Balancing climate change mitigation and environmental protection interests in the EU Directive on carbon capture and storage

The EU Climate and Energy Package highlights the potential contradictions between the climate change imperative of reducing GHGs emissions and the importance to maintain environmental integrity. While the package supports climate change mainstreaming, it remains to be seen to what extent it succeeds in achieving internal environmental integration between climate change mitigation and other environment- protection objectives. Directive 2009/31/EC on the capture and geological storage of carbon dioxide (hereinafter the CCS Directive) offers a paradigmatic example of this potential conflict. One of the main regulatory challenges arising from the CCS Directive relates to finding the proper balance between the different interests involved and the not-fully-consistent objectives of environmental protection, climate change mitigation, and energy security. The present article will discuss this regulatory challenge and examine how the CCS Directive’s regulatory framework for CCS permits a combination of the various interests at stake and the giving of proper weight to concerns about environmental protection. The role that the precautionary principle in conjunction with the proportionality principle may have in balancing climate change mitigation and environment-protection interests will be considere

International Climate Agreements, Cost Reductions and Convergence of Partisan Politics

In recent years, differences between traditional and green parties have been leveled with respect to climate protection. We show that this partial convergence in party platforms can be explained by international climate agreements, effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We set up a voting model in which political parties differ in their preferences for climate protection and in which (national) climate protection causes both resource costs and distortions in the international allocation of production. International agreements, which reduce greenhouse gas emissions, decrease effective abatement costs. This affects traditional parties in a different way than green parties, since a lower preference for climate protection implies a higher price (cost) elasticity of demand. Thus, climate agreements can lead to more political consensus within countries, even if politicians are partisans. We also point out that increasing flexibility and efficiency in abatement mechanisms is preferable to forming a climate coalition that focuses directly on emission reduction commitments.climate protection, political economy, green parties, platform convergence

Global Climate Protection: Immediate Action Will Avert High Costs

The anthropogenic climate change will persist if the global volume of greenhousegas emissions will not be reduced significantly. A dangerous and irreversibleclimate change will occur if atmospheric concentrations of greenhousegases in the year 2100 exceed 450 ppm and global surface temperatureis 2 °C higher than its preindustrial level. The consequence of exceedingthese limits would be both more frequent and more violent extreme climateevents. In order to avoid this, it is necessary to stabilize global greenhousegas concentrations at nearly today's level.Significant emission reduction would require the countries that are primarilyresponsible immediately implementing emissions-reducing measures.If climate policy measures are not introduced, global climate changedamages amounting to up to 20 trillion US dollars can be expected in theyear 2100.1 If such measures are not implemented now, but only in 20 or30 years' time, it will not be possible to prevent the rise in global surfacetemperature exceeding the 2 °C limit. Moreover, the costs of a climate protectionpolicy launched today are likely to be lower than a policy initiatedonly in 20 years' time, which would then be based on drastic measures. Thesooner a policy of climate protection is implemented, the fewer climatechange damages humankind will face in future decades. The costs of anactive climate protection policy implemented today would reach globallyaround 430 billion US dollars in 2050 and around 3 trillion US dollars in2100. A climate protection policy that entered into force only in 2025 wouldimply additional costs of up to 50 billion US dollars in 2050 and 340 billionUS dollars in 2100. Global climate damages of up to 12 trillion US dollarscan be avoided in 2100 if active climate protection policy is implemented asrapidly as possible.In Germany, a climate protection policy that immediately implementseffective measures would cost 5.7 billion US dollars in 2050 and 40 billionUS dollars in 2100. At the same time, however, climate change damagesamounting to 33 billion US dollars in 2050 and 160 billion US dollars in 2100would be avoided.

Comprehensive Package of Climate Protection Measures Could Substantially Decrease Cost of Emission Reductions in Germany

Seeking to play a pioneering role in climate protection, the European Union has decided to pursue a reduction of at least 20% in greenhouse-gas emissions (on 1990 levels) by the year 2020. Moreover, Europe has declared its willingness to commit itself to emission reductions of 30% over the same period if other developed countries commit themselves to similar targets and if developing countries also make an appropriate contribution. A fair distribution of the burden of emission reductions in Europe and a comprehensive package of climate protection measures in Germany could substantially reduce the cost of emission reductions for the German economy. If Germany succeeds at European level in pushing through a fair burden-sharing mechanism that takes into account the emission reductions achieved to date in the different member states, and at the same time implements a comprehensive package of climate protection measures at home, then climate protection costs can be kept low. It would be very difficult for Germany to achieve its reduction target only by shutting down nuclear installations. What are also needed, in particular, are increased exploitation of energy efficiency potentials, the further development of renewable energy sources, the improvement of the system of emissions trading, and the promotion of innovative energy technologies. If European burden-sharing were fairly distributed and if Germany were to exploit all its energy efficiency potentials, then, in order to achieve a 20% reduction in current European emissions, Germany's climate protection costs would amount to total of around 1.9 billion euro per annum up to 2020. In this case, Germany would have reduced its emissions by 31% on 1990 levels. If it were not possible to negotiate a fair distribution of the burden, and if Germany were unable to exploit the necessary energy efficiency potentials, then the reduction costs would increase to around 5.7 billion euro per annum.Climate protection, Germany, costs of climate policy

Climate Change Policy

Having risen from relative obscurity as few as ten years ago, climate change now looms large among environmental policy issues. Its scope is global; the potential environmental and economic impacts are ubiquitous; the potential restrictions on human choices touch the most basic goals of people in all nations; and the sheer scope of the potential response—a significant shift away from using fossil fuels as the primary energy source in the modern economy—is daunting. In this paper, we explore the economics of climate change policy. We examine the risks that climate change poses for society, the benefits of protection against the effects of climate change, and the costs of alternative protection policies. We organize our discussion around three broad themes: why costs and benefits matter in assessing climate change policies, as does the uncertainty surrounding them; why well-designed, cost-effective climate policies are essential in addressing the threat of climate change; and why a coherent architecture of international agreements is key to successful policy implementation. We conclude the paper with a summary of key policy lessons and gaps in knowledge.

What about local climate governance? A review of promise and problems

A large proportion of greenhouse gas emissions is produced in urban areas, particularly in high income countries. Cities are also vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, and particularly so in developing countries. Therefore, local climate policies for mitigation and adaptation have to play an important role in any effective global climate protection strategy. Based upon a systematic literature review, this article gives a comprehensive overview of motivation and challenges for local climate governance. A large part of the literature focuses on mitigation and cities in industrialized countries. The review also includes the smaller and emerging body of literature on adaptation and cities in developing or industrializing countries. Motivations and challenges we find fall into broad categories like ‘economic’, ‘informational’, ‘institutional’, ‘liveability’ or ‘political/cultural’. We conclude that the mix of motivation and challenges is city-specific, and that the national framework conditions are important. It matters, whether cities engage in mitigation or adaptation policies, whether they are located in developing, industrializing or industrialized countries, and at which stage of climate policy-making cities are. For many cities, cost savings are a primary motivation for local mitigation policies, while perceived vulnerability and a commitment to development is the primary motivator for adaptation policies. The collective action problem of climate protection (also known as ‘Tragedy of the Commons’) and inappropriate legal frameworks are key barriers to mitigation policies. Challenges for adaptation include financial constraints, and a lack of expertise, cooperation, leadership and political support. Understanding their specific motivation and challenges may support cities in developing appropriate local climate action plans. Furthermore, the understanding of motivation and challenges can inform other policy levels that want to help realize the local climate protection potential.Climate policy, local authorities, cities, mitigation, adaptation, energy, local climate governance

Climate Effects on Rainfall Index Insurance Purchase Decisions

Rainfall Index (RI) insurance provides forage and hay producers with group risk protection against drought related losses. However, insurance premiums and risk protection are currently based on pooled weather data series and do not account for the impacts of specific climate phases, specifically the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), on local rainfall distribution. This analysis examines differences in the expected payoffs on the RI insurance under varying coverage levels based on probabilities of rainfall shortage during specific climate events at four Agricultural Experiment Stations in Alabama. Policy makers and producers are expected to benefit from the results that show the varying effects of climate on expected payouts from this insurance.Risk and Uncertainty,

The EU Proposal for Emissions Trading: A Reasonable Approach? Pro: Emissions Trading for Efficiency, Environmental Protection and Equity: The Cornerstone of EU Climate Policy Contra: Many Open Questions

Immissionsschutz, Klimaschutz, EU-Umweltpolitik, EU-Staaten, Emission control, Climate protection, EU environmental policy, EU countries

Climate Change in the Supreme Court

In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court confronted the issue of climate change for the first time. The Court held that the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate greenhouse gases and that the agency may not decline to exercise this authority based either on factors not present in the statute or inconclusive gestures toward uncertainty in the science of climate change. I had the privilege of serving as the lead author of the winning briefs in this case. This Article provides an insider\u27s perspective on the choices that went into bringing and briefing the case. This Article is an edited version of the 20th Annual Natural Resources Law Institute Distinguished Lecture, delivered in the fall of 2007 at Lewis & Clark Law School