Democrats face climate challenge from the left

  • Market: Electricity, Emissions
  • 18/07/18

As Democrats gear up for this November's elections, some are facing a backlash from members of their own party who want more aggressive action on climate and renewable energy.

New York governor Andrew Cuomo (D) is one the leading figures in the US for efforts to promote renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. And yet Cuomo, and other incumbent Democrats, are facing challenges from opponents who say even more action is needed to combat climate change.

"With the incumbents, there is that challenge coming from the left," clean energy think tank Acadia Center advocacy director Bill Dornbos said. "It does have a lot of energy."

Cuomo, during his time as governor, has set New York on a track to reach 50pc renewable energy by 2030, while reducing GHG emissions to 40pc below 1990 levels by that same year. His administration has also moved to promote emerging technologies like offshore wind and energy storage, while strengthening the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cap-and-trade program for CO2.

But that is not enough, according to Cuomo's Democratic primary challenger Cynthia Nixon, who says the state should get to 100pc renewable energy by 2050. She has criticized Cuomo for allowing aging nuclear plants to remain open, for not doing enough to reduce GHG emissions from all parts of the state's economy.

"Governor Cuomo only has a plan for the electricity sector when most of the emissions in New York come from buildings and transportation," Nixon said. "Governor Cuomo's plan also lacks targeted support for low-income communities and communities of color."

Cuomo's situation is not unique. Across the country, progressive candidates have come forward to challenge their more-moderate counterparts, largely in reaction to the conservative policies being put in place by President Donald Trump and the Republicans, who control both chambers of Congress. And that effort seems to be working.

"Leadership from the progressives and from activists is shifting the Democratic Party and their demands," environmental group Friends of the Earth Action senior political strategist Benjamin Schreiber said. Cuomo and others now "have to be responsive" to the left.

Some of those progressive candidates, like Nixon, face an uphill battle. Cuomo leads Nixon 59-23pc among Democratic voters, according to polling from Quinnipiac University released today.

In California, state senator Kevin de Leon (D) is trying to unseat veteran US senator Dianne Feinstein (D) this November. De Leon has touted his "central role" in setting up the state's 50pc by 2030 renewables mandate and cap-and-trade program extension. He has also proposed legislation to move California to 100pc zero-emission energy by 2045.

But De Leon faces a tough task in replacing Feinstein, a well-funded five-term senator who also has been a supporter of climate and clean energy legislation.

Despite slim chances for some candidates, others are forcing the party to sit up and pay attention. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' shocking primary win over incumbent congressman Joe Crowley (D) has signaled that liberal climate politics may be set for new light. Cortez has called for a "Green New Deal" that would take the US to 100pc renewable energy by 2035. That would mark a sharp rise, given renewables supplied about 17p of US electricity generation in 2017, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Along the same vein, Colorado and Maryland last month selected Democratic candidates for governor who want their states to get all of their electricity from renewable energy sources.

The progressive rise in the Democratic Party mirrors to some degree the Tea Party movement that launched in the wake of the election of former president Barack Obama. Here, as then, more radical candidates have been able to use their opposition to a sitting president as a rallying cry to attract voters and unsettle established party platforms. Falling costs and rising employment in the renewable energy sector have also made forceful climate action more palatable to the public.

There is "real frustration with the pace of progress in the states," the Acadia Center's Dornbos said. "It has been given new urgency by what is going on at the national level."

The results in November will show how much this progressive push will actually shape the US future on climate and renewable energy. But even if unsuccessful at the polls, the wave of liberal-leaning candidates could end up tilting others to support more ambitious action.

The progressive push "is having an effect," Dornbos said. "Whether that leads to real policy action and results on the ground, is harder to say."

US electic generation by energy source

New York electricity generation March 2018 ’000 MWh

Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
28/03/24

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI

London, 28 March (Argus) — The "best bet" to achieving global energy security is through mitigation funding and multilateral cooperation, according to the World Resources Institute (WRI). WRI highlighted that governments are funding more domestic renewable energy projects but have increased oil and gas production in the name of "energy security" at home in the years following the Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The recent rebrand of energy transition funding to energy security funding has allowed some developed nations to justify domestic oil and gas licences and drag their feet on multilateral financial commitments. This is causing "real worry" among climate-vulnerable developing nations, WRI chief executive Ani Dasgupta said. He said that although the initial "shock" to the world's energy markets after the invasion of Ukraine "quickly went away", it has triggered "real worry among poorer countries that when push comes to shove, it won't be an even game, or have a fair outcome." Developing countries have long complained about the lack of access to climate funding. Richer nations have only recently met the $100bn/yr target in climate finance to developing countries agreed in 2009, while discussions on setting a new climate finance goal for 2025 at Cop 29 in Baku in November could prove difficult. President of the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville) Denis Sassou-Nguesso said last year that the $100bn/yr in climate financing to developing countries promised by rich countries "never reached us", adding that the annual UN Cop climate conferences have become little more than a talking shop. "Just after the invasion of Ukraine, every country started to think about energy security," Dasgupta said. "In theory, good things could have happened, countries could have concluded that their best bet to getting energy security is by going renewable". But it was not the case in key consumer countries or regions, Dasgupta pointed out. China bought the majority of Russian gas following the EU's withdrawal, he said, and has since upped production at coal-fired power stations despite an "extraordinary" acceleration towards renewables set for 2023-28, according to Paris-based energy watchdog IEA . In Europe, the UK and Norway continue to award new oil and gas licences . "In the US, the fossil fuel lobby argues that the best route to energy security is to invest more in fossil fuels". But the best route is to invest in more renewables, he said. "Even if the US produces a large amount of oil and gas, it is still a traded commodity, and so you have to pay a price for it that is set globally." The US special presidential co-ordinator for energy security Amos Hochstein has also suggested in September that a widening climate finance gap could ultimately threaten global security. "We have seen the percentage of dollars spent on the energy transition outside the OECD, in developing and middle income countries actually go down instead of up…" By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Read more
News

Australia to delay mandatory climate reporting to 2025


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Australia to delay mandatory climate reporting to 2025

Sydney, 28 March (Argus) — Australia's biggest companies will likely face mandatory climate reporting from 1 January 2025, six months later than originally planned, according to a bill the Australian federal government introduced in parliament. Under the revised proposal, the country's largest companies and financial institutions will need to start disclosing their climate-related risks and opportunities, including scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, within their annual sustainability reports from 1 January 2025 instead of 1 July as previously intended . Scope 3 emissions disclosure will continue to be required from the second year of reporting. Companies will be arranged in three groups, with group 1 entities including companies meeting at least two of three criteria: more than A$500mn ($324mn) of annual revenues, over A$1bn of gross assets, 500 or more employees. Group 2 companies will have lower thresholds — above A$200mn of revenues, $500mn of assets and 250 employees — and will start reporting from the financial year starting on 1 July 2026. Reporting for group 3 entities — those with more than A$50mn of revenues, $25mn of assets and 100 employees — will begin from 1 July 2027. The 1 January 2025 start date might be pushed further to 1 July 2025, if the bill does not become law before 2 December. It will now be debated in parliament and needs to pass both houses, the Senate and the House of Representatives, before receiving royal assent. Its approval will support more investment in renewable energy as well as help companies and investors manage climate risks, the government said. Companies are currently not required to report their scope 3 emissions under Australia's National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act, which is used to measure and report GHG emissions and energy production and consumption. Scope 3 can include emissions within supply chains that occur inside or outside Australia, such as emissions from the combustion of Australian coal or LNG exported to other countries. By Juan Weik Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Japan’s Renova starts Miyagi biomass power plant


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Japan’s Renova starts Miyagi biomass power plant

Tokyo, 28 March (Argus) — Japanese renewable power developer Renova started commercial operations today at its 75MW Ishinomaki Hibarino biomass-fired power plant in northeast Japan's Miyagi prefecture. The power plant is designed to consume an undisclosed volume of wood pellets and palm kernel shells (PKS) to generate around 530 GWh/yr of electricity. Renova originally targeted to start up the power plant in May 2023 but postponed the start-up multiple times. Renova has been forced to delay the start-up schedules at several of its power plants. It previously targeted to begin commercial operations of the 75MW Omaezaki biomass power plant this month but postponed it to July, as the final adjustment of boiler and turbine units is taking longer than expected. It delayed the launch of the 74.8MW Tokushima Tsuda biomass power plant in September before it began commercial operations in December 2023 . Japan imported 1mn t of wood pellets during January-February, up by 14pc from the same period in 2023, according to the finance ministry. PKS purchases fell by 24pc to 466,186t. By Nanami Oki Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Oil transition plans inadequate for investors: Report


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

Oil transition plans inadequate for investors: Report

London, 27 March (Argus) — Oil and gas producers' energy transition plans are "insufficient for investors to accurately gauge transition risk", according to a report released today from investor initiative Climate Action 100+ and investor research group Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI). Several companies measured have net zero goals, but there is an "absence of disclosure on critical elements", which makes it difficult for investors to understand how companies will achieve net zero, as well as the transition risks posed. The lack of sufficient transition plans presents a "material financial risk", Climate Action 100+ said. The report assessed 10 publicly-listed oil and gas producers — European firms BP, Eni, Repsol, Shell and TotalEnergies, and North American companies Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Occidental and Suncor. The companies scored lowest against 'alignment' metrics, measuring if they are in line with the Paris climate agreement that seeks to limit global warming to 1.5°C above the pre-industrial average. "More disclosure is required on the central aspects of transition planning, including measures to neutralise emissions, and production forecasts", TPI found. Companies assessed failed to score on 87pc of metrics related to quantifying emissions cuts, and on 89pc of metrics related to future oil and gas production. Most North American firms assessed have stated they plan to lift output, the report noted. But "without acknowledging the impact of the transition on the core business, companies risk deploying capital that… accentuates the risk of assets becoming stranded", it said. The report flagged a stark difference between the two regions. "European companies provide substantially better disclosure, set more aligned targets and are investing more in climate solutions", it said. North American firms are "not planning to meaningfully diversify into low carbon energy production", while European ones are exploring a range of lower-carbon options, including biofuels, hydrogen and renewable power. The companies assessed are also not reaching for "easy wins" on methane abatement, with just two having "convincing strategies" on this, the report found. Of the 10 companies, seven have joined reduction initiative the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership, but "most companies have not set a methane emissions reduction target with a clear and specific base and target year." Investment is crucial for companies looking to decarbonise. A report this week from non-profit CDP and consulting firm Oliver Wyman found that more than half of corporations in high-emitting sectors said access to capital was "a key concern in decarbonisation efforts". Their report analysed data from 1,600 European companies, which reported via CDP's environmental disclosures programme. "This implementation gap between concrete business actions and stated climate goals persists despite most businesses reporting they have a transition plan and emissions reduction targets in place", CDP said. By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Australia softens fuel efficiency standard targets


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

Australia softens fuel efficiency standard targets

Sydney, 27 March (Argus) — The Australian federal government has agreed on draft legislation for its fuel efficiency standards for new passenger and light commercial vehicles, which will come into effect with reduced targets and later than originally proposed. The scheme will start on 1 January 2025 as planned by the government but manufacturers will not begin earning credits or penalties until 1 July 2025. This will enable it to prepare and test data reporting capabilities in partnership with the industry, the federal government said. Some sport utility vehicles, such as the Toyota Landcruiser and Nissan Patrol models, will also be recategorised as light commercial vehicles that will now have smoother targets compared with the government's preferred model released in early February. The government said this reflects recent adjustments announced by the US Environmental Protection Agency to its vehicle standards, which gave US auto manufactures more time to scale up the production of electric vehicles (EVs). Under Australia's proposed emissions standards, whose bill was introduced for a vote in parliament on 27 March, manufacturers will be set an average carbon dioxide (CO2) target for the range of vehicles they sell. Those will be lowered over time to mandate the sale of more fuel efficient, low or zero emissions vehicles. Companies that exceed their emissions targets will receive credits, which they might sell to less efficient manufacturers or use in future years. Those that fail to meet the requirement will need to make it up over the following two-year period, pay a penalty or acquire credits. The government's preferred model was criticised by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) as unreasonable , given the short timeframe for manufacturers to adjust their fleets. The FCAI welcomed the changes made by the government, although it said it would still need to review the draft legislation in detail to understand the impact to the industry and consumers. Associations such as the Electric Vehicle Council of Australia and the Climate Council supported the bill, with the former saying the "strong, ambitious standards" will drive a greater update of EVs. Charging boost Together with the bill, the federal government announced it will provide A$60mn ($39.2mn) to boost EV charging at Australian car dealerships. It said the standards will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from new passenger vehicles by more than 60pc by 2030, while those from new light commercial vehicles will be nearly halved over the same period compared with a 60pc reduction originally. Environmental group Greenpeace said the final proposal is a meaningful effort to reduce transport pollution but it will achieve only 80pc of the emissions reduction originally planned for light commercial vehicles. "The decision to weaken the standards when it comes to light commercial vehicles will mean around 20pc more carbon pollution will be allowed by 2030 compared to the original proposal, so we expect the government will be looking at other options for reducing pollution from transport in order to meet their climate targets," Greenpeace said. Transport makes up 98mn t/yr or 21pc of Australia's total GHG emissions. By 2030 it is expected to be the largest source of emissions as the electricity sector decarbonises. Government data show that on average passenger cars in Australia emit at a rate 20pc higher than the US vehicle fleet. Passenger cars contribute 41mn t/yr of CO2 equivalent (CO2e), or 42pc of all transport emissions, with light commercial vehicles emitting 18mn t/yr CO2e or 18pc of total transport emissions. By Juan Weik Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more