2012 Elections: America's the bet on a green future

The elections are finally over.  No more annoying ads, no more negative talk, and no more infinite hours of political analysis and polls.  On election day, I said to my self that I was not going to spend the night checking the results. I was aware that there was nothing I could do and that by doing so I would only increase my anxiety.  Yes I must say I had a favorite.  A favorite that I picked simply because his opponent kept saying how much he liked coal and how he was going to stop the EPA from hurting this noble industry.

Romney got it wrong. He was wrong to bet on coal. He got the facts about green energy wrong.  He was wrong about the number of Solyndras that failed.  And the worst part is that he kept repeating his lies over and over again as if he had no one to help him corroborate the facts. Ironically, it is the market that has turned its back on coal which now only produces 37.3% of America's electricity, down from 49.8% just a few years ago. 

For his part, Obama is at least consistent.  He has bet on green energy like no other president.  He understands that fossil fuels are not the future and that if America wants to keep leading, green is the way to go.  As a result, clean energies are growing at record levels and CO₂ emissions resulting from energy use are the lowest in two decades. 

The biggest winner in this election is America's green energy future. This won't mean that an energy revolution is to come in the next four years, but rather that our use of coal and oil will continue to decrease as we invest more in research and development of green energies. 

  

  

The Kyoto Protocol: Does it have a Future?

Canadian Citizens demostrate at the venue of climate change talks in cancun, December 2010
From: the National post 

In less than a month, the 17 Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the UN Climate Change Conference will be held in South Africa in order to reach a legally binding agreement for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. So far, the only agreement that seems to exist between the parts is that once Kyoto ends, there will be a regulatory gap, and it looks like most developed countries are content to let this happen.

We must remember, Kyoto’s due date is December 2012 and even if an agreement is reached in COP 17, the document must be ratified for the United Nation countries, which in Kyoto’s case took 7 years.

One reason for this “lack of agreement” is that Canada, Japan, Russia and the US will not enter a second phase that doesn’t treat all current “major emitters” similarly. The current document gives reduction targets only to developed nations, which excludes major polluters like China and India. “It is too early for biding obligations. Our view is it would have to include all the major players –China, India, Brazil and South Africa” said Todd Stern, the US’ Special Envoy for Climate Change. These states are “not ready to have international, legally-binding obligations” he added.   

Without the Kyoto protocol, the Clean Development Mechanism (CMD) also faces a dark future. The Clean Development Mechanism allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one ton of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets.¹

The Global Carbon Market has already stopped growing, in part because of the financial crisis, and in part because of Kyoto’s failing negotiations. On the other hand CER markets have suffered a significant loss of 48% in 2010.

It is my belief that this crisis may bring better solutions to reduce GHGemissions, because even though the Kyoto protocol and its carbon markets had a noble purpose, they have been proven to fail over time. The emission targets aren’t high enough and there isn’t a good way to prove that the targets were reached. The good news is that in the US the EPAis moving forward with its GreenhouseTailoring rule and in the EU the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will be valid until 2020. Both regions are more likely to create a more stringent regulation of GHG (which in the US has just begun), more likely with taxation and away from Carbon Markets.