Search

Global firms are increasingly adopting greenhouse gas mitigation targets in response to climate change. These targets serve as a spur for carbon mitigation initiatives, provide guidelines to select appropriate mitigation actions, and set the standards to measure the progress of the mitigation efforts. Despite their important functionalities, firm-level mitigation targets have rarely been studied. In this paper we aim to provide a comparative view on mitigation targets set by global firms across different countries and industrial sectors. The analysis focuses on four dimensions, i.e., adoption, metric, scope, and stringency. We find Japan far leads the other major countries in terms of target adoption, but the targets of Japanese firms are generally less stringent. Canadian firms are laggards in both target adoption and target stringency. The mitigation targets are also considerably uncommon among Australian firms. Firms in developing countries fall behind in target stringency and display a significantly greater divergence than developed countries in sectoral adoption rate. The European Union firms are most likely to cover the emissions in their supply chains in targets. Target stringency has substantially tightened from 2005 to 2012. For all the countries in this study, around 95% of the firm-level targets are more stringent than the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions submitted to the Paris Agreement. Setting mitigation target has a significant positive impact on both the likelihood of investing in renewable energy and the amount of investment in renewable energy. However, there is no evidence that more stringent targets lead to higher investment. These findings point to the most pressing issues with regard to corporate mitigation target-setting that policymakers and corporate management should address. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union launched a set of policies as part of its 2020 climate and energy package aimed at meeting its 20/20/20 headline targets for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. This paper evaluates how successful new-to-the-market climate change mitigation technologies (CCMT) are in helping EU member states (MS) reach these goals and, furthermore, whether there are differences between sectors subject to EU-wide polices. To do so, we relate CCMT patent counts to two specific headline targets: (1) achieving 20% of gross final energy consumption from renewables, and (2) achieving a 20% increase in energy efficiency. Our results provide the first ex-post evaluation of the effectiveness of these technologies for combating climate change. Moreover, our sectoral impact assessment points to significant differences in the way in which these technologies contribute to policy goals across the sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anthropogenic global climate change has large and mounting negative economic impacts. Companies and nations responsible for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are thus acquiring considerable potential liabilities. If litigation becomes widespread, renewable energy technologies (RETs) potentially offer emitters reduced liability for climate change. This benefit has been ignored because of the lack of knowledge of potential liabilities. To overcome this information deficit, this paper reviews recent literature on the potential for climate change litigation and methods to quantify liability for climate change. Next, the top 10 emitters in the U.S. are identified and their potential liability is quantified using standard GHG emission costs. Potential liabilities are explored in depth with a single case study company comparing the results of the fractional liability from only natural disasters within the U.S. for a single year to a sensitivity of the future costs of carbon emissions from other sources of emission-related liability. Then classes of potential climate change litigants are identified and their capacity to bring such lawsuits is evaluated. The results show that the net income available to shareholders of large companies could see a significant reduction from the emissions liability related to only natural disasters in the U.S. from a single coal-fired power plant. Finally, a rough estimate of the economic risk associated with future scenarios and existing organized international potential litigants is quantified. The results show that potential liability for climate change for the Alliance of Small Island States is over $570 trillion. It is concluded that as emitters begin to be held liable for damages resulting from GHG emissions resulting in climate change, a high value for liability mitigation would provide additional powerful incentives for deployment of renewable energy technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Space-based geoengineering is gaining attention, if not necessarily traction, as a possible "break the glass" solution to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change and facilitate the transition to a low-carbon future. Though still on the periphery of discussions around climate mitigation and geoengineering, space-based methods that would deflect or block incoming sunlight, and thereby diminish how much radiation ultimately reaches the Earth, could offer advantages, notably, by avoiding the need for difficult trade-offs and decisions in terms of land and resource use on Earth. Aside from a few specialist-oriented studies, the literature on space-based geoengineering remains limited. In this study, we utilize a large and diverse expert-interview exercise (N = 125) to provide a first critical examination of the promise and relevance of space-based geoengineering for tackling climate change, including perhaps as a source of renewable energy, its feasibility and prospective risks, as well as key actors and issues related to commercialization and governance. To our knowledge, no other study has employed empirical data of any kind to examine perceptions of space-based geoengineering, let alone in relation to other kinds of climate-intervention technologies. Not only does the current research represent the first of its kind, it also provides a foundation for more informed, comprehensive deliberations around this interesting, possibly even necessary solution to climate change. • Space-based solar geoengineering is a radical proposal for tackling climate change. • No study has so far employed empirical data to explore perceptions of space-based proposals. • Our data is derived from a diverse set of 125 original interviews with key experts. • The promise, feasibility, and risks for climate mitigation are critically examined. • We also engage with the potential of sunshades to provide significant amounts of renewable energy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Space-based geoengineering is gaining attention, if not necessarily traction, as a possible "break the glass" solution to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change and facilitate the transition to a low-carbon future. Though still on the periphery of discussions around climate mitigation and geoengineering, space-based methods that would deflect or block incoming sunlight, and thereby diminish how much radiation ultimately reaches the Earth, could offer advantages, notably, by avoiding the need for difficult trade-offs and decisions in terms of land and resource use on Earth. Aside from a few specialist-oriented studies, the literature on space-based geoengineering remains limited. In this study, we utilize a large and diverse expert-interview exercise (N = 125) to provide a first critical examination of the promise and relevance of space-based geoengineering for tackling climate change, including perhaps as a source of renewable energy, its feasibility and prospective risks, as well as key actors and issues related to commercialization and governance. To our knowledge, no other study has employed empirical data of any kind to examine perceptions of space-based geoengineering, let alone in relation to other kinds of climate-intervention technologies. Not only does the current research represent the first of its kind, it also provides a foundation for more informed, comprehensive deliberations around this interesting, possibly even necessary solution to climate change. • Space-based solar geoengineering is a radical proposal for tackling climate change. • No study has so far employed empirical data to explore perceptions of space-based proposals. • Our data is derived from a diverse set of 125 original interviews with key experts. • The promise, feasibility, and risks for climate mitigation are critically examined. • We also engage with the potential of sunshades to provide significant amounts of renewable energy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Renewable energy plays a crucial role in both climate change mitigation and adaptation in highly climate-vulnerable nations such as Nepal. This paper reviews various types of renewable energy technologies and their status, potential for adoption, relationship to climate change, and mitigative and adaptive roles in Nepal. Nepal has installed micro-hydro projects, solar power, improved cooking stoves, biogas technology, improved water mills, and wind energy to mitigate and adapt to climate change. There is a growing potential for renewable energy development in Nepal, such as hydropower, solar, wind energy, biogas, and improved cooking stoves. Roughly 70% of Nepal's energy consumption is generated from traditional energy sources while renewable energy accounts for approximately three percent. The gradual increase in the use of renewable energy has reduced greenhouse gas emissions and enhanced carbon sequestration. By adopting renewable energy technologies, Nepal has reduced emissions by 221,129 tCO 2 e from 2017 to 2018. Nepal's second Nationally Determined Contribution targets a 15% increase in national energy use from renewables with a reduction of 23% of CO 2 emissions by 2030 using biogas and improved cooking systems. Furthermore, a significant increase in the adoption of renewable energy has become a pivotal strategy in adaptation to climate change in social, health, and economic sectors resulting in time savings, alternative income sources, improved health and educational status, local job opportunities, and the promotion of social capital. The benefits of adapting to climate change and mitigating CO 2 emissions via renewable energy are significant at the local, national, and international levels. This study recommends that the government of Nepal focus work on energy policy reviews to address local energy demand and climate change issues by utilizing renewable energy resources at the local level, which has global implications. • Suitable, potential renewable energy technologies in Nepal. • The relationship between energy and climate change. • Relevant data on energy and climate change in tables and figures. • Social, economic, and environmental benefits of renewable energy. • Climate change adaptation and mitigation via renewable energy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]