31/03/2017

China Poised To Take Lead On Climate After Trump’s Move To Undo Policies

New York Times - Edward Wong

Burning coal at an unauthorized steel factory in Inner Mongolia in November. China consumes as much coal as the rest of the world combined. Kevin Frayer/Getty Images
For years, the Obama administration prodded, cajoled and beseeched China to make commitments to limit the use of fossil fuels to try to slow the global effects of climate change.
President Obama and other American officials saw the pledges from both Beijing and Washington as crucial: China is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, followed by the United States.
In the coming years, the opposite dynamic is poised to play out. President Trump’s signing of an executive order on Tuesday aimed at undoing many of the Obama administration’s climate change policies flips the roles of the two powers.
Now, it is far likelier that the world will see China pushing the United States to meet its commitments and try to live up to the letter and spirit of the 2015 Paris Agreement, even if Mr. Trump has signaled he has no intention of doing so.
“They’ve set the direction they intend to go in the next five years,” Barbara Finamore, a senior lawyer and Asia director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, based in New York, said of China. “It’s clear they intend to double down on bringing down their reliance on coal and increasing their use of renewable energy.”
“China wants to take over the role of the U.S. as a climate leader, and they’ve baked it into their five-year plans,” she added, referring to the economic development blueprints drawn up by the Chinese government.
Even before the presidential campaign last year, Mr. Trump had made statements consistent with climate change denial, including calling climate change a hoax created by China. He has also threatened to formally withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. Since Mr. Trump’s election in November, senior Chinese officials and leaders have been taking the high ground on the issue by urging all countries, including the United States, to abide by their climate commitments.
The biggest rhetorical turning point came in January, when Xi Jinping, China’s president, said at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that the Paris Agreement was “hard won” and should remain in force.
“All signatories should stick to it instead of walking away from it, as this is a responsibility we must assume for future generations,” he said.
Other Chinese officials at Davos repeated that message, including the energy minister, Nur Bekri, and top executives of state-owned enterprises.
In an interview before the recent climate conference in Marrakesh, Chai Qimin, a climate change researcher and policy adviser, said that policies adopted at a recent Communist Party meeting showed that China “has attached ever greater importance to ecological civilization and green development.”
“Everyone is taking this more and more seriously,” he added.
On Wednesday, a Foreign Ministry spokesperson said at a regularly scheduled news conference in Beijing that all countries in the Paris Agreement should “fulfill their commitments” and that China would stick to its pledges “regardless of how other countries’ climate policies change.”
Global Times, a state-run nationalist newspaper, used harsher language in an editorial chastising the Trump administration for “brazenly shirking its responsibility on climate change.”
A solar farm near Wenquan, in the region of Xinjiang, this month. China has pledged to generate 20 percent of the country’s energy from sources that are not fossil fuel, including solar, by 2030. Gilles Sabrié for The New York Times
“Washington is obliged to set an example for mankind’s efforts against global warming, and now the Trump administration has become the first government of a major power to take opposite actions on the Paris Agreement,” the newspaper said. “It is undermining the great cause of mankind trying to protect the earth, and the move is indeed irresponsible and very disappointing.”
The editorial also questioned why China was making concessions on fossil-fuel use when the United States was scrapping its promises: “How can China, still underdeveloped, give away a chunk of room for development, just to nourish those Western countries that are already rich?”
Chinese participation is critical for global efforts on climate change. With its economic growth and rampant infrastructure construction, China consumes as much coal as the rest of the world combined. The burning of coal, which is at the core of the power, steel and cement industries in the country, generates enormous amounts of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas. So environmental advocates and officials around the world constantly say China must break its coal addiction.
But unlike in the United States, Chinese leaders and senior officials have consistently said that climate change is a serious problem and acknowledged that changing the energy mix to move away from fossil-fuel sources is important.
And because of its air pollution crisis, China announced policies in 2013 to limit the use of coal in the country’s three largest population centers. More recently, scientists have said that there is a dangerous cycle at work: Weather patterns from climate change are exacerbating the smog.
“China is cutting back on coal because of its lethal costs to human health as well as its high carbon emissions, and plans to transition to the energy sources of tomorrow, rather than yesterday,” said Isabel Hilton, founder of Chinadialogue, a prominent website that reports on environmental issues and policy. “President Trump seems intent on reviving a 19th-century energy source rather than pursuing the promise of the 21st century.”
Mr. Trump’s pro-coal talk, and the unlikelihood that his administration will pressure China to cut back on fossil fuels, might mean that pro-coal interests in China, including among state-owned energy companies, will try harder to push back against officials putting limits on coal.
But in recent years, coal consumption in China has declined slightly, surprising many analysts and researchers. China’s economic slowdown — from decades of double-digit annual growth to 6.7 percent last year — has been a major factor. Analysts say there appeared to be an increase in coal use during part of 2016 because of economic stimulus policies, but preliminary statistics released in February indicate that overall coal consumption declined last year compared with 2015.
Given such numbers, researchers say China may reach a carbon emissions peak in 2025 — five years ahead of its stated goal of 2030.
China has also made pledges on the percentage of total energy that will be generated by non-fossil-fuel sources, which include hydropower, nuclear power, wind and solar. Mr. Xi has said that by 2030, 20 percent of China’s energy will come from such sources. Chinese officials are now grappling with the complex problem of getting energy generated by wind and solar sources onto the grid and properly used.
“Trump’s rejection of regulatory action on climate change creates a vacuum in global climate leadership that China can now seize,” said Alex L. Wang, a law professor and China environmental expert at the University of California, Los Angeles. “In recent years, a variety of factors — crisis levels of pollution, economic opportunities from green development and concerns about the domestic risks of rising temperatures — have pushed China to action on climate change. Trump’s actions don’t affect these underlying drivers.”
In addition, China has said that it will put in place by the end of this year a national market for greenhouse gas quotas, commonly known as a cap-and-trade program. It has experimented with seven such regional markets, and there have been problems with them, but the government is determined to set up a national program to put a price on carbon and impose a cost on companies that generate large amounts of carbon dioxide, Chinese policy advisers say.
China appears to be overperforming on other targets besides its carbon emissions peak date. It had stated that by 2020, 58 percent of its energy would come from coal consumption. Official statistics indicate China might meet that target early. Chinese officials now say they expect to get the number down to 60 percent this year.
A report released in January by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, based in Ohio, said China was the world leader in domestic investment in renewable energy and associated low-emissions-energy sectors, with $103 billion invested in 2015. And China is going global with that strategy — last year, it invested $32 billion in large overseas deals involving renewable energy.
“There are clear differences between the Chinese approach and the Trump administration on climate change,” Ms. Hilton said. “While Trump’s administration seems to believe that action on climate change is a waste of money and threatens jobs in the U.S., China sees investment in climate-related action as essential to secure a safe and prosperous future for Chinese citizens, as well as a strategic opportunity to develop and supply the technologies of the future.”

Links
at No comments:

Trump’s Energy And Climate Change Order: Seven Essential Reads

The Conversation - *

President Trump holds up the signed Energy Independence Executive Order, Tuesday, March 28, 2017, at EPA headquarters in Washington, surrounded by coal miners and members of his Cabinet. AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais
On March 28 President Trump signed an executive order that launched a broad assault on policies put in place by the Obama administration to reduce carbon pollution. Trump’s order directs the Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw and rewrite the Clean Power Plan, which limits carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants. It also eliminates a number of other policies related to cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
Our experts explain the policies under assault and the impacts of this about-face.

Challenging established policies
Trump has accused the Environmental Protection Agency of pursuing “an out-of-control anti-energy agenda,” and called for refocusing the agency on its “essential mission of keeping our air and our water clean and safe.”
But as Greg Dotson of the University of Oregon Law School points out, EPA has been analyzing and regulating climate change for decades. Climate change “has been at the heart of EPA’s mission since its creation, and administrations of both parties have moved forward to mitigate this threat – with varying levels of ambition and enthusiasm – for 30 years,” Dotson writes.
Trump has also instructed federal agencies to discount official estimates of the social cost of carbon – a figure that represents the harm done by one ton of carbon dioxide emissions – in making policy decisions. Harvard Kennedy School economist Joseph Aldy, who helped develop the first SCC estimate in 2009 for the Obama administration, explains its purpose: When we know the dollar value of damage from carbon pollution, we can see how much society will benefit from regulations to cut carbon emissions.

Methane leaks, coal leasing, national security
Many other federal agencies have roles in regulating carbon pollution alongside EPA. Trump’s order overturns restrictions on energy production on federal lands managed by the Interior Department.
One measure required energy companies to control “fugitive” emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, from oil and natural gas operations on public lands. Catherine Hausman of the University of Michigan calls these leaks “a standard environmental externalities problem, straight out of an Econ 1 textbook,” because they cause environmental damage that is much more costly than the financial losses they represent for energy producers. Consequently, Hausman concludes, businesses have little incentive to self-regulate and capture the emissions on their own.
Trump also directed Interior to lift a moratorium on new coal-mining leases on federal land, which was put in place by the Obama administration in 2016. Studies have shown that these leases undervalue federal coal reserves, thus benefiting energy companies at taxpayers’ expense. Economist Meredith Fowlie of the University of California, Berkeley argues that the coal-leasing program is ripe for reform, and that “Hitting the snooze button will deliver more good deals to the coal companies operating on federal lands, at the expense of taxpayers and the environment.”

Coal mine on federal land in New Mexico. BLM New Mexico/Flickr, CC BY
Although many readers may not associate the Defense Department with climate change, President Obama issued a memorandum in September 2016 that formally stated that climate change affected national security, and directed federal agencies to consider it in defense planning. Trump’s order revokes this directive – even though Trump’s defense secretary, James Mattis, recently stated in written responses to Congress that climate change is “impacting stability in areas of the world where our troops are operating today.”
Pennsylvania State University meteorology professor and retired Rear Admiral David Titley agrees with Mattis. “Here is how military planners see this issue: We know that the climate is changing, we know why it’s changing and we understand that change will have large impacts on our national security. Yet as a nation we still only begrudgingly take precautions,” Titley writes.

Views from the states
While Trump’s order marks a dramatic redirection of federal policy, states can chart their own courses in many areas. Rebecca Romsdahl of the University of North Dakota reports that red states are quietly addressing climate change in many ways, from investing in renewable energy to preparing for flooding and droughts. Often local officials frame these actions as smart growth or prudent planning, without mentioning climate change.
“Energy, economic benefits, common sense and sustainability are frames that are providing opportunities for local leaders to address climate change without getting stuck in the political quagmire,” Romsdahl observes.
At the other extreme, California – led by a Democratic governor and Democrat-dominated legislature – remains proudly committed to making deep cuts in its carbon emissions and building an economy based on clean energy. Many advocates assert that by pursuing a low-carbon path, California will attract lucrative industries and high-skill, high-wage jobs.

Wind farm outside of Palm Springs, California. Chris Goldberg/Flickr, CC BY-NC
Economist Matthew Kahn of the University of Southern California is skeptical of these claims, which are based on complex economic modeling and extremely hard to prove. However, he also believes that California’s strong economic growth in recent years shows that pursuing a low-carbon path has not harmed the state’s economy.
Kahn sees value in California’s willingness to serve as a “green guinea pig,” testing strategies that other states can emulate. “With the federal government slamming the brakes on climate action, it is valuable to have California moving full speed ahead,” he states.

*Jennifer Weeks is the Editor, Environment and Energy, The Conversation. 'Trump’s Energy And Climate Change Order: Seven Essential Reads' is a roundup of archival stories.

Links
at No comments: