Discussing a range of topics related to establishing a policy suite to decarbonise global energy systems and reduce emissions, Mr Rowley addressed five key points; the business of climate change, the timing of policy, the global financial situation, the implications of the new US President Barack Obama and the UN Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen.

“Firstly, if you are in the business of clean energy you are very much in the business of tackling climate change, it is very important to go back to the tasks we are engaged in,” he said.

The climate problem is non-trivial, he told delegates. “It’s an absolute imperative that we decarbonise our energy systems very quickly. I just want to give you that message that whenever we are thinking about what it means to be in the clean energy industry in Australia, we are actually engaged in what is a fundamentally important purpose for this economy and indeed the global economy to decarbonise the energy systems that we are reliant on.”

Following a brief synopsis on the history of climate change science Mr Rowley made the point that we make a mistake if we consider the climate change problem to be purely environmental. “For the environmental policy suite is nowhere near adequate to actually drive the transformation in our economy that is required if we are going to come within Cooee of creating the reductions in emissions that we need to.

“It is a fundamentally difficult problem to de-link energy growth from economic growth. There will be significant energy growth, we need to decarbonise that energy. And how we do that will be an ongoing learning exercise.”

Mr Rowley referenced the IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2008 to illustrate that the global community is time poor in relation to this issue.

“If you take that sort of data and you look at the sort of things that need to be achieved in relation to an emissions reduction and then you look at the policy suite that we have at either a domestic, international or regional level then there’s an enormous disconnect in terms of those dynamics, and resolving that disconnect and getting those dynamics more into line is an enormously challenging task. And it is something that has to be done in limited time.”

Mr Rowley quoted economist Nick Stern, who called the climate problem “a ‘complex inter-temporal, international collection action problem under uncertainty’. Now that’s pretty wordy but it’s a hard problem and a hard problem we need to be tackling now.”

All in good time

The second topic of the presentation was the importance of time. He emphasised the importance of recognising where we have come from in relation to sustainability and climate change. He outlined terms of understanding and response and also the critical importance of time in relation to putting in place a series of policies, incentives and activities that can come close to tackling climate change over the next few years.

Mr Rowley spoke about the relative immaturity of environmental policy generally and climate policy in particular. He made the point that environment policy must now centre on ‘incentivising’; “[it must be] about doing the things that are good rather than stopping the things that are bad.”

“We have to get into the head-space of making renewables far cheaper, far sexier, far cleverer, far more attractive than the fossil fuel alternatives.

“If you then look at climate policy, the first piece of policy to my knowledge that actually had tackling emissions and the climate problem as part of its title was in 1991 in California,” he continued. “That is a very, very short period of time. And yet from 1991 to 2008 we fixate on whether or not an ETS works in Europe, whether or not the renewables obligation is working well.

“We need to view the growing area of climate policy response as an ongoing learning exercise, where we’re going to be doing things that we learn are inadequate, we’re going to be doing things that we know work much better. And we’re going to have to learn about how market incentives and other regulations can actually lead towards the transformation required to create the emissions reductions that we need.

However, he warned of the danger in concluding that this is solely an economic problem. He said that the policy suite to tackle climate change must be environmental and economic. Furthermore, politicians are beginning to identify the threat to the physical security of their countries if they do not act to reduce emissions.

“Don’t underestimate the extent to which governments are now viewing climate risk as an essential security risk over the medium to longer term,” he said.

“And it is not a problem that we can simply afford to put off to another day. If we maintain business as usual over the next five to ten years, then we’re actually throwing away our capacity to make a significant difference in terms of the climate problem. Time is extremely important.”

In relation to the “pending global recession of uncertain length,” Mr Rowley reflected on the implications for the clean energy business in the business of tackling climate change.

“Economic situations do come and go, but sadly the climate problem is something that we have that is not going to go away because of the fundamental dynamics that are behind this problem. Maintaining the level of public, political and business engagement on this issue over the coming five, ten, twenty years even is going to be an enormous challenge.”

Mr Rowley identified possible positive outcomes of the global financial situation for finding solutions to climate change. For example, political action provides a compelling metaphor, demonstrating the possibility for consensus and action on climate change. Secondly, in uncertain times the clean energy industry is a good investment.

“I would say that investment in renewable and other low emissions technologies represent long term, secure, tangible and needed things.”

Leading the world

Discussing the Obama Presidency, Mr Rowley said the change should be viewed positively. “US denial and obstruction on climate policy has been a major obstacle for the past eight years, but I fear we delude ourselves if we don’t recognise that there remain big, challenging impediments to real progress at an international level in relation to climate policy.”

“If you look at his [President-elect Obama’s] policy suite, you almost couldn’t ask for more. You have a commitment to a federal cap and trade system with strong annual targets. You have a commitment to getting emissions in the US economy down to 1990 levels by 2020, and with 80 per cent reductions of 1990 levels by 2050. In simply doing that – that is a very significant position for the US to take.

“In my view he’s pretty serious and he’s got some extremely capable people around him.”

Informed optimism

Mr Rowley concluded his presentation by expressing a cautious optimism about his hopes for the UN meeting at the end of 2009 in Copenhagen.

As the Strategic Director to the Copenhagen Climate Council Mr Rowley said that through its membership, the Council aimed to create a powerful group of people who represent science and politics.

“The UN Copenhagen meeting is – in terms of timing – really the warm porridge of international climate policy. It’s just right, it is just the right temperature you’ve potentially got just the right political dynamics in place.

“I believe that the symbolism of a global agreement on 450 parts per million of CO2e is extremely powerful, and we shouldn’t agonise too much on the ‘how’ we’re going to get to that ‘what’ when it comes to the international context.

“To agree on that goal would have a pervasive flow-on effect to so many other elements of the response and the ongoing learning exercise through the coming years.”

“I firmly believe that the climate problem is solvable, but it is a formidable problem and if we think it is easy being green, being sustainable, that it is easy transforming our energy systems, we make a mistake. And the days when affiliation to a particular approach – Kyoto, cap and trade – a particular numeric target, or a particular technology as a demonstration of one’s moral or environmental rectitude are over.

“Between now and Copenhagen and beyond is the time for governments, businesses and this industry to be rigorous and serious about achieving the measurable, reportable and verifiable emissions reductions that tackling this most wicked of problems demands.”