Why some countries are leading the shift to green energy

Oct. 7 () –

A study published in ‘science’ identifies the political factors that allow some countries to take the lead in adopting cleaner energy sources and others lag behind.

Findings offer important lessons as many governments around the world strive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and limit the devastating effects of climate change.

Oil and gas prices soared after the Russian invasion of Ukraine last spring, creating a global energy crisis similar to the oil crisis of the 1970s. While some countries took advantage of the price shock to hasten the transition to cleaner energy sources, such as wind, solar and geothermal, others have responded by expanding fossil fuel production.

“We’re very interested in understanding how national differences mediate countries’ responses to the same type of energy challenge,” says the study’s lead author, Jonas Meckling, an associate professor of energy and environmental policy at the University of California, Berkeley ( United States)–.We found that the political institutions of countries determine the extent to which they can absorb costly policies of all kinds, including costly energy policies”.

By analyzing how different countries responded to the current energy crisis and the oil crisis of the 1970s, the study reveals how the structure of political institutions can help or hinder the shift to clean energy. Meckling performed the analysis in collaboration with study co-authors Phillip Y. Lipscy, University of Toronto, Canada; Jared J. Finnegan, from University College London, United Kingdom, and Florence Metz, from the University of Twente, in the Netherlands.

Since policies that promote the transition to cleaner energy technologies are often costly in the short term, can garner significant political backlash from constituents, including consumers and businesses.

The analysis found that countries that were most successful in introducing cleaner energy technologies had political institutions that helped absorb some of this pushback, either by insulating policymakers from political opposition or compensating consumers and businesses. by the additional costs associated with the adoption of new technologies.

For example, according to Meckling, many countries in continental and northern Europe have created institutions that allow policymakers to insulate themselves from opposition from voters or pressure groups, or to compensate interest groups affected by the transition. As a result, many of these countries have been more successful in absorbing the costs associated with transitioning to a clean energy system, such as investing in increased wind capacity or improving transmission networks.

Meanwhile, countries that lack such institutions, such as the United States, Australia, and Canada, often follow market-driven transitions, waiting for the price of new technologies to fall before adopting them.

“We can expect countries that can go down the isolation or offset path to be the first public investors in these very expensive technologies that we need for decarbonization, like hydrogen fuel cells and carbon removal technologies,” Meckling said. –.But once these new technologies are cost competitive in the market, countries like the United States will be able to respond relatively quickly because they are very sensitive to price signals.”

One way to help insulate policymakers from political pressure is to hand over regulatory power to independent agencies that are less subject to the demands of voters or pressure groups.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB), a relatively autonomous body that has been charged with implementing many of California’s climate goals, is an excellent example of this type of institution. Thanks, in part, to CARB, California is often considered a world leader in limiting greenhouse gas emissions, despite being a state within the United States.

Germany, another global climate leader, instead uses offsetting to reach its ambitious climate goals. For example, the Coal Pledge brought together disparate groups – including environmentalists, coal executives, unions and leaders from coal mining regions – to agree on a plan to phase out coal by 2038. To achieve this goal, the country will provide economic support to workers and regional economies that depend on coal, while strengthening the labor market in other industries.

“We want to demonstrate that it is not only the endowment of resources that determines the response of countries to energy crises, but also politicsMeckling explains.

According to the study, the United States as a whole does not have strong institutions to absorb political opposition to costly energy policies. However, Meckling argues that policymakers can still drive the energy transition by leveraging the leadership of states like California, focusing on policies that have more dispersed costs and less political opposition – such as support for energy research and development. and clearing the way for the market to adopt the new technologies once the cost has disappeared.

“Countries that, like the United States, don’t have these institutions should at least focus on removing barriers once these clean technologies are cost competitive,” Meckling recommends. What they can do is reduce the cost for market players.”