Green hypocrisy: Still kicking the ladder

Under the guise of benevolent greenie-speak, governments of developed countries are once again pushing for old-school protectionist industrial policies as they see their technological advance crumbling vis-a-vis the emerging countries.

While developed countries engage in esotheric greenie-speak despite being the largest per capita polluters, emerging countries have embarked on an impressive industrial upgrading towards innovative, R&D intensive energy sectors: Within ten years, India-based Suzlon Energy has become the largest wind turbine manufacturer in Asia (5th in worldwide). In 2009, China has overtaken Denmark, Germany, Spain and the US in the production of wind turbines, increasing her installed wind power capacity almost 25 fold in only 4 years. China has also leapfrogged the West in two years to become the largest manufacturer of solar panels.

In response, EU and US have adopted a hypocritical and highly inconsistent stance, calling for protection in face of increased (free market) competition. Months ago, Sarko called for "carbon tariffs" to prevent carbon leakage, thereby forcing emerging countries to adopt more sustainable manufacturing (de facto stifling its manufacturing by imposing tight regulation). Not only has this populist (and by the way WTO non-compliant) call been supported by Stiglitz beginning this year. Only two days ago, the French have renewed their calls for a "carbon tariff", underlining its importance in fighting global climate change. Similarly, "Lord" Turner (head of UK climate change committee) has likewise called for a levy against cheap (Asian) imports to stimulate the transition to a green economy. Just today, Germany's green party even openly called for protectionism against Chinese solar imports.

Most proponents of first-world protectionism, however, have been much more subtle, and it is amusing to see how yes-we-can greenie-speak is employed to disguise policies that are, at the end of the day, deeply nationalistic and run against the neoclassical free trade ideology. Of course, this kicking away the ladder-mentality is nothing new to the developed world. Nevertheless, it will be very interesting to see how the developed world will bend its own WTO rules to implement yet another round of ladder kicking (see image).

Third Industrial Revolution

The concept of a Third Industrial Revolution, i.e. the idea that we are entering a period in history, in which we need to restructure the oil-dependent energy system and counter the consequences of climate change was put forward by the American economist, “professional protester” and president of the Foundation on Economic Trends Jeremy Rifkin.

Rifkin puts reminds that when new energy regimes converge with new communication regimes groundbreaking economic changes occur, e.g. the combination of coal powered steam technology and the printing press in the 19th century. The IT and renewable energy technologies have in this sense the potential to initiate a new sustainable economic structure

The four pillars of this Third Industrial Revolution are:

1. Renewable energy
2. Buildings as positive power plants
3. Hydrogen storage
4. Smart grids and Plug-in Vehicles

In “Leading the Way to the Third Industrial Revolution and a New Social Europe in the 21st Century”, Rifkin praises the leading role of the EU in making renewable energy investments and creating jobs in this sector. (Europe has pledged to reach 20% energy supply of renewables by 2020.) Since buildings are “the major contributor to human induced global warming”, reforming the infrastructure is a an essential tool or reducing energy use. Commercial and private buildings can be converted into “positive power plants”, which generate energy from sun, wind, ocean tides and waves, etc. on their own.

In order to make renewable energy reliable, energy from infrequent sources needs to be converted and stored. The hydrogen technology offers a viable solution to the storage problem. The forth pillar in the Third Industrial Revolution Master Plan foresees that the existing internet lines across Europe are used for the implementation of the European power grid. This smart grid will be bi-directional: allowing households and firms to produce their own energy, sell it in times of excess and buy in times of shortage. It would be then possible to measure energy use in peaks and lulls and also adapt the price, which would induce further energy saving incentives.

What Rifkin seems to be condemned for his criticism of meat consumption and warnings about the use of GMO technology as well the implementation of other untested technologies. This has led the Time calling him “the most hated man in science”. The United States definitely needs a critic like Jeremy Rifkin, who would point out environmental and justice problems, especially in times when genetical engineering has gained a sense of normality. 

Europeans are sometimes skeptical about his American ways (maybe implying his open and outspoken public speaking that they interpret as lack of modesty). His straightforwardness and clarity is however something we can all learn from. His useful insights on Europe remind of the challenge in maintaining the previous standard of living, advancing Europe’s energy security and establishing a business model that conforms with the sustainability goals.

Links...

http://thirdindustrialrevolution.ning.com/

http://foet.org/global-column.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,959181,00.html