Connect with us


Commission Produce Country-Specific Energy Advice



The European Commission has made economic recommendations to its Member States. The advice is country-specific, but many believe it fails to recognise the Europe-wide link to the Paris Agreement and more must be done to support Europe’s energy transition.

The European Commission has urged Belgium, Czech Republic, Poland, Romania and the UK to address energy investment shortfalls – but without noting the need for energy investment to match the global Climate Agreement concluded in Paris in December and signed last month.

James Nix, Director of Green Budget Europe, said: “The Commission strangely stops half way it does press Member States to enhance their energy systems, but ignores the vital need that the resulting investment advances Europe’s transition to low-carbon energy, and delivers the Paris Climate Agreement.”

Green Budget Europe (GBE) say the EU doesn’t have the time – or money – to miss further reform opportunities to implement the Paris Climate Agreement. Nix added that a central provision of the Paris Agreement, to “make financial flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development” can only be made real by phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and shifting taxes from labour to pollution and non-renewable. He also said the Commission’s European Semester process must get behind the EU’s transition to clean energy, climate action and the circular economy.

GBE said: “Tax shift can help consolidate national budgets in a cost-efficient way while cutting the EU’s stubbornly high unemployment rate of 8.8 per cent hand in hand with the bloc’s 53.2 per cent level of energy dependence and the Commission has a much greater role to play in this.”

Nix added: “Environmental taxation across Member States is slipping, going down from 6.8 per cent in 2004 to 6.3 per cent in 2014. Labour taxes continue to make up more than half of total tax revenue (53.3 per cent) in the Euro zone while carbon emissions increased in 2015.”

Latvia is the only country requested to undertake “a growth-friendly tax shift towards environmental and property taxes”. And so, looked at overall, the 2016 Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) miss the opportunity to deploy environmental taxation to boost investment and employment on the one hand, while delivering benefits for climate, environment and resource use on the other.

Three countries, France, Lithuania and Ireland, were asked to broaden their tax base, with France and Lithuania encouraged to raise VAT to achieve this. Nix said: “Yet VAT is more regressive and less growth-friendly than shifting tax to pollution and non-renewables. It is not clear why environmental tax reform is being largely overlooked by the Commission, particularly when it fits so well with EU priorities.”

The Commission used its Country Reports, documents which run around 100 pages per country, rather than country-specific recommendations, to highlight four countries (Austria, Belgium, Ireland, and Luxembourg) lagging behind on climate. Similarly, four countries are at risk of missing the renewables targets (Belgium, Ireland, Luxembourg and Netherlands). Eight member states – Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and the UK – need to step up energy efficiency measures.

While the Country Reports identify 21 EU member states with potential for environmental tax reforms, 14 states that need to phase out environmentally harmful subsidies, and another 18 that should act on Circular Economy, there were, with the exception of Latvia, no country-specific recommendations to advance such reform.

Constanze Adolf, Vice Director of GBE, said: “Finance Ministers have a key role in implementing the Paris Agreement. The Semester needs to be re-framed to help Finance Ministers and Member States transition to a low-carbon Europe and deliver the agreement reached in Paris.”


Will Self-Driving Cars Be Better for the Environment?



self-driving cars for green environment
Shutterstock Licensed Photo - By Zapp2Photo |

Technologists, engineers, lawmakers, and the general public have been excitedly debating about the merits of self-driving cars for the past several years, as companies like Waymo and Uber race to get the first fully autonomous vehicles on the market. Largely, the concerns have been about safety and ethics; is a self-driving car really capable of eliminating the human errors responsible for the majority of vehicular accidents? And if so, who’s responsible for programming life-or-death decisions, and who’s held liable in the event of an accident?

But while these questions continue being debated, protecting people on an individual level, it’s worth posing a different question: how will self-driving cars impact the environment?

The Big Picture

The Department of Energy attempted to answer this question in clear terms, using scientific research and existing data sets to project the short-term and long-term environmental impact that self-driving vehicles could have. Its findings? The emergence of self-driving vehicles could essentially go either way; it could reduce energy consumption in transportation by as much as 90 percent, or increase it by more than 200 percent.

That’s a margin of error so wide it might as well be a total guess, but there are too many unknown variables to form a solid conclusion. There are many ways autonomous vehicles could influence our energy consumption and environmental impact, and they could go well or poorly, depending on how they’re adopted.

Driver Reduction?

One of the big selling points of autonomous vehicles is their capacity to reduce the total number of vehicles—and human drivers—on the road. If you’re able to carpool to work in a self-driving vehicle, or rely on autonomous public transportation, you’ll spend far less time, money, and energy on your own car. The convenience and efficiency of autonomous vehicles would therefore reduce the total miles driven, and significantly reduce carbon emissions.

There’s a flip side to this argument, however. If autonomous vehicles are far more convenient and less expensive than previous means of travel, it could be an incentive for people to travel more frequently, or drive to more destinations they’d otherwise avoid. In this case, the total miles driven could actually increase with the rise of self-driving cars.

As an added consideration, the increase or decrease in drivers on the road could result in more or fewer vehicle collisions, respectively—especially in the early days of autonomous vehicle adoption, when so many human drivers are still on the road. Car accident injury cases, therefore, would become far more complicated, and the roads could be temporarily less safe.


Deadheading is a term used in trucking and ridesharing to refer to miles driven with an empty load. Assume for a moment that there’s a fleet of self-driving vehicles available to pick people up and carry them to their destinations. It’s a convenient service, but by necessity, these vehicles will spend at least some of their time driving without passengers, whether it’s spent waiting to pick someone up or en route to their location. The increase in miles from deadheading could nullify the potential benefits of people driving fewer total miles, or add to the damage done by their increased mileage.

Make and Model of Car

Much will also depend on the types of cars equipped to be self-driving. For example, Waymo recently launched a wave of self-driving hybrid minivans, capable of getting far better mileage than a gas-only vehicle. If the majority of self-driving cars are electric or hybrids, the environmental impact will be much lower than if they’re converted from existing vehicles. Good emissions ratings are also important here.

On the other hand, the increased demand for autonomous vehicles could put more pressure on factory production, and make older cars obsolete. In that case, the gas mileage savings could be counteracted by the increased environmental impact of factory production.

The Bottom Line

Right now, there are too many unanswered questions to make a confident determination whether self-driving vehicles will help or harm the environment. Will we start driving more, or less? How will they handle dead time? What kind of models are going to be on the road?

Engineers and the general public are in complete control of how this develops in the near future. Hopefully, we’ll be able to see all the safety benefits of having autonomous vehicles on the road, but without any of the extra environmental impact to deal with.

Continue Reading


New Zealand to Switch to Fully Renewable Energy by 2035



renewable energy policy
Shutterstock Licensed Photo - By Eviart /

New Zealand’s prime minister-elect Jacinda Ardern is already taking steps towards reducing the country’s carbon footprint. She signed a coalition deal with NZ First in October, aiming to generate 100% of the country’s energy from renewable sources by 2035.

New Zealand is already one of the greenest countries in the world, sourcing over 80% of its energy for its 4.7 million people from renewable resources like hydroelectric, geothermal and wind. The majority of its electricity comes from hydro-power, which generated 60% of the country’s energy in 2016. Last winter, renewable generation peaked at 93%.

Now, Ardern is taking on the challenge of eliminating New Zealand’s remaining use of fossil fuels. One of the biggest obstacles will be filling in the gap left by hydropower sources during dry conditions. When lake levels drop, the country relies on gas and coal to provide energy. Eliminating fossil fuels will require finding an alternative source to avoid spikes in energy costs during droughts.

Business NZ’s executive director John Carnegie told Bloomberg he believes Ardern needs to balance her goals with affordability, stating, “It’s completely appropriate to have a focus on reducing carbon emissions, but there needs to be an open and transparent public conversation about the policies and how they are delivered.”

The coalition deal outlined a few steps towards achieving this, including investing more in solar, which currently only provides 0.1% of the country’s energy. Ardern’s plans also include switching the electricity grid to renewable energy, investing more funds into rail transport, and switching all government vehicles to green fuel within a decade.

Zero net emissions by 2050

Beyond powering the country’s electricity grid with 100% green energy, Ardern also wants to reach zero net emissions by 2050. This ambitious goal is very much in line with her focus on climate change throughout the course of her campaign. Environmental issues were one of her top priorities from the start, which increased her appeal with young voters and helped her become one of the youngest world leaders at only 37.

Reaching zero net emissions would require overcoming challenging issues like eliminating fossil fuels in vehicles. Ardern hasn’t outlined a plan for reaching this goal, but has suggested creating an independent commission to aid in the transition to a lower carbon economy.

She also set a goal of doubling the number of trees the country plants per year to 100 million, a goal she says is “absolutely achievable” using land that is marginal for farming animals.

Greenpeace New Zealand climate and energy campaigner Amanda Larsson believes that phasing out fossil fuels should be a priority for the new prime minister. She says that in order to reach zero net emissions, Ardern “must prioritize closing down coal, putting a moratorium on new fossil fuel plants, building more wind infrastructure, and opening the playing field for household and community solar.”

A worldwide shift to renewable energy

Addressing climate change is becoming more of a priority around the world and many governments are assessing how they can reduce their reliance on fossil fuels and switch to environmentally-friendly energy sources. Sustainable energy is becoming an increasingly profitable industry, giving companies more of an incentive to invest.

Ardern isn’t alone in her climate concerns, as other prominent world leaders like Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron have made renewable energy a focus of their campaigns. She isn’t the first to set ambitious goals, either. Sweden and Norway share New Zealand’s goal of net zero emissions by 2045 and 2030, respectively.

Scotland already sources more than half of its electricity from renewable sources and aims to fully transition by 2020, while France announced plans in September to stop fossil fuel production by 2040. This would make it the first country to do so, and the first to end the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles.

Many parts of the world still rely heavily on coal, but if these countries are successful in phasing out fossil fuels and transitioning to renewable resources, it could serve as a turning point. As other world leaders see that switching to sustainable energy is possible – and profitable – it could be the start of a worldwide shift towards environmentally-friendly energy.


Continue Reading