Abstract
After briefly introducing the climate change challenge, this chapter discusses how policy responses remain shaped by dominant understandings of geopolitical, global political economy, and domestic politics’ concerns. It then moves on to present and evaluate the new climate regime established at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris (COP21), the opportunities it presents, and its limitations. The analysis ties the ineffective responses to climate change to the imperative of growth, and introduces the implicit trilemma faced by global society involving growth, energy security, and climate change mitigation. In taking issue with growth, the chapter lays the groundwork for the analysis that follows. This rests in the designation of a steady-state energy policy and its profound implications for climate change mitigation, energy security, geopolitics, and development.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Failure to render this technology commercial at a wide scale , not least due to high storage and associated infrastructure investments costs , means that we remain some distance from its potential implementation (Brown and Sovacool 2011: 106). In a similar note, nuclear fusion has been on the table as a viable large-scale alternative due to its low carbon and security credentials, but remains so far prohibitively expensive and demonstrates no learning curve. High safety standards for nuclear reactors exponentially raise the cost of production of nuclear energy and decisively discourage further investments. What is more, nuclear energy can lead to toxic leaks, and calls for safe storage facilities operative well into the future. Finally yet importantly, decommissioning toxic waste remains an unresolved issue (Brown and Sovacool 2011: 100–2; Kuzemko et al. 2015: 53, 121–3).
- 2.
Geo-engineering methods also feature enormous geopolitical disruption potential. For one, great powers may acquire control of the planetary thermostat, and meddle with it for all sorts of geopolitical goals (Fuhr 2016). This stands for nothing less than ecological imperialism, since unilateral actions are certain to have global consequences. At a broader level, corporations, powerful institutions and even affluent individuals can also undertake such practices with unpredictable consequences. The spectre of such methods being used by terrorist groups speaks to the magnitude of the problem in its direst form (Brown and Sovacool 2011: 137–8).
- 3.
As Noreng (2013: 172) indicatively asserts, a coalition of the automobile industry, oil, real estate, and construction interests has much leverage in the Congress to thwart any proposed measures on reduction of oil consumption in the US .
- 4.
Peter Haas (2017: 2) estimates a range from 2.6 to 3.1 degrees Celsius by 2100.
- 5.
Two caveats are crucial here. Firstly, such a scheme obscures more ambitious agendas, like fully renewable energy systems. Secondly, while gas is certainly cleaner than oil and coal , shale gas is not that cleaner and also brings other detrimental side-effects to the environment (Franca et al. 2016; van der Veen 2015; IFRI/CIEP 2015).
References
Beck, U. and Van Loon, J. 2011. Until the Last Tin of Fossil Fuel Has Burnt to Ashes: Climate Change, Global Inequalities and the Dilemma of Green Politics, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 111–134.
Bowen, A. and Rydge, J. 2011. The Economics of Climate Change, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 68–88.
Bradshaw, M. 2014. Global Energy Dilemmas. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Brown, M. and Sovacool, B. 2011. Climate Change and Global Energy Security: Technology and Policy Options: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cairns, R. and Stirling, A. 2014. ‘Maintaining Planetary Systems’ or ‘Concentrating Global Power?’ High Stakes in Contending Framings of Climate Geoengineering. Global Environmental Change, 28, 25–38.
Chen, G. and Lees, C. 2016. Growing China’s Renewables Sector: A Developmental State Approach. New Political Economy, 21: 6, 574–586.
Cherp, A. and Jewell, J. 2014. The Concept of Energy Security: Beyond the Four As. Energy Policy, 75, 415–421.
Chesney, M. et al. 2016. The Issue of Climate Change, in M. Chesney et al. (eds), Environmental Finance and Investments. Heidelberg: Springer, 5–16.
Coll, S. 2012. Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power. London: Penguin.
Compston, H. and Bailey, I. 2013. Climate Policies and Anti-Climate Policies. Open Journal of Political Science, 3: 4, 146–157.
Dalby, S. 2015. Climate Geopolitics: Securing the Global Economy. International Politics, 52: 4, 426–444.
Daly, H. 1996. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Dannreuther, R. 2015. Energy Security and Shifting Modes of Governance. International Politics, 52: 4, 466–483.
De Matteis, P. 2012. The EU’s and China’s Institutional Diplomacy in the Field of Climate Change. European Union Institute for Security Studies Occasional Paper, 96. Paris.
Dubash, N. and Florini, A. 2011. Mapping Global Energy Governance. Global Policy, 2: 1, 6–18.
Ebinger, C. and Avasarala, G. 2013. The “Gs” and the Future of Energy Governance in a Multipolar World, in A. Goldthau (ed.), The Handbook of Global Energy Policy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 190–204.
Eid, C., Hakvoort, R. and de Jong, M. 2016. Global Trends in the Political Economy of Smart Grids: A Tailored Perspective on ‘Smart’ for Grids in Transition. UNU-WIDER Research Paper wp2016-022. World Institute for Development Economic Research, 1–19.
European Commission. 2016. The Revised Renewable Energy Directive. MEMO – Clean Energy for All, 30 November, 1–6.
Falkner, R. 2016. The Paris Agreement and the New Logic of International Climate Politics. International Affairs, 92: 5, 1107–1125.
Falkner, R., Hannes, S. and Vogler, J. 2011. International Climate Policy after Copenhagen: Toward a ‘Building Blocks’ Approach, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 202–222.
Franca, L., de Jong, D. and van der Linde, C. 2016. The Future of Gas: The Transition Fuel?, in S. Colombo, M. El Harrak and N. Sartori (eds), The Future of Natural Gas Markets and Geopolitics. Netherlands: IAI/OCP, 25–40.
Frangonikolopoulos, C. and Proedrou, F. 2013. Global Governance and Cosmopolitan Democracy: Bridging the Gap between Proponents and Opponents. Bridges: Conversations in Global Politics and Public Policy, 2: 1, 1–26.
Fuhr, L. 2016. Radical Realism About Climate Change. Project Syndicate [Online]. Available: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/paris-climate-agreement-and-geo-engineering-by-lili-fuhr-2016-11 [Accessed on 11 November 2016].
Giddens, A. 2011. The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Goldthau, A. 2013a. Introduction: Key Dimensions of Global Energy Policy, in A. Goldthau (ed.), The Handbook of Global Energy Policy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 1–12.
Goldthau, A. 2013b. Conclusion: Global Energy Policy: Findings and New Research Agendas, in A. Goldthau (ed.), The Handbook of Global Energy Policy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 521–525.
Goldthau, A. and Sovacool, B. 2012. The Uniqueness of the Energy Security, Justice, and Governance Problem. Energy Policy, 41, 232–240.
Haas, P. 2017. Parxit, the United States, and the World. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment [First online], 1–3.
Harris, P. 2011. Reconceptualizing Global Governance, in J. Dryzek, R. Norgaard and D. Schlosberg (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 639–652.
Hayek, F. 1944. The Road to Serfdom: With the Intellectuals and Socialism. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Held, D. 2004. Global Covenant. The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Held, D. and Fane-Hervey, A. 2011. Democracy, Climate Change and Global Governance: Democratic Agency and the Policy Menu Ahead, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 89–110.
Held, D., Fane-Hervey, A. and Theros, M. 2011. Editors’ Introduction, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1–10.
Helm, D. 2014. The European Framework for Energy and Climate Policies. Energy Policy, 64, 29–35.
Heywood, A. 2011. Global Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Institut français des relations internationales/Clingendael International Energy Programme. 2015. The New Dimensions of Geopolitics. 2012–2015 Triennium Work Reports, 1–36.
Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. 1990. First Assessment Report: Climate Change 1990.
Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. 1995. Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995.
Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. 2001. Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001.
Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007.
Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. 2013. Fifth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2013.
Keohane, R. and Victor, D. 2011. The Regime Complex for Climate Change. Perspectives on Politics, 9: 1, 7–23.
King, D. 2011. The Challenge of Climate Change, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 13–30.
Kuzemko, C., Keating, M. and Goldthau, A. 2015. The Global Energy Challenge: Environment, Development and Security. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Larkin, A. et al. 2017. What if Negative Emission Technologies Fail at Scale? Implications of the Paris Agreement for Big Emitting Nations. Climate Policy [first online], 1–25.
Liu, E. and Hanauer, N. 2016. Economics Shows Us Why Laissez-Faire Economics Always Fails. Evonomics [Online]. Available: https://evonomics.com/complexity-economics-shows-us-that-laissez-faire-fail-nickhanauer/ [Accessed on 12 July 2017].
Mahbubani, K. 2013. The Great Convergence: Asia, the West, and the Logic of One World. New York: Public Affairs.
Mason, M. 2011. The Ends of Justice: Climate Vulnerability Beyond the Pale, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 162–182.
Mathews, J. 2015. The Renewable Energy Revolution. Project Syndicate [Online]. Available: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/china-india-transition-to-renewable-energy-by-john-a--mathews-2015-12 [Accessed on 14 June 2017].
Mazzucato, M. 2015a. The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. New York: Anthem Press.
Mazzucato, M. 2015b. Toward a Green New Deal. Project Syndicate [Online]. Available: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/clean-energy-billionaires-public-investment-by-mariana-mazzucato-2015-12?barrier=true [Accessed on 14 June 2017].
McGrew, Α. 2007. Globalization and Global Politics, in J. Baylis, S. Smith and P. Owens (eds), Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 14–34.
Miliband, D. 2011a. Green Peace: Energy, Europe and the Global Order, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 185–193.
Miliband, E. 2011b. The Politics of Climate Change, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 194–201.
Mulligan, S. 2010. Energy, Environment, and Security: Critical Links in a Post-Peak World. Global Environmental Politics, 10: 4, 79–100.
Noreng, O. 2013. Global Resource Scramble and New Energy Frontiers, in A. Goldthau (ed.), The Handbook of Global Energy Policy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 159–175.
O’Neill, O. 2011. Social Justice and Sustainability: Elastic Terms of Debate, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 137–143.
Paterson, M. 2011. Selling Carbon: From International Climate Regime to Global Carbon Market, in J. Dryzek, R. Norgaard and D. Schlosberg (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 611–624.
Proedrou, F. 2012. EU Energy Security in the Gas Sector: Evolving Dynamics, Policy Dilemmas and Prospects. Surrey: Ashgate.
Renner, M. 2015. The Seeds of Modern Threats, in World Watch Institute (ed.), State of the World 2015: Confronting Hidden Threats to Sustainability. London: Island Press, 3–17.
Singer, P. 2011. Changing Values for a Just and Sustainable World, in D. Held, A. Fane-Hervey and M. Theros (eds), The Governance of Climate Change. Science, Economics, Politics & Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 144–161.
Smith, A. and Stirling, A. 2010. The Politics of Social-Ecological Resilience and Sustainable Socio-Technical Transitions. Ecology and Society, 15: 1, 1–13.
Stang, G. 2015. The Climate-Energy Nexus. European Union Institute for Security Studies Issue Alert 54, Paris.
Steffen, W. 2011. A Truly Complex and Diabolical Policy Problem, in J. Dryzek, R. Norgaard and D. Schlosberg (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21–37.
Stiglitz, J. 2010. Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy. New York: Norton.
The World Bank. 2016. COP 22: Three New Ways to Help Cities Reach their Climate Goals. Feature Story [Online]. Available: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2016/11/28/cop-22-three-new-ways-to-help-cities-reach-their-climate-goals [Accessed on 14 February 2017].
Van der Veen, E. 2015. Why Energy Per Carbon Matters. The Relevance of Fossil Fuel Properties for Climate Change and Energy Transition Discussions and Policy-Making. The Clingedael Institute Energy Programme Paper, 2, 1–20.
Wackernagel, M. et al. 2006. Ecological Footprint Accounts for Advancing Sustainability: Measuring Human Demands on Nature, in P. Lawn (ed.), Sustainable Development Indicators in Ecological Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 246–267.
Wu, F. 2016. Shaping China’s Climate Diplomacy: Wealth, Status, and Asymmetric Interdependence. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 21: 2, 199–215.
Young, O. 2011. Improving the Performance of the Climate Regime: Insights from Regime Analysis, in J. Dryzek, R. Norgaard and D. Schlosberg (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 625–638.
Zelli, F. et al. 2013. Global Climate Governance and Energy Choices, in A. Goldthau (ed.), The Handbook of Global Energy Policy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 340–357.
Zimmerer, J. 2014. Climate Change, Environmental Violence and Genocide. The International Journal of Human Rights, 18: 3, 265–280.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Proedrou, F. (2018). Introduction. In: Energy Policy and Security under Climate Change. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77164-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77164-9_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77163-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77164-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)