The failure to decarbonize the global energy education system: Carbon lock-in and stranded skill sets
Den globale energiomstillingen medfører en omrokkering av yrker og arbeidsmarkeder, som igjen er avhengig av tilgang på arbeidskraft med riktig utdanning og kompetanse. Denne studien undersøker hvor raskt høyere utdanning, globalt sett, skifter fokus fra fossil energi til fornybar energi i sitt undervisningsinnhold. Artikkelen er basert på en gjennomgang av 18 400 universiteter, hvorav 6142 universiteter i 196 land tilbyr energispesifikke utdanninger. Studien sammenligner forekomsten av utdanningsprogram rettet mot fossil og fornybar energi. Funnene viser at omstillingen til fornybar energi globalt ikke gjenspeiles i endringer i høyere utdanning. Universiteter fortsetter å prioritere kull- og petroleumsstudier. I 2019 hadde 546 universiteter fakulteter og/eller studieprogrammer dedikert til fossil energi, mens kun 247 universiteter hadde fakulteter og/eller studieprogrammer i fornybar energi. Så mange som 68% av verdens energirelaterte utdanninger var rettet mot fossil energi, og kun 32% fokuserte på fornybar energi. Dette vil si at universiteter ikke klarer å imøtekomme den økende etterspørselen etter arbeidskraft innen ren energi. Med den nåværende endringstakten vil energirelaterte utdanninger først være 100% dedikert til fornybar energi i år 2107. Ettersom en karriere varer rundt 30 til 40 år, oppstår det en risiko for langsiktig karbon «lock-in» og utdatert kompetanse gjennom (feil)utdanning. Resultatene indikerer også at utviklingsland henger etter industriland på dette området, til tross for at de har et større behov for fagpersoner innen fornybar energi. Sammen med manglende kapital, underutviklede reguleringsrammeverk for fornybar energi og inngrodde interesser i fossil energi, kan misforholdet mellom energirelatert utdanning og behovene til fornybar energisektor hindre energiomstillingen i mange utviklingsland.
Gir inntrykk av «business as usual» i Arktis
Climate and Russia - Does the world need nuclear power?
Økende temperaturer på kloden må begrenses til godt under en to-graders økning. Det blir derfor svært viktig å gjøre energiproduksjonen karbonnøytral så hurtig som mulig. Er atomkraft det som skal til for å oppnå dette målet? I denne dokumentaren fra DW, snakker Forsker 1 på NUPI, Kacper Szulecki, om atomkraft.
Norway’s Climate Policy: Don’t Think of the Elephant!
All Norwegian governments in the twenty-first century, left and right, have made climate action an important element of their diplomacy and domestic policy, while recently some political parties have even made climate neutrality and decarbonisation the core of their electoral campaign messages. Norway has played the role of an advocate for international climate action, for instance of rainforest protection. Moreover, government incentives such as tax levies have been instrumental in the spectacular expansion of electric vehicles. However, despite the self-promoted image of a climate policy champion abroad, Norway’s efforts to cut domestic greenhouse gas emissions have been modest since signing the Kyoto Protocol in December 1997. Norway is exporting oil and gas that cause massive emissions, but the significance of the fossil fuel sector for the country makes it difficult to find alternatives and seriously consider rapid phase out. That said, a debate on the future of the oil and gas sector is ongoing. Whilst Norway’s point of departure in an imminent transition is rather favourable, the lack of progress is due to insufficient political leadership and vision. Norwegian decision makers need to be bold in their choice of whether the transition’s main goal should be managing decline in the oil and gas sector or managing climate-related economic risks. Meanwhile, in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the EU’s decision for a drastic reduction in dependence on Russian fossil fuels, the lifetime of Norway’s oil and gas production could well be extended by a decade or more. It is not unreasonable to expect that the last molecule of fossil methane burned in Europe before it switches to hydrogen and biogas—is going to come from Norway.
Handbook on European Union Climate Change Policy and Politics
Through detailed and wide-ranging analysis, the Handbook on European Union Climate Change Policy and Politics provides a critical assessment of current and emerging challenges facing the EU in committing to and delivering increasingly ambitious climate policy objectives. Highlighting the importance of topics such as finance and investment, litigation, ‘hard to abate’ sectors and negative emissions, it offers an up-to-date exploration of the complexities of climate politics and policy making.
Semi-peripheries in the world-system? The Visegrad group countries in the geopolitical order of energy and raw materials after the war in Ukraine
What are the geopolitical risk implications related to the war in Ukraine for the raw material and energy policies of countries highly dependent on Russia? This paper looks at the Visegrad Group (V4) states – Czechia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia – as some of the most impacted countries and assesses their position in the emerging new geopolitical and energy order. V4 countries display a semi-peripheral position in the world-system, as defined by Immanuel Wallerstein. On the geopolitical level, they were balancing between dependence on Russia in energy and raw materials (a result of Cold War legacies) and economic integration with Western countries. However, after the Cold War, dependence on raw materials from the East went hand in hand with dependence on technology and investment from the West, as the V4 region saw the emergence of ‘dependent capitalism.’ The war in Ukraine may reshuffle these dependencies by changing the meaning of the ‘centre,’ for which such actors as the United States, Western Europe or China will strive after Russia's importance has weakened in the V4 countries. It may also create an opportunity to redefine the V4's semi-peripheral status. Drawing on an analysis of recent documents and governmental strategies that emerged in the aftermath of Russia's invasion in 2022, we offer a structured comparative analysis of the way V4 states responded to the crisis along four dimensions (positioning in the international political economy of energy and technology, role of the state, visions of energy futures, geopolitical and geoeconomic course). In the conclusions, we outline the main changes in the import of raw materials, fuels and technologies in individual V4 countries and consider the possible position of the region in the future energy geopolitical order.
Julie Stensønes
Julie Stensønes er en masterstudent ved Universitet i Oslo hvor hun særlig fokuserer på klimapolitikk. Hennes forskningsinteresser inkluderer inte...
Silje Balseth
Silje er masterstudent ved Forskningsgruppen fred, konflikt og utvikling. Hun studerer statsvitenskap ved Universitetet i Oslo og skriver masterop...
Skisserer løsninger for Sikkerhetsrådet