With all the recent developments in energy, is it time to change the script from climate change to energy I’ve been asking myself? My short answer is: “Nice idea – but no.”

Here are some of the activities that have led up to my question:

• The recently finished global Ministerial Meeting on Energy and Green Industry which considered three possible objectives referred to as the “30-30-30” goals:

1. achieving universal energy access by 2030;
2. increasing energy efficiency by 40% by 2030; and
3. achieving 30% renewable energy by 2030.

• The launch of ISO 50001, the standard for energy management, in a web-based manner in mid-June – see ISO 50001 – Energy Management Standard on YouTube. www.iso.org or www.businessassurance.com.
• New ISO work related to energy savings linked to renovation projects, industrial enterprises and regions.
• EU’s proposed amendments to the Energy Taxation Directive (www.endseurope.com) with its link to both a proposed  fixed CO2 element and other tax elements.
• In the marine field, the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP).

Other examples include:

• Jonathon Porritt’s presentation to the Sustainable Shipping Initiative (SSI) in May which revealed China invested $41 billion in clean energy and energy efficiency. Also see the new SSI website – www.sustainableshipping.com.
• Some UK daily newspapers which appear to have launched a campaign against green taxes – intermingled with a general disbelief in climate change.

So, before I went on leave for a week, I pondered if it was time to shift the terminology (though not necessarily the content) from climate change to energy? It sounds like an easy option, I thought, and it might make the discussions easier!

Having pondered this while walking the beach in Newquay, I reminded myself that climate change is a much bigger issue than energy efficiency and management. Energy use is a key part of the generation of CO2 but there are other parts that contribute to our CO2  emissions. Shifting to the energy title would not deal with such matters as sinking small island states or other aspects of adaptation – some much closer to home – like increased floods and heatwaves.

So using the term ‘energy’ might lull me into too narrow a focus of considering the issue. However uncomfortable the climate change title is I had better stay with it. Or shift to Low Carbon World?! Views please…. and silence taken as agreement.

Enough for today. I’m looking at environmental issues in-the-round next week.

Other Links:

Shipping and the environment

ISO Focus free