Steven Chu, U.S. Energy Secretary, Speaks

Posted on 07. Dec, 2010 by astark in U.S.A.

As more and more high-level ministers arrive in Cancun for the UN climate talks, the venues have taken on the air of a red carpet. TV cameraman and reporters move in flocks, chasing down the most important ministers for interviews, and long lines form outside of the meeting rooms where they are scheduled to speak.

Such was the case earlier this afternoon, when U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu gave a talk at the U.S. Center in the civil society venue. The small make-shift room in the center of a warehouse-like space was packed, but I managed to slip in a glimpse of the detail-laden slides that accompanied the talk, which brought me back to high school science courses (no surprise, since Chu is a Noble Prize-winning scientists and lectured at Berkley).

The first half of Chu’s talk focused on the science of climate change. This might be surprising for the expert audience here, but made plenty of sense in the context of the United States, where scientists are waging a PR battle with “climate deniers,” who have managed to convince many Americans that anthropogenic climate change does not exist. He showed charts and graphs to convey the message that the world is definitely warming in temperature, ice masses are decreasing globally and increased concentrations of carbon in the atmosphere are disrupting natural atmospheric circulation.

Perhaps more interestingly to someone who follows U.S. politics, Chu stated that “we will live in a carbon constrained world” in the near-term future. He noted that demand for oil will increase in the future even as supplies become more difficult to extract, increasing oil prices. In this context, he reaffirmed President Obama’s deep commitment to meeting the Copenhagen commitments, saying that “moving to a clean energy economy is about security:” both economic and national security.

Chu also listed several steps that the Department of Energy is taking to achieve our energy goals, noting that “energy savings and cost savings are the same: energy efficiency means money saved.” First, the Department is working to improve energy efficiency savings through approving and enforcing efficiency standards for appliances, vehicles and buildings. Chu also aims to “double U.S. clean energy generation by 2012,” with some of the economic stimulus package passed last year used to galvanize clean energy investments. This includes a clean energy tax credit, as well as a “historic investment in carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).” A $4 billion investment with public funds has been met with $7 billion in private funds in CCS.

Finally, Chu explained U.S. investments in clean energy research, including “energy frontier research centers,” energy innovation hubs and ARPA-E (the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy). Since Chu himself was a researcher at Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, his belief that research centers can come up with “game-changing” innovations makes sense.

Chu’s talk may not have taught many of its listeners anything new, but it was an important signal at these climate negotiations. It was most likely designed to build trust in other country parties that the United States remains committed to the commitment it made in Copenhagen of cutting emissions by 17% by 2020 over 2005 levels even without national legislation, through Department of energy investments, regulations and other parts of a piecemeal approach. It was also meant to convey a sense of transparency in the mitigation actions that the United States is taking, a significant signal in the debate over MRV.

The talk may have also been an important signal for people back home who are urging the Obama administration to act on climate change. Sending Steven Chu, a noted “climate hawk” to these meetings, is an important statement on the administration’s part that it is serious about tackling this issue both at home and in the international arena. Of course, even if the United States is able to reach the 17% commitment, this will not be enough to protect global health, economy, security and the environment.

A report released today by called “The U.S. Role in International Climate Finance” notes that “we are therefore deeply concerned about the inability of our nation to come to terms with the enormity of the climate crisis and mount an ambitious, comprehensive response. This failure has many causes, from the influence of polluters and corporate special interests in U.S. politics to the aftermath of the recent recession.” Even so, it goes on to say that “even in the face of these unavoidable political realities, we believe the United States can reduce emissions well below current levels by 2020 if it aggressively pursues a mix of climate and energy policies.”

If the United States is able to achieve significant emissions reductions due to an aggressive energy policy, it will only be if and because we have smart and capable leaders like Steven Chu pushing the Obama administration and U.S. policymakers every step of the way. In that context, it’s good to know that Chu is in charge.

Tags: Bill Richardson, climate change, COP16, energy, featured, Steven Chu, UNFCCC, United States, USA