Skip to main content

National Plans for Energy Security Under the Paris Agreement Are Not Only About Emissions Reduction: Must the Kyoto Protocol History Repeat?

 KEY WORDS: Paris Agreement; emission reduction targets; energy security; affordable energy; renewables;  equity; sustainable development; SDG13; scientific-round-table; ETS

1.0    To achieve the Paris Agreement goals, effective integration between energy security and action for climate change to reduce GHG emissions is crucial - but remains problematic.

2.0    The UN’s 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goal 13 for “Climate Action” requires climate change measures to be integrated into national plans, policies, and strategies.

3.0    A national plan for energy security and sustainable development should not only represent a power system that is affordable, reliable, and secure - but also have the optimum balance between renewables and other feasible and viable climate action options to achieve emission  reduction targets, sustainably.

4.0   A pathway for a national plan that integrates energy security, emissions reduction, and sustainable development is described.

READ MORE ...


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

COMMENT: Australia’s Nuclear Future?

  The recent announcement by the leader of the Federal Liberal National Party for a climate action plan for Australia’s transition to net zero emissions based on seven nuclear plants with a mix of renewables of gas and renewables, has ignited concern and controversy. This is not surprising given the latest independent polling (18 June 2024) on this issue in Australia by the Essential Report  which indicated that: - “People think the best way to achieve our net zero by 2050 target is by developing renewables rather than developing nuclear (63% to 37%) ”. The poll highlighted the reason why public interest environmental controversies continue to ignite conflict when environment/anti-nuclear positions and development/pro-nuclear positions collide. T he unfortunate outcome for the information conflict situation, in this case, is a red corner ~v~ blue corner scenario! Instead, the focus should be on managing the information conflict created by divergent op...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could UNFCCC COP 29 be the Watershed For Finding a Solution to Reduce Emissions Equitably? A Pathway to a Level Playing Field for Reaching Net Zero

    1.0            In 2023, the U.N. Secretary-General, António Guterres identified the  “ Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities” [ CBDR-RC Principle]  as a key driver for achieving net zero deadlines - subject to a significant condition: “Every country must be part of  the solution. Demanding others move first only ensures humanity comes last”. 2.0            Existing issues that have limited the adoption of the CPDR-RC Principle over time are identified e.g., c onflicts over inequality and competitive advantage; the wide disparity in national contributions of global CO 2 emissions between all countries . 3.0            The article outlines the framework for a level playing field for reducing emissions, equitably, to reach net zero by 2050, based on the linkage be...
Post a Comment
Read more

Resolving Cultural Heritage Protection and Development Conflicts on Indigenous Lands

“ P rotecting cultural heritage and development are not mutually exclusive; we can have both, but projects have to be well-designed.” Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek (2024).   The recent decision by the Federal Environment Minister to shut down a tailings dam for a gold mine development, to protect Indigenous cultural heritage, has ignited controversy and conflict.   The controversy is not only over the decision’s impact on the viability of the Regis Resources’ Gold Mine Project at Orange, Central-Western NSW.  It has also highlighted the complexity of the problem when cultural heritage protection (with its focus on Traditional knowledge) and  development (with its focus on Western science) collide over future land use. There is now  community concern that history may repeat in Australia for development projects proposed on Indigenous owned and controlled lands. However, there would be little dispute that the above statement by ...
Post a Comment
Read more