A new report reveals gaps between the goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and the actual results. Despite Biden's extensive efforts, the picture appears to be much more complex
It is not surprising that as one of the leading powers in the world, the United States greatly influences various global trends, including climate and energy issues. Published report by the research group Rhodium (Rhodium Group) indicates significant progress in the policy of zero greenhouse gas emissions and alternative energy under the Biden administration, but also reveals alarming gaps between the ambitious goals and the expected results. The current picture of the climate crisis policy and the reduction of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere in the United States remains complex.
Let's start with the good news
The good news is that significant progress has been made: by 2035, the United States - which until recently was considered a country that emits The most greenhouse gases per year (And is still considered a country that emitted Cumulatively the most greenhouse gases in history) – is expected to reduce its annual greenhouse gas emissions by 38 percent to 56 percent (compared to 2005 levels). This figure is a direct result of several factors, such as the policies of previous administrations such as the Obama administration and of specific states such as California and New York, improvement in technologies worldwide, as well as the large investment of the Biden administration in the field of green energy. In the first three months of 2024 were invested More than 71 billion dollars In clean energy in the United States - a 40 percent increase compared to the corresponding quarter in 2023. Ben King, senior director of Rhodium's energy and climate department, called it a "step change" in an interview for The Financial Times.
Also, the report describes significant progress in several other areas. In the transportation sector, a 22 percent to 34 percent reduction in emissions is expected by 2035 compared to 2023, with 64 percent to 74 percent of cars and other light vehicles sold by 2032 expected to be electric. In the electricity production sector, a dramatic decrease of 42 percent to 83 percent in greenhouse gas emissions is expected by 2035, and clean energy sources are expected to provide 62 percent to 88 percent of the electricity. Even in the oil and gas industry, which is considered one of the most polluting industries, a 12 percent to 28 percent reduction in emissions is expected by 2035.
The road is still long
However, not everything is rosy. Despite the good news, the United States is still far from the goal it set for itself in the frameworkagreementParisמ-2015 , which includes a reduction of at least 50 percent in emissions by 2030, and an almost complete reduction in emissions by the middle of the century. A reduction of only 32 percent to 42 percent is now expected by 2030, and in fact, if the current pace continues, the gap could widen.
These conclusions take into account the series of legislative and regulatory achievements at the level of the federal government of the United States as a whole and at the level of its states. They emphasize the difficulty in reducing greenhouse gas emissions quickly enough to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as stipulated in the Paris Agreement (it is important to note that the global average temperature has already risen at 1.1 degrees Celsius At least, since the pre-industrial era).
The reasons for the gap stem from several key factors. The report predicts a 24 percent to 29 percent increase in electricity demand by 2035. The increase in electricity demand is due to economic growth, a transition to electric vehicles (which at the same time reduce oil consumption), and a dramatic increase in the use of energy-intensive data centers (various cloud technologies, AI, Blockchain). Another factor is the difficulty in deploying clean energy. Despite the large investments, there are significant delays in the establishment of green energy infrastructures due to local objections, delays in licensing processes and problems in the supply chain. Also, legal and political uncertainty piles up additional difficulties. recent decisions The United States Supreme Court is questioning the ability of federal agencies to set far-reaching environmental regulations.
The report indicates that there is a significant risk that the reduction of emissions will be harmed in the event that there is a significant change in the policy of the United States - for example, if the Republicans, who lead מדיניותanti-scientific, who opposes the use of clean technologies, will win the presidential or congressional elections this November. Indeed, we have seen in the last decade in many states in the United States headed by a Republican governor or House of Representatives, a policy that makes it difficult to install renewable energies, to switch to electric transportation and to reduce pollution in general.
An increase in demand for electricity is due to economic growth, and a dramatic increase in the use of energy-intensive data centers such as various cloud technologies, AI and blockchain. Photo: pexels, davidmcbee
Reasons to be happy and reasons to worry
According to Dr. Daniel Mader, a researcher and scientific consultant in the fields of alternative energies, climate change, and more, and one of the founders of the SP Interface company, more widespread use of electricity due to the transition from oil-driven transportation for transportationtram, he is blessed. "Electric transportation is much more efficient compared to transportation with internal combustion engines, and large power plants are also more efficient compared to vehicle engines," he says. "Therefore, even if all the electricity to drive transportation was produced in power plants powered by petroleum distillates, there would be a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions in this sector. Moreover, since the electricity grid makes increasing use of technologies that emit very little greenhouse gases, such as renewable energies and energy storage, each kWh of electricity emits less and less greenhouse gases compared to the past."
In terms of the uncertainty regarding American policy after the elections, it may actually not change for the worse in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In this scenario, according to Madar, there is a reasonable chance that the forecasts presented in the report are pessimistic, and in practice a greater reduction in emissions is possible. Because the report provides linear projections, in which the adoption of low-carbon technologies increases by a constant value each year, and correspondingly, emissions decrease by a constant value. However, when it comes to adopting new technologies, disruptive technologies (new technologies that are better and cheaper) take over an existing market exponentially within 10-15 years.
On top of that, Madar says that this year the American (and European) government decided to impose heavy protective tariffs on the import of electric vehicles from China (as well as on batteries for energy storage and other technologies) as part of an extensive geopolitical struggle to protect their local auto industries. The heavy duty will seriously damage the pace of transition to electric transportation.
When it comes to the Biden administration's investment in reducing emissions, it turns out that there is also another side to the coin. "It is true that there was an unprecedented investment on the part of the democratic federal government in recent years in reducing emissions," Madar answers, "but it cannot be ignored that at the same time there was also Investpetitionin my drillingoil, which made the United States the largest oil producer in the world, with a volume of activity on a scale never before seen in world history." That is, on the one hand, the administration worked to promote green energy, and at the same time, did the exact opposite. It seems that the Biden administration "preferred to keep oil prices relatively low (through extensive oil production and increasing supply) to moderate inflation and price increases that could endanger world regimes, over reducing greenhouse gas emissions."
On the face of it, it seems that we have reasons to be happy following the report. But even so, there are also reasons for concern. At the end of the day, the decisions of the current American administration can turn 180 degrees if Trump will be selected. Even if the trend remains unchanged, there still seems to be Investpetitionin my fuelfossils. What is certain is that the amount of changes that can happen by 2030 is expected to be on a scale never seen before.
