Global green energy push likely to continue despite Trump climate retreat: UN

6 comments

1. From the article: Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement should not slow the global momentum towards renewable energy investments that the deal created, the UN said Wednesday.
   “I believe that many countries will continue moving in the direction of green energy,” said Celeste Saulo, head of the United Nations’ World Meteorological Organization weather and climate agency.

   As he took office on Monday, President Trump announced the US withdrawal from the 2015 Paris accord adopted by 195 parties to curb greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change.

   Critics warn that the move undermines global cooperation on reducing fossil fuel use and could weaken other countries’ commitments to climate action.

   But WMO chief Saulo said in a joint interview with AFP and Reuters she did not believe the US exit would slow what are turning out to be profitable investments in green energy.

   The shift towards renewable energy sources “is ongoing and… brings wealth to the countries”, she said on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in the Swiss ski resort town of Davos.

   “That will not change.”

   She did not “expect people to move away from investments that are really very profitable and at the same time are green initiatives.

   “I think that the move and the momentum that started with the Paris Agreement is there.”

2. We will be left behind with respect to innovation

3. My question is (which I should research more) what’s the impact on incentivizing companies to do climate risk assessments, tracking Scope 3 emissions, supplier engagement targets.

   I’m sure companies see green energy as a strong way to future proof their business, but will momentum to take these steps slow down over the next 4 years

4. To my engineer brain, this has always been a fairly simple calculation. There are definitely businesses that has PR departments that are putting great PR spins on their environmentalism (green washing) – but in the end, ALL private business is here to make money and increase shareholder value. Industry will do whatever industry can do to maximize profits. If that option involves renewable energy, they will PR the hell out of it, but it’s something they would have went for anyway as a least cost alternative. What has been incredible to me is the rapid scale up of solar and corresponding price decrease per kW. It is at the point where it may be more economically viable to install solar + batteries in *some* circumstances. And as those circumstances continue to grow in scale (more demand) and as technology improves and is scalable (cheaper), then more and more solar gets installed. But it’s not about the ethics of it for the private industry. It’s about the profits. Least cost rules, always has.

5. Although the Trump administration is anti-wind and anti-solar, they did include several zero-carbon options they would support. These are geothermal power, hydropower, and nuclear power. Might as well proceed with developing those. All three scale and would be worth pursuing. Yes this is the energy equivalent of making lemonade when you get lemons.

6. Green energy is already over the summit of the initial mountain of resistance. The rest of the world will move forward eventually forcing the US to buy foreign technology just to stay relevant.

Comments are closed.