Alliance for Affordable Energy
  • Home
  • Who
  • What
    • Consumer Protection and Education >
      • Regulate Our Pipelines
      • Health Impact Assessment
    • Clean Energy >
      • Renewable & Clean Portfolio Standard
      • Transmission
    • Energy Efficiency >
      • EEFA
    • GS4GND
    • Past Work
  • How
    • New Orleans City Council >
      • Council Actions
    • New Orleans Dockets >
      • UD-22-05 Hurricane Ida Costs
      • UD-22-04 Demand Solutions
      • UD-22-03 Battery Storage
      • UD-22-02 100% Renewable
      • UD-22-01 Storm Reserve
      • UD-21-03 Resilience
      • UD-21-02 Zeta Cost Recovery
      • UD-21-01 Winter Storm Uri
      • UD-20-02 IRP (2021)
      • UD-19-01 RPS
      • UD-18-07 ENO Rate Case
      • UD-18-02 EV Charging
      • UD-18-01 Smart Cities
      • UD-17-04 Reliability
      • UD-17-03 IRP (2018)
    • LA Public Service Commission >
      • LPSC 2022 Election
      • Engage with the LPSC
    • Lawsuits & Appeals
    • Climate Initiative Task Force
  • News
    • The Watchdog
    • People's Power Hour
    • MISO Soup
    • Hurricane Ida
    • Events Calendar >
      • AAE House Party
  • Learn
    • Glossary
    • Timeline
    • Reports
  • Get Involved
    • Support
    • Newsletter
    • Intern and Volunteer >
      • Wimpelberg Intern Fellowship
    • Contact Us

The Watchdog

A blog on energy matters in Louisiana!

Debunking Demand (IPCC Mitigation Report, Part 1) by Amy Westervelt

4/18/2022

0 Comments

 
Article by Amy Westervelt
​Originally Published on Drilled News
April 5th, 2022
Every few years the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) releases an assessment, which consists of several reports prepared by three working groups. Working Group I focuses on the scientific evidence for climate change; Working Group II on the impacts, adaptation and vulnerabilities; and Working Group III on mitigation, what we can do about it (and what's stopping us).  The 2018 IPCC report got a LOT of media attention, more than any previous report, thanks to a combination of uncharacteristically stark warnings from climate scientists and a media cycle that wasn't quite as inundated with crises as the current one.

On April 4, 2022, the IPCC released the mitigation report for its current cycle and folks if the 2018 report was blunt, this one is absolutely screaming "do something!!!"
Picture
Picture
Yet, coverage was as slim as those pre-2018 days. There are lots of mitigating circumstances, 'scuse the pun. For a start, the release of the report was pushed back thanks to the fraught approval process for the report's Summary for Policymakers, or SPM (you can read more about that here). That meant that reporters got zero time with the actual report before we had to write about it, which was particularly problematic because some government representatives involved in the SPM process succeeded in watering it down so much it reads like the summary of an entirely different report. Plenty of reporters will only read the SPM; if they do, they'll miss the importance of this report. Then of course there's Russia's invasion of Ukraine, subsequent war crimes, and the world bracing itself for WWIII. And the endless pulse of Covid-19 vibrating underneath at all. Not to mention mass shootings, insane school boards, book banning, a looming Trump 2024 campaign, the midterms that Democrats seem destined to lose, a Supreme Court nomination process that McConnell is doing everything to derail yet again. These are deeply troubled times. So I get why the story of yet another dire warning on climate might not register for some outlets.

But that's why I'm here. I'm a climate reporter. It's all I focus on, and pretty much all I think about, and I've been covering IPCC reports for 20 years so I've got a pretty good handle on them. And what I'm reading in this one is eye-opening in a lot of ways. So to all my reply guys who are like "well don't you already know what's in the report, things are still bad," I say actually what's in this report are the seeds for revolution, so let's take it all in shall we?

Throughout the month of April, I'll be posting weekly installments (at least) of analysis on this report, sometimes accompanied by bonus podcast episodes, sometimes not. These posts will be free, so feel free to forward or share. If you run a media outlet you're welcome to re-run anything, with appropriate attribution. If you feel so inclined, you can sign up for a paid subscription here, or via the button at the bottom of this post. Okay, here we go!
​⚫️  ⚫️  ​⚫️

​Debunking Demand (An Ode to Chapter 5)

There are a lot of new additions to the IPCC report this time around, but the newest and shiniest is Chapter 5 "Demand, services and social aspects of mitigation." Sounds kinda wonky and boring I know, but what it means is roughly: are people actually demanding fossil fuels, or even energy, or are they actually just demanding services? And that is a pretty revolutionary question.

Right away, first paragraph of the chapter they come out with: "People demand services and not primary energy and physical resources per se. Focusing on demand for services and the different social and political roles people play broadens the climate solution space."
​
Remember when car-sharing services first appeared in the U.S. and for a few years there people were like holy shit I don't actually need to own a whole car to myself, I just need to borrow a car occasionally? Or way before that when offices were like wait what we can just have a copier on loan? Magic! This is like that but for the whole economy. It upends a deeply held belief (yeah I said it, belief) in economics that demand will increase with economic growth. 
​
"This is the first time we've ever had a chapter on demand because this idea about economic growth and demand being linked was just untouchable," environmental economist Julia Steinberger, a contributing author to chapter 5, says. "Everybody wants economic growth, so everybody wants demand to increase and that's it. But as soon as you start questioning it, you realize that it's a God with clay feet. That you can actually do a lot better with a lot less. There's nothing preventing us from doing a lot better and using a lot less, including resolving poverty and deprivation around the world."

​That's huge because not only does it up-end a rigid belief about how economies work, it also obliterates one of the fossil fuel industry's favorite narratives: that people living in poverty need fossil fuels to get out of poverty.
Picture
"So there are lots of myths about the way we understand the economy," Steinberger says. "One of the myths is that it's demand driven when it's not. It's supply driven. So you can imagine that in phases of economies when everybody's in poverty, then you know, there's going to be a lot of demand that drives production. After a certain phase, basically you have an overproductive industry that's constantly driving productivity and competitiveness. And so at that point you start having overproduction and you need to find an outlet for that. Otherwise you get economic crises. And the outlet for that is various kinds of over-consumption or things like planned obsolescence. So it's basically like production is looking for outlets."

​This is what American sociologists Allan Schnaiberg, David Pellow, and Kenneth Gould termed the "treadmill of production" in their seminal 2008 book by the same name. "Basically the fossil fuel industry is using this fake narrative of demand-driven production to excuse their activities," Steinberger says. "But as soon as you look at demand, the story crumbles. Because all we need is services; that's what there is demand for. We don't need the energy use itself. So let's think about how we deliver those services in a more efficient way."

​Underpinning this idea is a new type of economic model: the Decent Living Energy model, which was pioneered by Dr. Narasimha D. Rao and his team at Yale. It aims to quantify the energy needs and climate change impacts of eradicating poverty and providing decent living standards to all. Steinberger and her group at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland collaborated with team at Yale to develop the first global Decent Living Energy model, which delivered another head-exploding result that made its way into Summary for Policymakers: It's possible to have decent living conditions for everybody at half the current energy use.

Paging Alex Epstein, Michael Shellenberger and all the rest of the debate-me bros making the "moral" case for fossil fuels.

"It's a pretty big result because it basically says all we need is services," Steinberger says. "We don't need the energy use itself. So then we can think about how we deliver those services in a more efficient way. And then we can demonstrate that what you need to do that exists already and you get to these results that are really quite staggering, that you can really do things very, very differently."

It's an idea that holds enormous potential for addressing the climate crisis. As in: "Demand-side strategies, categorised under Avoid, Shift, Improve, can reduce 40-70% of emissions across all sectors (high confidence)." That's a direct quote from the chapter.

Quick detour here to explain the weird layout of IPCC reports. Every assertion in the report is followed by a parenthetical like this – low, medium, high, or very high confidence. It relates to the amount of large-scale, data-based research there is behind that assertion. High confidence is real freakin' solid. 

Fifty to 80 percent of emissions ACROSS ALL SECTORS...woahhhh why is this not a headline in every paper??!!

Well, the reasons I explained above, but also what we're talking about here is a fundamental shift of values in the economy, from what companies want to sell people to what people actually need to make their lives work. So it should probably come as no surprise that for-profit papers that generate revenue making ad campaigns for oil companies (cough cough The Washington Post AND The New York Times) are not shouting this from the rooftops.

But let's keep reading.

Not only did IPCC authors poke holes in the economic theories underpinning the fossil fuel industry's favorite story, they were also able to clearly demonstrate that fossil fuel expansion does not lift communities out of poverty, it does the opposite. That's something they were able to demonstrate so clearly it actually managed to stay in the Summary for Policymakers.

"What we were able to demonstrate was actually that there is no sustainable development—or development full stop—without climate mitigation," Steinberger says. "Unless you mitigate climate, the impacts are going to catch you every step of the way and just make people's lives increasingly hard and miserable, especially in Global South countries. And so this idea of a fossil fueled pathway to development is really a myth. There is no substance there because of the destructive power that it comes with."

So how exactly do we meet these needs, supply these services, and deliver these big reductions in emissions all at the same time. Chapter 5 suggests a few things:​
  • Lifestyle changes – In the next installment I'm going to dig into this deeper because what this draws on is the work of Dr. Kimberly Nicholas and others who have shown that the world's wealthiest 10% globally can have a tremendous impact on greenhouse gas emissions through behavior change (don't worry we're going to have a nuanced discussion of the old false individual v. systemic debate – obviously these choices need to be enabled by things like public transit, bikable streets, and so forth). Chapter 5 states: "Individuals with high socio-economic status have high behavioural plasticity and capability to reduce their GHG emissions, especially in mobility by flying less and utilising electric two, three, or four wheelers, by becoming role models of low-carbon lifestyles, by investing into low-carbon business, and by lobbying for stringent climate policies."
  • Car-free and electrified transportation (this one has the largest potential to reduce CO2)
  • Reduction in primary energy use (so, energy efficiency) and/or shift to renewable energy
  • Policy levers like prohibitions, mandates, taxes, fees, and subsidies, but also choice- and agency-preserving interventions that shape the options available to citizens.
  • Collective action by individuals as part of formal social movements or informal lifestyle movements
  • Policies that increase the political access and participation of women, and racialised and marginalised groups, increase the democratic impetus for climate action
  • Targeted and fair carbon pricing

​There's more, a lot more. A whole blueprint really. Which is great because the other big news that didn't seem to make it into any headlines is that keeping warming to 2 degrees feels like a stretch goal at this point. I'm not going full doomer on you, but the reality is that in the ten years that we've known the most about what we need to do, average emissions have increased. We're going the wrong direction. And this offers not just a way to put us back on the right path, but to improve people's quality of life around the world, and do it quickly, and in many cases affordably, all while delivering the sorts of dramatic emissions reductions required to blunt this crisis.
⚫️  ⚫️  ​⚫️
This is the first of several installments analyzing the 2022 IPCC Mitigation Report. You can access the report and all ancillary materials here. If you're short on time, I highly recommend the Technical Summary, which is just slightly longer than the Summary for Policymakers but comes straight from the authors with no politicking.

About the Author

Picture
Amy Westervelt is the founder of the Critical Frequency podcast network, named AdWeek's 2019 Podcast Network of the Year. She is also an award-winning print and audio journalist who has contributed to The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Guardian, NPR, and many other outlets. In 2007, she won a Folio for her feature on the potential of algae as a feedstock for biofuel. In 2015 she was awarded a Rachel Carson award for "women greening journalism", and in 2016 she won an Edward R. Murrow award for her series on the impacts of the Tesla Gigafactory in Nevada. As the head of Critical Frequency, she has executive produced more than a dozen podcasts, including her own show Drilled -- a true-crime style podcast about climate change—which was awarded the 2019 Online News Association award for "Excellence in Audio Storytelling". Her book Forget Having It All: How America Messed Up Motherhood, and How to Fix It was published in November 2018 by Seal Press, and received a starred Publisher's Weekly review.
Read More About Amy Here
0 Comments




Leave a Reply.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    October 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    December 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012

    Categories

    All
    Alexandria Lia
    ALI
    ALI Meiner
    Andrew Wiseman
    Anniversary
    Bia Assevero
    CalGreen
    CCS
    Charles Rice
    Clean Energy
    CLECO
    CLECO FAQ
    CLECO Sale
    CLECO Sale Denied
    CLECO Stock
    CLECO Stock Prices
    CLECO Takeover
    Climate Change
    Clyde Holloway
    CO2
    Coastal Restoration
    Corruption
    Cost
    David Roberts
    Decoupling
    Dirty Energy
    Education
    Elections
    Energy
    Energy Efficiency
    Energy Policy
    Energy Smart
    Entergy
    Entergy New Orleans
    Environmental Risks
    EPA
    FERC
    Gas Plant
    Georgetown
    Government
    Grand Gulf
    Green Building
    Grid Failure
    GSREIA
    Gulf Of Mexico
    Health Risks
    Hurricane
    Hurricane Sandy
    Industrials
    Infrastructure
    IRP
    Land Loss
    Land-Use
    LA Public Service Commission
    LEED
    Liquid Air
    Louisiana
    Louisiana Public Service Commission
    LPSC
    MACQUAIRE
    Mayor's Office
    MISO
    Natural Gas
    New Iberia
    New Orleans City Council
    News
    NRDC
    Nuclear
    Oil & Gas Leases
    People Power
    Pipelines
    Power Grid
    Power Outages
    Power Plant
    Public Interest
    Regulation
    Reliability
    Renewable Energy
    RENEWABLE ENERGY POLICY NETWORK FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
    Resiliency
    Resolutions
    RTO
    Rulemaking
    Sacrifice Zones
    Sea Level Rise
    Solar
    Storage Solutions
    Subsidies
    SWEPCO
    TED Talks
    The Town Walk
    Town Hall Meetings
    Transmission
    Utilities
    Vicki Arroyo
    Watchdog
    Water Conservation
    Water Use
    WDSU
    Wetlands
    WWL Radio

    RSS Feed

Intern & Volunteer
If you want to be a frontline soldier on environmental protection, social justice, or environmental racism, come to Louisiana” –Gary Groesch, Founder of AAE
Calendar
View our events calendar ​for important upcoming community events and public meetings!
Support our work- ensure fair, affordable, and environmentally responsible energy for all.
501(c)3 IRS Notice

Alliance for Affordable Energy
Phone: (504) 208-9761
4505 S Claiborne Ave
New Orleans, LA 70175

Copyright © 2022 · Alliance for Affordable Energy
  • Home
  • Who
  • What
    • Consumer Protection and Education >
      • Regulate Our Pipelines
      • Health Impact Assessment
    • Clean Energy >
      • Renewable & Clean Portfolio Standard
      • Transmission
    • Energy Efficiency >
      • EEFA
    • GS4GND
    • Past Work
  • How
    • New Orleans City Council >
      • Council Actions
    • New Orleans Dockets >
      • UD-22-05 Hurricane Ida Costs
      • UD-22-04 Demand Solutions
      • UD-22-03 Battery Storage
      • UD-22-02 100% Renewable
      • UD-22-01 Storm Reserve
      • UD-21-03 Resilience
      • UD-21-02 Zeta Cost Recovery
      • UD-21-01 Winter Storm Uri
      • UD-20-02 IRP (2021)
      • UD-19-01 RPS
      • UD-18-07 ENO Rate Case
      • UD-18-02 EV Charging
      • UD-18-01 Smart Cities
      • UD-17-04 Reliability
      • UD-17-03 IRP (2018)
    • LA Public Service Commission >
      • LPSC 2022 Election
      • Engage with the LPSC
    • Lawsuits & Appeals
    • Climate Initiative Task Force
  • News
    • The Watchdog
    • People's Power Hour
    • MISO Soup
    • Hurricane Ida
    • Events Calendar >
      • AAE House Party
  • Learn
    • Glossary
    • Timeline
    • Reports
  • Get Involved
    • Support
    • Newsletter
    • Intern and Volunteer >
      • Wimpelberg Intern Fellowship
    • Contact Us