Search

Most countries, notably those that signed the Paris Climate Agreement, prioritize achieving the zero carbon or carbon neutrality aim. Unlike earlier studies, this one assesses the contribution of environmental policy, clean energy, green innovation, and renewable energy to the E7 economies' achievement of carbon neutrality goals from 1990 to 2019. Findings emanating from the study show that the EKC hypothesis is valid in E7 countries. Implying that emissions in the E7 countries increased with the kick-off of development but declined later due to possible potent environmental regulatory policies put in place. Similarly, across all models, renewable energy (REN), green innovations (GINNO), environmental tax (ETAX), and technological innovations (TECH) were found to exert a negative and significant impact on carbon emissions in the E7 countries both in the short and long run. On the other hand, economic expansion (GDP) positively impacts environmental deterioration. Furthermore, the country-specific result shows that, on average, Brazil, India, China, Russia, Mexico, and Indonesia have significant environmental policies aiding carbon abatement. Except for Brazil, Mexico, and Indonesia, the income growth in the rest of the countries does not follow the EKC proposition. Furthermore, the causality result revealed a unidirectional causal relationship between GDP, REN, and GINNO to CO2 emission. No causality was found between ETAX with CO2, while a bi-directional causality exists between technology and CO2 emissions. Based on the finding, policymakers in the E7 countries should move away from fossil fuels because future electricity output will not be sufficient to reduce emissions considerably. Environmental regulations, encouraging technological innovation, adopting green and sustainable technology, and clean energy sources, among other things, demand radical and broad changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Federal Government of Brazil has ambitious plans to build a system of 58 additional hydroelectric dams in the Brazilian Amazon, with Hundreds of additional dams planned for other countries in the watershed. Although hydropower is often billed as clean energy, we argue that the environmental impacts of this project are likely to be large, and will result in substantial loss of biodiversity, as well as changes in the flows of ecological services. Moreover, the projects will generate significant greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and decay of organic matter in the reservoirs. These emissions are equivalent to the five years of emissions that would be generated by gas powered plants of equivalent capacity. In addition, we examine the economic benefits of the hydropower in comparison to new alternatives, such as photovoltaic energy and wind power. We find that current costs of hydropower exceed alternatives, and the costs of costs of these alternatives are likely to fall substantially below those of hydropower, while the environmental damages from the dams will be extensive and irreversible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]