Search

Carbon neutrality is an important policy in the current global response to climate change and has been widely recognized by various industries. In the process of promoting carbon neutrality, new energy plays a pivotal role. In this study, the definition and connotation of new energy and its role and specific operation in the energy transition of carbon neutrality are firstly explained. Promoting new energy development requires significant green and low-carbon investments. Taking China as an example, this paper analyzes the opportunities brought by the carbon neutral process to the field of green finance and analyzes the main features and development trends of green finance in China at present. Then this paper proposes policy recommendations to strengthen the development of green finance in China in terms of improving the green financial policy system, enhancing the supply capacity of green financial services, and optimizing the supporting environment for green financial development. Finally, this paper analyzes the measures and experiences of the United States in promoting low-carbon development and proposes countermeasures for China's low-carbon development on the basis of the five major relationships that need attention in China's carbon-neutral process. That is, strengthen the top-level design and improve the regulatory policy system; optimize the energy structure and increase the proportion of clean energy; optimize the industrial structure and reduce energy consumption in key industries; build a complete low-carbon technology system and promote low-carbon technology research and development and demonstration applications, and encourage local conditions to explore low-carbon development paths. The development of green finance can contribute to the advancement of new energy technologies, thus contributing to the achievement of carbon neutrality goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Local opposition to infrastructure projects that implement renewable energy (RE), such as wind farms, is often strong even if state-wide support for RE is strikingly high. The slogan 'Not In My Backyard' (NIMBY) has become synonymous for this kind of protest. This paper revisits the question of what might be wrong with those who are NIMBYs about RE projects, and how best to address them. I will argue that local opponents to wind farm (and other RE) developments do not necessarily fail to contribute their fair share to producing a desirable public good (clean energy). In fact, with landscape concerns being at the heart of much protest, the question of fair burden distribution becomes sidelined: landscape impacts cannot be distributed nor compensated for. Protests may be attempts to express a true conflict of (incommensurable) values. Understanding them as such will help us better address NIMBY concerns and overcome such opposition through ensuring procedural justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rapid growth in the global population and associated elevated reliance on modern technology has resulted in increased demand for energy consumption. This has resulted in an increased focus on the development and generation of advanced sustainable energy systems. The swift implementation of sustainable renewable energy resource utilization and improvement in their efficiency by the modification of current technologies are the possible solutions that gave rise to the emergence of geothermal technology as a potential alternative. Geothermal technology is a non-carbon renewable energy resource that could be utilized efficiently to fulfil the energy demands while mitigating the climate change threat. According to the surveyed literature, the global geothermal energy power plant installation capacity has reached 14.3 GWe to successfully implement this sustainable alternative. In order to have a successful and uninterrupted way forward, it is essential to evaluate the constraints both in terms of technicality and economic feasibility to establish an approved framework. Moreover, the governance and monitoring regarding the social and environmental impact alongside the legal challenges should also be addressed. The significant barriers include increased capital cost, site selection, superiority of resources at diverse levels of rock bottoms, and obstruction from nearby residents that need to be addressed appropriately. As a result, policymakers will continue to seek measure that have least negative impact on environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Indian government advocates for a major shift from national reliance on coal to more renewable energy sources. While these aspirations are laudable, a political ecology review reveals the uneven power relations associated with the introduction of renewable energy in the southern Indian state of Kerala. Drawing from fieldwork, research traces how Kerala government solar projects, including schemes to promote rooftop solar, prioritize middle- and upper-class consumers. Historically marginalized communities, including people living below the poverty level and Adivasis (indigenous peoples), are not a priority for the state agency implementing renewable energy and thus are not beneficiaries of cleaner energy. This disconnected approach builds from and exacerbates historical political and resource inequalities and enables the persistence of social and environmental injustices, even while moving towards a lower-carbon future. This model does not allow for all residents to actively engage in decision-making about energy processes and proves to be a missed opportunity to think holistically about development and energy in tandem. Energy democracy provides ideas to disturb this uneven power structure, with cooperatives being one possible way to implement this change. As the case of Kerala underscores, India may undergo an energy transition, but it will not be a just energy transition without significant changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although organizational scholars and social scientists have recently called for the integration of the natural environment into management theories, natural scientists have long espoused integrative frameworks. Gottfried Leibniz, the founder of differential calculus, sought integration long before the industrial revolution and Ludwig Boltzmann, the pioneer of statistical mechanics, before the oil boom. Alfred Lotka formalized this notion long before the financial crisis of 1933, while Howard Odum extended it before the oil crisis of 1973. In this essay, and accompanying simulation, I summarize and visualize how the laws of thermodynamics are independently insufficient yet jointly necessary alongside market economics to address the pressing problem of global climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]