Zukünftige Energie- und Industriesysteme
The paper reviews the current knowledge on the use of biomass for non-food purposes, critically discusses its environmental sustainability implications, and describes the needs for further research, thus enabling a more balanced policy approach. The life-cylce wide impacts of the use of biomass for energy and material purposes derived from either direct crop harvest or residuals indicate that biomass based substitutes have a different, not always superior environmental performance than comparable fossil based products. Cascading use, i.e. when biomass is used for material products first and the energy content is recovered from the end-of-life products, tends to provide a higher environmental benefit than primary use as fuel. Due to limited global land resources, non-food biomass may only substitute for a certain share of non-renewables. If the demand for non-food biomass, especially fuel crops and its derivates, continues to grow this will inevitably lead to an expansion of global arable land at the expense of natural ecosystems such as savannas and tropical rain forests. Whereas the current aspirations and incentives to increase the use of non-food biomass are intended to counteract climate change and environmental degradation, they are thus bound to a high risk of problem shifting and may even lead to a global deterioration of the environment. Although the "balanced approach" of the European Union's biomass strategy may be deemed a good principle, the concrete targets and implementation measures in the Union and countries like Germany should be revisited. Likewise, countries like Brazil and Indonesia may revisit their strategies to use their natural resources for export or domestic purposes. Further research is needed to optimize the use of biomass within and between regions.
Inducing the international diffusion of carbon capture and storage technologies in the power sector
(2007)
Although CO2 capture and storage(CCS) technologies are heatedly debated, many politicians and energy producers consider them to be a possible technical option to mitigate carbon dioxide from large-point sources. Hence, both national and international decision-makers devote a growing amount of capacities and financial resources to CCS in order to develop and demonstrate the technology and enable ist broad diffusion.The presented report concentrates on the influence of policy incentives on CCS diffusion and examines the following research question: Which policy strategy is needed to stimulate the international diffusion of carbon capture and storage technologies in the power sector? Based on the analysis of innovation-specific (e.g. CCS competitiveness and compatibility), market-related (e.g. national CO2 discharges and storage capacities) and institutional determinants (e.g. existing national and international policy frameworks) of CCS diffusion, the paper discusses the suitability of various national and international policy instruments to induce the international deployment of CCS. Afterwards, three CCS diffusion paths are derived from fundamentally different carbon stabilisation scenarios which include climate policy measures to stimulate the adoption of CO2 mitigation technologies.
Norway's abundance of resources is the establishing factor in explaining how the North European state ranks among the countries worldwide with the highest standard of living. Indeed, fossil fuels are finite and after their depletion the Norwegian social welfare state should endure. Therefore, a sovereign wealth fund has been founded in the kingdom in 1990, in which the surpluses from the oil and gas industry sales have been invested from that time on. This method should secure the state's ability to act in the post-petroleum era.
At the end of the 1990's the voice of Norwegian society insisted that the sovereign wealth fund should not only be for intergenerational justice, but should also contribute to the implementation of worth and norms of the present country. In the end of 2004 the Parliament (Storting), on the basis of the Graver Report, finally agreed upon ethic regulations for the investment of the sovereign wealth fund. With capital of over 280 billion Euros (figures from 2007), the second largest sovereign wealth fund in the world, they should now only have businesses in their portfolio which adhere to those ethical regulations. In the present paper, the emergence and outcomes of the development of a "Third Way" between maximising profit and sustainability will be illustrated.
The ethical regulations have different dimensions (e.g. no contribution to human rights violations, child labour, serious environmental damages, etc.) to which the present text concentrates on posing the question to what extent sovereign wealth funds could be a new instrument of climate protection policy. For this purpose, the contribution of both main instruments of ethical regulations, "Active Ownership" and the exclusion of businesses, were analysed as well as the actors which have been created for their implementation. The repercussions reach from dialogs with businesses in the USA to stop lobby activities against Congress-planned climate protection laws, such as an emissions trading system, to adjusting to the exclusion of individual firms from the portfolio of welfare states, due to a breach of ethics.
The drawbacks and constraints of a takeover of the Norwegian regulations by other financial actors and its first diffusion effects will be analysed. Finally, this article will deal with the running evaluations of the ethical regulations and Norwegian current and future domestic climate policies.