Energy poverty - lack of access to electricity and reliance on traditional fuels for cooking and heating - remains an enduring problem. Globally, more than a billion people live without electricity and, nearly three billion depend entirely on wood, charcoal and dung for other domestic energy needs. Their search for energy fuels and services is an arduous, daily grind. Lack of access to modern energy has a broad impact. It not only limits economic opportunities for income generation and blunts efforts to escape poverty; but it also severely impacts living conditions for women and children and contributes to global deforestation and climate change. In a business-as-usual scenario, by 2030, the estimated number of deaths from dependence on traditional fuels will likely be greater than those individually from malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS, underscoring the necessity of finding more sustainable forms of energy supply.
Fossil fuel subsidies undermine efforts to mitigate climate change and damage the trading system. However, multilateral discussion is hampered by inconsistent definitions and incomplete data. Members do not notify such subsidies as much as they should under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing measures (ASCM), which limits the usefulness of the SCM Committee. The reports of the Trade Policy review mechanism on individual countries and on the trading system draw on a wider range of sources, creating an opportunity for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to provide the missing data from publicly available sources. This report suggest a new template that could be used for such third-party notifications. The objective is to shine a light on all fossil fuel subsidies that cause market distortions, especially trade distortions. The result should be better, more comparable data for the Secretariat, governments, and researchers, providing the basis for better-informed discussion of the incidence of fossil fuel subsidies and rationale for their use.
This report confirms that the country is a global leader in renewable energy technology investment. In 2012, alone, China’s renewable energy investment totalled US$ 67.7 billion – the highest in the world – and double the amount it invested in 2009. However, the report underlines that despite China’s rapid advancement towards a green economy, the country is facing significant environmental and social challenges that must be addressed if it is to achieve its sustainable development goals.
Sustainable Energy is the sixth in the series of annual reports produced by the Arab Forum for Environment and Development (AFED) on the state of Arab environment. The report highlights the need for more efficient management of the energy sector, in view of enhancing its contribution to sustainable development in the Arab region.
This publication (the 10th edition of Greenhouse Gas Market) brings together carbon market professionals, policymakers, academics and NGOs to provide in-depth analysis and perspective on the main issues affecting carbon policy worldwide. IETA is global in its outreach and the publication features latest developments in current and emerging carbon markets, as well as taking a step back to consider the wider implications of climate policy design and implementation.
China’s economy continues to grow rapidly with corresponding increases in both energy consumption and environmental pollution. Renewable energy is a key part of China’s response to this challenge. Currently, the costs of measures to facilitate the large-scale deployment of renewable energy are primarily met through an electricity surcharge—effectively a tax on electricity consumption. However, concerns have been raised that continuing to rely on the surcharge alone places a disproportionate burden on electricity consumers. In response, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the China National Renewable Energy Centre (CNREC) identified the need for further debate on how best to fund renewable energy and reduce environmental pollution, leading to the establishment of a research project to examine the international experience of similar schemes and their relevance to China.
The publication includes case studies from Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany, India, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States.