In Britain, a large package of budget cuts and austerity measures which rolled out in 2010 has not unleashed the proverbial job creators in the private market. Instead, the country is still shackled with an economic growth trend that’s even worse that what it suffered in the aftermath of the Great Depression.

In the Eurozone as a whole, the European Central Bank and other relevant authorities have so far insisted on massive austerity measures from struggling countries in exchange for fiscal aid. Here, too, the result has not been a revitalized economy but a continuance of dismal growth rates.

Here at home, the effect of 2009′s recovery package and the tax deal in December 2010 was more than offset by cuts in state budgets. By the end of 2009, the combined budgets of the federal and state governments had entered a period of fiscal contraction from which they have yet to emerge.

The portions of Obama’s economic policy which actually passed simply made the economic hole created by state-level cuts less deep. Which was a valuable and necessary function, but insufficient to actually boost the economy back to healthy growth. Contrary to Republicans’ claim that Obama’s first two years were a period of unbound Keynesian experimentation, austerity is the budgetary policy reality which has accompanied America’s stagnant economic growth.

This matters because, now that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are winding down, the Bush tax cuts and the lingering effects of the recession remain the two primary drivers of the U.S. federal deficit. While the Republicans insist on not only maintaining all the tax cuts, but blowing an even larger hole in our revenue with added tax relief for the wealthy, Obama has proposed raising new revenue by allowing the Bush cuts for the top income rates to expire and by eliminating other injustices in the code which go to the benefit of the wealthiest Americans.

Even more importantly, because our tax system pulls in a percentage of the country’s overall wealth production, tax revenues will continue to underperform as long as our GDP production remains below capacity. The perverse irony of austerity as an immediate response to economic recession is that it drives down demand and GDP, thus driving down revenues and deepening the deficit hole it seeks to mend. In the opposite direction, a sudden positive jump in GDP could bring our economy back into line with its pre-recession trend and bring tax revenues back up without any change in tax rates or policy at all. The policy history in Britain, Europe, and here in America since the end of 2008 shows the Republicans’ austerity fixation won’t deliver this reinvigoration. But a recommitment by the government to boost demand could do the trick.

Obama’s budget, while imperfect, aims for the proper balance and the proper order of repairs: Investment now in jobs, infrastructure, state aid, extensions for the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance, and other immediate boosts to demand, followed by longer-term deficit cutting once the economy is again firing on all cylinders. If the GOP had not been using every political tool at their disposal to undermine this approach during the last four years, the president could probably have done considerably more.

Even with a few countries pulling back on government support of the industry because of fiscal troubles, 2011 was still a huge year for deployment — with wind and solar alone representing almost 70% of new capacity.

That’s almost a 10-fold increase over deployment in 2000, when only 3.5 GW of renewable energy projects were installed. Last year, 32 GW of renewables — mostly wind and solar — were deployed across European countries.

The figures come from the European Wind Energy Association, which just released a report on industry growth.

Growth in Europe has consistently outstripped forecasts. The EU currently has a target of getting 20% of its final energy (heat, electricity and fuels) from renewable energy. Numerous countries have already surpassed their needed targets in the electricity and heating sectors, and it’s likely that the entire region will move past the goal well ahead of schedule.

It’s expected that renewable electricity sources will meet 34% of demand in Europe by 2020, with 25 of 27 countries to surpass their targets beforehand.

In 2011, solar PV accounted for 26.7% of capacity additions, wind power accounted for 21.4% of additions, and natural gas made up 22% of installations. Below that was coal at 4.8%, fuel oil at 1.6%, large hydro at 1.3%, and concentrating solar power at 1.1% of capacity.

(A side note to anyone confused by terms: It is always important to remember that “capacity” is the ability to do work. It is completely different than actual electricity generation. Just because 68% of new capacity was added in 2011, doesn’t mean that Europe will get 68% more electricity from renewables. Hence, the major differences in generation figures).

So what does Europe’s power capacity mix look like today?

Notice the stunning increase in wind, solar and natural gas — by far the top three choices for developers in the region. However, coal and fuel oil still have a very large market share. Some experts are concerned that a roll back of nuclear in various countries will increase the share of fossil fuels, particularly coal.

But with wind, solar and gas prices all declining to record lows, the combination of those three resources could prevent a sizable increase in coal development.

Related Posts:

• Offshore Wind Could Meet 14% of Europe’s Energy Demand by 2030, Leveraging $193 Billion in Investments
• Clean Energy Stunner: Renewable Power Tops Fossil Fuels for First Time

[T]he probability of cold winters with much snow in Central Europe rises when the Arctic is covered by less sea ice in summer. Scientists of the Research Unit Potsdam of the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in the Helmholtz Association have decrypted a mechanism in which a shrinking summertime sea ice cover changes the air pressure zones in the Arctic atmosphere and impacts our European winter weather. These results of a global climate analysis were recently published in a study in the scientific journal Tellus A.

That’s the news release for yet another new study examining what will inevitably be the huge implications for extreme weather from the massive amount of heat released by the declining Arctic sea ice cover.

Arctic sea ice in September 2007 reached its lowest extent on record, approximately 40% lower than when satellite records began in 1979. Sea ice loss in 2011 was virtually tied with the ice loss in 2007, despite weather conditions that were not as unusual in the Arctic. ”Such a large area of open water is bound to cause significant impacts on weather patterns, due to the huge amount of heat and moisture that escapes from the exposed ocean into the atmosphere over a multi-month period following the summer melt.”  Image: Cryosphere Today.

You may recall the recent repost of the discussion by meteorologist Dr. Jeff Masters (see “Our Extreme Weather: Is Arctic Sea Ice Loss Partly to Blame?” the source of the figure above):

“The question is not whether sea ice loss is affecting the large-scale atmospheric circulation…. It’s how can it not?” That was the take-home message from Dr. Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University, in her talk “Does Arctic Amplification Fuel Extreme Weather in Mid-Latitudes?”, presented at last week’s American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco.

Dr. Francis presented new research in review for publication, which shows that Arctic sea ice loss may significantly affect the upper-level atmospheric circulation, slowing its winds and increasing its tendency to make contorted high-amplitude loops. High-amplitude loops in the upper level wind pattern (and associated jet stream) increases the probability of persistent weather patterns in the Northern Hemisphere, potentially leading to extreme weather due to longer-duration cold spells, snow events, heat waves, flooding events, and drought conditions.

The new German study looks at the specific case of winters in central Europe.  The UK Independent story explains, “A growing number of experts believe complex wind patterns are being changed because melting Arctic sea ice has exposed huge swaths of normally frozen ocean to the atmosphere above.”

As cold weather hit much of Europe, the story describes the findings this way:

In particular, the loss of Arctic sea ice could be influencing the development of high-pressure weather systems over northern Russia, which bring very cold winds from the Arctic and Siberia to Western Europe and the British Isles, the scientists believe. An intense anticyclone over north-west Russia is behind the bitterly cold easterly winds that have swept across Europe and some climate scientists say the lack of Arctic sea ice brought about by global warming is responsible.

“The current weather pattern fits earlier predictions of computer models for how the atmosphere responds to the loss of sea ice due to global warming,” said Professor Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. “The ice-free areas of the ocean act like a heater as the water is warmer than the Arctic air above it. This favours the formation of a high-pressure system near the Barents Sea, which steers cold air into Europe.”

Sea ice covering the Barents and Kara Seas has been exceptionally low this winter, according to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Boulder, Colorado. But air temperatures above the Barents and Kara Seas have been higher than average. The relatively mild westerly winds that have kept Britain from freezing much of this winter have been blocked by fierce high pressure over north-west Russia, centred on an area just south of the Barents Sea.

Indeed, as the story makes clear, although the impacts are complicated, more and more climate experts have been making the connection:

Professor Rahmstorf said the Alfred Wegener study confirms earlier predictions from computer models by Vladimir Petoukhov of the Potsdam Institute, who forecast colder winters in western Europe as a result of melting sea ice.

Dr Petoukhov and his colleague Vladimir Semenov were among the first scientists to suggest a link between the loss of sea ice and colder winters in Europe. Their 2009 study simulated the effects of disappearing sea ice and found that for some years to come the loss will increase the chances of colder winters.

“Whoever thinks that the shrinking of some far-away sea ice won’t bother him could be wrong. There are complex interconnections in the climate system, and in the Barents-Kara Sea we might have discovered a powerful feedback mechanism,” Dr Petoukhov said.

You can read the original study online: “Impact of sea ice cover changes on the Northern Hemisphere atmospheric winter circulation.”  Here’s more detail for non-scientists from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research news release:

If there is a particularly large-scale melt of Arctic sea ice in summer, as observed in recent years, two important effects are intensified. Firstly, the retreat of the light ice surface reveals the darker ocean, causing it to warm up more in summer from the solar radiation (ice-albedo feedback mechanism). Secondly, the diminished ice cover can no longer prevent the heat stored in the ocean being released into the atmosphere (lid effect). As a result of the decreased sea ice cover the air is warmed more greatly than it used to be particularly in autumn and winter because during this period the ocean is warmer than the atmosphere. “These higher temperatures can be proven by current measurements from the Arctic regions,” reports Ralf Jaiser, lead author of the publication from the Research Unit Potsdam of the Alfred Wegener Institute.

The warming of the air near to the ground leads to rising movements and the atmosphere becomes less stable. “We have analysed the complex non-linear processes behind this destabilisation and have shown how these altered conditions in the Arctic influence the typical circulation and air pressure patterns,” explains Jaiser. One of these patterns is the air pressure difference between the Arctic and mid-latitudes: the so-called Arctic oscillation with the Azores highs and Iceland lows known from the weather reports. If this difference is high, a strong westerly wind will result which in winter carries warm and humid Atlantic air masses right down to Europe. If the wind does not come, cold Arctic air can penetrate down through to Europe, as was the case in the last two winters. Model calculations show that the air pressure difference with decreased sea ice cover in the Arctic summer is weakened in the following winter, enabling Arctic cold to push down to mid-latitudes.

Despite the low sea ice cover in summer 2011, a cold winter with much snow has so far not occurred here in Germany. Jaiser explains this as follows: “Many other factors naturally play a role in the complex climate system of our Earth which overlap in part. Our results explain the mechanisms of how regional changes in the Arctic sea ice cover have a global impact and their effects over a period from late summer to winter. Other mechanisms are linked, for example, with the snow cover in Siberia or tropical influences. The interactions between these influential factors will be the subject matter of future research work and therefore represent a factor of uncertainty in forecasts.”

I added “for now” to the subhed “Less Summer Arctic Sea Ice Cover Means Colder, Snowier Winters in Central Europe” because if we stay on our current emissions path, then the warming is going to be so great in the second half of the century it will generally overcome even these cold blasts.

In the worst case, we get both continuing high levels of emissions and high carbon-cycle feedbacks.  That possibility was discussed here:

• Royal Society Special Issue on Global Warming Details ‘Hellish Vision’ of 7°F (4°C) World — Which We May Face in the 2060s! “In such a 4°C world, the limits for human adaptation are likely to be exceeded in many parts of the world, while the limits for adaptation for natural systems would largely be exceeded throughout the world.”

This would be the worst-case for the 2060s, but is in any case, close to business as usual for 2090s:

This is indeed 13-18°F over most of U.S. and 27°F in the Arctic.  Central Europe sees 11-14°F. So, yes, there will no doubt still be relatively cool winters — but relatively to a vastly warmer average.

Moreover, there is every reason to believe that the earth would just keep getting hotter and hotter:

• Science stunner — On our current emissions path, CO2 levels in 2100 will hit levels last seen when the Earth was 29°F (16°C) hotter:  Paleoclimate data suggests CO2 “may have at least twice the effect on global temperatures than currently projected by computer models”

Steve Easterbrook’s post “A first glimpse at model results for the next IPCC assessment” shows that for the scenario where there is 9°F warming by 2100, you get another 7°F warming by 2300.  Of course, folks that aren’t motivated to avoid the civilization-destroying 9°F by 2100 won’t be moved by whatever happens after that.

Related Post:

• Arctic Death Spiral Continues: Sea Ice Volume Hits Record Low for Second Straight Year

Court Upholds Europe’s Plan to Charge Airlines for Carbon Emissions

The European Union’s highest court on Wednesday endorsed the bloc’s plan to begin charging the world’s biggest airlines for their greenhouse gas emissions from Jan. 1, setting the stage for a potentially costly trade war with the United States, China and other countries.

A group of United States airlines had argued that forcing them to participate in the bloc’s potentially costly emissions-trading program infringed on national sovereignty and conflicted with existing international aviation treaties.

But in its ruling, the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg affirmed an opinion issued in October by its advocate general, who had rejected their claim.

“The court confirms the validity of the directive that integrates aviation activities in the system for trading emissions quotas,” the ruling said, adding that it “infringes neither the principles of customary international law at issue, nor the ‘Open Skies’ agreement” concluded with the United States in 2007.

Debt crisis threatens not only euro, but also EU’s ambitious cap-and-trade system

Europe’s main weapon in the battle against climate change is now fighting for its own survival.

In early January, investors in the continent’s cap-and-trade system still had to pay some €14 ($18.30) for the right to emit one ton of carbon dioxide into the air. By last week, the price of one emission allowance had tumbled to a meager €6.41 — making it much cheaper to pollute and slashing the financial incentives for companies to invest in low-carbon technologies.

Analysts warn that the prospect of another recession in the debt-ridden continent, and the accompanying decline in emissions, could push prices below €2 by the end of next month.

U.S. helping Britain investigate hacking of climate scientists’ emails

The Justice Department is helping British authorities in an investigation into the hacking of climate scientists’ emails, which caused an uproar among skeptics of global warming when they were released two years ago.

Ten days ago, the Justice Department contacted San Francisco web development company Automattic, asking it to preserve records of three climate skeptic bloggers in the U.S., Canada and Britain who recently received another batch of stolen emails sent from a server in Russia.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the nature of the investigation and did not give Automattic a reason for its request. But the letter to Automattic suggests the request is part of an ongoing investigation by law enforcement officials in Britain.

On Dec. 14, the home of Roger Tattersall, the British blogger “Tallbloke,” was raided by detectives from the Metropolitan Police in London and members of the Norfolk Constabulary, whose jurisdiction in East Central England includes the University of East Anglia, whose scientists’ email accounts were targeted. Tattersall was not arrested, but the police confiscated two laptop computers and other equipment, according to his blog.

Global Warming Wilts Rodent Malaria

A common assumption is that rising global temperatures will increase the spread of malaria — the deadly mosquito-borne disease that affects millions of people worldwide. But a study out today in Biology Letters finds that warmer temperatures seem to slow transmission of malaria-causing parasites, by reducing their infectiousness.

The study was done with rodent malaria, but the researchers, at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, expect the pattern to apply to human malaria and possibly to other mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue fever and West Nile virus.

Studies predicting that warmer climates will increase malaria infections commonly assume that the disease-causing parasites will develop faster and that the ability of the mosquito to acquire, maintain and transmit the pathogen will remain constant. They conclude that as temperature rises, mosquitoes become infectious quicker and therefore malaria transmission increases.

As the Philippines begins to bury more than a 1,000 disaster victims in mass graves, Philippine President Benigno Aquino has ordered an investigation into last weekend’s flash flood and landslide, including looking at the role of illegal logging. Officials have pointed to both climate change and vast deforestation as likely exacerbating the disaster.

The involvement of the IMF has, like always, gotten Republicans in the U.S. Congress all bent out of shape, since the U.S. is an IMF contributor. According to the Republicans, the IMF lending money to European nations would be indirectly approving of those nations’ fiscal choices.

“Europe is going to default eventually, so why would you socialize their profligate spending?” asked Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK). “The reason we’re in the situation we’re in [is] because of excessive debt in the industrialized world,” agreed Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT).

A lot of mythology has been built up regarding why Europe is in the shape it’s in, but this theory leads the pack — Europe is collapsing because its governments were out-of-control spenders. However, there’s one problem with the theory. As Martin Wolf noted in the Financial Times, the claim that Europe’s most troubled nations spent their way into a crisis is simply not true:

Take a look at the average fiscal deficits of 12 significant (or at least revealing) eurozone members from 1999 to 2007, inclusive. Every country, except Greece, fell below the famous 3 per cent of gross domestic product limit. Focusing on this criterion would have missed all today’s crisis-hit members, except Greece. Moreover, the four worst exemplars, after Greece, were Italy and then France, Germany and Austria. Meanwhile, Ireland, Estonia, Spain and Belgium had good performances over these years. After the crisis, the picture changed, with huge (and unexpected) deteriorations in the fiscal positions of Ireland, Portugal and Spain (though not Italy). In all, however, fiscal deficits were useless as indicators of looming crises.

Now consider public debt. Relying on that criterion would have picked up Greece, Italy, Belgium and Portugal. But Estonia, Ireland and Spain had vastly better public debt positions than Germany. Indeed, on the basis of its deficit and debt performance, pre-crisis Germany even looked vulnerable. Again, after the crisis, the picture transformed swiftly. Ireland’s story is amazing: in just five years it will suffer a 93 percentage point jump in the ratio of its net public debt to GDP.

These charts show that, according to deficits and debt, countries like Spain and Ireland were acting much more responsibly than Germany and France — therefore it can’t have been deficits and debt that caused their problems. As The American Prospect’s Harold Myerson put it, “some of Europe’s current basket cases were actually running budget surpluses in the years before the Lehman meltdown. Ireland and Spain weren’t overspending at all — but the banks and investors speculating on their housing markets most certainly were.” What Europe needed was better regulation of its financial sector and a central bank willing to take the steps necessary to lessen the pain of the Great Recession, neither of which it had.

Republicans like to claim that if the United States doesn’t slash its budget to the bone, then it will wind up like Europe, careening towards a crisis. But it’s simply a myth that it was spending that got Europe into trouble — and austerity is certainly not going to save it.

Canada tar sands

Despite the urgency of the Durban climate talks, industry interests have largely undercut global progress on lowering greenhouse gases. One example is the news that the United Kingdom has been quietly working to prevent a European Union climate penalty on Canadian tar sands oil. Throughout Europe’s negotiations, the U.K. government has been in close contact with oil companies Shell and BP:

At least 15 high-level meetings and frequent communications have taken place since September, with David Cameron discussing the issue with his counterpart Stephen Harper during his visit to Canada, and stating privately that the UK wanted “to work with Canada on finding a way forward”, according to documents released under freedom of information laws.

As Europe grapples with cutting greenhouse gases, U.S. activists are fighting the development of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline. Tar sands produce an even dirtier form of oil than conventional crude, with 23 percent higher greenhouse pollution, and NASA scientist James Hansen says development would mean “game over for the climate.”

The Guardian’s revelation about lobbying in the U.K. simply highlights how special interests have swayed decision-makers both domestically and abroad. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has lobbied seven state governments to approve the project. And in Canada, TransCanada lobbyists have met with Canadian officials at least 56 times since May.

President Obama’s decision regarding Keystone XL, as well as the European vote on tar sands penalties this Friday, present opportunities for nations to finally put public interest ahead of Big Oil’s gains.

Cain’s campaign website on “foreign policy and national security” leaves a little something to be desired in terms of basic geography: It lists Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom as countries in “the Americas.” Take a look at a screen shot of the campaign website, with those countries highlighted:

While the downloadable version of the document does indeed have a subject heading for “Europe,” where part of Russia and the whole of Germany and the U.K. are located, the website version leaves it out. Cain’s team, it seems, has a problem with editorial oversight on even the most basic subjects.

Other areas of Cain’s plan defy his simplistic foreign policy credo of “peace through strength and clarity” — namely, that he admits having no clarity at all on Libya. The intervention in Libya and its nascent transition to democracy have bedeviled the former pizza company C.E.O. Asked about it earlier this month, Cain gave a bizarre and rambling five-minute answer heavy on long, dramatic pauses. Months before that, though, he did have some clarity on the matter: opposing whatever President Obama was doing. Cain’s answer, which he blamed on a lack of sleep (promising to take a nap upon taking the White House), dovetails nicely with the declaration on his website that he “needs clarity” on Libya. That should come as no surprise from a man who thinks the Afghan Taliban insurgent group took over the North African country. (HT: UN Dispatch)

That’s according to new figures released by Europe’s wind trade group, the European Wind Energy Association. In a report issued earlier this month, EWEA projects that the European offshore wind market will grow from 3.9 gigawatts of capacity today to 40 gigawatts of capacity, generating roughly 148 terawatt-hours of energy annually — or about 4% of Europe’s electricity demand. By 2030, cumulative installation levels could reach about 150 GW — enough capacity to generate roughly 14% of European demand.

That compares to the 30 GW of capacity expected for China’s offshore wind market by 2020, as projected by the Chinese Renewable Energy Industries Association.

Assuming these projections are accurate, the employment numbers could be substantial. EWEA estimates that 40% of jobs in the European wind industry will be offshore by 2020, accounting for just under 170,000 jobs. And if recent growth is anything to judge by, a major boom in offshore projects through the next two decades is very likely.

Like many other energy sectors, the offshore wind industry was slowed by the global economic malaise and subsequent European Debt Crisis. But even during three years of economic troubles, offshore wind projects have grown substantially, from 318 MW in 2007 to 883 MW in 2010. Offshore installations are expected to reach roughly a gigawatt this year.

That doesn’t mean the sector is completely dry yet. The evolving debt crisis is may create yet another bottleneck into 2012 and 2013, says Christian Kjaer, the CEO of EWEA:

“The sector is coming out of the financial crisis but is still facing a potential worsening of the general economic crisis. The number of banks providing capital for offshore wind farm investments is steadily growing, although there is a continued need for attracting an increasing number of large institutional investors to offshore wind farms – presently the largest construction projects going on in Europe.”

Investors are increasingly seeking equity investments in projects, selling off stakes in offshore projects to develop new wind farms. And while no debt-based transactions were completed in the first half of this year, there are at least 900 MW of projects currently nearing closure.

Meanwhile, China is starting to keep pace with the Europeans. Developers in that country reportedly have about 1 GW of projects in varying phases of development.

Need we remind our readers that after ten years, America’s first offshore wind project — the 420-MW Cape Wind Project — is still stalled?

Related Post:

• Wind Electricity To Be Fully Competitive With Natural Gas by 2016, Says Bloomberg New Energy Finance

Defense Scientists Want Climate Change Intel

The United States’ Department of Defense needs to know more about how climate change affects global security, recommends a report by the the department’s science advisers, the Defense Science Board (DSB).

“Changes in climate patterns and their impact on the physical environment can create profound effects on populations in parts of the world and present new challenges to global security and stability,” wrote Defense Science Board co-chairs, Larry Welch and Willian Howard in a letter preceding the DSB report, Trends and Implications of Climate Change for National and International Security.

“Failure to anticipate and mitigate these changes increases the threat of more failed states with the instabilities and potential for conflict inherent in such failures,” the DSB co-chairs warned.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE OR COMMENT

Africa was of particular concern to the DSB.

“Climate change is already intensifying environmental and resource problems that communities are facing. In recent decades, social conflict has been particularly prevalent in Africa,” said the report.

Republicans Cut Top Science Office by 1/3

Scientists are regarding it as yet another attack on science by a political party that has, in the words of GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, become “the antiscience party.”

A 2012 spending bill expected to be approved this week slashes the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) budget by a whopping 32 percent. The cuts “will have real consequences on OSTP’s operations,” said spokesperson Rick Weiss.

The OSTP is the White House’s overall coordinating agency for federal science initiatives ranging from clean energy research to economic competitiveness to space exploration to climate change to education.

Cutting the top office responsible for insuring scientific integrity in government is the latest action by a Republican party whose leadership seems to be prosecuting an assault on science at almost every level, including House Speaker John Boehner’s attempts to have creationism taught in science classes and his false assertion that climate scientists are arguing carbon dioxide is a carcinogen.

Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA), who chairs the House appropriations panel that oversees NASA and the OSTP, is a fierce opponent of the Chinese government and doesn’t want any cooperation between the US and China. “Frankly, it boils down to a moral issue,” said Wolf. “Would you have a bilateral program with Stalin?” Wolf inserted two sentences into the April 2011 spending bill that prohibit any joint scientific activity between the two nations that involves NASA or is coordinated by the OSTP.

Wind Rush: Europeans Take The Credit

European wind companies have played a major role in the development of the US wind energy sector, even as shadows loom over the industry and the global economy.

Vestas, the world’s largest turbine manufacturer, clearly has high hopes for its US business, with a market share of 18.7% and room for growth. In recent years Vestas had invested in two blade factories, a nacelle facility and a tower facility in Colorado. It also has R&D hubs in Texas, Massachusetts and Colorado.

It is not yet clear whether these facilities will feel the impact of a radical reorganization at Vestas to be announced in February 2012 to reduce annual costs by at least €150 million.

Siemens, Acciona, Clipper and Gamesa are just some of the other companies from Europe that entered the US market because of its potential for growth and incentives such as the Production Tax Credit and the Section 48C program for advanced energy manufacturing facilities.

Euro zone crisis to widen climate fund gap – report

A worsening of the euro zone debt crisis could increase a climate funding gap to $45 billion by 2015 as governments struggle to maintain levels of climate change investment due to austerity measures, Ernst & Young said on Thursday.

Even under current cost-cutting measures, it is likely a gap of $22.5 billion in investment in renewable energy, clean technology, pollution-cutting measures and subsidies will emerge by 2015 across 10 of the world’s major economies, the accounting and consultancy firm said in a report.

Those countries are Germany, France, Britain, Spain, Italy, Japan, the United States, Australia, South Africa and South Korea.

The report comes ahead of a U.N. climate summit starting on Nov. 28 in Durban, South Africa, where negotiators will work on a new global climate deal.

Expectations are low for a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which limits greenhouse gas emissions in developed countries, to emerge in Durban. There are also concerns that governments will not be able to commit the full $100 billion a year pledged to help the most vulnerable countries tackle climate change.

“The enormous projected funding gap revealed by this report suggests continuing economic uncertainty is pushing a low carbon economy further out of reach,” said Juan Costa Climent, the firm’s global climate change and sustainability services leader.

Global Temps `Virtually Certain’ to Rise: UN

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change whirrs into action this week with a significant assessment of extreme events and disasters. The final report is due on Nov. 18. A draft summary for policymakers obtained by Bloomberg shows the caution and rigor with which scientists approach attributing observed trends to man-made climate change.

The panel says it’s “virtually certain” that warm daily temperature extremes will increase in this century. It’s “likely” that human influences have led to a warming of extreme daily minimum and maximum temperatures across the globe, and that instances of heavy rainfall will increase. The report finds the average maximum wind speed of hurricanes is likely to increase, though storm frequency is likely to drop or remain the same.

“Likely” or “virtually certain” imply precision in science that’s generally absent from everyday speech. So when they say “virtually certain,” they’re using a definition of 99 to 100 percent probability. “Very likely” is 90 to 100 percent, and “likely” is 66 to 100 percent.

The values assigned in this week’s report are meant to inform and constrain public policy discussions, and will be fodder for delegates to chew on at the UN’s annual climate treaty talks which start Nov. 28 in Durban, South Africa. NASA climatologist and IPCC contributor Gavin Schmidt explains how nonscientists might interpret these assessments: “If it is likely to rain, will you take an umbrella with you? If people answer yes, then that is your answer — responses to likely events are sensible. If they answer ‘no,’ then there isn’t much point in continuing the conversation.”

Climate change: Sea rise could kill vital marshes

The critical tidal marshes of San Francisco Bay – habitat for tens of thousands of birds and other animals – will virtually disappear within a century if the sea rises as high as some scientists predict it will as a result of global warming.

The sea would inundate the coastline and eliminate 93 percent of the bay’s tidal wetlands if carbon emissions continue unchecked and the ocean rises 5.4 feet, as predicted by scientists under a worst-case scenario, according to a new study by PRBO Conservation Science.

The tidal areas closest to the Golden Gate, including Richardson Bay in Marin County and much of the East Bay coastline, were identified as most vulnerable to sea level rise.

“Marshes cannot keep up with the high-end sea level rise predictions,” said Diana Stralberg, a research associate with PRBO, also known as the Point Reyes Bird Observatory, and the lead author of the study, which was published Wednesday in the online science journal PLoS One.

“If we can’t slow down sea level rise,” said Stralberg, who is working on a doctorate degree at the University of Alberta, “we will need to identify and protect areas where marshes can migrate to.”

The researchers measured the depth of mud, sediment and plant material in the existing marshes along the San Francisco Bay coastline and analyzed the impact on the wetlands under a variety of different scenarios.

As Europe continues its slide, the effects are sure to be felt in the United States, where the threat of a recession in 2012 is now greater than 50 percent. “It is not something that we would be insulated from,” Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said last week. “I don’t think we would be able to escape the consequences of a blow-up in Europe.”

But even with evidence that austerity is wreaking havoc on European economies, American policymakers remain intent on following that lead. But chasing Europe down the austerity hole is only ensuring that the U.S. will experience another “great recession,” according to economists surveyed by Politico:

“To engage in austerity right now would be a great mistake,” insisted Desmond Lachman, an economist with the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “It would push the economy into a great recession.” [...]

“We need to learn from the European recessions,” said David Walker, former comptroller general of the United States, “and structure our own program” accordingly. He, too, said he considers large, near-term budget cuts potentially disastrous. Walker and other experts said significant budget cuts are certainly necessary — eventually. But not now. [...]

“Austerity brings a cyclical contraction,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, a German who is senior director for strategy at the German Marshall Fund in Washington. “You can’t just slash. You also have to invest and reform.” In his view, U.S. politicians don’t seem to appreciate this because they hold “a dangerous philosophy of American exceptionalism, as if they were exempt from the rules of finance.”

Despite these warnings, congressional leaders — particularly on the right — continue to push for massive spending cuts to a variety of programs, while opposing economic stimulus that could spark growth and recovery. The House will vote this week on a radical Balanced Budget Amendment that would force bigger spending cuts than even the fiscal super committee could ever dream of, drive up the unemployment rate, and ensure that future recessions will be even more painful.

The GOP, along with some moderate Democrats, has opposed the American Jobs Act, which would inject money into the economy in the form of infrastructure investment, aid to states to hire teachers and public safety officials, and other measures designed for job creation. Instead, they have focused on anti-regulatory, anti-spending policies that have little (if any) effect on job creation.

As these economists noted, clear evidence exists across the pond that widespread austerity measures will only stunt economic growth and push the U.S. closer to the brink of another recession. Unfortunately, Congressional leadership continues to ignore them.

Oddly, though, part of the misconceived nature of the project is that adopting this see no evil attitude toward it is the only possible way to make it work. The whole idea of having a single currency is that 100 Euros in an Italian bank is just as good as 100 Euros in an Austrian bank. It’s all the same money. But if you think there’s some chance that in the future Italian Euros will be converted into Nuova Lira and Austrian Euros will be converted into Grossdeutschmarks, then all kinds of Italian firms and wealthy Italian individuals will be acting to shift as much of their funds as possible into Austria. This action, breaking the Italian banking system and starving the Italian economy of investment funds, is itself going to increase the stress on the economic union and make breakup more likely. What’s more, the main reason to think that leaving the Euro would be disastrous is precisely that it would create bank runs. Once bank runs are already happening, the costs of leaving get lower and the likelihood of even more bank runs increases.

Consequently, for the system to work you need discussion of a breakup to be completely taboo. Once it becomes widely discussed, the mere fact of the discussion becomes a huge problem. But of course rendering a subject taboo and shouting down skeptics produces a kind of insular groupthink, bungling, etc.

Ban Ki-moon urges consensus on emissions and funding at climate change meeting

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today stressed that the forthcoming United Nations conference on climate change in Durban, South Africa, should produce agreement on limiting emissions of greenhouse gases, and launch the green climate fund for mitigation and adaptation in developing countries.

“In Durban, I expect governments to find a way forward for the Kyoto Protocol so we can make a broader comprehensive climate agreement possible,” said Mr. Ban in remarks prepared for delivery to an event on climate change organized by the mission of the United Kingdom to the UN.

Mr. Ban urged governments to launch the Green Climate Fund, which was established last year in Cancun, Mexico. “But it must not be an empty shell – a fund in name only. Governments must provide the $100 billion that was pledged. This would be a welcome concrete outcome at Durban.”

NZ govt to slow carbon trade expansion if re-elected

The expansion of New Zealand’s carbon trading scheme, the only national market outside Europe, will be slowed to minimise costs to the economy if the ruling National-led government is returned to power in elections at the end of the month.

The centre-right party said it will adopt recommendations of a review released mid-September, which will see the energy, transport and industrial sectors get until 2015, two years later than planned, before they pay the full cost of emissions of NZ$25 ($20.25) a tonne of carbon.

“This approach slows the cost impacts on households and businesses but continues the progress needed to drive investment in renewable energy, clean technologies and forestry,” said Climate Change minister Nick Smith.

Canada’s climate stance likely to spark controversy

Canada expects to face international pressure at upcoming climate change talks over its refusal to sign on for a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, Environment Minister Peter Kent says.

Canada has already declared that it will not renew its Kyoto commitment “however acute the international pressure,” Kent said during a speech hosted by the Economic Club of Canada in Toronto on Tuesday.

The speech preceded this year’s United Nations climate change talks, known as COP 17, which begin Nov. 28.

“We will only support climate change agreements that are signed and ratified by all major emitters,” Kent said, making reference to the fact that developing nations had minimal obligations to reduce emissions under Kyoto and the U.S. had signed but not ratified the agreement.

The Kyoto Protocol was formally adopted in 1997, came into force in 2005, and set firm targets for 37 industrialized nations, including Canada, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are linked to global climate change. It was signed but not ratified by the U.S.

EU finance ministers reaffirm climate financing

EU finance ministers on Tuesday signed off on about 7 billion euros ($9.6 billion) in short-term funding to help developing countries adapt to climate change and curb emissions — even as they met to grapple with Europe’s debt crisis.

Draft conclusions seen by Reuters showed EU member states had mobilised an estimated 4.68 billion euros in 2010 and 2.34 billion euros so far this year, as part of a commitment to provide 7.2 billion.

“Considering the economic and fiscal challenges we are faced with, this demonstrates our strong commitment to deliver on the Cancun (climate summit) agreement and to the G20 (Group of 20 industrialised nations) commitment to fight climate change,” the document said.

Non-governmental organisations said it provided a glimmer of hope that environmental issues had not been knocked off the agenda by European debt, but they also voiced concern the funds had been reallocated from elsewhere and were not new money.

South African industry questions climate change plan

South Africa’s Chamber of Mines and petrochemicals group Sasol on Tuesday expressed reservations about the country’s main climate policy paper, with industry-specific reduction targets a key concern.

Released in October, the cabinet-backed climate change plan wants limits placed on carbon emissions for top polluters, who could face penalties if they do not conform to new regulations

“Our primary concern is centered around the introduction of fixed numbers for the PPD (peak-plateau-decline), which fundamentally changes the way in which climate change policy will be implemented nationally, and is also likely to negatively impact the international negotiations,” Sasol said in a presentation.

South Africa, which hosts global climate change talks in November/December, wants to cut CO2 emissions by 34 percent over the next decade but has little room to make fast changes with major employers among top polluters and its cash-strapped power sector almost fully reliant on coal.

China urges EU to drop aviation emission scheme, lawsuit looms

China’s aviation watchdog on Tuesday urged the European Union to drop a plan that would require global airlines to buy carbon emission permits, while Chinese aviation industry reportedly plan to sue the EU over the unpopular scheme.

“We hope the EU will avoid this unilateral move, solve international aviation emissions issues on the basis of mutual respect and consensus, and promote the sustainable development of the industry,” an official with China’s Civil Aviation Administration (CAAC) said on condition of anonymity.

The CAAC welcomes and supports a resolution adopted by the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) regarding the issue, the official said.

The ICAO resolution, adopted at a meeting in Montreal last week, opposes the EU plan to force non-EU airlines to take part in the bloc’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).

According to the EU plan, as of January 2012, airlines flying to or from the bloc will have to buy permits from the ETS for 15 percent of the carbon emissions they generate during the entire flight, with large fines for noncompliance.

Russia sees need for more urgency on climate deal: EU

Russia recognizes that concrete steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions need to be agreed at climate talks in South Africa next month before a globally binding climate deal can emerge by 2015, EU climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard said on Thursday.

Negotiators from around the world are due to meet in Durban at the end of this month to try to work on a new deal to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

Expectations are low that a binding deal will emerge, as rifts between countries have stifled progress.

A group of small island states accused countries such as Russia and Japan on Thursday of trying to delay a new international agreement until 2018 or 2020.

“Russia shares our view that we should go for a roadmap and have timetables in it,” Hedegaard told reporters.

The “roadmap” would include a set of standardized actions toward a global deal, perhaps similar to a proposal by Australia and Norway last month, Hedegaard said.

EPA chief under first Bush laments GOP shift on environment

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency under former President George H.W. Bush on Tuesday called on Republicans to defend clean-air regulations from “demagogic assaults” by members of Congress.

“It’s time once again to put on battle gear, to charge out and remind the country that Republicans, whose party has an admirable record on environmental issues going back to Teddy Roosevelt, in fact still do care about asthma and allergies, about the effects on the young, the ill and the elderly of particulates and hot polluted air, about hospital admissions and lung impairment,” William Reilly said in prepared remarks at a summit on the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act.

Reilly was instrumental in the Clean Air Act amendments, which were aimed at limiting acid rain and air pollution. Reilly called the effort “George H.W. Bush’s monumental contribution to the environment.”

But about 20 years later, Republicans in Congress are targeting the Clean Air Act and EPA efforts to impose a slew of new regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, mercury emissions and other air pollutants.

Reilly, a Republican, defended EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s clean-air agenda.

“These rules are grounded in the best available science, and what’s more, given the priority we all hold for the economy, they will result in job creation as companies acquire and install pollution controls,” he said.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE OR COMMENT

Global Wind Power Investment to Total $820 Billion from 2011 to 2017, Forecasts Pike Research

Wind power now accounts for the majority of the world’s non-hydropower renewable electricity capacity. Now that wind power has reached approximately one-fifth of total electricity generation in some countries, most in the energy industry appreciate it as a mainstream technology that is key to not only reducing carbon emissions, but also meeting rapidly increasing electricity demand around the world.

While the global economic recession significantly slowed the pace of new wind power installations in 2010, turbine deployment activity remains strong and overall capacity will continue to rise at a healthy pace. According to a recent report from Pike Research, by 2017 wind power installations will represent a $153 billion global industry, up from $77 billion in 2011. Over that period, the cleantech market intelligence firm forecasts, cumulative investment in new wind power capacity will total $820 billion.

Over that same period, total wind generation capacity, including both onshore and offshore projects, will increase from 235.8 gigawatts (GW) in 2011 to 562.9 GW in 2017.

The Developing World, Leading on Climate Change?

In what may turn out to be one of the abiding ironies of global geopolitics, leadership on climate change seems to have suddenly passed from the developed to the developing world, as has public anxiety about the damaging effects of a changing climate.

As recently as the Copenhagen summit in late 2009, the West blamed large developing countries such as China and India for scuppering the chances of a “grand agreement” to curb the emission of greenhouse gases. Poor developing countries argued they needed the right to pollute in order to catch up to the West in terms of economic development, while the rich nations clucked that the world could ill afford more carbon emissions.

On the flip side, at the Cancun summit a year later, India’s then environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, was pilloried in the domestic press, and accused, by his own admission, of “caving in to the United States” in the final near-consensus plan that was agreed.

How quickly things have changed.

In the unfolding presidential election campaign in the United States, climate change is not a major issue. According to a recent poll, only 59 percent of Americans even believe that the planet is warming, as compared to 79 percent in 2006.

Renewables set to help European utilities’ profits

Three of Europe’s largest utilities, buoyed by government support, expect renewable energy sources plus ongoing cost cuts to help them weather higher wholesale gas purchasing prices and support earnings for the current financial year.

The world’s number one utility by sales, Germany’s E.ON reported Wednesday it produced 7 percent more green power than a year ago while central Europe’s biggest listed company, the Czech Republic’s CEZ, added its renewable power production remained stable.

One of Britain’s six big energy suppliers, Scottish & Southern Energy (SSE), produced 55 percent more renewable energy in the first half of its financial year.

European governments are enticing companies with subsidy systems to expand the use of solar, water and wind power to cut greenhouse gas emissions and assuage public opposition to coal-fired power plants.

Deutsche Bank analyst Hasim Sengl saw “positive developments in the renewable energy segment, especially wind energy” of Germany’s E.ON (EONGn.DE).

Deutsche Bank analyst Martin Brough, referring to SSE, added: “We continue to expect earnings growth to pick up in the coming years as wind farms under construction come on-line and as upstream profits benefit from rising wholesale prices.”

The big issues at the Durban climate summit

Representatives of nearly 200 nations will assemble at the end of November in Durban, South Africa, for their annual summit on climate change.

Following the failure of talks in Copenhagen in 2009 and Cancun in 2010 to agree a successor to the Kyoto Protocol — the only global accord on tackling climate change — diplomats and non-governmental organizations have been managing expectations for the Durban summit.

Rather than a breakthrough, they have emphasized incremental progress and the improvement of existing mechanisms for monitoring and managing climate change.

All observers agree time has run out to get a new version of Kyoto in place before the first commitment period expires at the end of next year.

The European Union has said the world might not be able to agree on a binding climate deal until 2015.

“After Copenhagen, there will probably never be another attempt to agree one global deal all at once,” Tim Gore, international climate change policy advisor at Oxfam, told Reuters. “Durban will be another stepping stone.”

“If we get an EU commitment to continue Kyoto, a signal from the rest of the world that they will undertake legal commitments in the future and delivery in the meantime … then we’ll be making progress toward a sophisticated global architecture for fighting climate change,” he added.

Nebraska lawmakers debate pipeline eminent domain rules

Nebraska lawmakers debated on Tuesday tightening eminent domain rules for procuring land during the second day of a special session to discuss bills related to the proposed $7 billion Keystone XL oil pipeline.

The pipeline’s planned route from Canada to Texas takes it across Nebraska, a move opposed by environmental groups and some property owners who will be affected by the construction.

Nebraska lawmakers are considering five bills to regulate the pipeline and possibly force TransCanada Corp to move its route away from the state’s ecologically sensitive Sand Hills region and Ogallala aquifer, a major source of drinking and irrigation water for several states.

State Senator Bill Avery, speaking at the statehouse on Tuesday, said his bill on eminent domain rules would require a pipeline company to have a state or federal permit before contacting landowners and giving notice that property could be taken via eminent domain rules.

“This bill is to protect Nebraska landowners from the unfair taking of property,” Avery said in morning hearings.

Steve Randy Waldmann has a fascinating wonky proposal for resolving the European debt crisis via basically a sovereign version of a debt-for-equity swap. It’s great stuff. At one point, though, he makes an effort to claim that this is not just a smart, workable, reasonably fair proposal but also a “populist” one. Earlier, he notes that an alternative proposal “would be to redenominate the debt of European sovereigns into unredeemable fiat currencies” but that this “would represent a large setback to the European project.”

Clearly, breaking up the Eurozone would be a huge setback to the European project. But I think any talk of populism in the European context needs to start from the reality that the European Union, as currently conceived, is the most anti-populist public institution in the democratic world. You can see this in part through questions of institutional design, like how the European Central Bank is not only operationally independent in its conduct of monetary policy, but even has a charter that basically can’t be changed by democratically elected national governments. That’s very different from the Federal Reserve System, which is “independent” merely by virtue of a Federal Reserve Act that can be amended at any time and, indeed, has been amended many times over the years. But the un-populism of the European project goes deeper than that, pretty close to the core of the concept. You can analyze this in an institutional context, but it’s easier to see on a level of sentiment. Nobody in California thinks it would be a good idea to break up the U.S. Olympic team and field a separate California squad, and nobody in Germany wants to dissolve the German Olympic team and field a unified E.U. squad. By contrast, unifying the East German and West German Olympic teams was a no-brainer. Nobody wants to root for “Europe” and no sensible Dutch person feels E.U. citizens in Bulgaria are more authentically “European” than Swiss or Norwegian people. This isn’t some kind of unchangeable fact of the human landscape. Nationalisms are constructed and change over time and there’s no reason in principle that you couldn’t have a “European” nationalism and “European” populist thought. But you don’t have one in practice.

The trouble here is that while this leaves proposals for more robust European federalism (Eurobonds or something like what Waldmann is proposing) un-populist and elitist, so is the alternative.

The combination of monetary union, hard money thinking at the ECB, and refusal to engage in substantial fiscal transfers is a business class wet dream. You have asymmetrical mobility—capital, goods, and high-end professional labor are super mobile while working class labor is largely fixed. With exchange rates fixed and the central bank inflexible, the only way to respond to macroeconomic shocks is to cut wages and social welfare benefits. They’ve created an institutional setting under which not only is the nominally socialist government of Spain pursuing a hard-right agenda of austerity and low wages, but they are correct to do so not because an austerity and low wage agenda is a good thing but because the institutional environment of Europe leaves them with no alternative.

So we’re basically stuck. The story of the west for the past 150 years or so has been the parallel development of capitalist markets and democratic politics. The E.U. has constructed a setting in which not only have markets escaped the bounds of democratic politics, but also one wherein strengthening the political forces at the center itself counts as an elitist anti-populist project. This is nothing smart people on the European left aren’t aware of and thinking about, but very little headway was made before the crisis and now, again, the practical business of crisis-management is being carried out entirely as a discourse between two different elite agendas.

But consider a statement like “Italian 10-year yields, which have recently taken up the mantle of prime eurozone stress gauge, and which at one point hit 5.75 per cent, are trading at 5.67 per cent up 10 basis points on the day.” U.S. 10-year Treasury yields were usually higher than that throughout the 1980s and 1990s. That’s not because the United States in 1997 was a bad default risk, it was just a pretty banal market price for a security in which investors had lots of other options. Our yields ended up consistently below five percent only after the dot-com bubble burst, and were a product of the ensuing recession and Chinese currency policy. Now of course Italy’s bonds aren’t trading in the high 5 percent range because of a strong growth outlook. They really are that high as a risk premium over Germany. But the point about that is that to have large spreads when Italian yields aren’t even especially high, German interest rates would have to be freakishly low.

And, indeed, this is the case:

What you’re seeing here, I think, is not just a reflection of market sentiment that German debt is safer than Italian debt, but also deep pessimism about the growth outlook in even the “healthy” European countries. That’s not to say that the United States is doing much better on this score, but it is a bit of real talk for people who’ve gotten smug about Germany amidst the problems of Italy and Spain. The fact of the matter is that an unworkable currency union plus unworkable austerity policies are not serving any country’s concrete economic interests very well.

Brad DeLong introduces the concept of “zombie” elites with underwater reputations who thereby refuse to adapt to changing circumstances. Thus his theory of Jean-Claude Tricket and the European Central Bank, though the application is clearly wider:

The most likely scenario is this: they bet on mean-reversion in unemployment, on the magic full-employment equilibrium-restoring properties of the market, on their role as prudent stewards of financial rectitude, and on a take-no-prisoners commitment to price stability in all circumstances as the driving force behind the great moderation.

They were wrong. They now have a choice. They can admit that they were wrong. Then they will probably have to resign, and then be snubbed worldwide. Nobody likes a loser.

Alternatively, they can double down. Their reputations right now are underwater. What do they have to lose reputationwise by saying more absurd nonsense? And there is a chance that tomorrow the confidence fairy will appear, wave her magic wand, and the V-shaped recovery will start.

This is, I think, the right way to think about the “success” of Bush administration Iraq policy in its second term. In the case of Europe, I would add that the underwater elites extend well beyond the narrow confines of the European Central Bank. The current crisis is revealing the fact that the Euro wasn’t a very good idea and realistic approaches to resolving it require admitting that. Either the project is a failure and countries need to leave the Eurozone, or else the project can only be made workable by asking German taxpayers to do something they were promised they’d never been asked to do. Talking about fiscal austerity is a good way of casting the problems here as caused by greedily unaustere voters and obscuring the extent that what we’re watching is the fundamental failure of a deeply elite-driven project.