By Bridget Stuart

It is a fact that we need to limit the increase in global temperatures to below 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels as soon as possible, but certainly before 2050. When I say ‘we’, I mean the governments of the world, and in particular the governments of wealthy countries in the Global North, who have particular responsibility for both causing the problem, and therefore for solving it. Unfortunately, it is already too late to prevent dangerous climate change, and it is unlikely the 1.5 degrees target will be achieved. Therefore, the more pertinent question asked by the climate scientist Kevin Anderson is how long we have between dangerous climate change and extremely dangerous climate change [1].
 
COVID-19 has created a mean 7% decline in CO2  emissions, as well as a decline in other toxic air pollutants from the transport and industrial sectors [2]. Unfortunately, it appears that this decline will only be temporary, and that emissions will rebound as the economy does. For example, China’s emissions have already rebounded past their 2019 levels [3]. However, this need not be the case if countries work to ‘build back better’ and create a just transition to a low-carbon, green economy.
 
This is where the ‘green recovery’ comes in. In their recovery packages responding to the pandemic-induced economic crisis, many governments have included ‘green recovery’ measures. Such measures include investments, grants and loans for projects directed at improving green transport, clean energy, the circular economy, and research & development. Other initiatives focus on creating green jobs, and the conservation of ecosystems. The OECD estimates the overall funds directed towards 'green recovery' programmes currently total USD312 billion, with the focus being predominantly directed towards the energy and transport sectors. For example, Boris Johnson has promised a £12billion government investment, with a potential private sector of three times that amount, projected to create 250,000 green jobs [4].
 
However, the announced green recovery packages remain insufficient. It has been estimated that an investment of USD6.3 trillion will be needed annually until 2030, a figure far beyond what has currently been promised [5]. This, coupled with widespread lack of ambition in implementation and the active rolling back of existing environmental regulations to bolster the failing fossil-fuel industry in some countries, the outlook is far from promising. Therefore, it is important that countries’ progress is monitored to ensure accountability and that they actually implement the pledges they have made.
 
It is important that countries who are able to do so set strong examples and show a concerted effort to tackle climate change. The USA re-joining the Paris Agreement under the Biden administration and its renewed presence at COP26 next year could be a real symbol of change. If the USA invest enough money in R&D innovation projects, this could herald a new suite of green technology advances.
 
To leverage real sustained green change in the long-term, we need to invest in a workable Green New Deal (GND) within G20 economies. As individuals, we must be sure to use our electoral power to vote in the governments and policies which have a sincere focus on a GND. Fortunately, Biden’s election in the US does shine out as a beacon of hope in this respect.
 
It is also important to highlight that the green recovery will look very different depending on the country. For countries in the Global South, the focus will be primarily on alleviating poverty and suffering through sustainable methods. However, international economic assistance may be necessary for green initiatives to be feasible. In light of the inequality of historical emissions’ and colonial legacies, international acts of climate justice must be woven into the cloth of the green recovery. For example, Biden’s proposed ‘Green Marshall Plan’ or the UK’s £64 million package to support Colombia to combat deforestation and build back a cleaner economy in the wake of the pandemic, could be good places to start.
 
Overall, we need to speed-up a rapid, yet just transition to a low-emissions, green economy. COVID-19 has been and continues to be a great threat to humankind and has required unprecedented collective action to fight it. Miraculously, through a period of extreme suffering, it seems as if the world may have overcome it. However, climate change represents a threat on an incomparable order of magnitude. It is here, and we can no longer discount or ignore it. In this immediate post-COVID era, there is a unique opportunity not just for a recovery but for a transformation towards a green, inclusive and socially just future.
 
REFERENCES

1. Anderson, K., & Bows, A. (2010). A 2 C target? Get real, because 4 C is on its way. Parliamentary Brief, 13(2), 19.
2. Le Quéré, C., Jackson, R.B., Jones, M.W. et al. Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10, 647–653 (2020).
3. Liu, Z., Ciais, P., Deng, Z. et al. Near-real-time monitoring of global CO2 emissions reveals the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat Commun 11, 5172 (2020).
4. https://www.ft.com/content/6c112691-fa2f-491a-85b2-b03fc2e38a30
5. http://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/en/themes/green-recovery

Summary by Bridget Stuart

This week, we heard from Dr. Fatih Birol, the Executive Director of the International Energy Agency (IEA). Dr Birol’s spoke on the impact of COVID on the energy sector, and the Green Recovery of the future.
 
The global pandemic has led to the biggest shock to the energy industry since WWII, causing a decline more than 7 times larger than the 2008 financial crash. Fortunately, it is fossil fuels which have been hit the hardest, and renewable energies, such as wind or solar have actually proven to be relatively ‘COVID immune’. There has also been a 7% drop in emissions, thanks to the pandemic—the deepest decline in decades. However, there is a real risk that emissions will rebound with the economy and this decline will only be temporary.
 
This means that the next 3 years will be a ‘make or break’ period in determining whether countries will meet their 2050 net-zero goals. Recovery policies and economic packages centring on renewables will be essential in facilitating this. These policies must be aimed at maximising energy efficiency, improving pre-existing energy grids, and developing innovative technologies.
 
The questions considered green stimulus packages, the geopolitics of energy, COP26, OPEC countries, individual action and policy-making in emerging economies.

• It is great that countries are announcing ambitious green stimulus packages, but they need to follow through and provide sufficient funding.
• The new US administration is a beacon of hope. The re-joining of the US to the Paris Agreement will create great political momentum. The conflict between the US and China is also more likely to be resolved.
• The US must invest time, money and effort in R&D projects, specifically those which focus on electricity.
• Dr Birol is very optimistic about COP26 in Glasgow next year and has expectations it will over-shadow Paris 2015, in terms of the advances that are made.
• There is a risk of geopolitical tensions around the raw materials required for renewable development, which are only concentrated in a small number of countries. The IEA is working on this matter.
• The value of oil is in rapid decline, a problem for OPEC countries which have economies closely tied to the fortunes of oil and gas. These countries must diversify rapidly in order to improve their economies, citizens’ welfare and political stability.
• Solar is "the new king of global power markets". It is now one of the cheapest forms of energy and enjoys widespread state support. Of all new energy plants installed this year globally, 50% were solar.
• Fossil fuels are in rapid decline. For coal this decline is terminal, but oil and gas will remain for longer. The emissions produced from this residual fossil fuel usage needs to be offset by carbon-capture and storage.
• China is the world’s largest emitter and if it doesn’t meet its net zero targets, then the rest of the world doing so will be ineffective. China’s emissions have already rebound past what they were in 2019.
• The most important thing an individual can do to exert influence on the problem is to vote for the right government.
• Hydrogen is preferred by all governments, above and beyond other technologies.
• It is unfair to hold African countries to the same standards as European countries, since Africa’s cumulative share in historical global emissions is less than 2%. Such countries need support to transition to renewables.

By Bridget Stuart