Connect with us

Published

on

Picture this: The lush rice fields of South and Southeast Asia are withering away due to prolonged droughts, causing a significant drop in rice yields.

In a bid to prioritise their own citizens needs, several countries make the difficult decision to either restrict or ban rice exports entirely.

The domino effect is swift. Countries far from these drought-stricken areas, relying on rice imports, are hit with soaring prices and food scarcities.

World Bank controversy sends loss and damage talks into overtime

Such a disruption, caused by weather extremes,exemplifies a transboundary climate risk. These risks dont respect national borders.

They ripple across continents, creating a cascade of global repercussions. And this isnt a mere hypothetical situation.

Back in 2008, this exact scenario unfolded, leading to hunger and food riots in West African countries that heavily depend on rice imports.

Global goal on adaptation

At Cop28, government negotiators are expected to approve a framework to operationalise the Paris Agreement’s global goal on adaptation (GGA) to climate threats like this.

It will do this by enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability, and thus ensuring an adequate adaptation response and contributing to sustainable development.

The Paris Agreement clearly identifies adaptation as a priority on par with emissions-reduction, yet tracking progress towards the adaptation goal has posed “methodological, empirical, conceptual and political challenges”, as noted by the Adaptation Committee in 2021.

Climate diplomats pay tribute to Pete Betts, EU negotiator who helped land Paris Agreement

The two-year Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work programme on the global goal on adaptation was agreed at Cio26 to address these challenges.

The work programme is expected to present a draft framework for approval at COP28. One issue that several Parties, country groups and observer organizations have sought to call attention to is the need to consider transboundary climate risks across the adaptation cycle and in adaptation support, along with risks arising at the local and national levels.

Such an approach would reflect the spirit of the Paris Agreement, which recognizes adaptation as global challenge with local, subnational, national, regional and international dimensions. 

Transboundary climate risks – which arise when countries share natural resources (e.g. a river basin) or are connected through trade or the movement of people or finance – highlight the importance of international cooperation to build global resilience.

Small islands struggle to get help from UN’s flagship climate fund

The framework to be approved in Dubai thus presents an opportunity to enhance the world’s understanding of the complexity of climate risk, and to bring that perspective to the global stocktake and to future discussions on adaptation finance and capacity-building.

It is also a chance to send a strong message about the need for countries to work together to find adaptation solutions that truly reduce climate risks, and don’t simply shift them.

In a new Adaptation Without Borders discussion brief, we identify entry points for integrating transboundary climate risks in the framework.

Recognising that key decisions about the framework have yet to be made, and different governments and negotiating groups have different priorities, we considered a range of options, taking into account the stages of the adaptation cycle and themes to be covered by the framework.

Our main message is that it’s time to address transboundary climate risks at the highest levels of global climate cooperation, recognizing them as a vital aspect of global adaptation efforts.

For Cop28, this means:

  • Including an overarching statement on the specific need to build global resilience to transboundary climate risks in the decision on the GGA;
  • Integrating transboundary climate risks in the GGA framework’s articulation of each stage of the adaptation cycle – impact, vulnerability and risk assessment; planning; implementation; and monitoring, evaluation and learning; in the cross-cutting discussion on means of implementation, and in addressing the themes covered by the framework; and
  • Adopting specific targets and indicators on transboundary climate risks and cross-border collaboration, as these are developed.

 A detailed GGA framework with clearly articulated targets and indicators would provide a strong foundation for the global stocktake and for efforts to accelerate and scale up action to build resilience to climate risks at all levels.

Agreeing on the details will take time, however, and the work is expected to continue after Cop28. Explicitly addressing transboundary risks in the Dubai decision is thus an essential first step. Ideally, this would be done in two ways:

  • Recognising that countries face climate risks not only at the local and national levels, but also – through shared resources, trade, and the movement of people and finance – at the regional and global scales, and enhanced dialogue and cooperation are needed to ensure effective adaptation that is equitable and inclusive and protects the most vulnerable people.
  • Including a specific call for follow-on work on the GGA to consider transboundary risks along with local and national-level risks, with a view to enhancing cooperation at all stages of the adaptation cycle and across the themes covered by the GGA framework.

In anticipation of a more detailed framework, we examined how transboundary climate risks could be addressed at each stage of the adaptation cycle.

China’s Belt and Road gets ‘green’ reboot and spending boost

We used sample targets, such as “impact, vulnerability and risk assessments account for transboundary climate risks” and “adaptation policies and planning instruments include measures that aim to strengthen resilience to transboundary climate risks,” and potential indicators. We also stressed the need to provide additional resources and initiate new partnerships to tackle these risks.

The dialogue initiated by the Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work programme has already encouraged the Parties to think more deeply about what it means to ensure “an adequate adaptation response” to the global climate crisis.

The GGA framework that is approved in Dubai will not be the end of this process, but the messages it sends still matter profoundly for incentivizing and informing future adaptation policies. It is thus essential that the framework explicitly address the need to assess and adapt to transboundary climate risks.

Richard Klein is a Senior Research Fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute and leads the team “International Climate Risk and Adaptation”

The post At Cop28, neighbouring nations must work together to tackle their shared climate threats appeared first on Climate Home News.

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/10/26/at-cop28-neighbouring-nations-must-work-together-agaisnt-climate-threats/

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Hardline Conservative Wins Republican Primary for Texas Oil and Gas Regulator

Published

on

Bo French prevailed over incumbent Jim Wright after a primary campaign focused more on Islamophobia and deportations than oil and gas regulation.

Bo French has won the Republican nomination to help run a little-known but influential regulatory office in Texas that oversees the state’s oil and gas industry.

Hardline Conservative Wins Republican Primary for Texas Oil and Gas Regulator

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Q&A: Can China turn hydrogen into its next clean-energy industry?

Published

on

China has said that hydrogen is a key “future industry”, important to both its energy transition and its industrial policy.

Hydrogen frequently goes through hype cycles, most recently driven by rising oil and gas prices due to the conflict in the Middle East.

Yet, even in China, the world’s largest producer and consumer of the fuel, hydrogen remains expensive and inefficient to produce.

This is especially the case for “green” hydrogen derived from renewables.

Moreover, there is limited supporting infrastructure and there is little incentive to use hydrogen over other energy sources.

As a result, uptake in China of hydrogen as an alternative fuel remains low.

Nevertheless, these challenges echo the early circumstances of another key clean-energy technology – electric vehicles (EVs).

In China, EVs benefited from a policy environment that included consistent signals of support, financial aid and the development of supporting infrastructure.

Many similar policies are now being deployed – and in some cases improved upon – to support the development of China’s hydrogen industry.

This article examines China’s approach to developing hydrogen and how its evolving industrial policy could make the fuel viable.

How is China using hydrogen and where does it come from?

Electrification and rising installations of solar and wind power have been the biggest drivers of China’s decarbonisation story so far. However, how China will address the more energy-intensive, hard-to-electrify segments of its economy remains an open question.

Hydrogen is seen by some in China as a potential solution for reducing emissions in a range of “hard-to-abate” industries, from steel and chemicals to aviation and shipping.

The country is the world’s foremost producer and consumer of hydrogen. It produced 36.5m tonnes of the gas in 2024, with maximum production capacity standing at 50m tonnes that year.

It also consumed nearly a third of the world’s hydrogen in 2024, as shown below.

Share of global hydrogen consumption in select regions in 2024
Share of global hydrogen consumption in select regions in 2024, %. Source: IEA.

Most of China’s production capacity is in regions with potential for high demand, such as Shandong, Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, Ningxia, Shanxi and other provinces with significant heavy industry.

In 2024, the vast majority of China’s hydrogen – around 78% – was produced using fossil fuels, predominantly coal and gas, as shown in the figure below.

Another 21% was produced as an industrial by-product, while only 1% – just 320,000 tonnes – was derived from renewable-powered electrolysis of water.

Production of hydrogen in China by energy source in 2024
Production of hydrogen in China by energy source in 2024, %. Source: National Energy Administration.

One study found that, for every kilogram of hydrogen produced, 38.6kg of carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted if the hydrogen is produced using coal-fired power. Hydrogen made through coal gasification results in 28.5kg of CO2 for every kilogram of hydrogen, while gas-based hydrogen creates 13kg of emissions.

By contrast, one kilogram of renewables-based hydrogen results in 0.5kg of CO2.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) calculates that hydrogen and hydrogen-based fuels could help China avoid close to 16bn tonnes of CO2 cumulatively by 2060 – but only if it comes from low-carbon sources.

The biggest reductions, it adds, would come from heavy industry, particularly chemicals and steel, with the maritime and shipping sectors also seeing some benefit.

Currently, around half of the hydrogen produced in China is used in synthetic ammonia and methanol production.

Ammonia is primarily used to manufacture fertiliser and is seen as a possible fuel technology for shipping. Methanol is used as a fuel for the transport industry, as well as for heating.

Another quarter of China’s current hydrogen usage is consumed by the oil refining and coal-to-chemical sectors. The remaining amount is used in other industries, including transport, heating and metallurgy.

What are the barriers to scaling up hydrogen?

Although China is the largest producer and consumer of hydrogen globally, the industry faces several barriers to becoming a viable clean-energy technology.

Agora Energiewende, a thinktank focused on the energy sector, says that, in order to make hydrogen a practical clean-energy solution, China would need to expand the scale and range of its application, as well as improving the conversion efficiency of production and use.

Both BloombergNEF and the IEA highlight the importance of China creating demand for hydrogen, such as through quotas for industrial usage.

Hydrogen “suffers from a relatively large efficiency loss during various conversion processes”, adds Agora. For example, it notes that only around 22% of the energy put into hydrogen fuel-cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) is converted into motion, compared to 73% for battery electric vehicles. Producing hydrogen with renewable energy is also less efficient than coal-to-hydrogen processes.

Cui Chuansheng, technical director at East China Engineering Science and Technology, tells state news agency Xinhua that the variability of wind and solar power often leads to low utilisation of electrolysers, resulting in “efficiency losses”.

Meanwhile, the cost of producing hydrogen – particularly green hydrogen – remains high.

One study placed the cost of hydrogen produced through alkaline water electrolysis (AWE), the most common method for producing green hydrogen in China, at $4-6 per kilogram, compared with $1.20-2.50/kg for steam methane reforming and $1.30-2 for coal gasification.

In some specific cases, such as blending hydrogen with gas, researchers find that hydrogen prices would need to fall to one-third of gas prices to incentivise uptake.

These constraints are all “interdependent”, Kevin Tu, managing director of Agora Energy China, tells Carbon Brief, with the need to ensure “bankable demand” while also reducing costs and developing infrastructure. He adds:

“Without credible offtake in the right sectors, costs will not fall; without lower costs and better logistics, downstream users will not commit.”

The IEA says that green hydrogen “could become cost-competitive by the end of this decade due to low technology costs and cost of capital”.

For now, however, the China Hydrogen Bulletin Substack reports that China’s four listed hydrogen equipment manufacturers all reported significant losses in 2025.

Meanwhile, a senior executive at a Chinese hydrogen company told economic news outlet Jiemian that he expected 40% of companies in the sector to have closed down by the end of 2026, with surviving companies only turning a profit in 2029 at the earliest.

The industry also lacks refueling and pipeline infrastructure. China’s development of a pipeline network for hydrogen remains in its early stages, with around 400km of pipelines currently in operation. By contrast, its long-distance gas network stands at 128,000km. Similarly, storage remains expensive and inefficient, creating a further obstacle to wider uptake.

How is China supporting hydrogen development?

China began considering the use of hydrogen as an energy source in earnest in the early 2000s, to address concerns around pollution and dependence on imported oil for the transport sector.

A clearer signal of its importance came in 2015, when the State Council included the technology in a 10-year national industrial strategy known as the “Made in China” initiative. This pitched hydrogen as a way to contribute to electrification of China’s road-transport system through the development of FCEVs.

Yuki Yu, founder of research firm Energy Iceberg, tells Carbon Brief that, from 2018-2021, hydrogen was treated as a “FCEV and manufacturing technology challenge”.

This has since evolved, she says, given that battery electric vehicles have emerged as the more popular technology.

Shen Xinyi, senior advisor at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), agrees, telling Carbon Brief that recent policy documents suggest the aim is now for hydrogen to be targeted at areas where direct electrification is harder, such as hydrogen-based chemicals, hydrogen metallurgy and some heavy-duty transport applications.

This is in line with the “hydrogen ladder”, an analysis of how likely different possibilities for applying hydrogen as a clean alternative are to become significant. The ladder sees significant future use of hydrogen in these hard-to-electrify areas as much more likely than for light vehicles.

Notable policy moves are being made in “three layers”, says Agora’s Tu, which are combining to improve the technology’s chances of scaling up. These are: the “legal and institutional” layer; “application-oriented” policies; and targeted measures to address “practical bottlenecks” at the local level.

One of the documents underpinning this pivot was the “medium- and long-term plan for the development of the hydrogen energy industry (2021-2035)”, issued in March 2022.

According to a report by the National Energy Administration (NEA), the plan is an attempt to develop an “industrial ecosystem” for hydrogen that features “diverse stakeholders, coordinated innovation and clustered development”.

The plan was the first government document to “lay out a long-term vision for China’s hydrogen economy”, unifying a previously disparate policy push into one document, according to the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, a UK-based thinktank.

Following on from the 2022 plan, the importance of hydrogen as a broad clean-energy solution has been emphasised in a number of policies. These include its classification being changed from a hazardous chemical to an energy carrier in China’s Energy Law, a 2024 action plan to “accelerate” the use of low-carbon hydrogen in industry and a new pilot scheme offering subsidies for projects that achieve specific targets.

The table below sets out the timeline and content of China’s hydrogen-related policies over the past 25 years.

Policy Year published Key features
10th five-year plan (2001–2005) 2001 Calls for “actively developing” low-emission vehicles, understood to include hydrogen vehicles
Made in China 2025 2015 Pledges to “continue to support” development of fuel cell vehicles and “master core technologies” for low-carbon vehicles
Notice on implementation of demonstration projects for fuel cell vehicles 2020 Creates a dedicated subsidy programme for finding breakthroughs in FCEV core technologies and industrial applications
14th five-year plan (2021-2025) 2021 Hydrogen listed as a future industry
Medium- and long-term plan for the development of the hydrogen energy industry (2021–2035) 2022 Aims to reach 100,000-200,000 tonnes of green hydrogen production [this target has been met]. Also aims to get 50,000 FCEVs on the road by 2025, leading to a “diversified” hydrogen industry by 2035
Opinions on accelerating the comprehensive green transformation of economic and social development 2024 Promotes further development of hydrogen production, transport, storage and applications
Implementation plan for accelerating the application of clean and low-carbon hydrogen in the industrial sector 2025 Outlines tasks to promote use of low-carbon hydrogen to reduce emissions in heavy industries, such as steel and chemicals
Energy law 2025 Sees hydrogen included in national legislation for the first time, re-classifies it from a hazardous chemical to an energy carrier
15th five-year plan (2026-2030) 2026 Again lists as a future industry, and calls for the development of green fuels derived from green hydrogen
Notice on the implementation of pilot projects for the comprehensive application of hydrogen energy 2026 Provides subsidies to projects to reduce hydrogen costs to 15-25 yuan/kilogram ($2.20-3.67/kg) and help develop a fleet of 100,000 FCEVs

Key policies in the development of China’s hydrogen sector.

In addition, the NEA said in 2025 that local governments across China had issued more than 560 hydrogen-related energy policies by the end of 2024.

Tu notes that these local policies cover everything from permitting reforms and pipeline planning to exempting FCEVs from paying road toll.

Different provinces across China adopt distinct strategies for developing hydrogen industries, based on local conditions, says the US-based Center on Global Energy Policy, such as energy mix, availability of coal and industrial needs.

However, these local policies and targets are frequently more ambitious than the “conservative” national-level targets, it adds.

Could a new pilot programme boost hydrogen’s prospects?

A new pilot programme, announced in March 2026, aims to commercialise the country’s hydrogen industry by funding projects to reduce the cost of the fuel to 15-25 yuan/kilogram ($2.20-3.67/kg) by 2030, as well as other targets.

Unlike the 2020 subsidies, which focused on FCEVs, the new programme reaffirms China’s interest in a broader series of sectoral applications for hydrogen, including in clean heating, production of low-carbon iron and steel, and production of “green fuels” and other chemicals.

This new pilot is the “strongest financial instrument ever released for China’s green hydrogen application” in terms of creating a comprehensive hydrogen policy that covers a broad swathe of the economy, supporting it with financial backing and targeting application scenarios, Yu says.

However, she argues that strict grant caps – 240m yuan ($35m) per project and 1.6bn yuan ($235m) per selected region across only five regions – limited the overall funding scale available to the industry.

Energy Iceberg has calculated that only around 60-70 projects nationally could receive funding under the current rules, out of more than 670 active green hydrogen proposals in China.

Shen agrees that the pilot programme is significant and that it will expand the use of hydrogen in China’s climate strategy, particularly green hydrogen.

She notes a provision that “explicitly states that coal-based ammonia and methanol projects cannot be labelled as ‘green’ ammonia or methanol”, suggesting that policymakers are increasingly paying attention to the “integrity” of definitions for hydrogen and hydrogen-derived fuel.

The “real value” of the pilot scheme, says Tu, is that it focuses on developing “integrated city-cluster ecosystems linking supply, transport, infrastructure and end-use demand”, rather than only supporting individual projects.

This “should help identify viable business models, accelerate cost discovery and concentrate support on applications with stronger scale potential”, as well as boost investor confidence, adds Tu.

However, he continues that the broader effect it will have on boosting production of hydrogen will “depend on how quickly the selected clusters can translate the programme into real offtake and lower delivered hydrogen prices”.

How does this compare to China’s EV policy push?

The debate around the viability of hydrogen is reminiscent of critiques of EVs.

Until recently, EVs were seen as too expensive for consumers, inefficient and challenging to use without supporting infrastructure. As a result, many western automakers chose to temper their focus on EVs, while continuing to develop internal combustion engines.

However, China has managed to develop a competitive EV industry with products that top global sales.

Part of the playbook that spurred China’s success on EVs included consistent policy signalling in favour of the technology, including mentions in high-level documents and committing resources to building charging infrastructure.

“The defining features of China’s industrial-policy success are its persistence and adaptability,” says Kyle Chan, fellow at the Brookings Institution, adding that “long before the technology and economics of EVs and batteries were proven, China was making long-term investments and policy bets [in the sectors]”.

More tangible measures included direct and indirect subsidies and policy support in the shape of favourable loan rates and low-cost land. One estimate by US-based thinktank the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) pegs the amount of support allocated to the EV industry between 2009-2023 at $230.9bn.

This coupled with the success of private Chinese manufacturers in creating innovative, nimble companies that “forc[ed] policymakers to adapt”, as well as growing links between the automotive and information technology industries, according to a separate CSIS report.

But this progress on EVs also reportedly came with significant fraud. In 2016, one investigation found that 33 companies were involved in subsidy fraud totalling 9.2bn yuan ($1.3bn).

(It should also be noted that profitability in the industry lags far behind the average for downstream industrial sectors, according to the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post, which says that “only a handful” of nearly 50 EV makers have reported profits.)

Being the subject of an industrial policy push alone does not guarantee success, states CSIS. It says the strength of the EV industry “was neither inevitable nor the result of a single master plan” and that China’s aims to develop globally-competitive industries in areas such as commercial aviation remain unaccomplished.

China’s approach to hydrogen has been markedly different.

Instead of offering blanket subsidies, the fuel cell demonstration programme it established in 2020 focused on performance-based rewards.

To avoid the subsidy issues seen in the solar and EV industries, the ministry of finance deliberately chose this indirect funding model, says Yu.

However, Yu argues, the programme did not work as well as hoped, due to the funding ceiling and the siloed attempts made by different regional governments to develop hydrogen ecosystems .

But Chinese policy thinking is becoming more selective and pragmatic for hydrogen compared with EVs, says Shen. She says:

“Electrification remains the primary decarbonisation pathway [for road transport], while hydrogen is increasingly positioned for applications where direct electrification is more difficult.”

Tu echoes this, adding that China is “clearly moving toward a more supportive policy environment for hydrogen”.

But its approach is “unlikely to replicate the EV story one-for-one”, he adds.

China’s concerted hydrogen push is also unlikely to echo the EV story at a global level, according to the IEA.

In terms of green hydrogen, around 60% of global electrolyser manufacturing capacity is currently in China, prompting concerns from the EU about a repeat of China’s global dominance in the solar and EV sectors.

However, the IEA says, electrolysers made in China “might not supply other markets at scale in the short term”, due to difficulties transporting the bulky technology globally, expectations that costs will only fall gradually, uncertainty around global demand and questions over how well Chinese electrolysers perform against global alternatives.

China’s industrial focus on hydrogen is centred more on domestic use, Shen argues. “It is less about near-term export competitiveness and more about building domestic industrial ecosystems,” she says.

The post Q&A: Can China turn hydrogen into its next clean-energy industry? appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Q&A: Can China turn hydrogen into its next clean-energy industry?

Continue Reading

Climate Change

In Venezuela, Anxiety About Ramping Up Oil Production in the Heavily Polluted Lake Maracaibo Region

Published

on

Experts and local activists, wary of past exploitation, are hoping it will be different this time—but aren’t confident it will be.

There is a joke Mónica Godoy Molero likes to make with her family: if you swim in Venezuela’s Lake Maracaibo after an oil spill, you’ll sprout a third eye.

In Venezuela, Anxiety About Ramping Up Oil Production in the Heavily Polluted Lake Maracaibo Region

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com