Mereja

Author: Jonathan Lash

  • The World Bank, MDBs, and Low Carbon Development

    Multilateral Development Banks can play a leading role in promoting more sustainable energy options.

    Governments around the world are struggling
    to mitigate dangerous climate change while
    securing the energy they need to sustain
    economic development. The need to direct future
    investment to meet the world’s energy needs away
    from polluting fossil fuels, and into more sustainable,
    low-carbon options has never been more urgent.
    Achieving this goal will require the right policies,
    regulations, and institutional capacities to be in
    place. It will also require leadership from governments,
    and from development institutions. The Multilateral
    Development Banks (MDBs), including the
    World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and Inter-
    American Development Bank have an important role
    to play in advancing more sustainable energy for
    several reasons.

    MDBs can do
    much more to ensure that the issues of sustainability
    and governance are integrated
    into their policy advice and lending.

    First, most future growth in energy demand, approximately
    90% by 2030 according to the Interntional
    Energy Agency, will come from developing
    countries, where the MDBs have a long history of
    engagement with the electricity sector. Second, these
    international financial institutions are already channeling
    emergency assistance to developing countries
    to weather the economic storm, providing opportunities
    to guide the energy and infrastructure sectors on
    to a new low-carbon path. The World Bank alone has
    set aside US $55 billion over three years for infrastructure
    in vulnerable developing countries. Third,
    MDBs and in particular the World Bank are assuming
    a growing role in helping finance climate change
    solutions in developing countries.

    Taken together, these circumstances provide a
    powerful rationale for MDBs to help countries reach
    a sustainable energy future that dramatically reduces
    greenhouse gas emissions while responding to the
    needs of the world’s poor. However, the MDBs can do
    much more to ensure that the issues of sustainability
    and governance vital to such a transition are integrated
    into their policy advice and lending.

    Recent analysis from WRI suggests that MDB investments in
    electricity sector policy have often missed opportunities
    to address these issues of sustainability. In
    particular, issues of governance, such as the capacity
    of government, regulatory agencies, and utilities to oversee and implement sustainable energy solutions,
    are often overlooked.

    MDBs could play a role
    in assisting developing countries to transition toward
    low-carbon sustainable development. But in order
    to be effective, their core electricity sector programs
    must more comprehensively reflect the important elements
    of environmental and social sustainability identified
    in this framework. In particular, these programs
    must consistently include support for institutional
    capacity, and improve governance.

    The inter-related challenges of climate change and
    energy security are complex in nature and global in
    scale. But the solutions exist if the political will can be
    found. There is no room left for “business as usual”
    models, or business as usual financing, and the
    MDBs should be playing a leadership role.

    This piece originally appeared as the Foreword to Investing in Sustainable Energy Futures: Multilateral Development Banks’ Investments in Energy Policy.

    David Runnalls is the CEO and President of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.

  • Leading By Example: Federal Agencies To Reduce Emissions 28 Percent

    Today’s announcement from the White House suggests that significant emissions cuts could save money–along with the environment.

    Many presidential executive orders go unnoticed, but here’s one that actually merits greater attention. Last October, President Obama issued Executive Order 13514, which (among other things) directed all federal agencies to develop greenhouse gas reduction targets and plans to achieve them. As I remarked earlier, the executive order could be an important indicator of climate change policy in 2010.

    Today, the White House announced its target: a 28% reduction in GHG emissions by 2020. Furthermore, the Administration released an extensive list (PDF) of energy projects that various agencies are planning to use to meet their commitments.

    The Executive Order and today’s announcement are significant in several respects.

    First, as the country’s largest energy consumer, the Federal government has a substantial carbon footprint. According to the White House, today’s target would save the energy equivalent of about 205 million barrels of oil, equivalent to taking 17 million cars off the road.

    Second, the 28 percent target is squarely in line with all recent legislation to reduce emissions, and significantly greater than the Administration’s international commitment of 17 percent. Federal agencies are thus setting a strong precedent for the kind of system-wide emissions reductions that are achievable by other large organizations—such as big corporations. They are demonstrating what is possible. And with 500,000 buildings and 600,000 vehicles in its portfolio, emissions reductions by the Federal government will undoubtedly have a positive ripple effect throughout other sectors.

    Finally and perhaps most important, the actions announced today will ultimately save the government (and therefore the taxpayers) an estimated $8-11 billion in energy costs over the length of the plan. Much of today’s debate over climate legislation turns on whether we can afford to reduce emissions in a battered economy. If the Federal government plans to save billions of dollars by reducing its own emissions, then the real question is: how can the country afford not to do this?

    One last item to watch for: Executive Order 13514 also instructs the Office of Management and Budget to develop a “Scope 3” emissions reduction plan, due later this spring. Scope 3 emissions would include federal contractors and suppliers, which means the significance of today’s actions could ultimately be even bigger. Stay tuned.

  • On the Verge of a Global Low-Carbon Economy

    As I write this letter, the climate negotiations in Copenhagen have come to a close. The resulting Copenhagen Accord—produced after excruciating round-the-clock negotiations—is an important step on the road to an international agreement. Its emissions reductions are clearly inadequate and important details have yet to be completed. But never before have both developed and developing countries made such clear and tangible commitments to addressing climate change.

    WRI’s climate team was heavily engaged “on the ground” throughout COP-15, on issues ranging from avoided deforestation and adaptation to the arcane details of accounting and verification. Many of the final documents—including the Copenhagen Accord—reflect WRI’s work and expertise.

    But our work is far from over; in fact, the most difficult work is likely ahead. No generation before ours fully understood the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. No generation after ours will have a better opportunity to chart a course that avoids a global environmental catastrophe. We have the opportunity and the capacity to act, both through strong U.S. legislation and an international agreement. But the window of opportunity—environmentally, economically, and politically—is closing fast. We are the generation faced with this task, and we must respond.

    But we need your support to respond with the urgency demanded by this challenge.

    With your help:

    • WRI has become the go-to resource on international climate data, especially as it relates to greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
    • We are helping design the tools that will be used to verify country-level reduction commitments—something developed nations insist must be part of a deal.
    • Our climate team is playing a major role in creating the finance mechanisms that will help the most vulnerable countries adapt to the effects of climate change—a critical component of an agreement for most developing nations.
    • WRI has also been an influential voice in ensuring that climate policies address emissions from deforestation in a way that is measurable and permanent, without sacrificing the livelihoods of indigenous communities that depend on forest resources.

    But no international agreement will be complete or effective without a U.S. commitment that is backed by domestic legislation. And once we have legislation, a global agreement will assure others act as well. With your generous support, we are continuing to engage legislators in Congress to help them better understand international climate change efforts—including the vital role of China and other major developing countries—and the implications for U.S. policy.

    We have come far in the past twenty-five years. Today we stand on the verge of a de-carbonized world that can have both economic vitality and environmental health. We have the tools and the technologies. What we need is the will. The choices we make today will determine what urgent issues like climate change will mean for people and nature tomorrow.

    Please help WRI tackle these challenges with a special year-end gift.

    Together, we can protect the environment and its capacity to provide for the needs and aspirations of current and future generations. Thank you for your support.

    Sincerely,

    Jonathan Lash
    President