The Paris Climate Agreement and the Three Largest Emitters: China, the United States, and the European Union

"The Paris Agreement would not have come into being had China, the United States (US), and the European Union (EU), which together contribute more than half of all global greenhouse gas emissions, not signaled their intent to take major steps to reduce their domestic emissions. The EU has been at the forefront of global climate change measures for years having issued binding domestic emission reduction targets for 2020 and 2030. For many years, China refused to announce a target date for when it might begin reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, and the US Congress blocked action on climate change. In the lead up to the Paris climate negotiations, however, there were major shifts in China's and the US's climate positions. This commentary examines the climate policies of the three largest emitters and the factors motivating the positions they took in the Paris negotiations. Given that the commitments made in Paris are most likely insufficient to keep global temperature from rising 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, the commentary also considers what the likelihood is that these three major economies will strengthen their emission reduction targets in the near future." (author's abstract

U.S. Environmental Performance Is Improving, But Work Remains

Die Nachhaltigkeitsberichterstattung gewinnt auch auf internationaler Ebene zunehmend an Bedeutung. Die Bewertung der US-Umweltpolitik durch die OECD hält dabei einige Überraschungen bereit

The Ethics of Nuclear Energy: Germany’s Energy Politics after Fukushima

The Fukushima nuclear accident had a large impact in Germany, a countrythat was already greatly sensitized to nuclear risks. Germany had one of thelarger nuclear power sectors in the world in the 1970s and 1980s. It began tobuild nuclear power plants in the 1960s and 1970s as a follower of the conceptof the Atoms for Peace Program. The government and industry invested heavilyin nuclear energy in the hopes of obtaining a cheap and sustainable supply ofenergy. Germany’s anti-nuclear movement questioned the safety and costs ofnuclear energy and pointed to the ethical concerns about leaving nuclear wasteto future generations. In the 1970s the United States and its allies were in a ColdWar with the Soviet Union. Germany was at the center of the Cold War as acountry divided between east and west. Concerns grew about whether Germanymight be used as a base for nuclear missiles and whether it would becomeground zero in a conflict. Anti-nuclear protesters marched against the stationingof nuclear weapons and the construction of nuclear power plants in Germany.These movements became the basis for the emergence of Germany’s verysuccessful Green Party, the first political party to openly take an anti-nuclearstance. After the Chernobyl nuclear accident, support for nuclear energy inGermany dropped sharply. The Social Democratic Party responded by callingfor a phase out of nuclear energy. With both the Green Party and the SocialDemocratic Party opposed to nuclear energy, the days of nuclear energy becamenumbered.The conservative political parties, the Christian Democratic Union, theChristian Socialist Union, and the Free Democratic Party continued to supportnuclear energy arguing that German safety standards were very high and thechances of a nuclear accident in Germany extremely small. They also tried tofind new ways to support nuclear energy linking its use to efforts to controlclimate change.The election of a Social Democraticy Party-Green Party coalition in 1998opened the door for the first nuclear phase out law in 2001. A decade later,however, a conservative government coalition tried to slow down the nuclearphase out linking the extension of the operating time of Germany’s nuclearpower plants to a new climate and energy plan with ambitious renewable energytargets. This policy may have stayed in place had it not been for the Fukushimanuclear accident. The Fukushima nuclear accident brought back memories ofChernobyl and strengthened societal opposition to nuclear energy. The Germangovernment reached a second decision to phase out nuclear energy in 2011.The main differences with the earlier phase out law are that this one led tothe immediate shut down of the 8 oldest nuclear power plants and scheduled theshut down of the remaining nine nuclear power plants by 2022. Thegovernment’s decision to phase out nuclear energy was supported by the work ofan Ethics Commission for a Safe Energy Supply. An important argument madeby the commission for the phase out of nuclear energy is that safer forms of lowcarbon energy are available. An energy transition to a renewable energydominated system would lead to the development of a system that is less conflictridden and can provide the world with a new energy model

China, the United States, and the European Union

The Paris Agreement would not have come into being had China, the United States (US), and the European Union (EU), which together contribute more than half of all global greenhouse gas emissions, not signaled their intent to take major steps to reduce their domestic emissions. The EU has been at the forefront of global climate change measures for years having issued binding domestic emission reduction targets for 2020 and 2030. For many years, China refused to announce a target date for when it might begin reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, and the US Congress blocked action on climate change. In the lead up to the Paris climate negotiations, however, there were major shifts in China’s and the US’s climate positions. This commentary examines the climate policies of the three largest emitters and the factors motivating the positions they took in the Paris negotiations. Given that the commitments made in Paris are most likely insufficient to keep global temperature from rising 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, the commentary also considers what the likelihood is that these three major economies will strengthen their emission reduction targets in the near future

米国における気候変動政策 : 米国および日韓の地球環境政策ネットワーク調査からの考察 (特集 地球環境政治と市民社会)

近年政治学では政策決定過程に及ぼすネットワークの役割に関心が集っている。本稿は米国環境政策ネットワーク調査を日韓の同調査と比較し、米国の特性を浮き彫りにする。これは広範な政策ネットワークの構造と機能を国際比較する白米独韓調査計画の中間報告である

GJETC report 2020 : German-Japanese cooperation in energy research ; supporting the closure of implementation gaps ; key results and policy recommendations

The German-Japanese Energy Transition Council (GJETC) was established in 2016 by experts from research institutions, energy policy think tanks, and practitioners in Germany and Japan. The objectives and main activities of the Council and the supporting secretariats are to identify and analyze current and future issues regarding policy frameworks, markets, infrastructure, and technological developments in the energy transition, and to hold Council meetings to exchange ideas and propose better policies and strategies. In its second project phase (2018-2020), the GJETC had six members from academia on the Japanese side, and eight members on the German side, with one Co-Chair from each country. From October 2018 to March 2020, the GJETC worked on and debated six topics: 1) Digitalization and the energy transition. 2) Hydrogen society. 3) Review of German and Japanese long-term energy scenarios and their evaluation mechanism. 4) Buildings, energy efficiency, heating/cooling. 5) Integration costs of renewable energies. 6) Transport and sector coupling. The outputs and the recommendations of the second phase of the GJETC are summarized in this report