establishing without delay a clear work programme for the next two years.
Concretely, Parties meeting in Bangkok will identify the areas that need to be further clarified as well as the issues where work needs to be done and in what order that should happen. They will also establish what input is needed from the UN at large, the business sector and others, and how this will be integrated into the overall work plan.
The issues that the new Working Group needs to address were clearly defined at Bali. In addition to the goal of achieving agreement on long-term global action, work on on-going issues such as deforestation and technology needs to be advanced.
The Kyoto Protocol AWG, mandated in 2005 to consider future commitments for Annex I Parties, will initiate the second step of its work programme; in particular, the analysis of possible means available to Annex I Parties to reach their emission reduction targets. It will provide an informal setting for input from experts and for Parties to present their views on the issues related to the different means, as well as on how to enhance their effectiveness and contribution to sustainable development. Issues under consideration include emissions trading and the project based mechanisms, land use, land-use change and forestry, greenhouse gases, sectors and source categories to be covered, and possible approaches targeting sectoral emissions. These themes will be addressed in an in-session thematic workshop.
For both groups, work will continue at the twenty-eighth session of the Subsidiary Bodies to be held in Bonn in June. After that, both groups will reconvene at a week-long intersessional meeting at the end of August before meeting again at the fourteenth session of the Conference of the Parties and the fourth session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in Poland in December.
Investing in Sustainable Energy Options in Ukraine via the Kyoto Protocol
This webcasted panel discussion will examine opportunities for U.S. businesses and others to invest in energy efficient and renewable energy projects in Ukraine using the mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol. The panelists will review opportunities for reducing energy waste in Ukraine’s major end-use energy sectors as well as the status and near-term potential for developing Ukraine’s solar, wind, biomass/biofuels, small hydro, geothermal, and coal-mine methane resources.
Panelists- Brian Castelli – Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Alliance to Save Energy
- John Palmisano – Chairman, IE3
- Rich Rosenzweig – Chief Operating Officer, Natsource
- Ken Bossong – Co-Director, Ukrainian-American Environmental Association
(biographical information on each of the four panelists follows below)
This event, being co-sponsored by the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation and The Washington Group, will be broadcast live on-line in English.
Persons planning to attend in person should arrive by 11:50 am
- (Ukrainian Time: 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm)
U.S.-Ukraine Foundation 1701 “K” Street NW Suite #903 Washington, DC 20006
TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS ON-LINE: Questions for the panelists can be e-mailed either in advance or during the discussion to [email protected]. Please type “Kyoto/Energy Panel” in the “subject” line.
TO REGISTER AND FOR MORE INFORMATION: For On-Site Attendance, RSVPs Required. Lunch will be served. Space is Limited.
RSVP by email to: [email protected].
The presentation will be broadcast live online. To register to watch online, please visit this link and follow the instructions.
Speakers:
JOHN PALMISANO Chairman, IE3
Since 1976, Mr. Palmisano has:
- Created 3 emissions brokerage and 1 emissions trading businesses, including the first emissions brokerage firm, AER*X
- Advised the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on developing a “green” exchange
- Consulted to trade associations, the US EPA, the United Nations, the World Bank, US Congress, the Russian government, the Ukrainian government, the Canadian government and many US and international companies on both emissions trading matters and developing “green” energy projects and policies
- Helped create three “green” NGOs that focus on promoting emissions trading—one in Russia, one in Ukraine, and one in the United States
- Established emission brokerage offices and representatives in Moscow, Kiev, Hong Kong, London, and Washington DC
- Brokered more than 70 emission trades
- Served as an expert witness in public utility commission and legal proceedings
- Managed the air pollution control program in California for an engineering company
- Developed several major environmental policies while working at US EPA
Mr. Palmisano’s immersion into emissions trading began when he was a manager at the United States Environmental Protection Agency where he developed regulatory reforms dealing with air and water pollution control. He received U.S. EPA’s Gold Medal for his work on emissions trading.
////////////////////////////////
BRIAN CASTELLI Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Alliance to Save Energy
Brian T. Castelli is the executive vice president and chief operating officer of the Alliance to Save Energy. He has 30 years of national and international experience in the energy field, including expertise in energy efficiency, renewables, emission reductions, and electricity demand reduction.
Prior to joining the Alliance in July 2005, Castelli ran his own energy consulting firm. There he was the federal energy liaison for the California Energy Commission; a principal with the Center for Energy and Climate Solutions, and a consultant to both the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO).
As a presidential appointee, Castelli served as chief of staff to the U.S. Department of Energy’s assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy from 1994 to 2001. He managed 550 staff and more than $1 billion in programs and research, development, and deployment initiatives and directed the development and implementation of energy policies and programs.
Castelli also led and participated in missions to Western Hemisphere, European, and former Soviet Union countries and was also deeply involved in developing energy-efficiency measures for the eventual closure of the nuclear reactors in Chornobyl, Ukraine.
Prior to DOE, Castelli was appointed in 1988 by Gov. Bob Casey to the Pennsylvania Energy Office (PEO), for three years as deputy director for administration and public affairs and then as executive director, through 1994. As executive director he ran the commonwealth’s energy policies and programs, managed the state energy office and the Pennsylvania Energy Development Authority, and took the lead on responding to energy emergencies.
Notably, he developed a revolving loan fund for energy-efficiency measures and a “Green Buildings” program for cutting energy use and costs in all commonwealth-owned or operated buildings, and he drafted legislation for and implemented an alternative fuel program.
Earlier in his career, Castelli was vice president of finance for The National Center for Appropriate Technology; senior vice president and cofounder of CEXEC; and financial analyst with the Federal Energy Administration. He has authored many articles, studies, and reports on energy-related issues, served on various boards of directors, and made presentations in many state, national, and international forums and conferences.
Castelli holds two degrees from the University of Pennsylvania, a bachelor of science in chemical engineering and an MBA in industrial/environmental management from the university’s Wharton School.
////////////////////////////////
RICH ROSENZWEIG Chief Operating Officer, Natsource
Richard Rosenzweig, Chief Operating Officer of Natsource (Washington, DC), is responsible for the company’s global Advisory Services and Research business unit. He provides services to private firms, investment funds, governments, and international financial institutions on all aspects of climate change and renewable energy, including risk assessment and management, market entry strategies, trading system design, domestic policy development and international negotiations. Mr. Rosenzweig has extensive experience in all aspects of emissions trading and risk management. He represented several companies in the design of the U.S. Acid Rain and NOx SIP Call Programs. Mr. Rosenzweig was involved in the first transaction of UK and Danish greenhouse gas allowances. He joined Natsource from the Washington law firm of Van Ness Feldman, where he was Principal.
Mr. Rosenzweig served as Chief of Staff to the Secretary of Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) from 1993-1996. His national policy responsibilities included the development and coordination of DOE strategy related to global climate change. He played key roles in developing the Clinton Administration’s Climate Change Action Plan, which incorporated the first project-based mechanism to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the Secretary of Energy’s international energy, environmental, and national security initiatives. He also helped to negotiate voluntary agreements between DOE and more than 600 electric utilities to achieve voluntary greenhouse gas reductions in the “Climate Challenge” program. Mr. Rosenzweig has written extensively on the greenhouse gas market, the impacts of trading system design, and the role of technology in addressing climate change. He has a BA degree from Northeastern University and an MS degree from American University in Political Science.
////////////////////////////////
KEN BOSSONG Co-Director, Ukrainian-American Environmental Association
A former volunteer in Ukraine with the U.S. Peace Corps (February 2000 – January 2003), Ken Bossong presently serves as the coordinator of the Sustainable Energy Coalition, a U.S. NGO comprised of 50+ U.S. business, environmental, consumer, and energy policy organizations promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies.
Over the past 35 years he has served as the director of several national U.S. environmental NGOs as well as worked as a member of several organizations working on Ukrainian issues. He has degrees in law, public administration, and environmental engineering.
Most recently he was a short-term scholar at the Kennan Institute of the Woodrow Wilson Center where he conducted research on sustainable energy policies and options for Ukraine.
////////////////////////////////
Major Financial Program Support provided by:
Chopivsky Family Foundation Dmytro & Jaroslava Jarosewycz Memorial Charitable Gift Fund Heritage Foundation of First Security Federal Savings Bank (Chicago, IL) The Maria Hulai Lion Foundaton Self Reliance (NY) Federal Credit Union (New York City) Selfreliance Ukrainian American Federal Credit Union (Chicago, IL) Sutaruk Foundation
Individuals: Leonard & Helena Mazur Marta Pereyma Murray Senkus Stefan & Wolodymyra Slywotzky
Climate Change: Competitiveness Concerns and Prospects for Engaging Developing Countries
See the January 31, 2008 white paper.
Competitiveness and the Future of Carbon Trading: A View from Europe
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) invites you to a briefing addressing the efficiency of a cap-and-trade approach to controlling carbon emissions. The cap-and-trade approach is often set against concerns about its possible impact on industrial competitiveness. These and related concerns led to significant excess allocation of free allowances in the first phase of the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), which caps carbon from five major trading industrial sectors, in addition to power generation.
- With the first phase of the EU ETS now complete and the system in its second (Kyoto) phase, what has been learned to date?
- What is now proposed for the future of the EU ETS beyond 2012 – with the recent structure proposed for a third term, right out to 2020?
- And what may the EU ETS experience and future plans imply for the international effort to control climate change?
The EU ETS covers 45 percent of European CO2 emissions. Concerns about the loss of industrial competitiveness and leakage of CO2 emissions remain one of the major barriers to placing more robust CO2 mitigation obligations on industrial sectors in the EU. A January 15 report by Climate Strategies, “Differentiation and Dynamics of EU ETS Industrial Competitiveness Impacts,” analyzes what would happen if Europe presses ahead with strong CO2 prices without waiting for similar policies elsewhere. The study finds that competitiveness and leakage concerns are no threat to the viability of the EU ETS overall, but can be analyzed and addressed for the individual sectors affected. Various policy instruments are available, and the best option can be selected individually for each of the affected sectors.
Speaker:- Dr. Michael Grubb, Chief Economist, Carbon Trust; Professor, Cambridge Faculty of Economics; and Contributing Author, Differentiation and Dynamics of EU ETS Industrial Competitiveness Impacts
Professor Michael Grubb is Chief Economist at the UK’s Carbon Trust, the $200 million/year public-private partnership established by the UK government and business to kick-start the UK’s transition to a low carbon economy. He combines this with academic positions at Cambridge University and Imperial College London. Prof. Grubb was also recently appointed to the UK government’s Committee on Climate Change, being established under the UK Climate Change Bill, with statutory powers to advise the UK government on future carbon reduction targets and to monitor government progress towards those targets.
This briefing is free and open to the public. No RSVP required. For more information, contact Fred Beck at [email protected] or 202-662-1892.
International Deforestation and Climate Change Adaptation
- The Honorable Stuart Eizenstat, Partner, Covington & Burling, Sustainable Forestry Management, Ltd.
- Heather McGray, Senior Associate, World Resources Institute
Climate Change and Vulnerable Societies: A Post-Bali Overview
Witnesses
Panel I- Harlan Watson, Ph.D., Special Representative and Senior Climate Negotiator, Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State
- His Excellency Ali’ioaiga Feturi Elisaia, Permanent Representative of the Independent State of Samoa
- Mason F. Smith, Charge d’affaires, a.i. of the Republic of the Fiji Islands
- Mr. Charles Paul, Charge d’affaires, a.i., Republic of the Marshall Islands
- His Excellency Masao Nakayama, Permanent Representative of the Federated States of Micronesia
- Her Excellency Marlene Moses, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Nauru
Environmental Justice Coalition Opposes Carbon Markets
Citing the American Enterprise Institute, the Economist, and the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, a group of environmental justice organizations including the California Environmental Rights Alliance (CERA) have come out in opposition to carbon trading schemes, in particular the European Union cap-and-trade system (the European Union Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Scheme or EU ETS) and the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism for investing in emissions reductions in developing countries. Major signatories include the Rainforest Action Network and the Los Angeles chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
The declaration cites the windfall profits generated by the initial phase of EU ETS and argues that carbon trading “stands in the way of the transition to clean renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency strategies.” CDM is criticized for encouraging “carbon dumps” and financing “private industrial tree plantations and large hydro-electric facilities that appropriate land and water resources”.
The California Environmental Justice Movement will oppose efforts by our state government to create a carbon trading and offset program, because such a program will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the pace called for by the international scientific community, it will not result in a shift to clean sustainable energy sources, it will support and enrich the state’s worst polluters, it will fail to address the existing and future inequitable burden of pollution, it will deprive communities of the ability to protect and enhance their communities, and because if our state joins regional or international trading schemes it will further create incentives for carbon offset programs that harm communities in California, the region, the country, and developing nations around the world.
Signatories are below the jump.
- Asian-Pacific Environmental Network
- Association of Irritated Residents
- California Communities Against Toxics
- California Environmental Rights Alliance
- Carbon Trade Watch
- Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment
- Clean New York
- Coalition For A Safe Environment
- Communities for a Better Environment
- Del Amo Action Committee
- Desert Citizens Against Pollution
- Environmental Health Coalition
- Fresno Metro Ministry
- Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice
- People Organized in Defense of the Earth and Her Resources
- Physicians for Social Responsibility-LA
- Rainforest Action Network
- San Joaquin Valley Latino
- Environmental Advance Project
- Society for Positive Action
- The Corner House
- West County Toxics Coalition
McKinsey: Energy Efficiency Investment Offers Massive Returns
At yesterday’s Investor Summit on Climate Risk, McKinsey’s economic research arm, the McKinsey Global Institute, released the report The Case for Investing in Energy Productivity (lead authors Jaana Remes and Diana Farrell).
The report finds that global investments on the order of $170 billion annually through 2020 ($38 billion in the US) in energy efficiency (what they call “energy productivity”) would deliver annual returns at a rate of 17 percent. Furthermore, these investments would reduce energy demand at half the cost of building out infrastructure to meet that demand. (For a sense of scale, $170 billion is 1.6 percent of global fixed-capital investment today.)
MGI finds some key energy-market failures that block the needed capital outlays:Fuel subsidies that directly discourage productive energy use; a lack of information available to consumers about the kind of energy productivity choices that are available to them; and agency issues in high-turnover commercial businesses.The report’s top-line recommendations for repairing these failures:
- Set energy efficiency standards for appliances and equipment
- Finance energy efficiency upgrades in new buildings and remodels (see Architecture 2030)
- Raise corporate standards for energy efficiency
- Invest in energy intermediaries (such as energy service companies aka ESCOs)
For more, read the full report.