TL: ENERGY: A NEW DEAL FOR THE WORLD SO: John Willis, Greenpeace International, (GP) DT: October 23, 1994 Keywords: energy atmosphere alternatives / "Peace, development, and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible." - AGENDA 21, Principle 25 "Nobody doubts that renewable energy sources will one day take over from fossil fuels." - The Economist, 18 June 1994 "'Atoms for Peace' are today the major potential source of 'Atoms for War'." - S. David Freeman, President and Chief Operating Officer, New York Power Authority, in Nuclear Engineering International, October 1994 1. THE NEED FOR A 'NEW DEAL ON ENERGY' Summary 1.1 The energy systems of the world are as fundamental to human life as agriculture and industry; access to adequate energy services is a factor central to peace, economic and social development, and environmental sustainability. In the industrial world of the late twentieth-century, "we have to recognise that economics is the hard core of society, and energy is the hard core of economy". 1.2 The overwhelming importance of energy in modern society is demonstrated by its role in many serious global problems. Poverty, insecurity and ecological decline can all be traced in part to the global dependency on fossil and nuclear fuel -- non- renewable fuels which are unequally distributed and environmentally damaging. The 'development' programme of trying to build economies in 'the South' on the same unstable energy basis as the industrial countries has shown clearly that the traditional energy path is a trail of broken promises. For developing countries, it has secured not 'sustainable development', but deindustrialisation through debt, obsolescence, heavy pollution, and application of inappropriate technologies to human needs. 1.3 Conventional energy 'solutions' have undermined the developing nations' prosperity and ability to raise the standard of living of citizens. Conventional energy 'solutions', in fact, have shown the poverty of the western industrial system as the very model of 'development'. In the words of one European Union official speaking about the transfer of the western development model to all parts of the globe, "an effective programme for a civilisation to commit suicide is working well". 1.4 Radically-improved end-use efficiency of energy, and a shift to commercial renewable energy technologies such as biomass, solar, tidal and wind is the only practical means to achieve energy self-sufficiency for the developing world and reverse the crippling balance-of-payments flow from South to North that has built up due to conventional energy infrastructure. Energy efficiency and techniques to exploit renewable energy can lay foundations for improved standards of living worldwide, sustainable energy use for present and future generations, elimination of nuclear risk, and a reduction of military tensions. It is the only viable response to the disastrous impact of the western energy model on the environment and human beings. It is the only viable path to a self-sufficient industrial base for the developing nations. The alternative is to simply accelerate ourselves head on into the immovable ecological limits of the planet. POVERTY & DEBT: Energy for De-Industrialisation 1.5 The provision of energy services influences general prosperity directly, by providing heating, lighting, and motive power for health-care, education, industry, government, and transportation. As well, energy systems are key determinants of macro-economic prosperity through their impact on balances of payments, labour markets, productive efficiencies, and capital requirements. Levels of general prosperity -- through factors such as education and health-care for women -- are correlated with birth rates, and thus energy services can also have a definable effect on increasing or decreasing population pressure. 1.6 Armed with the firm belief that the only model of development is that of the west, economic development agencies and industrialists have poured billions into new power plants, oil refineries, and electricity grids in the developing nations. Development banks led by the World Bank spent over $20 billion/year on energy projects in the developing nations in the 1980s. Globally, about 15% of all investment goes to energy projects. 1.7 So what has gone so terribly wrong? Clearly over the past two decades the plight of many in developing nations has grown worse. In spite of a 4-fold increase in primary energy consumption in non-OECD nations since 1960, the income gap between the richest fifth of the world and the poorest fifth has doubled, reaching 60:1 today. During the same period, per capita energy use doubled in the developing nations, but close to a billion people still do not have basic energy services. Increasing poverty during a boom in energy consumption is not supposed to happen. According to conventional wisdom, more energy should equal more prosperity. 1.8 The reasons are not difficult to discover: The 'energy solutions' that have been promoted, and often imposed, by the industrial nations are finite, unequally distributed, and inappropriate for many people's needs. Unequal distribution, whether of fossil and nuclear fuels or of the technology to use them, reinforces the dependence of developing countries on foreign suppliers who expect payment in foreign currency. Furthermore, fuel costs are a large fraction of the total cost of conventional energy systems, and when the fuel is burned, the debt repayments begin. Centralised large electrical grids built around enormous nuclear or fossil power stations have simply failed to meet the needs of many of the poorest rural people. Thus it was precisely the 'conventional wisdom' for meeting the developing world's energy requirements that contributed to worsening poverty and deindustrialisation. 1.9 Many developing nations are now deeply embedded in a debt- spiral to pay off the banks who provided financing to build up the fossil and nuclear infrastructure. Some nations are paying up to 50% of their enormous debt-service payments for conventional energy projects developed during the 1970s and 1980s. Often the slice of GDP devoted to energy-related foreign debt dwarfs incoming development aid by as much as 2000%. This bleeds huge amounts of financial capital from the South, diverting resources from improvements in welfare, industrial productivity, and environmental protection of agricultural or coastal zones. In the 1980s, no less than 25% of debt-servicing from South to North was due to energy projects. 1.10 Yet, despite these huge capital flows, inadequate and intermittent delivery of energy services remains a serious problem in nations that are most entrenched in the commercial energy system: Brazil, India, Pakistan, Taiwan, and so on. Lack of usable, delivered power undermines economies directly, reducing the quality of output, motivating investment in 'standby' generators, and driving industries to relocate to regions where good supplies are assured. This occurs because all available capital has been expended to construct a centralised energy infrastructure that requires imported parts and skills, and 'squeezes out' indigenous energy solutions. 1.11 Nuclear power, promised to the developing world in the Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT, 1970), has proved itself completely incapable of addressing any of the real energy needs of developing nations. Today over 95% of all nuclear power is in the OECD and former COMECON countries. Economic costs have driven new orders so low that the industry's future is seriously in doubt. For nations which did adopt nuclear power such as Brazil, Mexico, Taiwan, and South Korea, the financial and macroeconomic penalties have been extremely severe. Because nuclear power is an expensive imported technology for most nations, it generates capital outflow and fails to benefit the domestic economy. Moreover, nuclear power actually works against the achievement of energy self- sufficiency, by diverting human and financial resources from appropriate end-use technologies, improved efficiency and transmission, and delivery of services. 1.12 The 'energy deal' which the Nuclear Weapons States (NWSs) offered in the NPT was that everyone else should forego possession of nuclear weapons in return for inexpensive electricity from nuclear reactors. This arrangement has managed to multiply the energy debt load of the developing world, increase anxiety about weapons proliferation, and pose insoluble problems of nuclear safety and radioactive waste management. What it has not managed to do is benefit anyone but the western nuclear industry. 1.13 The western 'experts' promised the developing world cheap energy if they followed the conventional wisdom. But the price per unit of energy is much less relevant than whether it must be imported and paid for in foreign currency. Lost opportunity for domestic economic activity is the real cost of artificially- inexpensive imported energy. Financed by multilateral bank lending, this 'import penalty' has turned out to be very harsh indeed for many nations. In effect, we have been witnessing the transfer of public funds from the wealthy industrialised nations to developing countries, so that they can be sent right back -- with interest -- as profits to oil, coal, and nuclear industries and interest to multilateral banks beholden to the OECD. There are economic benefits of the conventional energy path, but they don't accrue to those who need them most. SECURITY & PROLIFERATION: Energy for Instability 1.14 All human societies need an assured and affordable supply of energy. Adequate and affordable energy services promote prosperity, which in turn underpins stability and international cooperation. The heavy reliance today on finite, unevenly- distributed fuels, especially oil, has created a world order in which gaining and maintaining access to energy supplies is a primary aim of military readiness. Since the early 1970s, 'security of supply' has dominated not just national energy policies, but international security as well. 1.15 America and its allies ostensibly fought the Gulf War in 1991 to maintain access to cheap oil. This is a spectacular instance of the resource-anxiety that is inherent in the commercial energy system today. The United States slowed its energy conservation efforts during the 1980s, allowing imports of oil from the Gulf to boom by 600% between 1985 and 1990. Assuring Kuwaiti supplies was not the sole aim of military action, however; it was aimed at maintaining a glut of oil on the market to ensure low prices. 1.17 Nuclear power, on the other hand, is often touted as a source of 'secure' energy on which a nation can rely from its own resources, because it is 'technology-intensive' rather than 'fuel-intensive'. But the linkage of civilian nuclear technology and nuclear weapons is as strong as ever. No reactor is 'proliferation-proof', because all fission reactors produce plutonium that is weapons-usable. Nuclear tensions, which are prone to quickly becoming international in scope, are manifest today in Asia and Europe thanks to continued plutonium separation from 'civil' spent fuel at reprocessing plants in the UK, France, and Japan. Long-term development of nuclear power would result in even larger stockpiles of weapons-usable plutonium, which would be constantly in commercial circulation. All nuclear nations claim their motivations are to achieve 'energy security' by reducing dependence on oil. Renewable energy for industrial development has received only a fraction of the resources that have been funnelled into nuclear technology, however, and if anything energy 'insecurity' has increased along with proliferation tension. 1.18 As energy demand grows and fossil fuels become more difficult and expensive to develop, attention may turn to more violent confrontations and the proliferation of more nuclear technology around the world. Any energy system that is reliant on finite fuels such as oil and coal is inherently 'insecure' -- chasing rising energy demand with dwindling high-cost fuels is guaranteed to destabilise international affairs, and answering this problem with nuclear power is like putting gasoline on an open flame. How much more secure could the world be if solar, tidal, and biomass energies were harnessed to the task of sustainable prosperity? ECOLOGICAL DESTRUCTION: Energy for an Unsustainable Future 1.20 The sharp rise in the use of fossil and nuclear fuels since World War II has shown how damaging energy production can be for local and regional ecosystems. The risk of nuclear disasters like Chernobyl, widespread acid rain and urban smog, and pollution of waterways from oil and coal production are prominent ecological problems in most parts of the world. These and other damages are costing billions in health care, lost agricultural and fisheries productivity, and end-of-pipe cleanups. Everyone in the world bears these costs, although the benefits flow mainly to wealthy nations. 1.21 The changes now evident in the Earth's atmosphere -- more frequent and destructive storms, flooding and drought -- are the first harbingers of cataclysmic global climate change on a scale never before witnessed by human beings. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has found that concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will cause rapid temperature increases, and that an increase in global temperature of only three degrees Celsius will produce ecological transformation so great as to overwhelm the human species' ability to adapt. Stabilising atmospheric greenhouse gases will require cuts of 60 - 80% worldwide. Carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels is of primary importance because of its huge contribution to the problem. 2. THE ENERGY DILEMMA: More with Less 2.1 The wealthy nations' historic energy consumption patterns optimised availability of 'cheap' fuel through legislated prices, subsidies, military intervention, and ignoring health and environmental impacts. This has benefitted the economic output of the few, while the costs have been paid by all, North and South, and especially the poor. We are now burdened with interlocking crises of sustainability in the global economy and the global commons. The future, unless radical change comes immediately, will be even worse. 2.2 With the urgent need to deliver basic services to impoverished regions, rapidly expanding economies and growing populations, large new demands for energy services will arise over the coming century, possibly doubling by the year 2020. This figure is only a global estimate, however; in fact this new energy demand will arise mainly in non-OECD countries, which, as a whole, is now growing at twice the rate of the OECD. Developing world energy demand could triple in the next quarter- century, eventually overtaking even the energy gluttons of industrialised nations. By the year 2020, based on a 'business- as-usual' model, the developing world could account for over 60% of global primary energy demand, compared with less than 25% today. 2.3 The debt spiral for developing countries will grow worse as competition for new capital intensifies, and as fossil and nuclear power become more costly under the pressure of environmental and non-proliferation controls. The concentration of scarce financial capital on large, centralised, electricity grids and oil production systems diverts resources from 'off- grid' electrical services to rural areas and development of cleaner indigenous fuels. Continued energy-service deprivation in rural areas is a mainspring of poverty, and poverty itself is a mainspring of migration to urban centres. Urbanisation in turn raises the demand for energy irrespective of population or economic growth. Thus the debt/energy spiral goes on. 2.4 The central 'energy dilemma' facing the world is that more energy services are desperately needed, and they are becoming impossible to provide by traditional means, because of rising environmental, financial, political, and social constraints. Failing to meet the rising demand for energy services in the developing world, and failing to equalise access to basic energy services, is not an option. The prosperity of the North was bought with abundant energy services; the developing world deserves nothing less. We must make a choice. Either we chase thesedemands for energy services with dirty and expensive traditional f uelswhich can never provide 'self-sufficiency' for any nation; or we can meet them head-on, sustainabl yand equitably, by a 'root-and-branch' industrial transformation -- a New Deal for the developing world. While Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change and signatories of the Rio Declaration delivered fine promises about meeting the needs of the developing nations, the same destructive con-game continues. 3. BARRIERS TO CHANGE 3.1 The driving force behind the global energy dilemma is the consumption pattern of the wealthiest nations. Industrialised nations of the North consume over 80% of all delivered commercial energy in the world; the per capita consumption of the United States is 20 times greater than the world average, and 50 times greater than the poorest regions. This pattern of energy consumption is maintained by means of low prices and the dominance of traditional energy suppliers in the formation of energy policy. Decades of governmental action have resulted in a powerful web of policy and financial measures to ensure that energy industries can 'externalise' as many costs as possible. The 'playing field' in the energy sector is therefore extremely lopsided, with large subsidies, protection from liability, absorption of waste costs by the public, artificial prices, protected markets, and reliance on taxpayer funding for R&D shoring up the traditional industries. Without these interventions, oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear fuels would find themselves fighting hard against the inevitable ingrowth of energy efficiency and renewables, which do not burden society with these additional costs. 3.4 Western consumption patterns are governed by the economic fiction that more energy consumed equals more industrial output and general prosperity. This is a view that is remarkably profitable to energy suppliers, because it has produced an energy system which maximises the consumption of energy, rather than the delivery of the services which energy can provide. This is the equivalent of running a government whose goal is to maximise the spending of tax revenue rather than the delivery of public services, or a business whose goal is to maximise borrowing from the bank rather than return on investment. Although industrialised nations to some extent realised the inherent problem of this energy model when oil prices shot up in 1973, in the 1980's strong actions -- such as the Gulf War, increased subsidies for oil development, and cuts in funding for conservation -- were taken to ensure the continuation of the fossil and nuclear energy model. 3.5 The crisis today is rooted in the fact that OECD energy markets are approaching saturation; the need to fulfil existing demand will go on, of course, but the OECD market for energy is not expanding at anything like the rate of the developing world. Conventional energy producers and their financiers therefore view the developing world as the new market. To capture it they must export -- not just energy products -- but the entire unsustainable energy system built on consumption rather than delivered services. 3.6 This is the real barrier to change: The OECD and OPEC have a large financial stake in guaranteeing that the unsustainable pattern of energy use in the west is exported and becomes universal. Through political action and the diversion of research, development, and investment capital, the dominance of the conventional energy companies blocks the reforms which could produce an energy system beneficial to developing economies, the environment, and global peace. 3.8 The drive for the new market in conventional energy products is carried out through key institutions: - the International Monetary Fund (IMF) - the multilateral development banks (MDBs) for example the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction & Development (EBRD) - the Global Environment Facility (GEF) - Bilateral funding agencies such as the US Export-Import Bank and the Japanese Export-Import Bank - specialised bodies like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD (NEA/OECD), and the International Energy Agency (IAEA) As the economic crisis of the west has intensified, more and higher levels of power have been mobilised to serve the need to expand energy markets: the North American Free Trade Agreement, which may one day include South American nations; the GATT; and the Group of Seven Economic Summit (G7). The major industrial countries have fought hard against any restrictions on destructive energy supply in the only fora where the issue has received serious attention to date: the Conference on Sustainable Development (CSD), and the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). 4. SOLUTIONS 4.1 The urgency of the energy crisis facing the world -- North and South -- was recognised at the UN Conference on Environment & Development (UNCED), held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. "Agenda 21", the statement of the conference, identifies implementation of energy efficiency worldwide and the rapid deployment of renewable energy technologies as a vital foundation of sustainable development. It identifies these technologies as part of the solution for the global problems of debt, poverty, population pressure, and environmental destruction. 4.2 Energy efficiency is the never-ending process of reducing the net energy input (oil, coal, uranium) required to supply a given energy service (refrigeration, heat, light, etc.). It is, after all, the service that a consumer needs or desires, not the fuel. Energy efficiency is measured in terms of economic output vs energy input. End-use energy efficiency is a large combination of specific technologies, all oriented to specific end-uses; so for example, high-efficiency lightbulbs, cogeneration units that recapture waste heat in industry, and 'power-down' modules that reduce standby power consumption in all manner of industrial and consumer products. Improved energy efficiency is today most notable for how inexpensive it is: saving a kilowatt of power is generally cheaper than producing a kilowatt of power. Where energy waste is especially high, such as Central and Eastern Europe, unit costs are below zero. 4.3 Renewable energy technologies, on the other hand, are supply technologies ranging from single solar cells to provide electricity for a few homes all the way up to industrial scale solar thermal, geothermal, and tidal power plants. The fuel for renewable energy systems is effectively infinite, free, and widely-distributed, and most of these technologies are based on simple design principles. With the dawn of the renewable age, the opportunity for every nation to achieve self-sufficiency in energy has finally come, for the first time since the start of the Industrial Revolution. Because the global ambient renewable energy available to be captured by humans far exceeds our present energy consumption, the 'potential' for renewables is bounded only by the aggregate investment needed to build an industrial and commercial infrastructure. 4.4 In summary, a sustainable energy future based on energy efficiency and renewables addresses all the problems noted above in Section One: - reduce and ultimately eliminate nuclear proliferation and accident risks - halt global warming - reduce health and environmental costs - deliver energy services quickly and inexpensively to the poorest regions, thus contributing to the elimination of rural poverty and the environmental and economic pressures which it produces - enhance energy independence by reducing foreign debt burdens and insulating economies from sudden price shocks - create jobs and domestic wealth by mobilising a high proportion of indigenous skilled labour, technology and financial capital; and by preserving local capital instead of funnelling it into debt payments - reduce international anxiety over access to fuels, thus reducing military tensions and, ultimately, expenditures 4.5 Technology transfer to achieve global sustainability must initially come through governments and development agencies -- as a result of negotiations on climate change, for example. Governmental action can provide the resources developing nations need to generate commercial renewable energy industries. For those nations which move quickest to integrating efficiency and renewables as the foundation of industry, the new demands for energy services can be economically met with little environmental impact. In addition, export markets await, not only in the growing developing nations but also in the North. Steps to provide enough resources to create a self-sustaining renewables market are the subject of Section Five. 5. MAKING IT HAPPEN 5.1 Escaping the 'no win' energy dilemma which is in force in all parts of the world today is not a dream; it can be done. From photovoltaic cells for basic rural electricity needs, to high-quality and high-intensity power for industrial processes and renewable liquid fuels for transport, we have the technical solutions at highly competitive costs. 5.2 Agenda 21 is clear on the core political imperative: "The existing constraints to increasing the environmentally sound energy supplies required for pursuing the path towards sustainable development, particularly in developing countries, need to be removed" (para. 9.10 of Agenda 21) 5.3 To make the new renewables revolution a success, the most urgent short-term factor is rapid reform by the OECD in terms of its own energy policy and in enhanced technology cooperation. Full cost pricing and removal of subsidies to fossil fuels and nuclear power combined with much greater technology transfer from the highly-industrialised nations to the developing countries, and among Southern nations is the necessary first step. 5.4 Government action using public funds is essential to establish viable new energy systems in key regions. Ultimately, though, the scale of economic resources which must be mobilised makes it essential that private enterprise and commercial financing are heavily involved, and on a global scale. Therefore the rapid emergence of a self-supporting commercial market in renewable technologies, based in and serving the needs of the developing world, is necessary to drive the transformation. 5.5 The following four priority actions can lay the groundwork for the emergence of the new, renewable, energy system of the future: Immediate Reform of OECD Energy Policies: OECD nations have a special responsibility to build the sustainable energy future by kick-starting effective market-penetration of renewable energies at home. These nations can take the lead by: - basing energy development on the generally accepted principles of integrated resource planning (IRP), with full internalisation of social and environmental costs - establishment of minimum efficiency standards for electrical equipment, whether for the domestic market or export, and for commercial & residential buildings - establishment of minimum efficiency standards in industry - establishment of full-cost pricing for energy supply through energy taxes - removal of all subsidies to fossil and nuclear fuels and introduction of capacity-building subsidies to renewable energy technologies - reversal of historic R&D priorities which favour fossils and nuclear -removal of limitations on liability for nuclear accidents In addition, all OECD nations must agree to achieve a minimum sustained energy efficiency improvement of 3%/year, and introduction of renewable energy at a minimum annual rate of 1%/year of total energy production. 5.4 Technology Cooperation: All nations, but especially the developed industrial nations, must take steps to remove economic, financial and institutional barriers to enhanced cooperation and transfer in the field of renewable energy and efficiency, even where this requires changes to recent agreements on liberalised trade. As a first step all Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) must support adoption of the proposed Berlin Protocol at the Eleventh meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in March 1995. The highly industrialised nations of the world must meet their commitment of 25 years ago to devote at least 0.7% of the GDP to overseas development aid -- at present only 4 nations have met this target. Revenues raised in this way and through a specific FCCC funding mechanism needs to be prioritised to ensure the rapid emergence of indigenous renewable energy industries in developing countries, and not simply finished exports from North to South. Effective technology transfer at the required rate will also require the mobilisation of commercial credit and the relaxation of patents which are blocking transfers. 5.5 Immediate Reform of International Financial Institutions (IFIs): All development banks and other IFIs should be directed to coordinate lending for energy to achieve the targets of the Framework Convention on Climate Change and Agenda 21 sustainable energy objectives in Chapters 4, 7, and 9; and through Integrated Resource Planning to place the highest priority on - achieving 'least-cost' solutions for energy needs through the use of indigenous resources and a minimum of foreign technology and imported fuels - meeting the basic needs of the one billion people who now lack the most rudimentary energy services for cooking, lighting, heating/cooling, and transportation - effecting a rapid transition 'off oil' through energy efficiency and renewables for nations of the developing world 5.6 Establishment of an International Agency for Sustainable Energy: Despite its overwhelming importance in so many areas of human endeavour, there is NO dedicated international treaty or organisation devoted to attaining a sustainable energy future -- that is, dedicated to channelling energy systems to solving critical problems of environment and development in the world today. Industrial reform of this scale requires the coordination of many political, financial, and institutional factors: it is, after all, the 'new industrial revolution'. The renewables revolution cannot be left to ad hoc means; it will require the active involvement of: a. Institutional Players: utilities, development organisations (non-governmental, bilateral and multilateral), schools & universities, research & scientific institutes b. Financial & Technical Players: development banks, commercial enterprise, commercial banks energy and appliance consumers c. Political Players: citizens' organisations, national, regional and local governments, Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Non-Proliferation Treaty, national policy-making bodies, regional policy fora (EU, ASEAN, OAU, OECD, etc.) 5.7 Coordination of the many players required to make the necessary changes -- and to hold nations to commitments to a New Energy Deal -- calls for the rationalisation of all intergovernmental diplomatic, technical, and financial efforts under the leadership of a dedicated agency whose role is to facilitate rapid technological and economic change. In short, a politically-motivated and integrated programme of action is required, but it is imperative that it not be shuffled off to any of the existing agencies with energy responsibilities. Existing agencies are either dominated by specific fuel-producers (IAEA, NEA, OPEC) or by regional blocks of economic interests (OECD, IEA). Therefore Greenpeace advocates a United Nations Sustainable Energy Agency (UNSEA). The goal of the UNSEA should be the attainment of the objectives for reform of energy systems as outlined in UNCED's Agenda 21, Chapters 4, 7, and 9. 5.8 Such an agency can be a practical and efficient agent of change if accompanied by: - adoption of integrated resource planning in the OECD and developing world; - fundamental reform of MDB lending practices and of national energy policies; - elimination of the promotional function of the Atomic Energy Agency; - agreement by all UN agencies and programmes with a portion responsibility for energy and development issues to submit to a 'full cooperation pact' to allow the UNSEA to take the lead in the broadest range of policy areas. 5.9 Together, the reform of OECD energy policy, enhanced North- South technology cooperation based on increased funding via the MDBs and bi-lateral initiatives, and establishment of a coordinating and motivating agency is a strong start toward a sustainable future. But their real importance is in laying the foundation for the establishment of a self-sustaining commercial renewables market based in the developing world. 6. POLITICAL FACTORS 6.1 The real question is whether action can realistically be taken in time to avoid the imminent catastrophic impact of climate change, and the social and economic collapse which 'business as usual' will produce. In Greenpeace's view, there are opportunities which can be grasped immediately which will accomplish reform in the OECD, establish effective global technology cooperation and funding mechanisms to back them up. Furthermore, by focusing special attention on providing adequate energy services to the least advantaged population, the rapidly- growing industrial economies of South and Southeast Asia, and an affordable and sustainable solution to the problem of nuclear accident risks in Central & Eastern Europe, a self-sustaining commercial renewable energy market can be rapidly generated. 6.2 In 1995. Parties to two crucial treaties dealing with energy -- the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the Framework Convention on Climate Change -- will meet almost back-to-back. Both gatherings offer new openings to generate immediate energy reform. Non-Proliferation Treaty Extension Conference (April/May, 1995) 6.3 A core feature of the NPT is the promise of nuclear states to make available and promote the technology for civilian application (Article IV), in return for the promise of non- nuclear weapons states to forego development of nuclear arms. The NPT is, in part, a technology cooperation agreement, but as we have seen it is a failure in this regard (see paragraphs 1.11/1.12, above). The NPT has, however, successfully increased global tension surrounding weapons proliferation, by providing the main impetus to the spread of nuclear technology through the efforts of the IAEA and national exporters. The situation as the Fifth Review of the NPT approaches -- in April and May, 1995 --is that the Non-Nuclear Weapons States (NNWSs) have held up their end of the bargain by not building nuclear weapons. But the Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) have so far reneged on their own commitments in the Treaty: Article VI commits them to the early conclusion of a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and total military denuclearisation. To this unhappy failure has been added tensions over plutonium stockpiles arising from civil nuclear power. 6.4 1995 provides a key opportunity for nations to press for a true non-proliferation regime that offers real energy solutions as well as security assurances and global disarmament. Greenpeace advocates extension of the NPT for five years maximum, with the option of further five year extensions to provide a 'safety-net' during a comprehensive 'nuclear build-down'. The actions which must be taken to transfer from the current 'proliferation path' to a nuclear-free future are: - elimination of Article IV of the NPT and of the promotional functions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) - promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energy by giving them priority status within existing international institutions and by creation of a United Nations Sustainable Energy Agency (UNSEA) - extension of binding security assurances to all NPT Parties - early completion of a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) including a ban on hydronuclear tests and all laboratory experiments - a halt to nuclear weapons modernisation and deployment - commitment by NWSs to begin negotiations on global denuclearisation, with a clear and realistic target date for completion - immediate conclusion of a comprehensive weapons-usable fissile materials cut-off, including a ban on civil reprocessing, at the Conference on Disarmament. Proposed Berlin Protocol to The Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) 6.7 Governments which signed the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) in 1992, thus committing themselves to stabilising carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000, are the same governments which continue to subsidise coal, nuclear power, and oil, build new power stations burning non-renewable fuels, and have little or no strategy for commercialising renewable energy technologies. The OECD as a whole is still spending 8 times as much money on R&D in nuclear and fossil power as it is on renewables and conservation combined. 6.8 The FCCC, which was signed in 1992 at the Rio Summit, is the only global forum where substantive debate on a sustainable energy future is currently underway. At the eleventh session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Ctte (INC), in March and April, 1995, discussions will hinge on energy reform. Greenpeace International has circulated a proposed 'Berlin Protocol' to the FCCC which would commit industrialised nations to adoption and promotion of energy efficiency and renewables, and integrated technology cooperation with developing nations. The protocol also calls for establishment of technology cooperation agency such as the UNSEA proposed above, and a funding mechanism. 6.9 The traditional energy-related bodies in the international sphere are effectively dominated by OECD nations (International Energy Agency, Nuclear Energy Agency) or they deal with only one special interest (International Atomic Energy Agency, Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Nuclear Energy Agency). UN Agencies which have partial responsibility for energy matters (UNEP, UNDP, UNIDA) are already overstretched and underfunded. The FCCC, however, has the distinct advantage that it deals with all energy issues, is inclusive, has a mechanism for financing of energy technology cooperation, and is a political treaty with fixed commitments that produce momentum for change. The FCCC therefore is potentially an extremely powerful tool of the developing world, a tool which can only be strengthened by adoption of the Berlin Protocol in '95. 6.10 The reforms so far outlined can create a 'framework of expectations' to guide the emergence of much greater commercial capital and expertise in the field. However, 'forcing' change and embedding the efficiency and renewables revolution firmly in the soil of economic development in the 21st century, requires positive action to generate an indigenous renewables industrial base in the developing world. If action is taken only by the OECD but not in the rest of the world, rising energy demand will swamp this accomplishment within two decades. More likely though is that unless action by the OECD is matched by the non-OECD, the age-old inequalities will repeat themselves. The primary developers, exporters, and beneficiaries of the new industrial base will be the northern wealthy nations, who will be selling their new technologies in global markets financed by borrowed funds. 6.11 States in different regions of the developing world can, and should, take the current interest in renewable energy as a solution to global environmental problems to its logical conclusion: the mobilisation of funding from development institutions to develop large-scale commercial applications in their own countries. There are today some critical opportunities which are waiting to be grasped in regions where the cost- effectiveness of efficiency and renewables are well-established: - replacement of dangerous nuclear reactors in central and eastern Europe with energy efficiency gains and renewable power (funding: EBRD, European Union, US Export-Import Bank, G7); attention to renewable energy solutions in this region has grown steadily over the past year, and culminated in the US Department of Energy advocating energy efficiency and renewables in lieu of nuclear solutions for the closure of Chernobyl at the 1994 Naples G7 Summit; - provision of basic electrical services to the world's poorest people, by use of solar photovoltaic cells (funding: European Union, World Bank); such a programme, dubbed 'Power to the World', has been strongly advocated by officials of the European Commission, and has begun to receive funding on a pilot basis; - efficiency gains and renewable power in rapidly- industrialising economies of South and Southeast Asia (funding: World Bank, Japan Export-Import Bank, Asia Development Bank); already the World Bank and Asian Development Bank have shown interest in funding renewables projects in this region, and pressure is building due to the political difficulties of moving ahead with fossil and nuclear proposals given climate and proliferation concerns. 6.12 Through action in these regions, cost-effectiveness, technical effectiveness, and rapid escalation of demand for renewable technology can be demonstrated quickly, thus attracting commercial capital and expertise for the establishment of a renewables industry outside the OECD. 7. CONCLUSION 7.1 The word 'underdeveloped' has passed out of normal discourse in recent years, but the belief that the only desirable economic evolution is that of the western, mainly northern, nations has gone on to become the touchstone of 'development' the world over. The evangelical self-belief of industrial nations is clear in their description of themselves: the 'developed' world, as distinct from those who are 'developing'. 7.2 But 'developing' to what end? The actual impact of the western industrial model on human beings, their society, and their natural environment has been catastrophic. The global situation has grown worse during the most recent period, the period of most intensive effort to bring all nations onto the same 'development' path. In Greenpeace's view, the nations which can least convincingly call themselves 'developed' are those of the industrialised world, whose profligate and destructive waste of natural and human resources has been mainly responsible for the global environmental crisis we all now face. 7.3 In the coming years, we will witness new pressures to push the destructive model of development from its home base into all parts of the world. This drive will be dressed-up in the traditional claim that there is no other choice, that the only road to prosperity lies in the unsustainable and inequitable patterns of consumption of the wealthiest nations. 7.4 For non-OECD nations this situation has sometimes been depicted as bleak. How can anyone afford to protect the environment if they lack the economic prosperity to pay for such luxuries? In fact, the situation is quite the opposite: there is a solution, and it is a solution that the so-called 'developing world' can implement even faster than the traditional industrialised nations. Renewable energy systems can provide a solid foundation for economic prosperity which is sustainable, equitable, and provides more self-sufficiency than conventional energy solutions. 7.5 All nations concerned with the development of human society must beware of the false equation of unsustainable energy consumption with prosperity. What cannot be afforded by any nation today is the dangerous belief that the future can be a copy of the past. By 'leaping over' the destructive practices of the North and moving straight to 'sustainable development', nations now called 'developing' can correctly define themselves as the real developed world. Principal Author: John Willis Greenpeace International c/o Greenpeace UK Canonbury Villas Islington, London N1 2PN phone: (44 71) 354 5100 fax: (44 71) 696 0012/0014 Internet:: john.willis@green2.dat.de or 100101.1744@compuserve.com ENDS =============== Keywords: environment energy alternatives solar wind oil economy /