Login     Sign Up     |      Home      Regions      Verify a Certification     EBA Portal    

Clean Energy: Professionals Outline How Governments Can Successfully Invest before It’s Too Late


Governments must provide technical experts more autonomy and as well hold their nerve to give more long-term durability whenever investing in clean energy, argue researchers in climate change as well as innovation policy in a new paper that is published today.
 
Putting up some writing in the journal Nature, the authors from the UK as well as US institutions have set aside procedures for making an investment in world-changing energy innovation based on an analysis of the past twenty years of “what works” in clean energy study programs.
 
Their six common “guiding principles” likewise include the need to channel creativity or new things into the private sector via formal tech transfer plans, and to think in terms of permanent creation of knowledge instead of ‘quick win’ potential when funding new plans.
 
The authors give a stark warning to governments as well as policymakers: learn from and as well build on experience before you run out of time, instead of continually reinventing aims and as well processes for the sake of political vanity.   
 
“As the window of possibility to avert risky climate change closes, we primarily need to take inventory of policy initiatives around the universe that aim to accelerate fresh energy technologies as well as stem greenhouse gas emissions,” states Laura Diaz Anadon, Professor of Climate Change Policy from the University of Cambridge.
 
“If we don’t capitalize on the lessons from the past policy successes as well as failures to know what works and why, it's possible that we would be wasting time and money in a way that we just can’t afford,” stated Anadon, who authored the new paper with co-workers from the Harvard Kennedy School, and the University of Minnesota’s Prof Gabriel Chan.
 
Public investments in energy research have increased right from the lows of the mid-1990s as well as early 2000s. OECD members used US$16.6 billion on new energy R&D (research and development) in 2016 in comparison to $10b in 2010. The EU other nations pledged to double clean energy investment as part of 2015’s Paris Climate Change Agreement.    
 
Recently, the UK government set out its own Clean Growth System, putting in £2.5 billion within the space of 2015 and 2021, with hundreds of millions to be invested in new generations of little nuclear power stations as well as offshore wind turbines.
 
Nevertheless, Anadon and co-workers state that government funding for energy reform has, in several cases, been greatly volatile in the past: with political shifts which results in big-budget instability as well as process reinventions in the UK and US.
 
For instance, the research team realized that every year between 1990 and 2017, one in every five technology areas established by the US Department of Energy (DoE) found a budget shift of over 30%. The Trump administration’s present plan is to reduce 2018’s energy R&D budget by at least 35% across the board.
 
In the United Kingdom, every single Prime Minister since 2000 has founded new institutions to manage energy innovation and as well bridge the public and private sectors. Blair’s UK Carbon Trust; Brown’s Energy Technologies Institute; Cameron’s Catapults; May’s Faraday Challenge as part of the newest industrial Plan.
 
“Experimentation has advantages, but as well costs,” states Anadon. “Researchers are beginning to relearn new methods, individuals, and programmes with all political change – wasting time as well as the effort for scientists, businesses, and policymakers.”
 
“Instead of recurred overhauls, existing programs must be constantly assessed and as well updated. New plans must only be set up if they fill requirements not presently met.”
 
More autonomy for plan selection must be passed to effective scientists, who are “best placed to spot bold but dangerous possibilities that managers miss,” say the authors of the new paper.
 
They point to projects prompted by the United State National Labs building more commercially-viable technologies than the ones dictated by DoE headquarters – irrespective of the Labs holding a mere 4% of the DoE’s overall plan.
 
The six prove-based guiding policies for clean energy investment are:
  • Build technology transfer into research or study organizations.
  • Adopt an adaptive learning system.
  • Focus demonstration projects on research.
  • Keep funding stable and predictable.
  • Incentivise international collaboration.
  • Give researchers and technical professionals more autonomy and influence over funding decisions.
 
From United State researchers utilizing the pace of Chinese construction markets to test energy reduction technologies, to the United Kingdom government boosting behavioral psychology to enhance energy efficiency, the authors highlight only a few samples of government investment that helped create or enhance clean energy initiatives all over the world.