Dec 14 2011
Dec 11 2011
Durban climate deal opens door to 2°C future
By Admin
Nov 30 2011
Driving down energy bills and security of supply: The case for demand side electricity market reform
By Taylor Dimsdale
Nov 18 2011
E3G Briefing: The Durban Package
By Shane Tomlinson, Liz Gallagher, Amal-Lee Amin
Nov 14 2011
ENDS: Euro travails and climate inaction – twin crises of political will
By Tom Burke
Nov 14 2011
Policy Brief: Securing Grids for a Sustainable Future
By Admin
Oct 20 2011
ENDS: From the greenest government ever… to our very own Tea Party
By Tom Burke
Sep 27 2011
Risk management, credible options and the future of European renewables policy
By Jonathan Gaventa and Nick Mabey
Aug 09 2011
More Fight, Less Fuel: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in the Department of Defense, USA.
By Claire Langley and Gouri Shukla
Jun 14 2011
Europe has to follow its Climate Realpolitik
By Nick Mabey
May 24 2011
Climate change: New frontiers in transparency and accountability
By Shane Tomlinson, Liz Gallagher, Claire Langley, Pelin Zorlu and Shin Wei Ng
Apr 13 2011
The case for EU moving to 30%: Global low carbon technology race and international cooperation
By Pelin Zorlu, Shane Tomlinson and Sanjeev Kumar
Apr 06 2011
Tom Burke participates on The Economist’s online live debate on Nuclear power.
By Tom Burke
Mar 14 2011
China’s 12th Five-Year-Plan: Engaging the world on the low carbon race
By Shin Wei Ng
Mar 07 2011
Re-monopolising Power? Reform Of The Electricity Market To Meet Climate Change Goals
By Simon Skillings
Feb 10 2011
Degrees of Risk: Defining a Risk Management Framework for Climate Security
By Nick Mabey and Katherine Silverthorne
Article Documents
Degrees of Risk: Defining a Risk Management Framework for Climate Security_Executive Summary.pdfDegrees of Risk: Defining a Risk Management Framework for Climate Security_Full Report.pdfE3G_Degrees of Risk Presentation_Nick Mabey.pdfE3G_Degrees of Risk Presentation_Jay Gulledge.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (6013)
Feb 02 2011
Chinese challenge or low carbon opportunity
By Dr. Shin Wei Ng and Nick Mabey
Jan 21 2011
Energy Market Reform: E3G’s evidence at the House of Commons
By Simon Skillings
Dec 11 2010
CANCUN: Negotiators throw climate a lifeline
By Admin
Dec 09 2010
Assessment of priority countries for climate action in 2010
By E3G
Nov 29 2010
All eyes on the strategic climate colonels at Cancun
By Nick Mabey and Shane Tomlinson
Nov 26 2010
‘Whole-of-Government’ Response to Global Climate Change
By Nick Mabey
Nov 23 2010
Speech for the Business of Sustainability conference at the Minerals Council of Australia 13/10/2010
By Tom Burke
Nov 23 2010
Politically Robust Package of Power Market Reform
By Simon Skillings
Nov 19 2010
Building a sustainable and low carbon European recovery: the case for a 30 percent emissions target
By Sanjeev Kumar
Nov 08 2010
EU-China alliance - the power to take the lead on climate change
By Nick Mabey
Oct 26 2010
Renewables Policy: Renewables Obligation vs. Feed In Tariffs
By Simon Skillings
Oct 17 2010
Emissions Performance Standards: E3G gives evidence
By Jonathan Gaventa
Oct 15 2010
GB power market reform – high level policy choices
By Simon Skillings
Oct 05 2010
Toward Low Carbon Resilient Economies-Implications for the Fast-Start Finance Package
By Monica Araya
Article Documents
E3G_Toward Low Carbon Resilient Economiese_Executive Summary.pdfE3G_Toward Low Carbon Resilient Economies_Implications for fast-start finance.pdfUNFCCC, Tianjin_Toward a Transformative Fast-Start Finance Package.pdfPress Release_Transforming the future with “Fast-Start” finance.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (2511)
Sep 15 2010
Emissions Performance Standards may lower costs of decarbonisation
By Jonathan Gaventa
Sep 03 2010
A climate for European action
By Tom Burke
Aug 16 2010
Nuclear companies open new front in fight for government subsidies
By Tom Burke
Aug 16 2010
Choices at stake for power market reform
By Simon Skillings
Jul 27 2010
Investing for an uncertain future: Priorities for UK energy and climate security
By Nick Mabey
Jul 02 2010
An E3G response to The European Commission’s Energy Strategy 2011-2020 Consultation
By Jesse Scott
May 20 2010
What the UK elections mean for climate security
By Editor
Apr 20 2010
European Climate Diplomacy after Copenhagen
By Nick Mabey and Matthew Findlay
Apr 14 2010
Pathways mapped out to zero carbon power sector
By Jonathan Gaventa
Apr 06 2010
The Value Proposition for a European Supergrid
By Jonathan Gaventa
Mar 19 2010
Low Carbon Technology: A Framework for EU-China Dialogue
By Aleyn Smith-Gillespie
Article Documents
E3G_Low Carbon Technology Cooperation_A Framework for EU-China Dialogue_Executive Summary.pdfE3G_Low Carbon Technology Cooperation_A Framework for EU-China Dialogue.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (1693)
Mar 03 2010
The Road From Copenhagen: Prospects and Priorities for Action on Climate Change
By Matthew Findlay and Nick Mabey
Article Documents
E3G Post-Copenhagen Climate Stocktake.pdfE3G_Down But Not Out Reviving the EU’s Political Strategy after Copenhagen.pdfE3G_Down But Not Out_German.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (1759)
Feb 16 2010
UK Power Sector Market Reform: The Case for Action
By Simon Skillings
Feb 10 2010
EU Must Learn Lessons from Copenhagen and Lead by Example
By Taylor Dimsdale and Matthew Findlay
Article Documents
E3G – 30 Percent and Beyond (Updated Jan 2010)E3G – 30 Percent and Beyond_FR.pdfE3G – 30 Percent and Beyond_DE.pdfE3G_30 Percent and Beyond_ES.pdfE3G – 30 Percent and Beyond_PL.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (1480)
Feb 03 2010
Conservative Party announces Green Investment Bank plans
By Nick Mabey
Jan 26 2010
A Road Map to Deliver Smart Grid in the UK
By Simon Skillings
Jan 18 2010
What does the Security Community need from a Global Climate Regime?
By Nick Mabey
Jan 12 2010
Delivering Climate Security: COP15 side event report
By Katherine Silverthorne
Article Documents
Maj Gen Muniruzzaman_The Security Dimensions of Climate Change_COP15.pdfW Chris King_Afghanistan-An Environmental Security Case Study in Climate Change and Security_COP15.pdfAlexandros Papaioannou_Delivering Climate Security_COP15.pdfNick Mabey_Developing a Risk Management Approach to Delivering Climate Security_COP15.pdfCleo Paskal_From Constants to Variables_COP15.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (1794)
Dec 18 2009
Global Leaders Leave Job Unfinished
By Nick Mabey
Dec 16 2009
Targets, Foundations and Transformation: Benchmarks for a Successful Copenhagen Agreement
By Nick Mabey
Dec 14 2009
Copenhagen Week 2 - Closing the Deal
By Editor
Dec 14 2009
Technology Action Plans and Funding Complement Legally Binding Climate Agreement
By Shane Tomlinson
Dec 09 2009
The Real Message of the Leaked Danish Text
By Nick Mabey
Dec 07 2009
Delivering Climate Security: Official COP15 side event *New Venue*
By Nick Mabey and Katherine Silverthorne
Dec 02 2009
Be careful what you wish for
By Nick Mabey and Shane Tomlinson
Nov 25 2009
Delivering a Zero Emissions Power Sector: Policy Challenges
By Simon Skillings
Nov 25 2009
The European Low Carbon Transformation: If not now when?
By Nick Mabey
Nov 24 2009
Sorting Blinks from Winks in the Copenhagen End Game
By Nick Mabey
Nov 23 2009
Towards a Global Deal on Climate Finance at Copenhagen
By Monica Araya, Matthew Findlay and Claire Langley
Nov 20 2009
30 Percent and Beyond: Strengthening EU Leadership on Climate Change
By Taylor DImsdale and Matthew Findlay
Nov 18 2009
Investment momentum for decarbonising the EU power sector
By Jonathan Gaventa
Article Documents
E3G_Investment momentum for decarbonising the EU power sector.pdfE3G_Delivering a zero emissions EU power sector_Investment Scenarios.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (848)
Nov 16 2009
Making choices over China: EU-China co-operation on energy and climate
By Nick Mabey
Nov 16 2009
Tom Burke on Voice of America: Environment Ministers Meet in Effort to Invigorate Climate Talks
By Editor
Nov 12 2009
Fog of War
By Tom Burke
Nov 05 2009
Scorecards on Best and Worst Policies for a Green New Deal
By Taylor Dimsdale
Article Documents
E3G-WWF_Briefing_Scorecards on Best and Worst Policies for a Green New Deal.pdfE3G-WWF_Scorecards on Best and Worst Policies for a Green New Deal.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (3272)
Nov 04 2009
UNFCCC Technology Institutional Structure: Identifying Convergence in Country Submissions
By Shane Tomlinson and Pelin Zorlu
Nov 03 2009
Financial assessment of the technology proposals under the UNFCCC: an E3G-ECN report
By Shane Tomlinson and Pelin Zorlu
Article Documents
E3G_ECN Executive Summary_Financial Assessment of the Technology Proposals under UNFCCC_October 2009.pdf
E3G_ECN Financial Assessment of Technology Proposals under UNFCCC_October 2009.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (2015)
Oct 28 2009
What the Security Community needs from Copenhagen: Washington Roundtable
By Nick Mabey and Katherine Silverthorne
Oct 28 2009
How can Copenhagen Support NAMAs in Pioneering Developing Countries?
By Monica Araya, Matthew Findlay and Claire Langley
Oct 26 2009
Climate Change and Global Governance
By Nick Mabey
Article Documents
Article Published in
- Climate and Energy Security - Delivering Climate Security
- Climate and Energy Security - Delivering a Global Deal
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (1979)
Consumer dominated forums such as the G20 are likely to play a far more important role in energy security moving forward than producer-consumer dialogues.
Nuclear proliferation
Counter-proliferation mechanisms will need to be greatly strengthened if nuclear power is to be deployed at a scale which would make a real difference to climate change. Climate change will be used as a political mask for some states to acquire nuclear technology for military purposes, and development and sharing of more benign energy alternatives is the best protection against this. A major climate change disaster in the next decade would also drive pressure for a “crash programme” of rapid deployment of nuclear power worldwide; at rates which would compromise the ability of the current nuclear industry supply chain to preserve safety or security. Research and development into the next generation of proliferation resistant and modular safe reactors currently seems unlikely to produce a commercial alternative to current reactor designs before 2025-30.
The UK has already placed this issue on the agenda for the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Review conference in 2010, and its importance will doubtless rise over the coming decade.
Borders and resources
Rising sea levels and melting ice caps in the Arctic are already leading to territorial disputes between major powers. The disappearance of small islands could release valuable marine resources into the already contested waters of the Indian Ocean, Pacific and South China Sea. The rights of environmental refugees and migrants will become a source of national and international tensions, especially in delta regions such as Bangladesh, Nigeria and Egypt. Fisheries stocks will collapse or move, destroying millions of people’s livelihoods and undermining delicately negotiated international management regimes. The EU Common Fisheries Policy will not survive in its present form.
Countries will respond to the forecasts of more erratic water flows in all major river basins by building new upstream dams and water storage. Such “climate change adaptation” will drive cross-border tensions in the next decade, including the potential for armed inter-state conflict. Any international adaptation funding under the UNFCCC which affects transboundary water flows should be made conditional on adoption of a “climate change resilient” water sharing agreement.
Strengthened international rules and more activist preventative diplomacy from the international community will be needed to peacefully manage changes in shared water and fisheries resources, and to preserve the rights of displaced people and states. Many of these issues are likely to emerge in the UN Security Council if not dealt with adequately in specialised parts of the international systems.
Preventing Conflict and Instability
Climate change is already increasing conflict risks in unstable regions – especially Africa – as fragile governance systems are overwhelmed by the social stresses released by drought, famine, flood, migration, extreme weather events and rising sea levels.
Over the next decades, the determinant of whether climate change drives serious conflict lies in how political systems respond to the tensions it creates. Too often, analysis of climate change impact assumes that all governments will act to maximise the common good in response to change. But resource management regimes in much of the world are already built upon communal divisions and conflict, and are highly unlikely to respond in a predictable, rational and inclusive manner to climate stresses. Experience of current instability in the Sahel – especially Darfur – shows how quickly disputes over access to resources in times of environmental stress can become politicised and exacerbate existing communal conflicts based on ethnic, religious or other lines. These conflicts develop their own internal dynamics, but will see no sustainable solutions unless the root causes of resource grievances are addressed.
Achieving security in a climate-stressed world will require a more proactive and intensive approach to tackling instability in strategically important regions with high climate vulnerability and weak governance. This will require changes across international, regional and national security regimes, with a stronger incorporation of long-term and structural risk factors into planning and a willingness to engage effectively with tough governance challenges; bringing diplomatic, development, intelligence and law enforcement capabilities to bear. This does not just require implementation of some general ‘conflict prevention’ agenda, but rather a direct focus on the strategic necessity of managing increased resource use tensions.
Conclusion
Climate change could drive a more collaborative approach in inter-state relations or it could exacerbate tensions between and within countries, leading to a ‘politics of insecurity’ as countries focus on protecting themselves against its impacts. Currently most countries are hedging their bets and adopting both collaborative and competitive strategies in terms of access to resources.
The pattern of cooperation which arises will depend on how effectively climate change is incorporated into mainstream foreign policy and international governance, and actually changes the balance of national interests of major countries across a wide range of security and geopolitical issues.
Sep 24 2009
Feasibility Study on EU-CHINA Low Carbon Technology and Investment Demonstration Zones
By Nannan Lundin and Shin Wei Ng
Sep 22 2009
Systematic Risk Management Approaches to Climate Change: London Workshop
By Katherine Silverthorne
Sep 13 2009
New Winners Emerging in Global Race for Low Carbon Competitiveness
By Nick Mabey, Matthew Findlay and Monica Araya
Article Documents
G20 Low Carbon Competitiveness Report.pdfE3G Policy Brief_G20 Low Carbon Competitiveness.pdfMEDIA RELEASE_New Winners Emerging in Global Race for Low Carbon Competitiveness.pdfMEDIA RELEASE_Neue Gewinnerländer im globalen Rennen um co2-arme Wettbewerbsfähigkeit.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (7997)
Jul 13 2009
Living on Earth Radio: Mired in the Mud on the Road to Copenhagen
By Jennifer Morgan
Jul 06 2009
Office of Tony Blair: Technology for a Low Carbon Future
By Shane Tomlinson
Jul 02 2009
Road to Copenhagen: UK Prime Minister’s Initiative
By Nick Mabey
Jul 01 2009
Financing the UK’s Low Carbon Transformation
By Nick Mabey
Article Documents
Delivering Centralised Renewables.pdfDelivering Energy Efficiency to the Residential Sector.pdfAccelerating Green Infrastructure Financing.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (4880)
Jun 22 2009
The Future of Climate Policy
By Tom Burke
Much will depend on how well the political leadership of the major countries understand the complexities of the problem and how effective they are at cutting through them to reach agreement on the essentials: preservation of the Kyoto mechanisms so that there continues to be a carbon price; sufficient additional funding for adaptation and technology transition in the developing world and successfully aligning timetables so that the US can again become a full participant in the global regime.
This would not solve the problem, but it would keep open the door to its solution.
The world is oversupplied with words and images and very short of deeds. The gap between rhetoric and action on climate change in even the most serious of nations is so wide as to justify much scepticism. Without clear signs of that gap closing, the political conditions for an ambitious enough policy agreement in Copenhagen and later will remain elusive.
There is an even larger gap coming ever more clearly into view. This is the gap between what climate science says we need to do and what climate politics says is within the realm of the possible. This is encouraging a realist school of climate policy thinkers to emerge.
In this view, we should not be trying to achieve ‘unrealistic’ goals. Better, this counsel of despair advises, to go for something achievable and build on that than to shoot for something too ambitious and fail. In other circumstance, with other problems, this might, indeed, be wise counsel. But for the reasons I gave before, with the particular nature of this problem makes such realist thought indistinguishable from defeatism.
We do not have any policy problems with climate change. What we are actually short of is the political will to deploy those policy instruments and the knowledge of how best to go about building that political will.
I grew up in a world that spent billions of dollars on building weapons it hoped never to use. When they became obsolete we threw them away and built even more sophisticated and expensive weapons which we hoped never to use. We did that for fifty years. The threat of climate change to the prosperity, security and well-being of everyone on the planet, especially anyone under forty, is far more certain than was the threat of the cold war going hot.
There is no engineering reason why we cannot make the transition to a carbon neutral energy system by 2050. Nor is there any fundamental economic obstacle as Nick Stern has demonstrated**. But knowing that solving the climate problem will not damage your economy is not the same as knowing how the cost of doing so should be shared between consumers, taxpayers and shareholders.
We do not have any policy problems with climate change. We have an extraordinary range of policy ideas to apply to the hugely diverse ways in which the problem will present itself to us. What we are actually short of is the political will to deploy those policy instruments and the knowledge of how best to go about building that political will.
Choosing who will win and who will lose is the province of politics. If politics is the art of the possible then the task of political leadership is that of expanding the realm of the possible. I am in no doubt that it is possible to solve this problem, but I wonder if we have the collective political leadership it will take to do so.
Address by Mr Tom Burke CBE to The Tomorrow Project, The Royal Society, London, June 18th 2009.
*Carlyle, T. (1840): ‘The Condition of England Question’
** Stern, N. (2006): ‘The Economics of Climate Change’, Cambridge University Press.
Jun 12 2009
Blame games on climate change
By Nick Mabey and Malini Mehra
May 22 2009
Carbon Capture and Storage in China
By Matthew Findlay
May 11 2009
Building the ambition coalition towards Copenhagen: Australia’s role
By Jennifer Morgan
May 04 2009
Copenhagen Climate Deal Business Briefing: Innovation and Technology Cooperation
By Nick Mabey, Shane Tomlinson, Jennifer Morgan
Apr 23 2009
An effective, fair and robust global climate agreement: Considerations for US policymakers
By Taylor Dimsdale
Article Documents
Comparable-Efforts-230409.pdfE3G-EU-Climate-Package-Briefing-Note-MEF.pdfPlus-Five-(US)-Updated-260109-TD.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (2588)
Apr 02 2009
E3G-WWF report: Economic-Climate Recovery Scorecards
By Taylor Dimsdale
Mar 16 2009
Case Studies on Low Carbon Zones in China
By Nannan Lundin, Matthew Findlay and Shin Wei Ng
Mar 11 2009
Delivering a Sustainable Low Carbon Recovery
By Nick Mabey
Article Documents
E3G_Delivering_a_Sustainable_Low_Carbon_Recovery.pdfE3G_Delivering_a_Sustainable_Low_Carbon_German.pdf
Article Published in
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (4422)
Feb 23 2009
Low Carbon Zones: EU-China cooperation
By Matthew Findlay and Felix Preston
Feb 09 2009
Copenhagen 2009: Political Risks Briefing
By Tom Burke
Feb 02 2009
Technology Cooperation – More Than Just a North-South Deal
By Nick Mabey and Shane Tomlinson
Jan 26 2009
What the EU Climate Package means for the Global Climate Deal
By Taylor Dimsdale
Jan 09 2009
UN Climate Conference: The countdown to Copenhagen
By Tom Burke
Dec 15 2008
A New European Climate Diplomacy: Engaging the US in solving the climate crisis
By Jennifer Morgan and Simon Koschut
Nov 29 2008
Jennifer Morgan on Living on Earth Radio
By Jennifer Morgan
Nov 24 2008
E3G report launch: Innovation and Technology Transfer: Framework for a Global Climate Deal
By Shane Tomlinson, Pelin Zorlu and Claire Langley
Article Documents
Executive Summary: Innovation & Technology TransferFull Report: Innovation & Technology TransferChinese Executive Summary: Innovation & Technology TransferChinese Full Report: Innovation & Technology TransferIPR Press Release
Article Published in
- Climate and Energy Security - News & Comment
- Climate and Energy Security - Activities
- Climate and Energy Security - Thinking
Email this Article
Share Article
Article hits (15510)
Nov 11 2008
“Plus Five”: Climate Action in Major Emerging Economies
By Matthew Findlay and Taylor Dimsdale
Nov 10 2008
Market distorting impacts of free EUA allocation to energy intensive industries
By Nick Mabey and Jesse Scott
Oct 15 2008
Europe’s World: An EU-China pact is key to a global climate deal
By Nick Mabey
As economies integrate, the competing needs of producers are commonly set in the public mind against those of importers and consumers. A good example of this dilemma is the way concerns over carbon leakage and loss of competitiveness (when high emitting industries are re-located to developing countries) have spurred discussion in the EU and the US on imposing tariffs on carbon-intensive imports.
Many of the claims over company relocations are overstated. Research suggests that pricing carbon is a major factor in only a small number of industries, accounting for a few percentage points of European GDP. These projections also fail to recognise the reality of global supply chains, or the potential for new technology to change the economics of energy-using sectors. As EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has asked, how do we define what is a European company in a world of global supply chains and multinational assembly lines?
Whatever the true economics, the politics of carbon leakage are nevertheless important. Unilateral action to impose border tax adjustments outside any global climate agreement would be likely to prompt retaliatory action, posing further threats to the already fragile multilateral trading system. It would also dampen trust and weaken present efforts to conclude a global climate deal in Copenhagen. Yet politicians in Europe and the US are now discussing legislation that would impose unilateral border sanctions, even if a global climate deal is in place. This undermines the very idea of the global climate negotiations; for if the “deal” turns out not to be a deal, then how are developing countries meant to accept that the industrialised nations are negotiating in good faith? The relocation of some energy intensive industries may be the price Europe has to pay to secure a global climate deal, and we cannot renege on the agreement if that is part of the outcome.
Two divergent paths lie ahead. One is the road of old-styled mercantilism and the obsessive cultivation of national champions. The other would take advantage of globalisation’s opportunities for win-win solutions that bring not only economic benefits but also energy and climate security.
Ensuring that China and other developing countries gain a sizeable economic share of the low carbon future is critical to the viability of the second path. Early movers are better able to maintain their competitive edge in a world of volatile energy prices. These potential gains may also persuade China to play a larger role in climate negotiations.
But winning public support for closer cooperation between the EU and China will not be easy, not least because of the present political tensions over Tibet. Europe’s political and business leaders must therefore begin shaping this debate on future foreign policy choices. If they fail, efforts to construct a low-carbon and secure energy future will be frustrated by the narrow concerns of special interest groups. And if we fail to secure climate security for Europe, or China, the result will be far higher economic costs than any marginal gains by energy-intensive sectors.
Bernice Lee is the Head of the Energy, Environment and Development Programme at Chatham House, the UK’s Royal Institute of International Affairs, and Nick Mabey is the Founding Director and CEO of E3G – Third Generation Environmentalism.
This article has been published in the autumn issue of Europe’s World, available here.
Sep 08 2008
Nick Mabey on Morning Ireland: urgently fund Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) plants
By Nick Mabey
Sep 05 2008
BBC Radio 4 interview: Funding for CCS plants
By Nick Mabey
Sep 05 2008

