This has undoubtedly been a year where the Energy Transition has felt, more often than not, thrown into reverse.

In Germany, coal mines have been reopened, and nuclear power stations scheduled to be decommissioned been given an extended lease of life. Nearly all EU countries, very dependent on Russian oil and gas, have been scrabbling like crazy to find alternative sources, all at rising prices and growing difficulties in finding supplies. The cost of energy to the consumer has risen significantly, and many Governments have been forced to offset winter bills with different incentives, payments or credits that will be highly expensive, so where does that cost come from, and what gets sacrificed?

France struggles with a rapidly ageing fleet of Nuclear power plants and the issue of how many of these can be up and running and functioning at levels to maintain power to their network and be able to support neighbours at times of their need.

The UK Government announced this week it’s the first opening of a new open coal mine in Cumbria a year after the UK lobbied to ‘consign coal to history. The developer, West Cumbria Mining, said it was “delighted” it could now deliver what it called “the world’s first net zero mine”. It plans to offset the emissions from the construction, mining and domestic transport phases. I hate the word “offset”. West Cumbria Mining says the coking coal it produces will be used for steelmaking in the UK and Europe. The local council had granted permission to dig for coking coal until 2049, with the mine expected to create about 500 jobs.. Yet the two prominent companies that still make steel using coal in the UK – British Steel and Tata – say they plan to move to lower carbon production methods. According to the UK Telegraph, this Cumbrian coal mine is economical and diplomatic idiocy.

LNG has taken on an entirely new lease of life, with shipments from the Middle East suddenly backing up and waiting around Europe to be offloaded as Europe rushes to increase their LNG receiving facilities. Many renewables, offshore wind, off the Northern coastal part of Europe are attempting to send power closer to the places of industrial or urban need.

The US has suddenly transformed itself within its energy approach.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 is the good news of 2022, this act makes the single largest investment in climate and energy in American history, enabling America to tackle the climate crisis, advancing environmental justice, securing America’s position as a world leader in domestic clean energy manufacturing, and putting the United States on a pathway to achieving the Biden Administration’s climate goals, including a net-zero economy by 2050.

The location of COP27 this year highlights the importance of the Africa and Mid-East regions on global net-zero objectives. Africa is set to take an increasingly pivotal role in the energy transition. Both its greatest challenges and most significant opportunities lay in the fact that its energy infrastructure is still largely under development. Thus a transition towards greener energy alternatives is highly feasible. The orderly energy transition could then unleash the crucial economic growth that the region is committed to, per the 2063 Agenda, becoming an economic, social, and climate win-win-win scenario.

There was a strong view that CoP27, held in Egypt, failed.

There is no doubt that countries could’ve done much more. It is also unquestionable that powerful actors, petro-state governments, and the fossil fuel industry are to blame for the insufficient progress made in Egypt. 

Compared to Glasgow’s CoP26 summit last year, fossil fuel lobbyists joining the climate talks in Egypt rose 25%, amounting to 636 people lobbyists. “The influence of the fossil-fuel industry was found across the board with the Egyptian Presidency of CoP27 producing a text that seemingly was protecting oil and gas petrostates and the fossil-fuel industries. This trend cannot continue in the United Arab Emirates next year for the CoP28, but the UAE is one of the fossil fuel giants. At present, it does not auger well.

The world has already warmed by 1.2°C above pre-industrial levels, and meeting the 1.5-degree target would require far more ambitious pre-2030 emissions cuts. Many experts and negotiators at the CoP27 felt this was the COP where we lost 1.5C as the target and began the significantly different debates on mitigation, which will, in the end, have a much higher, more devastating price to pay, in recovery, loss, disruption etc.

With its lower economic activity, caused mainly by a constant focus on controlling Corvid, China has not been so in the global market for oil and gas. That will change in 2023, and that added pressure of chasing less gas and oil globally will see the continuance of prices rising. Energy price protection costs are rapidly eroding the funds that would have been moving into the continued renewable changes we need.

We are pushing more Carbon into the atmosphere, goodbye 1.5C as our target

So we are pushing more carbon into the atmosphere due to the current Russian position on continuing the war on Ukraine and boycotting supplies.

Finally, our grids are under increasing strain, as power balance, effective responses, grid infrastructure limitation and present solutions are at a knife edge for possible blackouts and power shortages here in Europe. Power consumption and power generation are among the most difficult balancing acts for the winter of 2022/23. We can have severe bottlenecks in curtailment and activated response, insufficient transmission capacity at time of need and limited reserve capacity. Grids will operate under constant stress during these coming months.

Facing the challenges at the end of 2022

At the end of 2022, we will face more of the same issues as before but at heightened levels of risk.

In summary, we still have to continue to deal with ageing or outdated energy infrastructure; we are grappling with growing supply chain failures delaying changes into renewables we would like. The cost and availability of the raw materials to build at competitive prices new wind turbines, electrolyzers, solar, and batteries, all reliant on rare, expensive and limited raw materials, is yet to peak.

We continue not to inform the public in ways they increasingly support the need for a rapid energy transition; we have public opposition and permit delays and constraints due to multiple bodies required to approve any new energy project. A lack of streamlining or even harmonizing is a real drag on making change. The environmental impact always needs assessing, but the time, cost and vested interests are hard to modernize or adjust.

There is still a severe lack of funding for new technologies, renewables etc. The business models for renewables are still very immature, and the lack of (guaranteed) returns to investors, banks, institutions or venture companies needs some higher levels of underwriting by the Governments to change this.

Four other aspects are also holding back the energy transition.

The increased complexity of power grids is yet to be recognized as equal in importance to the shift from fossil fuel to renewables, not just due to variations but the technical abilities of distributed grids that need different designing. Cables, substations, switches, and thermal load limits require a radically different design.

The threat of cyber-attacks is a continued threat. When you are in the middle of substantial change, these become higher as you need to open up previously closed loops to accommodate new apps for monitoring, measuring and greater visibility.

We increasingly have extreme weather events, and the ability to build greater resiliency into the energy system is highly complex, expensive and time-consuming to change. With growing floods, fires, severe snow and ice storms, ground slippage etc., energy companies have their hands full in being able to respond and have spare parts on hand, anticipating what?

Lastly, our project management and development remain poor. We constantly reinvent the wheel, duplicate resources, and face difficulties in knowing if the solutions offered are the best of breed or a passing bridge solution. We lack a global “clearing” house to provide knowledge and understanding as the marketplace for competitive solutions is far from easy to compare or determine if they are the right fit for today’s energy system, let alone for one in 5, 10 or even 20 years with regulations changing, technologies still emerging and visualizing final supply/demand needs.

So for me, 2022 has been an actual energy crisis year. I have only touched on a group of issues.

McKinsey, in one of their constantly “encouraging” reports, suggests we have a nine-step problem-solving framework for debating (in my view, we need to be past debating!) and addressing barriers to unlock 1) Physical building blocks, 2) Commitments and enabling mechanisms and 3) economic and social adjustments.

Oh, I wish it was that easy, putting all the energy transition and its multiplicity of complexities into nine building blocks. Still, we struggle to offer broader problem-solving frameworks or detailed roadmaps, let alone common language and KPIs.

Maybe my wish for 2023 is that we can find the best, orderly energy transition, but with what we have been going through in 2022, that might be wishful thinking. It is so complex, challenging and presently in crisis.

Role in 2023, let’s put the Energy Crisis of 2022 behind us.

The post Wrapping up the Energy Crisis Year of 2022 first appeared on Innovating the Energy Transition.

The UK’s lead climate negotiator, the minister Alok Sharma, delivered a very telling speech at Cop27 revealing what some countries had tried to push through to an agreement.

Sharma was the president of the Glasgow Cop in 2021, and he was clearly frustrated with the events of the last two weeks in Egypt. and especially the final text outcome adopted at the Cop 27 meeting.

I personally was disappointed by the Cop26 held in Glasgow and chaired by Alok Sharma and the stunning last-minute intervention by India (along with China) where the phasing out changed to phasing down of coal.

Twelve months on and we seem to be making extremely slow or no progress on fossil fuels in any Global agreement of phasing down or out.

Alok Sharma, the UK’s Cop26 president, was visibly angry at the close of the CoP27 conference in Egypt. “Those of us who came to Egypt to keep 1.5C alive, and to respect what every single one of us agreed to in Glasgow, have had to fight relentlessly to hold the line. We have had to battle to build on one of the key achievements of Glasgow, the call on parties to revisit and strengthen their [national plans on emissions].”

He punctuated his speech with his hand thudding into his speech notes.

He opened by stating “We joined with many parties to propose a number of measures that would have contributed to [raising ambition].

Then he pointed out:

Peaking of greenhouse gas emission in 2025 “Not in this text.”

Emissions peaking before 2025, as science tells us, are necessary. Not in this text.

Clear follow-through on the phase-down of coal. Not in this text.

Clear commitments to phase out all fossil fuels. Not in this text.

And the energy text weakened in the final minutes to endorse “low-emissions energy”, which can be interpreted as a reference to gas or even oil with carbon capture.”

Sharma said in Glasgow “that the pulse of 1.5 degrees was weak. Unfortunately, it remains on life support.”

Sharma said he would not be in the UK’s chair position at next year’s Cop meeting but added:

“I promise you if we do not step up soon and rise above the minute-to-midnight battles to hold the line we will all be found wanting. Each of us will have to explain that to our citizens, to the world’s most vulnerable countries and communities, and ultimately to the children and grandchildren to whom many of us now go home.”

At Cop 27 a proposal from India to stipulate the phasing down of all fossil fuels was also mauled by oil-producing countries at the talks and watered down to a phasing down of coal, which reflected precisely the commitment made in Glasgow. So no progress on phasing out of fossil fuel was made or even adding text to phase down gas and oil alongside coal.

The spectre of Gas rules at present; securing winter supplies and energy security as reality kicks in.

The final text of Cop27 contained a provision to boost “low-emissions energy”. That could mean many things, from wind and solar farms to nuclear reactors and coal-fired power stations fitted with carbon capture and storage. It could also be interpreted to mean gas, which has lower emissions than coal but is still a major fossil fuel. Many countries at Cop27, particularly those from Africa with large reserves to exploit, came to Sharm el-Sheikh hoping to strike lucrative gas deals.

Loss and damage

At the recent Cop 27 the one bright spot was a shift in the highly contentious and long-running battles on “Loss and Damage” and the need to reimburse countries suffering most from climate change.

Global warming has been caused by industrial nations and they should therefore reimburse countries who are suffering most from climate change.

Although this was recognized the total funding required for adaptation is at least $2.5 trillion by 2030, and solutions and compensation are still orders of magnitude out.

Developing countries celebrated this Cop 27 outcome as crucial climate talks ended with a “historic” deal on their most cherished climate goal: a global fund for “loss and damage”, providing financial assistance to poor nations stricken by climate disaster.

Looking towards Cop 28 in November 2023

That fight is likely to get harder as COP28 heads to the United Arab Emirates, an oil and gas giant. Holding any line on phasing out fossil fuel will be exceptionally hard to achieve at this meeting.

Where does that leave the world?

Somehow at Cop 28 what we needed is an agreement to a rapid, equitable phase-out of all fossil fuels.”

My optimism is not high COP28 really does need a major advance against climate change; we have lost precious time in Cop 26 & 27. The clear imprint of fossil fuel influence needs counterbalancing or the momentum for clean energy renewables reduces. We burst through the goal of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, the threshold of scientifically recommended safety.

In the end, the responsibility will lie with everyone, as Meena Raman of Third World Network, an adviser to developing countries, points out. “Since the EU and Alok Sharma are disappointed that fossil fuel phase-out is not in the text, we would like them to take leadership and revise their NDCs [nationally determined contributions] and put into plans their fossil fuel phase-out urgently and stop the expansion of fossil fuels including oil and gas. [It’s] not enough to play to the gallery but act if they want to save the planet and not hide behind 2050 net zero targets, which will bust the remaining carbon budget for 1.5C.”

The climate fight is entering a critical point. What gives, yields or collapses?

We seem to have lost 1.5C as achievable. Reality is indicating we have blown this. The world looks towards Net Zero but those fighting for keeping fossil fuels included are seeking the miracle solution that would allow fossil fuels to exist in a net zero world.

Too little, too late; we are in real danger, as one commentator remarked, “our foot is still on the fossil fuel accelerator”.

Our world is in a climate mess.

Will the message given by the UN secretary-general to more than 110 world leaders at the Cop27 UN climate summit in Egypt be listened to change course now, or face “collective suicide”.

Let’s see what the next twelve months deliver that might change the present positions and we, as humans living on this one planet, achieve a path that does get the World back on track for recovering its equilibrium, fit for us to still live in. Or are we going to shift into a much higher gear for limiting the mitigation where we can, in a rear guard action as we lost our opportunity in this decade of disagreements and man-made crises to contain the carbon build-up and alter our behaviours arriving at a point where we are creating a highly unstable and unpredictable climate?

To quote the Worldwildlife.org:

“The climate crisis is increasingly distressing. Fortunately, there are many things we can do to ensure our future is as prosperous as possible. These actions fall into one of two broad categories: climate change adaptation and climate change mitigation. These terms go hand-in-hand while navigating through the climate crisis, but they mean very different things. 

Climate change mitigation means avoiding and reducing emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to prevent the planet from warming to more extreme temperatures. Climate change adaptation means altering our behaviour, systems, and—in some cases—ways of life to protect our families, our economies, and the environment in which we live from the impacts of climate change. The more we reduce emissions right now, the easier it will be to adapt to the changes we can no longer avoid.

Mitigation actions will take decades to affect rising temperatures, so we must adapt now to the change that is already upon us—and will continue to affect us in the foreseeable future.”

The post Not in this Text; disappointment at CoP 27 first appeared on Innovating the Energy Transition.