Five on Friday: Danish climate plan meets with criticism
Every Friday, the editorial staff of Energi og Klima presents five news items from the past week. This week I have chosen from these:
Breathtaking Danish climate plan “too little concrete”, say critics
On Wednesday this week, Denmark’s Climate Minister Dan Jørgensen presented one challenge in demand climate plan for Denmark, together with the year climate program. Now he and the rest of Mette Frederiksen’s government criticism from several teams, reports DR and Information (payment wall). Two of the government’s supporting parties believe that the plan is not concrete enough. And the leader of the Climate Council believes that we can not deliver on already adopted goals for 2025: To cut emissions by at least 50 percent.
Instead, the government has set a tight timetable for presenting and adopting a whole host of political plans and strategies. For example, before new ones come:
- A climate plan for agriculture,
- and own CO2-catch policy,
- a plan for climate-friendly public procurement,
- an e-fuel strategy
- and a strategy for restructuring Denmark’s gas system.
So this is the plan just for the next three months. And then it will continue for the next few years, because the intention is that all relevant decisions to achieve the goals of the Climate Act must be made by 2025. First, it will be time to introduce effective policy. And then it is really urgent: Climate law states that Denmark’s greenhouse gas emissions must be cut by 70 percent from 1990 levels in 2030, and the country must be climate neutral in 2050.
But the Climate Council’s leader Petter Møllgaard says they therefore do not have time to neglect the 2025 goal. The business community is also critical of the fact that it is not possible to clear signals about what framework conditions will be given when we arrive:
– The business community can not wait the end of a decade and a half to get clarity in the climate area, says climate policy leader in the Danish Chamber of Commerce Ulrich Bang according to Danish TV2.
Australia: Prime Minister in a climate crisis
Australian states now set climate targets that go far beyond the targets of the federal government. Prime Minister Scott Morrison therefore agrees under increasingly fierce pressure to tighten Australia’s climate targets, reports The Guardian. The opposition party Labor believes, for example, that Australia must report goals of climate neutrality by 2050, and more and more people in Morrison’s own Liberal Party want the same. Men Morrison holds back, and is accused of dragging his feet on climate issues. It does not exactly help that he has not even said clearly whether he will present at this autumn’s climate summit in Glasgow.
Morrison’s main problem is coalition partner Nationals, which opposes the climate field. The coalition rules with the smallest possible margin, and cracks now in the joints. Morrison’s own party is also murmuring. Now sandier as well torrential rain, extreme thunderstorms and floods million city of Brisbane, just to focus on the seriousness. If the autumn continues like this, it will be more difficult for Morrison not to book a ticket to Glasgow.
Fear climate more than corona
Climate change is again topping the risk picture for insurance experts, reports Bloomberg Green. This is stated by the insurance giant AXAs Report on future risks which came on Wednesday. Last year, the pandemic was the biggest concern. Thanks to the rollout of vaccines and increasing reopening, COVID-19 is now slipping down the aisle.
And meanwhile, the flow of long-term investors who choose to distribute oil continues: Last week, Canada’s second-largest pension fund announced, Cash deposit and placement of Quebec, that they sell out of oil, according to Pensions & Investments.
USA: More “fair” flood insurance leads to a multiplication of insurance premiums
The United States has federal flower insurance, which consists of settlement in hurricane-prone areas. But the challenge has been heavily subsidized. Reach reports the responsible agency FEMA that the flood insurance will in future be priced so that it reflects actual risk. The aim must be to help potential residents gain a «greater understanding of the risk» they can use to live in vulnerable areas. But in some areas, price adjustments and brutal tasks become: New York Times tells about and special case: A resident near Tampa in Florida who today pays $ 480, around $ 4,200, for flood insurance. Under the new rules, she has to pay 7140 dollars a year, ie more than 62,000 kroner. Now local politicians from both parties are trying to get FEMA to turn around.
“Gassbro” decision in the European Parliament
This summer, we wrote in our EU newsletter about how the revision of the rules for cross-border energy infrastructure (TEN-E Regulation) created conflict. While Western European countries would keep natural gas without the regulation, Eastern European countries would allow more natural gas. Now the European Parliament has voted, and adopted the compromise: Natural gas will as a general rule not be covered by the regulation. The exception is investing in such infrastructure that can contribute to and dispose of more polluting fossil fuels, such as coal. I also have a special status for projects where hydrogen is mixed into natural gas until 2027. The compromise is applauded by the gas industry, Greenpeace is not very happy.