Member countries are pushed back to the IEA zero roadmap

Japan Aponia և Australia thrown back against the International Energy Agency report: to reach zero emissions by 2050, which will indicate that they will continue to invest in fossil fuels, despite the advice of the Supervisory Board.

The response underscores the controversy surrounding the IEA’s recommendations, which include discontinuing fossil fuel exploration and spending on new projects.

While the IEA says there is a need to continue investing in existing projects և existing projects, critics say the body does not adequately accept future energy security risks. They say it will not be able to provide feedback if the world does not have time to create low-carbon alternatives to replace the strong demand for fossil fuels.

Japan Aponia, a founding member of the IEA, has always paid close attention to the Paris Energy Supervisory Board, but last week’s report caused skepticism from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

“It is a fact that there are areas with which the Japanese apony government disagrees,” said Minister Hiroshi Kajiyama, citing proposals to halt new coal-fired fuel investments.

Japan has targeted zero-emission zero emissions by 2050, but is struggling to plan how to get there. After the Fukushima disaster, nuclear fuel is no longer popular, and the country’s mountainous islands make renewable resources relatively expensive. Many Japanese experts want to continue to burn coal and gas and rely on emissions compensation in other countries.

Japan Aponia joined last week The promise of the G7 environment ministers suspend all government investment in international coal-fired power plants by the end of this year.

Australian Minister of Resources Keith Pete noted that previous IEA reports highlighted the greater role of coal, saying that the latest scenario did not adequately address carbon capture technology.

“Coal, oil and gas will continue to be part of Australia’s energy mix, part of our export success for decades,” Pete said.

Australia is using public funds to pursue a “gas recovery” policy in response to the Covid-19 epidemic, միջազգային resisting international pressure to aim for a net zero emissions.

Norway’s center-right government, the main left-wing opposition party, both traditionally strong supporters of the IEA, have also expressed some skepticism about a report ahead of the September election, in which the future of oil is likely to play a major role.

Oil Minister Tina Brown has said that “there will be no change globally” if Norway suspends its oil operations, claiming that Europe’s largest oil producer can produce oil and gas at lower emissions than many other countries with renewable energy. can be used to power offshore installations.

IEA scenarios often make up the basis of government energy policyև The latest bomb report on zero emissions was hailed by climate groups as a significant milestone.

Introduction: outlines the route By 2050, net emissions will fall by 90 percent, coal demand by 55 percent, gas demand by 55 percent and oil demand by 75 percent.

IEA President Fatih Birol commented on some of the criticisms on LinkedIn Post: over the weekend, saying the zero report is not the first time the agency has been accused of losing its bearing.

“This misses what the IEA is talking about,” he wrote, referring to the criticism. “For many years we have been focusing on building a secure, sustainable energy future for all, which requires a transition to clean energy. It requires a secure energy future. “The world destroyed by fossil fuel emissions from climate change will not be safe.”

A number of energy associations have criticized the report, including the World Nuclear Association, which called it “extremely unworkable,” and the World Coal Association, which said it was unrealistic.

Climate capital

Where climate change is relevant to business, markets and policies. Examine FT coverage here

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has warned that if the WWTP Zero Roadmap is implemented, it could pose a serious energy security threat.

“We would see significant disruptions in electricity supply, transportation systems, land-to-sea supply chains, city-to-factory power supplies, and significant increases in energy taxes,” said Andy Kalitz, secretary general of the International Gas Union.

At the same time, the major oil and gas companies expressed skepticism about the implementation of the steps outlined in the report.

“It’s a script on a piece of paper,” BP CEO Bernard Looney told an industry conference last week. He said he respected the importance of the IEA ի report, but added that the world needed fewer scenarios և “more action”.

Reports: Leslie Hook, Anjli Raval, Robin Harding, Jamie Smyth, Richard Milne and Neil Hume.

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button