|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 31st, 2010 “Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday that the country’s economy would expand by 7% this year. ‘We project an economic growth of no less than 7% in 2010 and we intend to create 2.5 million jobs,’ the President said. According to him, such a high growth expectation is possible due to the growing domestic market, the country’s solid banks and the government’s anti-cyclic policies. The President reaffirmed the need for reforms of the international financial institutions in order to prevent another financial crisis. ‘It is necessary to end lenient standards and repress the financial speculation in the international commodities market,’ the President said.” Brazil: Midyear Economic and Political Outlook. 8:00 – 8:30 AM Registration, Breakfast and Networking Hosted By: Speakers: ———————————————————————————————————————————
If any one figure personifies the New Brazil, it is surely Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President since January 1 2003 – and whose Presidency will end December 31, 2010. His childhood journey from rural poverty in Brazil’s hard-scrabble north-east to the industrial rust belt around São Paulo is one that millions of his compatriots have made themselves. His ascendancy from shoeshine boy to lathe operator, from union leader to founder of one of Brazil’s biggest political parties and thence to the presidency, mirrors Brazil’s own extraordinary progress over the past decade and a half. His charisma and popularity – his support in opinion polls has hardly dipped below 70 per cent during two four-year terms – are the perfect symbol for the exuberance and confidence of Brazil’s rising consumer classes. But Lula da Silva’s time is almost up. Four months from now, in October, Brazilians must choose a new president. The FT EDITOR’S CHOICE extends now to four additional articles from that report:South America’s giant comes of age – Jun-28Why Brazil must try harder – Jun-28A nation’s destiny – Jun-28To some, the election makes little difference. “Sincerely, I really don’t think markets are worried,” says Rogério Schmidt of CLP, a São Paulo political think-tank. “There is a sense that whoever wins, there will be a mix of orthodox and heterodox policies.” That view is supported by the fact Brazil has enjoyed broad continuity in macroeconomic policies for the past 16 years. The inflation-busting reforms that laid the basis of today’s prosperity were introduced in 1994 by Fernando Henrique Cardoso, then finance minister and subsequently president from 1995 to 2002. When Lula da Silva was elected to succeed him, Brazil’s borrowing costs soared as investors worried that the former firebrand leftwinger would lose control of public finances and lead Brazil into default. But Lula da Silva moved quickly to calm such fears, by promising no rupture with the past and by installing trusted pro-market figures at the finance ministry and central bank (the former lost to a corruption scandal in 2006; the latter still in office today). Many observers expect similar or greater continuity when the president hands over to his successor in January. Others are less sanguine. They worry that investors take too much comfort from the ease of transition last time around and risk becoming complacent about Brazil’s future prospects. “It worries me that people think this election doesn’t matter,” says Jim O’Neill, chief economist at Goldman Sachs and one of Brazil’s most vocal champions over the past decade. “People are getting carried away.” He says he has no view on who would make the best presidential successor, as long as that person ensures current macro policies stay in place.
The frontrunners in opinion polls are José Serra and Dilma Rousseff. He was governor of São Paulo state (Brazil’s biggest) and she was Lula da Silva’s chief minister until both stood down in April to qualify as candidates.It is often supposed that Serra is the more market-friendly candidate while Rousseff is more inclined to enlarge the role of the public sector in the economy to the detriment of the private sector. Serra was a highly successful health minister under Cardoso who has earned a reputation for managerial efficiency and fiscal austerity, not least as governor of São Paulo. If, as his centrist opposition party, the PSDB, has argued, what Brazil needs most is a dose of good management, he could be the man for the job. But Rousseff is also billed as a master of management, although with the emphasis on central planning rather than a minimal state. Lula da Silva calls her “the mother of the PAC [the government’s flagship growth acceleration programme]” and she is closely associated with what Brazilians call “developmentalism” – a drive for growth and income distribution above all else that pays less attention to the need for fiscal reform and an overhaul of Brazil’s tax system and labour laws. This suggests a broad distinction: Serra more orthodox, Rousseff more populist. Yet this classification does not hold up to much scrutiny. The bastion of orthodoxy in the Lula government has been the central bank, led by Henrique Meirelles, a former head of Bank Boston and a former member of Serra’s PSDB. Although the bank is not independent by law, it has been given operational independence, adjusting interest rates in pursuit of the government’s annual inflation targets, often in the face of fierce criticism from all sides, both inside and outside government. Serra – who was moved to health from the planning ministry under Cardoso after disagreements with the finance ministry and central bank – is among the most vocal critics of Brazil’s high interest rates. It could be argued that he would tackle the fiscal problems that have kept them high for so long. But he has a reputation as an interventionist and in recent interviews has done little to dispel a concern among many economists that he would attempt to reduce interest rates at the stroke of a pen. This, many observers fear, would not only undermine the credibility of monetary policy but also cause a mass walk-out of the central bank’s most competent directors. The impact on investor confidence could be disastrous.
Rousseff has gone out of her way to emphasise that if she wins, the three pillars of stability – inflation targeting, a floating exchange rate and gradual reductions in public debt – will be untouched. She is also close to Meirelles and to Antonio Palocci, the Lula government’s first finance minister who, in terms of economic policy, is probably to the right of Serra.Does this mean that Rousseff is the investor’s choice after all? Perhaps, but perhaps not, for a number of reasons. One is that she is not Lula da Silva, and may lack the political clout to defend the central bank or to hold in check the statist instincts of other leaders of their leftwing party, the PT (and which some commentators say she also shares). Another is that Serra, while erratic on monetary policy, shows every sign of being far more hawkish on fiscal issues – and a dose of fiscal hawkishness would be to Brazil’s benefit as evidence mounts that the economy is overheating, partly due to the exaggerated presence of the public sector. Perhaps doubts such as these will be clarified as campaigning starts after the World Cup. But, again, perhaps not. Orthodox economic policies have been good for the Brazilian people but they have rarely gained much popularity, perhaps because of an enduring belief in the beneficial influence of the state. If the opening salvos in the pre-campaign period have been any guide, the election will come down to a dispute over who is best suited to continue the work of Lula da Silva. With the most popular president in Brazilian history making it the declared priority of his final year to get her elected as his successor, Rousseff has got to be the one to beat. ———————————- What above article is missing is the candidacy of Marina da Silva, the Candidate of the Green Party and also a friend of President Lula. The issue is that though she does not have the votes it takes to win, she does have enough votes to influence who of the two above does win. It seems safe to accept that she will b part of a government established by whoever among the two front runners does win. ——————————- Our last article on deepwater drilling for oil – http://www.sustainabilitank.info/category/latin-america/brazil/#17264 has obviously as well interest to our readers about Brazil. Oil groups view the reality of upcoming tougher US rules on drilling. How will Canada, Brazil, the UK, Norway and Australia react? What will ExxonMobil, Chevron, Total, ConocoPhillips and Shell do? Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 22nd, 2010 —————————– From the two days at the Brazilian-American Chamber of Commerce Inc. I will start with the second say – this was the presentation by Dr. Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, a San Paulo based economist of high standing who is also an Economic Advisor to Ms. da Silva’s Presidential Campaign – on a Green Party line. Mr. da Fonseca is important and, we will not be surprised if Ms da Silva ends up in next government and so Mr. Gianetti da Fonseca. Marina da Silva’s childhood spent in the rain forest taught her the most valuable lesson anyone can learn: the love for the environment. She says she gets lost in any city in the world, but never in the forest. Already, when she was very young she knew she wanted to save her home, the rainforest, from the destruction by illegal loggers . 2003-08 Minister of Environment Maria Osmarina Marina da Silva Vaz de Lima. She has had to fight hard to reduce deforestation in the Amazon by 75 % and because of her, today, Brazil has the strictest environmental laws in the world. She resigned her position as Minister on May 14, 2008 after losing several key battles in her fight to rein in destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Her resignation was a blow to the Lula Government. If the government had any global credibility in environmental issues, it was because of Minister Marina,” Jose Maria Cardoso da Silva, vice president of Conservation International-South America, told Reuters. She only learned how to read and write when she was 16 years old and moved to the closest town, 70 km away – to Rio Branco. In the forest she was part of rubber trees tappers and worked as a child as there was no school nearby. When she came to Rio Branco she worked all day as a maid, and studied hard at night. She graduated in history in 1985 and soon became involved as a leader in a syndicate, defending workers. She became in 1994 the youngest female senator ever to be elected. When she resigned from her position of Minister of the Environment it was said that “Brazil is losing the only voice in the government that spoke out for the environment,” Sergio Leitao, director of public policy for Greenpeace in Brazil, was quoted as saying by the Associated Press. “The minister is leaving because the pressure on her for taking the measures she took against deforestation has become unbearable.” In Brazil, and internationally, she is a recognized hero – small in stature but long in spirit. She has no chance to win in the elections, but is considered a potential coalition member by either of the two front runners. As we understood from Mr. Giannetti, she might be favored more by Mr. Serra for balancing purpose. Mr. Giannetti himself is not a Paul Krugman, not even a Jeffrey Sachs or Joe Stiglitz. Nevertheless, in the Brazilian context he is is advanced, and we dare to say of exactly the mind-set that put together the Financial Times insert we mentioned above. Mr. Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca born in Belo Horizonte, in 1957, studied in Sao Paulo, received his doctorate in economics from the University of Cambridge, where he was also a professor from 1984 to 1987. From 1988 to 2001 he taught at the FEA/USP (School of Economics, Business and Accounting of the University of São Paulo). He is currently a full-time professor at IBMEC (Instituto Brasileiro de Mercado de Capitais) São Paulo. He came through as a basically enlightened conventional economist who has serious criticism of the Brazilian government. He said that huge part of the private sector relies on protection, subsidies etc. This helps the government to neutralize opposition. Business leaders will thus not speak up against the government in order not to be excluded from the ongoing system. In this respect it is clearly worse then the US State Socialism as here the lobbies fight for the share of public funding but never stop criticizing the government that feds them. Giannetti has helped shape the intellectual debate in Brazil by pointing at things as I just noted and this is what makes him important in the public discourse. His target is the Brazilian Complacency – and the effects of Growth with Imbalances. In the 90s Brazil used to be hypersensitive to global shocks – now it absorbed the shock without any major effects. Much of this is credited to the fact that it has $250 billion in foreign reserves insurance – this up from $39 billion in 2003. In 1970 it was about zero. How did it happen? This was thanks to a very dynamic export sector that led to the big turn around in current accounts. There is a positive balance also for the Public Sector – no debt. There was an increase in minimum vages and improvement of credit to the lower income masses. The continuity of government public policy and monetary stability – this for 12 years – since the second Cardozo government – created the confidence that things are under control. For Brazil, during the recent crisis – it was a clear first. While the world was in crisis – Brazil reduced interest rates whereas in the past it would have acted the other way around and devalued the currency on top. Now, Brazil has a strong currency – maybe too strong. Even though the public was buying less, there was an increase in expenditures by the public sector and an aggressive program to keep credit flowing – Brazil had a “good” crisis compared to others. Ergo – his optimism for the future of Brazil. But not so fast – he wants us to remember that it was the same during the second half of the 50′s under the Juscelino Kubitschek government’s growth of 10% consistently – but that was not sustained! They tripled the monetary base in 5 years to build Brasilia – this could not be sustained. Similarly – in the mid 70′s, when there was the oil crisis, Brazil was an island of prosperity in a sea of turbulence, but it also turned around This because the external debt that was fueled by OPEC money surplus and it ended in a 80′s-90′s collapse. He is warning of this series of failed stabilization cycles and we must learn from the errors and he proceeded to talk of the threats and the problems. He says we (Brazil) must learn from errors. With 7.5% growth per year expectation of inflation is growing. We face now for the first time since 2007 a current account deficit. It can be managed if it is done correctly. The danger is Overheating the economy. The way the government makes money available as implicit subsidy to the public enterprise. The government does not provide consistent figures but the treasury charges a fraction on this debt. This support for business amounts to $8 billion – more then the expenditures on social problems. His criticism of the government is that the expenditures are obscure and he feels not answering democracy and transparency. That is serious criticism and any next government will have to take a long look at it. On the other hand, the true driving force of growth was consumption. It is by families – this added to private investment and government investment – but we know you cannot do it all at the same time – that causes Overheating and Increased Imports. He went so far as to say that the Brazilian Government is like a brain with two hemispheres not connected – a Fiscal Side part and a Monetary Side part. Then he moved to education. His complaint that there is no number for measuring human capital build up. His estimate is 1.8% in this area and says 5-6% of GDP are needed for the long run. This creates a distortion in ways of long term business in Brazil. 39% of GDP is mediated by the State and the investment capacity of the private sector is extremely low – there is only 2.1% that comes out of this as capital formation. OECD countries statistics covering 57 countries, puts Brazil as 54th – and this is because of the human capital deficit. From her he moved to the Business Environment and pointed out that the Underground Economy in Brazil is 1/3 of the total economy. This is another big problem. In the World Bank estimates of 1`83 countries Brazil is 129th in the complexity of its tax system causing an absurd situation of the labor market. The government rellies on PAY-ROLL TAXES and 9% of GDP comes from this. The result is that hiring in the labor open market is dangerous to businesses in litigation terms. it takes 2600 hours/year to calculate and collect taxes while similarly outside Brazil it takes 138 hours. These labor and taxation laws become prohibitive and push businesses into the underground economy. CONCLUSION – In the Short Term Prospects in Brazil are Good – In the Long Term More Difficult. ——- The elections: Marina da Silva, his candidate, only dreams. Serra – has monetaristic views of the policy. Here, if it gets difficult – interest rates are risen. He thinks the currency is already absurdly overvalued – so you really cannot increase interest rates. Dilma – here he sees as problem that she will just continue the policy as she gets at the end of the Lula Administration. Giannetti thinks the State has infrastructure problems and is afraid that Dilma will start from the belief that the State can provide the way to attract private enterprise. ——- The chair remarked that there is agreement that the tax system must be overhauled but there is no agreement on how to do it. He also mentioned that labor is ready to go along with elimination of the labor courts – how can these things be helped by change of Presidency? A. The political consensus can help in the change. All see that there is a clear need to reduce payroll taxes in order to increase hiring – but then he said education and other things are paid for from these taxes. This is thus counterproductive! You can improve things when you incorporate the informal economy. To achieve this you must mobilize support. The underground economy has no access to credit, to technology – there is need for leadership to reel this all in! —— Question on the structural problems – lack of adequate infrastructure that was answered that the Central Bank has to do changes. The sad thing is that in Brazil – Words replace Acts, and we may have reached a state that a World double-dip helps Brazil. If that is salvation – what is damnation? – Question on the potential growth rate based on May data. A. We again rely on external savings and to some extent they are welcome – but this must be done carefully. —— NOW WE HAVE REACHED THE POINT WHERE I WAS ABLE TO PLACE MY OWN QUESTION, AND THIS WILL ALSO EXPLAIN WHY I STARTED MY REPORTING WITH MR. GIANNETTI FIRST: Based on the presentations of the previous day, where to a question of mine I was told that Brazil need the income from Petroleum in order to pursue things like education, it is that the public in Brazil will not be ready to address the possibility of a blowout like it happened in the Gulf of Mexico. I was left feeling like I was the outside kid who simply said the King is naked. Clearly, we will get back to the above, but let me say that here I started my question from the idea we heard that EDUCATION IS PAID FOR FROM LABOR TAX-ROLLS and mentioned that though Mr. Giannetti also did not touch even in passing the money-making of PETROBRAS, or the Environment, nevertheless, if the money is not really used for the causes he was talking about, then could we take an honest look at the potential damages from deepwater drilling for petroleum? A. The idea is for using the oil money in a fund established outside Brazil to fund the development of Brazil. What he is most afraid of for Brazil is that this money falls into the hands of a populist government that gets hold of Brazil – like it happened in other countries of Latin America. It could even turn Brazil to OPEC. In short – he described the well known “curse of oil.” Giannetti agred with me that the production of oil will become much more expensive in the wake f the Gulf Coast blow-out. —— To another question he answered that there is no clear analysis of the Brazilian economy by private enterprise because of the fact that most are being subsidized by government and they would not want to fall out of line because that would translate in their losing the subsidies – We have a very diligent bureaucracy that enforces its own codes of unanimous opinion-making. There are 40 million pay checks that go to 120 million people dependent on them – and that is the real governing power in Brazil he implied. To the idea of increasing savings in order to create funds for investment – he said it must be all voluntary – he dreads compulsory credit and wants voluntary credit. ============================== June 10, 2008, Mr. Jose Sergio Gabrielli, President and cEO pf Petroleo Brasiliero S.A. – Petrobras - was the speaker at a BACC breakfast at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in New York City. His line was then: “While some of the world’s largest oil producers, including Mexico and Iran, are struggling to remain exporters, Brazil is moving in the opposite direction. (?? – he said that.) A huge underwater oil field discovered late last year has the potential to transform South America’s largest country into a sizable exporter and win it a seat at the table of the world’s oil cartel …” He was optimistic that the company could develop the oil — “We think we can develop the oil faster than we thought at the beginning,” Mr. Gabrielli said then. “We don’t think we have any insurmountable challenge on the technology side.” At the time it was an oil company CEO making his presentation before a room-full of potential Wall Street investors. We neither heard there the government of Brazil making a political case, nor any other case of national economic significance. Above, the Brazilian ethanol issue, has been swallowed up now by Petrobras which sees in it another good avenue for profits, and is in the process of turning ethanol into feed for large tanker-ships to be moved overseas. Whatever, Petrobras rules by now over Brazilian energy and by its mere size, over the Brazilian economy as well. We are sure that they do not need anymore to come to Wall Street in order to advertise their potential – it is now Wall Street that chases after Petrobras. Nevertheless, it is a bit surprising that speakers on Brazil’s economic and political future manage somehow not to mention Petrobras in their presentations. ============================== Brazil Update: Tight Race for the PresidencyMateo Samper and Valeria Cruz
July 29, 2010, http://www.as-coa.org/articles/2566/Brazil_Update:_Tight_Race_for_the_Presidency/ Brazilians head to the polls on Sunday, October 3, to choose a new president who will lead the country for the next four years. The top contenders are Dilma Rousseff of the Worker’s Party (PT) and José Serra of the Brazilian Social Democratic Party (PSDB). A third candidate, Marina Silva of the Green Party (PV), trails third in the polls but could be a key player in the likely scenario that neither of the frontrunners wins the requisite 50 percent of ballots in the first round. If necessary, the runoff would be scheduled for October 31. However, for the past three months, the two have been technically tied in the polls. One recent survey shows Rousseff ahead by eight points, but another places Serra on top by just one percentage point. Marina Silva, who has been gaining ground, polls at 10 percent.
The Candidates in Brief
President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva handpicked Rousseff as his successor. She worked as a member of his cabinet since the beginning of his presidency in 2002, first as minister of Energy and Mines and then as chief of staff starting in 2005. If elected, she will be Brazil’s first female president. Prior to serving in the president’s cabinet, Rousseff worked for the city of Porto Alegre’s Treasury Department and for the state of Rousseff has never been elected to public office, but she now rides high on Lula’s popularity and promises to continue his policies. As she said: “President Lula left me a legacy—to take care of the Brazilian people. I am going to be a mother for all the Brazilian people.” Observers expect her to maintain market friendly economic policies paired with continued federal intervention in the economy. Internationally, she’s expected to pursue a left-leaning agenda, keeping close ties with Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez and the Castro government in Cuba, as well as to work closely with emerging markets.
Until March 2010, Serra was the governor of the state of São Paulo, the most industrialized state in the country, accounting for over 31 percent of the Brazilian GDP. A U.S.-trained economist with a doctorate, he has been a congressman and a senator, as well as the mayor of São Paulo (2004-2007). He also served as planning minister (1995-1996) and health minister (1998-2002) under President Fernando Henrique Cardoso. Serra disputed and lost the presidency to Lula in 2002. Considered a center-right pragmatic administrator with pro-market views, the PSDB candidate would continue Lula’s subsidy programs targeting the poor but favors less economic intervention. Serra has
been stepping up his criticisms against the Lula administration, questioning Brazil’s alignment with countries such as Venezuela and Iran.
Given the state of the economy and the popularity of the current president, Serra could have a difficult time trying to convince voters that he represents a better alternative to Rousseff’s continuity.
Green Party candidate Marina Silva is a former senator and world-renowned environmentalist. Silva, who stepped down as Lula’s environment minister in May 2008, proposes to cut taxes and social security benefits, urging a reform of the country’s costly pension system. The PV candidate also indicated that she would continue many of Lula’s policies, such as poverty reduction programs. Rather than promoting handouts, she has pledged to encourage mobility through better education and more job opportunities. In little over six months, Rousseff has surged in the polls, increasing the chances that the PT will remain in power. There are two explanations behind Rousseff’s rising support: the economy and Lula’s huge popularity, which is now close to 78 percent. Brazil has been steadily growing in recent years while keeping inflation low, allowing 13 million people to rise out of poverty from 1995 to 2008. In the midst of the global economic crisis, the country recorded only a mild slowdown. Its economy is expected to grow at around 7 percent this year, which could lead to the creation of thousands of new jobs. Moreover, expanded subsidy programs for low-income families, particularly in the north of the country, has made President Lula hugely popular and helped Rousseff boost her numbers as she promises to continue Lula’s policies and efforts.
But Lula’s involvement in the presidential race has raised eyebrows. He has used his political influence to promote and openly campaign in favor of his chosen candidate, earning him several fines from the electoral authority. He is now under the investigation of the deputy electoral attorney general, Sandra Cureau, who is studying the possibility of an action before the Brazilian Federal Election Commission against Lula for abuse of political and economic power. In that case, President Lula would garner additional fines and face sanctions, such as the inability to pursue public posts for as many as eight years.
In Brazil, presidents can endorse candidates, but what seems less clear is to what extent. PT lawyer Márcio Luiz Silva argued that the president can campaign when the event is not financed or organized by the federal government. He has also said that, as an affiliated member of the PT, Lula has the right to participate in campaign events in support of his candidate. Although television debates and radio commercials do not start until August 17, many of the candidates have begun debating online, as well as hosting campaign rallies. However, Rousseff said she would only participate in four of several planned presidential debates on television, prompting opponents and other analysts to posit that she is ill prepared for debates with Serra and Silva. Rousseff countered that her tight agenda limited her availability for debates and she would be open to interviews in Brasilia. In spite of the debate dispute, many analysts forecast that, barring a very poor performance in the debates or a major gaffe in what’s left of the campaign, Rousseff will emerge the victor in October. ————————————————————-==================================———————————————
Backing now into the July 21, 2010 Seminar on Brazil’s Economic and Political Outlook presented Midyear 2010, but in clear view of the October 3, 2010 Presidential elections, we listened to the following two panels: A, The Post-Crisis Election Macro Economy: Policy Challenges and Investment Opportunities. With Marcelo Salomon, Director and Chief Brazil Economist at Barclays Capital B. The Electoral Landscape, Platforms, Likely Outcomes: Lula’s Legacy and Shadow 2012-2016. With Christopher Garman, Director and Head of the Latin America Practice Eurasia Group, The welcome remarks were by host Michael J. Gilespi, Partner of Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP our hosts. ——- From the above, we see that all except Paulo Sotero Marques are economists and as this was going on with a Wall Street audience in New York, it became quite clear from the start that this was more about what Wall Street would like to see happen in Brazil, then what is best for Brazil. The point was that if post crisis – The US, China and the EU all grow, Brazil will have to compete in this capital market. Then, if Brazil continues as now, it will have a two tier money lending market and the formal banking system will be more aggressive in order to be able to accommodate growth. – Kasumovich looked at the young population with good potential for new household formation that will lead to growth. He sees the continuation of Microbased policies to facilitate this. He evaluates the situation as being helped by the crisis in the developed world that helped Brazil to avoid superheating. It regulated the normal cyclic expansion mechanism. POORER COUNTRIES RAISE THEIR STANDARDS AND HELP FINANCE THE US – THAT IS THE TRANSITION IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY. THE CURRENCY CRISES OF THE PAST WERE I THE FINANCING OF THE US DEBT. This does not impact the foreign investment in Brazil. The likelihood for a vicious cycle in Brazil is low. The above may change if US troubles go away. He further said that Petrobras has growth potential and is hampered by management. I cringed thinking what if Petrobras might not want to grow fast? Actually thet are Brazil Government owned and what does the government think? I promis to get back to this point. – Salomon said the missing link is the challenge of growing with savings. He wants sustainable growth. He finds an excellent monetary policy in Brazil, that eliminated inflation, but does not see the effort to answer: “Where do we get the money for investment.” Will it come from foreign savings only? Internal savings is now 14% but 10% more are needed. He asked: “Where the Wild Things Are? – Who will finance the infrastructure investments for the 2014 World Cup, The 2016 Olympics, the Pre-Salt oil extractive business? —- IS KEYNES REALLY DEAD – OR HE JUST MOVED TO BRAZIL, he asked.” Fiscal spending is increased by BNDES and he does not see things discussed during the present crisis as part of the election process. – Garman said there is more at stake: He sees no macroeconomic policy split between Serra and Dilma, but sector specific industrial policy differences. He specifically noted very different views on how to develop Brazil’s oil sector – with repercussion to growth he said. This will influence utilities, telecom, mining as well. He finds that the main difference between Serra and Dilma is in the industrial area. This gave me the clear feeling why the room was rather in Serra’s corner. – Sotero, as I said earlier, was different. He is a Journalist and had the longest resume of the four speakers. Paulo Sotero was the Washington correspondent for Estado de S.Paulo, the Gazeta Mercantil, for the last seventeen years. He has been also a regular commentator and analyst for the BBC radio’s Portuguese language service, Radio France Internationale, and the Brazilian Rádio Eldorado.He started He is a native of Sao Paulo, stated his career at the Veja weekly in 1968, held positions in Recife, Paris, Lisbon, Sao Paulo, and Brasilia. He is a frequent lecturer on Brazilian affairs at US universities, and think tanks. Since 2003 he has been an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University, both in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese and at the Center for Latin American Studies of the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Sotero has a BA in history from the Catholic University of Pernambuco, Brazil, and an MA in Journalism and Public Affairs from The American University in Washington, D.C. In 1987, he received the prestigious Maria Moors Cabot Award Special Citation from the Graduate School of Journalism, Columbia University. He is also the recipient of the 1993 Distinguished Visiting Lecturer award from the Foreign Service Institute of the U.S. Department of State. In Brazil, he was awarded the 1978 “Prêmio Abril de Reportagem” for Veja magazine’s cover story on Paraguay and for an investigative report on the assassination of Chilean General Carlos Prats in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington DC and at Princeton University, September 2006, appointed Sotero , as the director its Brazil Institute. He is clearly the kind of person that could evaluate not just the US interest in Brazil, but also what the people of Brazil would want to see happen to them. Dilma is clearly more ideological, and she has Lula’s backing in a country that loves Lula because he leaves the State in much better shape then he found it. Under her, there will be a clear supervision of exchange rates as her advisors will not want to see the currency appreciate – so the make-up of the Central Bank will be at play. Serra on the other hand will rather watch expenditures. 2010 is a dream year to run on a platform of continuity and Lula’s legacy and shadow will extend to the 2012-2016 years. It is clear – there is an enormously popular president, a satisfied population, an impressive economic achievements’ record and a prommissing economic outlook. ———– At Q&A time, and having heard about the reliance on income from oil as a way to fund development projects, while the oil is indeed of deepwater drilling source, and these being the days of the US BP Gulf disaster I decided to ask if in Brazil people read the papers about what can happen with this sort of oil production? From Mr. Garman I got a clear answer that it is of no concern to the Brazilians – specially as the economy is based on this income and people want education and education needs money … In this respect please see why I started the review from the following day’s presentation by Mr. Giannetti who said that education is paid from the taxes taken from labor. So – here goes out the argument that Brazil economy is based on that oil. Further o – Mr. Sotero picked up my question also and said that 25% of all investments in Brazil will go to oil & gas – this is the BNDES (the National Bank) forecast. That would tie down Brazil in many respects. In effect, the choice is to do it slower in order to develop other sectors of the economy – that will bring gains slower. But I clearly felt that this is more sustainable. Further, in private, one of the participants told me that the water currents are such that if there is an accident – the oil will go south to Argentina and will not hurt the Brazilian beaches – Well that is nice to know. We hope the Argentinians read this also. ———– The bottom line perspective of this end of July report of Brazil going to the October 3, 2010 elections, It seems the future may hold a presidency that will try to continue the achievements of the Lula eight years and it will be led by Ms. Dilma Rousseff with the support of Ms. Marina da Silva. We hope that this Brazilian Administration will clamp down on Petrobras and hold back somewhat from the development of oil beyond what is best for the Brazilian economy. The best one can hope for is that they continue to do it by themselves, at low speed, and do not look for outside companies that might be more inclined to lead them to disaster. The government will have to supervise the Petrobras accounting and indeed get the income from this that the government needs in order to build up the consumer society to help in Brazil growth as justified by its effort to grow along China and India. The official campaigning starts August 17th and provided there is no “September surprise” above is our estimate as of today.
Permalink |
| ### | ||||||||||||||||||||||
The New Brazil
Rio Grande do Sul as state secretary of Energy. She was also active in the restructuring of the center-left Brazilian Labor Party after the end of the military dictatorship in the 1980s.
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010 An Entire Generation of India’s Brightest Students is Galvanized into Tackling Sustainability, Climate Change, Energy Security and the Environment. IIT Madras to Host The 2010 Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture Competition™, India, in Chennai, September 30 ? October 3, 2010. —————— The The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture CompetitionTM 2010 to be held at IIT Madras
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 29th, 2010 WORLD NEWS – JULY 29, 2010 Climate report shows Earth has heated up over 50 years. Which in the printed Wall Street version was rechristened – “CLIMATE STUDY CITES 2000 as WARMEST DECADE.” This appropriate to the US inward look of New York, while the above title is clear better positioned for the world at large - By GAUTAM NAIK A new assessment concludes that the Earth has been getting warmer over the past 50 years and the past decade was the warmest on record. The State of the Climate 2009 report, published Wednesday as a special supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, was compiled by 300 scientists from 48 countries and drew on measures of 10 crucial climate indicators. Seven of the indicators were rising, including air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, sea level, ocean heat and humidity. Three indicators were declining, including Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere. “Each indicator is changing as we’d expect in a warming world,” said Peter Thorne, senior researcher at the Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, a research consortium based in College Park, Md., who was involved in compiling the report. The report’s conclusions broadly match those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body, which published its last set of findings in 2007. The IPCC report contained some errors, which further stoked the debate about the existence, causes and effects of global warming. The new report incorporates data from the past few years that weren’t included in the last IPCC assessment. While the IPCC report concluded that evidence for human-caused global warming was “unequivocal” and was linked to emissions of greenhouse gases, the latest report didn’t seek to address the issue. The report said, “Global average surface and lower-troposphere temperatures during the last three decades have been progressively warmer than all earlier decades, and the 2000s (2000-09) was the warmest decade in the instrumental record.” The troposphere is the lowest layer of the atmosphere. The scientists reported that they were surprised to find Greenland’s glaciers were losing ice at an accelerating rate. They also concluded that 90% of planetary warming over the past 50 years has gone into the oceans. Most of it had accumulated in near-surface layers, home to phytoplankton, tiny plants crucial to virtually all life in the sea. A new study has found that rising sea temperature may have had a harmful effect on global concentrations of phytoplankton over the past century. —————————– BUT THE WALL STREET JOURNAL IS VERY ANEMIC ON CONTENT OF ABOVE NEWS – IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, AS MOSTLY ALMOST – GO TO THE FINANCIAL TIMES. HERE YOU FIND FIONA HARVEY’S FULL ARTICLE – SHE CONTRIBUTES TO THE EDITORIAL SECTION AS WELL. YOU WILL BE IN THE CLEAR ABOUT THE MACHINATIONS IN WASHINGTON AS WELL. You will also see there the Washington rot as in the following: “Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute in the US, formerly in charge of energy with the powerful CSIS, said the new report would not change people’s minds. “It’s clear that the scientific case for global warming alarmism is weak. The scientific case for [many of the claims] is unsound and we are finding out all the time how unsound it is.” You will find that there was no doubt about the implication that it is humans who did it except in the words of that outspoken minority of industry lobbyists that hold power over Washington. ————————– NOAA finds “human fingerprints” on climateJuly 28th, 2010 by Fiona Harvey
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 20th, 2010
19 July 2010
Permalink |
| ### | ||||||||||
We all want to really make it right in the Gulf. Will BP and the government handle it well enough? That’s in doubt. It’s actually up to us all. We need urgent environmental action especially involving energy consumption: let us cut oil use.The grassroots coalition World Oil Reduction for the Gulf (WORG) has as its initial objective the promulgation and propagation of a powerful Resolution for immediate global remediation of the gusher in the Gulf of Mexico.
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 19th, 2010 The UN FOUNDATION has a question to you. They want to know if you think that climate change is everybody’s business, and then traps you into having to decide to let the money be distributed by the UN, as a help to its member State Governments. We thought that this is a really interesting question and that our readers may have ideas of their own which we hope you could pass to the UN Foundation for consideration.
Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 16th, 2010 Pop goes the green myth On World Population Day, take note: population isn’t the problem. 
by Fred Pearce, www.grist.org 11 Jul 2010.
Some greens think all efforts to save the world are doomed unless we “do something” about continuing population growth. But this is nonsense. Worse, it is dangerous nonsense. For a start, the population bomb that I remember being scared by 40 years ago as a schoolkid is being defused fast. Back then, most women round the world had five or six children. Today’s women have just half as many as their mothers — an average of 2.6. Not just in the rich world, but almost everywhere. This is getting close to the long-term replacement level, which, allowing for girls who don’t make it to adulthood, is around 2.3. Women are cutting their family sizes not because governments tell them to, but for their own good and the good of their families — and if it helps the planet too, then so much the better. This is a stunning change in just one generation. Why don’t we hear more about it? Because it doesn’t fit the doomsday agenda. Half the world now has fewer than the “replacement level” of children. That includes Europe, North America, and the Caribbean, most of the Far East from Japan to Thailand, and much of the Middle East from Algeria to Iran. Yes, Iran. Women in Tehran today have fewer children than their sisters in New York — and a quarter as many as their mothers had. The mullahs may not like it, but those guys don’t count for much in the bedroom. And China. There, the communist government decides how many children couples can have. The one-child policy is brutal and repulsive. But the odd thing is that it may not make much difference any more. Chinese women round the world have gone the same way without compulsion. When Britain finally handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, it had the lowest fertility in the world — below one child per woman. Britain wasn’t running a covert one-child policy. That was as many children as the women in Hong Kong wanted. What is going on? Family-planning experts used to say that women only started having fewer children when they got educated or escaped poverty — like us. But tell that to the women of Bangladesh. Recently I met Aisha, Miriam, and Akhi — three women from three families working in a backstreet sweatshop in the capital Dhaka. Together, they had 22 brothers and sisters. But they told me they planned to have only six children between them. That was the global reproductive revolution summed up in one shack. Bangladesh is one of the world’s poorest nations. Its girls are among the least educated in the world, and mostly marry in their mid-teens. Yet they have on average just three children now. India is even lower at 2.8. In Brazil, hotbed of Catholicism, most women have two children. And nothing the priests say can stop millions of them getting sterilized. The local joke is that they prefer being sterilized to other methods of contraception because you only have to confess once. It may not be a joke. Women are having smaller families because, for the first time in history, they can. Because we have largely eradicated the diseases that used to mean most children died before growing up. Mothers no longer need to have five or six children to ensure the next generation, so they don’t. There are holdouts, of course. In parts of rural Africa, women still have five or more children. But even here they are being rational — they need the kids to mind the animals and work in the fields. But most of the world now lives in cities. And in cities, children are an economic burden. You have to get them educated before they can get a job. And by then they are ready to leave home. The big story is that rich or poor, socialist or capitalist, Muslim or Catholic, secular or devout, with tough government birth-control policies or none, most countries tell the same story: Small families are the new norm. That doesn’t mean women don’t still need help to achieve their ambitions of small families. They need governments or charities to distribute modern contraception. But this is now about rights for women, not “population control.” It is also true that population growth has not ceased yet. We have 6.8 billion people today, and may end up with another 2 billion before the population bomb is finally defused. But this is mainly because of a time lag while the huge numbers of young women born during the baby boom years of the 20th century remain fertile. With half the world already at below-replacement birthrates, and with those rates still falling fast, the world’s population will probably be shrinking within a generation. This is good news for the environment, for sure. But don’t put out the flags. Another myth put out by the population doom-mongers is that it’s all those extra people that are wrecking the planet. But that’s no longer the case. Rising consumption today is a far bigger threat to the environment than a rising head count. And most of that extra consumption is still happening in rich countries that have long since given up growing their populations. Virtually all of the remaining population growth is in the poor world, and the poor half of the planet is only responsible for 7 percent of carbon emissions. The carbon emissions of one American today are equivalent to those of around four Chinese, 20 Indians, 40 Nigerians, or 250 Ethiopians. How dare rich-world greens blame the poor world for the planet’s perils? Some greens need to take a long, hard look at themselves. They should remember where some of their ideas came from. The granddaddy of demographic doomsters was Bob Malthus, an English clergyman who got famous by warning 200 years ago about population growth. He believed that the world’s population would keep increasing till it was cut down by disease or famine. Back in the ferment of the Industrial Revolution, he was a favorite of the evil mill owners and a scourge on anyone with a social conscience. Malthus hated Victorian charities because he said they were keeping poor people alive to breed. Better that they die, he said. He believed the workhouses, where the destitute ended up, were too lenient, and he successfully campaigned for a get-tough law known at the time as Malthus’s Law. The novelist Charles Dickens, a social reformer, attacked Malthus in several of his books. When Oliver Twist asked for more gruel in the workhouse, that was a satire on Malthus’s Law. In A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge was a caricature of Malthus. In Hard Times, Thomas Gradgrind, the unfeeling headmaster of Coketown, had a son called Malthus. I think Karl Marx, another contemporary, was spot on when he called Malthusian ideas “a libel on the human race.” And we are seeing the truth of that today as, round the world, women are voluntarily cutting their family sizes. No compulsion needed. The population bomb is being defused right now — by the world’s poor women. Sadly, the consumption bomb is still primed and ever more dangerous. Now that would be a proper target for environmentalists. Editor’s note: Read a rebuttal to Pearce’s post by Robert Walker of the Population Institute. ———————————- Earth to Fred Of course population is still a problemFred Pearce’s recent post on population generated lots of impassioned discussion. In a rebuttal post, Robert Walker of the Population Institute takes Pearce to task and says he got the story all wrong. Meanwhile, Jason D. Scorse asks: What is the “optimum” population of planet Earth? Permalink |
| ### |
Is population growth the cause of our troubles?A green myth is on the march. It wants to blame the world’s overbreeding poor people for the planet’s peril. It stinks. And on World Population Day, I encourage fellow environmentalists not to be seduced.|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 16th, 2010 New Power Capacity from Renewables Tops Fossil Fuels.07/16/2010 – SustainableBusiness.com News In 2009, for the second year in a row, both the U.S. and Europe added more power capacity from renewable sources such as wind and solar than from conventional sources like coal, gas and nuclear, according to twin reports launched today by the United Nations Environment Programme and the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21). Renewables accounted for 60% of newly installed capacity in Europe and more than 50% in the USA in 2009. This year or next, experts predict, the world as a whole will add more capacity to the electricity supply from renewable than non-renewable sources. The reports detail trends in the global green energy sector, including which sources attracted the greatest attention from investors and governments in different world regions. Investment in core clean energy (new renewables, biofuels and energy efficiency) decreased by 7% in 2009 to the value of $162 billion. Many sub-sectors declined significantly in money invested, including large (utility) scale solar power and biofuels. However, there was record investment in wind power. If spending on solar water heaters, as well as total installation costs for rooftop solar PV, were included, total investment in 2009 actually increased in 2009, bucking the economic trend. New private and public sector investments in core clean energy leapt 53% in China in 2009. China added 37 gigawatts (GW) of renewable power capacity, more than any other country. Globally, nearly 80 GW of renewable power capacity was added, including 31 GW of hydro and 48 GW of non-hydro capacity. China surpassed the U.S. in 2009 as the country with the greatest investment in clean energy. China’s wind farm development was the strongest investment feature of the year by far, although there were other areas of strength worldwide in 2009, notably North Sea offshore wind investment and the financing of power storage and electric vehicle technology companies. Wind power and solar PV additions reached a record high of 38 GW and 7 GW, respectively. Investment totals in utility-scale solar PV declined relative to 2008, partly a result of large drops in the costs of solar PV. However, this decline was offset by record investment in small-scale (rooftop) solar PV projects. The reports also show that countries with policies encouraging renewable energy have roughly doubled from 55 in 2005 to more than 100 today–half of them in the developing world–and have played a critically important role in the sector’s rapid growth. The sister reports, UNEP’s Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2010 and the REN21′s Renewables 2010 Global Status Report, were released by UN Under-Secretary-General Achim Steiner, UNEP’s Executive Director, and Mohamed El-Ashry, Chair of REN21. The UNEP report was prepared by London-based Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The REN21 report was produced by a team of authors in collaboration with a global network of research partners. The UNEP report focuses on the global trends in sustainable energy investment, covering both the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors. The REN21 report offers a broad look at the status of renewable energy worldwide today, covering power regeneration, heating and cooling and transport fuels, and paints the landscape of policies and targets introduced around the world to promote renewable energy. Achim Steiner said: “The sustainable energy investment story of 2009 was one of resilience, frustration and determination. Resilience to the financial downturn that was hitting all sectors of the global economy and frustration that, while the UN climate convention meeting in Copenhagen was not the big breakdown that might have occurred, neither was it the big breakthrough so many had hoped for. Yet there was determination on the part of many industry actors and governments, especially in rapidly developing economies, to transform the financial and economic crisis into an opportunity for greener growth.” “There remains, however, a serious gap between the ambition and the science in terms of where the world needs to be in 2020 to avoid dangerous climate change. But what this five years of research underlines is that this gap is not unbridgeable. Indeed, renewable energy is consistently and persistently bucking the trends and can play its part in realizing a low carbon, resource efficient Green Economy if government policy sends ever harder market signals to investors,” he added. Mohamed El-Ashry said, “Favorable policies now in place in more than 100 countries have played a critical role in the strength of global renewable energy investments recently. For the upward trend of renewable energy growth to continue, policy efforts now need to be taken to the next level and encourage a massive scale up of renewable technologies.” ——————
RELATED TOPICS
——————-
Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 16th, 2010 UN DAILY NEWS from the
UNITED NATIONS NEWS SERVICE 15 July, 2010 ========================================================================= UN ADVISORY GROUP SEEKS TO ENHANCE PUBLIC-PRIVATE LINKS TO BOOST ACCESS TO ENERGY. The potential of new public-private partnerships to enhance energy access and efficiency topped today’s discussions by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s high-level advisory group on the nexus between energy and climate change. “Governments alone will not be able to deal with the challenges,” said Kandeh K. Yumkella, Director-General of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), at the latest meeting of the Energy and Climate Change Advisory Group. “We need a commitment from all sectors of society, including the private sector, academia and civil society, as well as from international organizations and NGOs [non-governmental organizations],” he added. The meeting in Mexico City was hosted by Carlos Slim Helú, Mexican businessman and one the world’s wealthiest people, who is also a member of the Group, set up by Mr. Ban last year and comprising 20 business leaders, academics and representatives of the UN and civil society. In April, the Group launched a report calling on nations to commit themselves to two complementary goals. First, it urged universal access to modern energy services that are reliable, affordable, sustainable, and, if possible, from low-emissions sources by 2030. It also underlined the need to slash global energy intensity, measured by the quantity of energy per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). Currently, some 3 billion people worldwide rely on traditional biomass for cooking and heating, resulting in adverse health effects if used in inadequately ventilated buildings, with 1.6 billion having no access to electricity. “This is why we are looking at launching a worldwide campaign to ensure that access to modern energy services no longer represents a barrier to development,” Mr. Yumkella said. “A reliable, affordable energy supply is the key to economic growth and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs],” the eight anti-poverty targets with a 2015 deadline. Private companies, he pointed out, already have the technology needed to make global energy systems less dependent on fossil fuels, while many governments are offering financial incentives and support for this transition. “What we need today is to forge strong public-private partnerships to tackle these goals,” the UNIDO chief, who chairs the Advisory Group, said. Today’s meeting, co-hosted by Mexican Energy Minister Georgina Kessel Martínez, drew top UN officials and business executives, while representatives of Sharp and other corporations presented some of the latest renewable technologies. In a related development, a new report launched today by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) found that the United States and Europe have added more capacity to their electricity supplies from renewable sources, such as wind and solar, for the second consecutive year. In 2009, renewables accounted for 60 per cent of newly-installed capacity in Europe and more than 50 per cent in the USA. “The sustainable energy investment story of 2009 was one of resilience, frustration and determination,” said UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner. The sector was able to weather the global financial downturn, but faced setbacks given that last December’s UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, did not achieve the targets that had been hoped for, he noted. “Yet there was determination on the part of many industry actors and governments, especially in rapidly developing economies, to transform the financial and economic crisis into an opportunity for greener growth,” the official said. * * * TODAY’S GLOBAL CRISES HIGHLIGHT NEED TO PROMOTE HUMAN SECURITY – BAN. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has emphasized the need to promote the concept of human security, noting that the challenges facing the world today threaten the lives of millions and undermine development efforts. “Everyone has a right to enjoy freedom from fear…freedom from want…and freedom to live in dignity,” Mr. Ban said in a video message for a symposium on human security taking place in Tokyo. “These mutually reinforcing aspirations are at the heart of human security and our mission to build a better world for all,” he stated. More than ever, “we live in an interconnected world,” where crises transcend borders and threaten the lives and livelihoods of millions of men, women and children, he noted. “They increase human insecurity and undermine progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),” he added, referring to the targets world leaders have pledged to achieve by 2015, ranging from ensuring quality education and a clean environment to reducing hunger and disease. He said the symposium can help inform and advance discussions at the high-level summit he will be convening in New York in September at which world leaders will gather to push for further progress on the MDGs. The landmark 2005 World Summit referred to the concept of human security, recognizing that “that all individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to freedom from fear and freedom from want, with an equal opportunity to enjoy all their rights and fully develop their human potential.” In May, the General Assembly held its first formal debate on human security, during which Mr. Ban presented his report on the issue. Addressing that meeting, he had stressed that “we must ensure that the gains of today are not lost to the crises of tomorrow,” calling for actions focusing on “people-centred, comprehensive, context-specific and preventive strategies at every level.” Such an approach, the report pointed out, helps address both current and emerging threats, as well as their causes. The report also emphasized the need for strong and stable institutions to advance human security. Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 15th, 2010
THE GOLD STANDARD PREMIUM QUALITY CARBON CREDITS. GOLDEN PAGES IN PRINT – CARBON CHATTER: Swedavia Swedish Airports Chooses Tricorona as Supplier of Gold Standard CDM Carbon Offsets. Recently, Swedavia Swedish Airports, which runs has chosen Tricorona as supplier of Gold Standard The initiative is part of Swedavia’s comprehensive climate “Gold Standard CDM” represents the highest quality The offset projects chosen are Sri Balaji, a biomass power These projects save carbon emissions Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 15th, 2010 ROTOR ELEKTRIK URETIM OSMANIYE WIND FARM IN TURKEY (GS474) The projects consists of 54 wind turbines providing a total installed capacity 135 MW and reducing Turkey’s greenhouse gas emissions by over 300,000 tonnes a year. Located in the Gokcedag Mountain in the Osmaniye Province of Turkey, this project was fully constructed in 2009 and registered with the Gold Standard in May 2009. In addition to providing emission reductions, this project also provides the local communities with a number of sustainable benefits including local employment opportunities, knowledge transfer, contribution to thelocal economy with much of the construction equipment being sourced locally, and helping Turkey meet its growing energy demands through renewable energy sources. For more information about the impact of this project and to purchase Gold Standard VERs visit www.ecosecurities.com. Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 13th, 2010 UNEP NEWS RELEASE: Green Goes Mainstream: Biodiversity Is Climbing the Corporate Agenda. from James Sniffen : Green Goes Mainstream: Biodiversity Is Climbing the Corporate Agenda. One in four global CEOs sees biodiversity loss as a strategic issue for ———— 13 July, 2010 – Business leaders in biodiversity-rich developing economies Over 50 per cent of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) surveyed in Latin The findings, compiled by a study of “The Economics of Ecosystems and Another recent survey, also spotlighted in the TEEB report for business, Over 80 per cent of those consumers surveyed said they would stop buying The “TEEB for Business” report indicates that scrutiny of big business and The UK-based consultancy TruCost, on behalf of the UN’s Principles for Pavan Sukhdev, the TEEB Study Leader and also head of UNEP’s Green Economy Today’s report, entitled “TEEB for Business” and part of a suite of reports Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director of UNEP Julia Marton-Lefevre, TEEB advisory board member and Director-General of “Together Governments and business, in both developed and developing The TEEB report cites the case of the multinational mining giant Rio Tinto Other companies with similar commitments on biodiversity include Wal-Mart In addition to minimizing and mitigating adverse impacts, business can also The tourism sector has a major stake and role to play in conserving The “TEEB for Business” report, which will form part of a final TEEB The measurement and valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Joshua Bishop, the “TEEB for Business” report coordinator and Chief In another recent report by the World Business Council for Sustainable Steps in this direction are already being taken, as evidenced by the growth * The certified agricultural products market was valued at over $40bn in * Biodiversity offsets, such as wetland mitigation banking in the United * Bio carbon/forest offsets including REDD are expected to rise from just Starting today, businesses can show leadership on biodiversity and 1. Identifying their impacts and dependencies on biodiversity and ecosystem The “TEEB for Business” report will be launched at the first Global ———- The “TEEB for Business” report is available at www.teebweb.org The lead authors and editors of the “TEEB for Business” report include The survey of CEOs and their attitudes to biodiversity loss was carried out The survey of consumer attitudes to biodiversity and business was carried The TEEB project is hosted by UNEP and supported by the European For more information, please contact: Georgina Langdale, Communications, TEEB, Tel: +49-1707-617-138, Email Brian Thomson, Media Relations and Campaigns, IUCN, Tel: + 41-22-999-0251, Or Nick Nuttall, UNEP Spokesperson/Head of Media, Tel: +254-733-632755 *********************************** Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 11th, 2010 The Return of the Bicycle. WASHINGTON, Jul 6, 2010 (IPS) – The bicycle has many attractions as a form of personal transportation. It alleviates congestion, lowers air pollution, reduces obesity, increases physical fitness, does not emit climate-disrupting carbon dioxide, and is priced within the reach of the billions of people who cannot afford a car. Bicycles increase mobility while reducing congestion and the area of land paved over. Six bicycles can typically fit into the road space used by one car. For parking, the advantage is even greater, with 20 bicycles occupying the space required to park a car. Few methods of reducing carbon emissions are as effective as substituting a bicycle for a car on short trips. A bicycle is a marvel of engineering efficiency, one where an investment in 22 pounds of metal and rubber boosts the efficiency of individual mobility by a factor of three. The bicycle is not only a flexible means of transportation; it is ideal in restoring a balance between caloric intake and expenditure. Regular exercise of the sort provided by cycling to work reduces cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, and arthritis, and it strengthens the immune system. World bicycle production, averaging 94 million per year from 1990 to 2002, climbed to 130 million in 2007, far outstripping automobile production of 70 million. Bicycle sales in some markets are surging as governments devise a myriad of incentives to encourage bicycle use. For example, in 2009 the Italian government began a hefty incentive programme to encourage the purchase of bicycles or electric bikes in order to improve urban air quality and reduce the number of cars on the road. The direct payments will cover up to 30 percent of the cost of the bicycle. China, with 430 million bikes, has the world’s largest fleet, but ownership rates are higher in Europe. The Netherlands has more than one bike per person, while Denmark and Germany have just under one bike per person. China dramatically demonstrated the capacity of the bicycle to provide mobility for low-income populations. In 1976, this country produced six million bicycles. After the reforms in 1978 that led to an open market economy and rapidly rising incomes, bicycle production started climbing, reaching nearly 90 million in 2007. The surge to 430 million bicycle owners in China has provided the greatest increase in mobility in history. Bicycles took over rural roads and city streets. Although China’s rapidly multiplying passenger cars and the urban congestion they cause get a lot of attention, it is bicycles that provide personal mobility for hundreds of millions of Chinese. Among the industrial-country leaders in designing bicycle-friendly transport systems are the Netherlands, where 27 percent of all trips are by bike, Denmark with 18 percent, and Germany, 10 percent. By contrast, the United States and Britain are each at 1 percent. An excellent study by John Pucher and Ralph Buehler at Rutgers University analyzed the reasons for these wide disparities among countries. They note that “extensive cycling rights-of-way in the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany are complemented by ample bike parking, full integration with public transport, comprehensive traffic education and training of both cyclists and motorists.” These countries, they point out, “make driving expensive as well as inconvenient in central cities through a host of taxes and restrictions on car ownership, use and parking.… It is the coordinated implementation of this multi-faceted, mutually reinforcing set of policies that best explains the success of these three countries in promoting cycling.” And it is the lack of these policies, they note, that explains “the marginal status of cycling in the UK and USA”. The Netherlands, the unquestioned leader among industrial countries in encouraging bicycle use, has incorporated a vision of the role of bicycles into a Bicycle Master Plan. In addition to creating bike lanes and trails in all its cities, the system also often gives cyclists the advantage over motorists in right-of-way and at traffic lights. Some traffic signals permit cyclists to move out before cars. By 2007, Amsterdam had become the first western industrial city where the number of trips taken by bicycle exceeded those taken by car. Within the Netherlands, a nongovernmental group called Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-ce) has been formed to share the Dutch experience in designing a modern transport system that prominently features bicycles. It is working with groups in Botswana, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Ghana, India, Kenya, Peru, South Africa, and Uganda to facilitate bicycle use. Sales of electric bicycles, a relatively new genre of transport vehicles, also have taken off. E-bikes are similar to plug-in hybrid cars in that they are powered by two sources – in this case muscle and battery power – and can be plugged into the grid for recharging as needed. In China, where this technology came into its own, sales climbed from 40,000 e-bikes in 1998 to 21 million in 2008. China had close to 100 million electric bicycles on the road that year, compared with 18 million cars. These e-bikes are now attracting attention in other Asian countries similarly plagued with air pollution and in the United States and Europe, where combined sales now exceed 300,000 per year. In contrast to plug-in hybrid cars, electric bikes do not directly use any fossil fuel. If we can make the transition from coal-fired power plants to wind, solar, and geothermal power, then electrically powered bicycles can also operate fossil-fuel-free. Above all, the key to realising the potential of the bicycle is to create bicycle-friendly transport systems. This means providing bicycle trails and designated street lanes for bicycles, designed to serve both commuters and people biking for recreation, and making bike parking facilities and showers available at workplaces. This simple bicycle is a winner in the Plan B economy. ————— *Lester R. Brown is founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute. This article is excerpted from Chapter 6, “Designing Cities for People” in Brown’s ‘Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilisation’ (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009), available on-line at www.earthpolicy.org Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 9th, 2010
Dear all, For those of you in London or passing by, LondonRIG will be having another informal presentation and discussion on: “Christian Aid’s Climate Change & Adaptation Work with Links to Emerging Renewable Energy Issues” by Richard Ewbank, Climate Change Programme Coordinator at Christian Aid. Where: The Carpenters Arms, 12 Seymour Place, Marylebone, London Note: The event is open to all! However due to the informal nature and short duration of the meet-up, we do not encourage or support attendance from overseas – unless you are passing by London for other reasons. RSVP: thalia@ecoharmony.com (please respond with a YES or MAYBE if planning to come) Topic: He will describe how an important part of this process is to detect the level of climate change that has occurred and is likely in the future and to attribute livelihood risks correctly to climate or other risk factors. With 44% of people in India and over 70% in Africa not connected to grid sources of electricity, renewable energy is a key resource in this adaptation process. ’ Directions and other information about the event and the London Regional Interest Group, are available on the HEDON website: http://www.hedon.info/LondonRIG:29Jul2010 We look forward to seeing you there. – Thalia KONARIS Permalink |
| ### | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
raffaella@ecoharmony.com|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 9th, 2010 It happened last night, June 29, 2010, and the venue was the delightful Museum of American Finance – right there at 48 Wall Street, and our host was the delightful 1988 Founder, and Chairman Emeritus, John E. Herzog. The Spring Issue of Financial History, the Museum’s Magazine is very up-to-date. It has on the cover Charles Ponzi and articles like “why We Love Scandals,” “Robbing Peter to Pay Paul,” “James Bowie’s Louisiana Purchase Fraud,” and Monclova Speculations,” “How to Make a Dead Ma” on the life insurance business. The first thing I learned at the Museum was that Warren Buffet, now billionaire investor of the was the only student at the Columbia University School of Business, who ever got an A+ from his Professor Benjamin Graham who in the early 1930s, taught his students Value Investing. Today’s Ben Graham Center for Value Investment at the Richard Ivey School of Business, in London, Western Ontario, Canada, teaches: “First, we think of stocks in the same way that a business person would think of a business. Second, we do not follow but instead try to take advantage of the manic depressive Mr. Market. Third, we always look for a margin of safety.” Did you note – A MARGIN OF SAFETY!” Do you need to study the Manic Depressive side of Washington? Anyway, Warren Buffet went on to sell pinball machines in bars, and with his first $1,000 he earned he bought land which he rented to farmers. The rest is history, and ask Berkshire Hathaway investors about safe investing. I learned much more in this excellent museum and recommend it to our readers. I even learned that in the Napoleon – Thomas Jefferson Louisiana deal – the Louisiana purchase that doubled the size of the US for $15 million in US Treasuries subscribed by two European banks, the US acquired the land at 3 cents/acre. But, it was not the museum and the catered treats we got at the end that brought me there: it was a Sierra Club e-mail about a panel: “EVERYBODY WINS: INVESTING IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY.” The moderator was Michael Richter – partner with Environmental Capital Partners (ECP), a private equity firm affiliated with New York Private Bank & Trust that provides long-term capital and management support to leading middle-market companies in the environmental industry. (Before doing that, and before business school, he was three time National Hockey League All-Star.) His panel included: Rebecca Craft, Director of Energy Efficiency Programs at Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. A regulated utility that whatever happens – must make a profit. Christopher J. Lord, Senior Vice President of Business Development at Hannon Armstrong Capital. They specialized in the last 30 years in investment in new technologies. Carl Pope, Chairman of the Sierra Club, America’s largest grassroots environmental organization and as the paper proudly states - “The Aspen Institute, after surveying every member of Congress and key federal officials, named the Sierra Club as the most influential organization in Washington DC.” I was appalled reading this self description which in my eyes looked rather like the reason of disqualification from claiming representation on environmentalism’s board. ————– After the statements by the panelists, with major participation of Con Edison that turned it all into a rather energy for the home sort of an event, there were many intelligent questions from the audience, and I am sorry to say that again I found it quite disquieting as I realized that with this sort of discussion we will really not get out of the hole we find that we dug ourselves with the help of exactly this sort of thinking – how to make a buck by skirting the real issues and trying somehow to improve at the margin. I did not raise any question – rather slumbered through it all – then went over to a chat with Carl Pope.
Now this is a work in progress and I will get back to it – but want to post mow because of another event I picked up and want our readers that can make it – go over if they can. Today, Wednesday, June 30, 2010, 12:30 – 01:30, at the Museum – 48 Wall Street, New York NY, 10005 There will be a discussion on past, present, and future of energy trading. Participants are: Howard Hopkins, Director Energy Products CME Group. and Paul Huges. Senior Analyst within Business Development for CME Group. They will provide an overview of pre-electronic energy trading, speak about the current status of the markets, and discuss the globalization of futures markets and CME Group. ————— We just received our electricity bill and it had an attachment for the sake of “ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE FOR CON ED” So how did they produce our electricity in 2006? Gas – 50% Nuclear – 35% Coal - 8% Hydro - 3% Oil - 2% Biomass, Solar, Solid Waste, Wind – each one of them says Less then 1% – and if we total them all up – we find that their total is 2% at best. Now, do not think that the Con Edison list was according to resources used as I did it. It was rather by alphabet – so it is less obvious to the eye. Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 8th, 2010 A SWISS-led Project. They also came up with the Swatchmobil that turned into best-selling SMART car. Why does the US not do this sort of work. Think about the availability of the Huntsville, Alabama facilities, could they figure out work on Solar Flight projects? ————————- Solar Impulse completes 24-hour flight.AP – guardian.co.uk, – Thursday 8 July 2010. Plane powered by the sun lands safely in Switzerland after completing its first 24-hour test flight Watch footage of the flight Link to this video An experimental solar-powered plane landed safely today after completing its first 24-hour test flight, proving that the aircraft can collect enough energy from the sun during the day to stay aloft all night. Pilot André Borschberg eased the Solar Impulse aircraft on to the runway at Payerne airfield, about 31 miles south-west of the Swiss capital, Berne, at 9am local time today. Helpers rushed to stabilise the pioneering plane as it touched down, ensuring that its massive 63-metre wingspan didn’t touch the ground and topple the craft. The record feat completes seven years of planning and brings the Swiss-led project one step closer to its ultimate aim of circling the globe using only energy from the sun. The team says it has now shown the single-seat plane can theoretically stay in the air indefinitely, recharging its depleted batteries using 12,000 solar cells and nothing but the rays of the sun during the day. Borschberg took off from Payerne airfield into the clear blue sky shortly before 7am yesterday, allowing the plane to soak up plenty of sunshine and fly in gentle loops over the Jura mountains, west of the Swiss Alps. The 57-year-old former Swiss fighter pilot dodged low-level turbulence and thermal winds, endured freezing conditions during the night and ended the test flight with a picture-perfect landing to cheers and whoops from hundreds of supporters on the ground. After completing final tests on the plane he embraced project co-founder Bertrand Piccard before gingerly unstrapping himself from the bathtub size cockpit where he had spent more than 26 hours sitting. “When you took off it was another era,” said Piccard, himself a record-breaking balloonist. “You land in a new era where people understand that with renewable energy you can do impossible things.” Although the goal is to show that emissions-free air travel is possible, the team has said it doesn’t see solar technology replacing conventional jet propulsion any time soon. Instead, the project is designed to test and promote new energy-efficient technologies. ————————-
Solar-Powered Plane Flies for 26 Hours.Solar Impulse, piloted by André Borschberg, flew for 26 hours and reached a height of 28,543 feet, setting a record for the longest and highest flight ever made by a solar plane.
By ALAN COWELL, the New York Times
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 8th, 2010 From The Brazilian American Chamber of Commerce Inc. www.BrazilCham.com Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, Ph.D. Thursday, July 22, 2010 Crowell & Moring LLP Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 8th, 2010
New climate finance policy brief by ODI and the Heinrich Boell Foundation: Climate finance additionality: emerging definitions and their implications. The website has just updated information on several of its funds and will conduct a systematic update of all funds by end of July. The website will also soon expand to include new searchable graphs and databases as well as new information on Fast Start Finance. Permalink |
| ### | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 8th, 2010 Past US Independence Day, for Bastille Day – July 14, 2010 – we note the following US effort: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE SELECTS ROCHESTER AS A SITE FOR A FORUM DISCUSSION ABOUT PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA’S NATIONAL EXPORT INITIATIVE - NEI Aims to Double the Number of Exports by 2012 - ROCHESTER, N.Y. – (July 2, 2010) — Rochester is the only Upstate New York City the U.S. Department of State has selected as the location for a forum discussion about President Barack Obama’s National Export Initiative (NEI). NEI aims to double the United States’ number of exports by 2012 and create 2 million jobs nationwide, approximately the same number of jobs lost by the manufacturing sector during the economic downturn. “The Department of State chose Rochester because the Greater Rochester Region is the largest exporting metro region in Upstate New York, and it is one of the top 5 exporting regions per capita in the United States,” said International Business Council (IBC) of Greater Rochester, NY Executive Director Laurie DeRoller. “This town hall style meeting will provide local businesses with valuable information they need to grow and create jobs.” Thomas Engle, director of the Office of Monetary Affairs Bureau of Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs for the U.S. Department of State, will speak at the event, which takes place Wednesday, July 14 from 11 a.m. – 1:30 p.m. at the Gleason Works Auditorium, located at 1000 University Avenue in Rochester. The IBC is hosting the NEI Forum Discussion along with the United States Department of Commerce (USDOC) Export Assistant and the Upstate NY District Export Council (DEC). There is no cost for IBC and DEC members, and Greater Rochester Enterprise (GRE) board members and investors. There is a $20 cost for all other attendees. To register for the event, contact Heidi Schmitt at Heidi@Rochesterbiz.com or register at http://www.regonline.com/register/checkin.aspx?EventId=875859. ABOUT IBC: The International Business Council of Greater Rochester, NY (IBC) is a collaborative association established to promote and expand international opportunities by developing and ABOUT GRE: Located in the heart of New York’s technology corridor, Greater Rochester Enterprise (GRE) is a public-private partnership established to professionally market the Rochester metropolitan region as a competitive, high-profile place for business location and growth. Its efforts support business attraction and expansion, as well as entrepreneurship and innovation. GRE collaborates with businesses, universities, not-for-profit organizations and government leaders to ensure a unified approach to regional economic development. For more information, please go to www.RochesterBiz.com. But not everything is smooth with the NEI – there is also criticism. We hope that the Rochester location will provide for a discussion of not only the job creation aspect of this initiative – but also of the quality of the jobs as sustainability can be achieved only if these are high quality new tech jobs – otherwise the effort will rather end up promoting jobs overseas at high subsidy expense. We expect a lively discussion in Rochester. ——————————————- Obama Announces Export Council, Reports On Export Progress.
By Dave Johnson July 7, 2010,
In his State of the Union speech President Obama announced the National Export Initiative, a campaign to double US exports within 5 years. Today he gave a progress report and announced the members of his Export Council, with a number of CEOs (and one labor leader) including Alan Mulally of the Ford Motor Company, Scott Davis of U.P.S., Glenn Tilton, United Airlines Chairman and CEO and Robert A. Iger of the Walt Disney Company. The White House says that with a 17% increase in exports in the first 4 months of the year we are on track to double exports within 5 years. Announcing the Export Council, Obama said, “We’ve got to compete for those customers. We mean to compete for those jobs and compete to win.” For example, they are setting up “business assistance centers” abroad to help American companies get business, and increasing credit through the Export/Import bank.. They are fighting barriers that other countries have set up to keep out American products, so far increasing our export of things like pork by $1 billion. “When we give other countries the privilege of free and fair access we expect it in return.” —————– Leo Hindery, Chairman of the US Economy/Smart Globalization Initiative at the New America Foundation, writes at Huffington Post,
Hindery explains how past “free trade” agreement have failed American workers,
But Hindery’s beef is not that Obama is pushing Bush-negotiated agreements with Korea, Columbia and Panama, it is that this appears to be the only job-creation plan that Obama is offering. Hindery offers a number of steps to improve the situation, including scrapping Bush-negotiated trade agreements and negotiating fair and balanced agreements that lift us and our partners instead of giving big corporations a hammer to use to lower American wages and eliminate American jobs. Increasing exports is important. Fighting trade barriers is important. This will help the economy recover. Bravo to the President for this. Now, how about recognizing that there is a jobs emergency and pushing hard on the Congress to set up some direct government job-creation programs? —– —– —– We want to add here again – that job creation is important but one must remember to look under the rug and make sure that these are jobs in the technologies of the future. In the past the US exported wind mill technology under the otherwise corrupt ENRON Corporation – but with ENRON we also lost the wind – and that is something that needs correction – so our point is that the US needs exports that are for the long term – exports of technologies for the future. Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 8th, 2010
 A blog about all things green, from conservation to Capitol Hill.
Report Card on Renewables: Europe’s Getting A’s.
Posted by Jeffrey Kluger – Tuesday, July 6, 2010 at 3:54 pm
There are some new numbers worth pondering as the east coast sizzles through day three of a heat wave and the Time offices operate at brown-out levels so that the air conditioning doesn’t crash the building-wide power grid. Whether or not the current scorcher has anything to do with climate change, there’s no doubt that we’re in for a lot more such summers as atmospheric carbon levels rise and the planet steadily warms. And there’s no doubt that the best way out of that mess is to switch from an oil-based grid to a renewables-based one—and pronto. That’s why Europe—Olde Europe, fusty Europe, the continent that couldn’t shoot straight—has reason to be proud.
According to a new report from the European Commission’s Joint Research Center (JRC), fully 62% of new electrical capacity installed in the European Union in 2009 came from renewables—meaning that nearly 20% of all electricity consumed by the continent is now clean and green. Of the 62% that was newly installed, 37.1% was wind power, 21% was photovoltaics, 2.1% was biomass, 1.4% was hydropower, and .4% was concentrated solar power—solar electricity produced not from panels, but from collected sunlight that boils a fluid which in turn drives a zero-emissions turbine.
Of the 38% of new power that was not renewable, most (24%) was natural gas, and 8.7% was familiar, dirty coal. Nuclear power, which has historically played such a big role in the continent’s power grid, was just 1.6%.
Europe’s success is no accident, but rather comes from long range planning. Policymakers had set themselves a goal of producing 40 gigawatts (GW) of wind power per year by 2010, for example, and with that serving as a goad, actually exceeded the target by nearly 100%, with a current output of 74 GW. The new goal is 230 GW (or 20% of the continent’s total energy needs) by 2020.
As for the U.S.?
Renewables currently provide just 10.1% of our total electricity generation, or about half of the level Europe has achieved. And with the climate and energy bill now languishing in the place all good ideas go to die—the U.S. Senate—the prospects for improving those numbers in the near future look dim. Meantime, the 4 PM temperature in New York City is 102 degrees and the lights are still on—for now.
Permalink |
| ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 7th, 2010
By Nick Hodge, Energy & Capital | Wednesday, July 7th, 2010
I’ve got the Asian itch, and it won’t be hard to see why… I’ve got this itch because the region’s economies continue to grow while economic tremors continue to rock Europe and the United States. I’ve got this itch because Asia’s investment in cleantech continues to grow while it shrinks in other areas:
I’ve got this itch because Asian governments turned to cleantech as the obvious choice for financial stimulus — with China, South Korea, and Japan allocating $20 billion more to the sector than the United States:
I’ve got this itch because China out-invested us 2:1 last year in new energy technologies:
Which makes their long-term cleantech investment curve look like this:
While ours looks like this: Scratching the itch… With a financial investment edge like that, you can bet Asia’s — particularly China’s — dedication is translating to wins in the public markets as well. Five years ago, you’d be hard-pressed to find more than one or two Chinese companies on global top ten lists… Now, they’ve taken three of the top 10 global wind spots and six in the solar race: And not only are they whooping us in investment and production capacity; European and U.S. companies look silly next to Chinese stars: That’s why 19 of the last 60 or so winners I’ve closed in the Alternative Energy Speculator have been China-based. But my itch isn’t satisfied yet… You see, only Asia’s dominance of the solar market has been thoroughly established in U.S. markets, where Chinese ADRs are common. And while their dominance of wind and smart grid industries is definitely being plotted and executed, there’s been no way to play it in domestic markets — until now. Sinovel (the #3 company in the table above) has announced ambitions to be the world wind leader in the next five years. I’m guessing this company, along with a few other Chinese entrants, will go the initial public offering route. And if you think there’s work to be done on our grid, you should have a look at Asia where, in some places, there is no grid at all. In fact it’s being built from scratch. Just last week, Bloomberg broke news that “smart grid technology will be one of the key industries for research and development support in China’s upcoming 12th Five Year development plan, due to be enacted at the beginning of 2011.” China’s largest grid operator, the State Grid Corp., has already said it will invest $37 billion this year alone to build a nationwide smart grid network. So to recap… China has leveraged its massive economy to become world leaders in solar and wind technology, outinvesting other nations by far. Now they’re turning to the smart grid, which we’ll be necessary if they’re ever to harness that solar and wind potential effectively. And make no mistake — only the Chinese survive in China. They take care of and nurture their own. Like the Chinese solar companies now sharply outperforming their foreign competitors, I’ve found the one company about to become a global smart grid and electric car juggernaut. As you can tell from all the data above, China is betting on a clean energy future. And it’s winning. While the U.S. continues to lag behind, you can satisfy your Asian itch by following China’s lead. Call it like you see it. P.S. China’s thirst for energy is incomparable. And it’s not just clean energy they’re after… My friend Christian DeHaemer is fresh off a trip to Mongolia, where he cozied up with a tiny company sitting on $51 billion worth of crude. And China wants it — bad. He’s going to release a full report on the company and its massive find tomorrow. But because you’re a loyal reader of Energy & Capital, I figured I’d give you early access to it today. ———————– China’s Next Cleantech Takeover: World’s Largest Automaker! It was just a tiny, $10 battery company… But right now, as part of China’s rapid cleantech mission, this little gem is rapidly on the verge of becoming the world’s largest automaker! Permalink |
| ### | ||||||||||||||||||||
