Two steps forward, one step back: The arduous transition to a low-carbon society

1. Two steps forward, one step back: The arduous transition to a low-carbon society Prof. Frank W. Geels MIoIR and Sustainable Consumption Institute University of Manchester 2ndLundvall symposium (Aalborg 14-15 March, 2013)

2. Kind of paper • Empirical assessment of how far/fast the transition process is unfolding • Interpreting/assessing various data-sources • ‘Big picture’ assessment: -No in-depth analysis of technology and industry. - But wider political, cultural, economic issues

3. Structure 1. Introduction 2. Multi-level perspective 3. Empirical assessment 3.1. Renewable electricity in Europe 3.2. Incumbent regimes (gas, coal, nuclear) 4. Conclusions

4. 1. Introduction European climate change targets • 60-80% GHG reduction by 2050 • 20% GHG reduction by 2020: Already achieved (mainly because of offshoring + coal  gas) • 20% renewable energy by 2020: Good progress

6. But …. worldwide CO2 emissions rising fast

7. Aim Assess progress and setbacks in the transition to renewable electricity 1) Drivers of renewable options 2) Stability of existing regimes (coal, gas, nuclear) Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) as analytical framework

8. 2. Multi-level perspective (MLP)

9. Transition dynamics

10. 3. Empirical assessment 3.1. Renewable electricity in Europe 3.2. Incumbent regimes in UK (gas, coal, nuclear)

11. 3.1. Renewable electricity in Europe From 12.2% in 1990 to 19.6% in 2010: - Old renewables (hydro, biomass/wood) - New renewables (wind, solar, biogas)

12. High country variation within EU

13. Expansion in EU capacity in wind and solar-PV (in gigawatts)

14. Driving factors • Rising public concerns climate change after 2005 • Favourable policies, e.g. generous feed-in tariffs • Price/performance improvements in wind turbines and PV-modules (China) 4) Green stimulus packages + Rising (global) financial investments

15. Green stimulus (2009): $522 billion Varying country commitments - Korea + China - UK low green stimulus

16. Global investment in renewable energy by asset class (in $billion) (Frankfurt School and Bloomberg Finance, 2012)

17. Most investments (£billion) in Europe(Frankfurt School, 2012)

18. Possible setbacks (weakening drivers)

19. 1) Declining public attentionPercentage ranking ‘environment/pollution’ as one of the most important issues facing Britain (IpsosMori, May, 2012)

20. Percentage ranking ‘economy’ as one of the most important issues facing Britain (Ipsos Mori, May, 2012)

21. Weakening public attention for climate change(UK newspaper counts of ‘climate change’ as rough proxy)

22. 2) Weakening policies • a) Reductions in feed-in tariffs (UK, Germany, Spain, Italy) • b) No successor of Kyoto; no international action until 2020 • c) On-going government subsidies for fossil fuels($500-1000 billion per year) • d) Green stimulus packages winding down (2011-2012) • (Korea downscaled government R&D on green options by 80% in 2012)

23. e) EU ETS is not delivering (= flagship EU policy tool)Carbon price: low, decreasing, fluctuating

24. 3) Decreasing world-wide renewable energy investment in 2012 ($billion)

25. Intermediate conclusion • Substantial progress in ‘new’ renewables. • But momentum appears to be weakening

26. 3.2. Existing UK regimes (gas, coal, nuclear) Fuel input to electricity generation

27. Natural gas • Utilities ‘dash for gas’ in 1990s (replacing coal) • Gas/oil prices rise in 2000s

28. Utilities use more coal (1999-2006) • 2005: Government concerned about energy security, affordability + climate change • Shift in government priorities 2003 White Paper (Our Energy Future) embraced renewables 2007 White Paper (Meeting The Energy Challenge) proposes: CCS (for gas and coal), nuclear and renewables • 2012: Shale gas revolution + plans for 40 gas-fired power stations

29. Nuclear power • Disappeared from agenda after 1990 privatization (waste problem + high costs) • 2003 White Paper confirms: ‘no nuclear’ • Nuclear re-appears around 2005 (Blair): a) Nuclear framed as ‘low-carbon’ option (climate change) b) Nuclear enhances energy security • Blair ‘consults’ (2006), but says he will not listen • Government highly committed, but utilities and investors hesitant, because of uncertainties (cost, decommissioning cost, waste liabilities) • Plans to ‘subsidize’ nuclear despite earlier promises not to

30. Coal • On its way out in 1990s: dash for gas, acid rain regulation, climate change • But coal reappears by 2004/5 • Utilities use more coal because of rising gas price. Applications for new power stations since 2008; delayed procedures • Concerns about energy security (gas prices, Russian gas)  government recommits to coal • promise of CCS legitimates ‘clean’ coal. Government announces £1 billion for demonstration project (2007). But …. last consortium pulled out in 2011. • No concrete CCS activity • New promise of ‘capture ready’ (risk of lock-in)

31. 4. Conclusions • Substantial European progress in green electricity • But drivers are weakening • Renewables face uphill struggle against regimes, and likely to diffuse slowly • Regimes (coal, gas, nuclear) relatively stable, because of commitment from government and industry • Climate change only one consideration amongst others (energy security, affordability, diversity, return on investment) • Major risks with UK government low-carbon strategy (CCS and nuclear promises may not materialize) • UK transition will be arduous and unlikely to accelerate in next 5-10 years.