Discoveries of natural gas have occurred in a number of sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, bringing enthusiasm and hopes for economic growth that addresses the energy deficit and limited access to electricity while lowering ...

A closer look at ESG investing

Halfway between traditional philanthropy and return-driven financial investment, ESG investing – i.e. directing capital to companies which yield environmental, social and governance benefits in addition to profits – enables investors to “do well by doing good”. Lying within the broad range of responsible investments, ESG can be virtually any asset class or investment vehicle.

Within the debate around climate change, renewable energy sources (RES) hold an important place, some of which are perhaps more widely known than others. Next to solar and wind, biomethane is less well known and often even classified in “other renewable power”. However, it has a bright future as solar and wind showed their limitations in Autumn 2021, being partially responsible for the increase of gas prices in Europe.

More than ever, our growing dependence on intermittent energy sources makes it crucial to diversify the energy mix. It should be noted that, even though Europe is moving towards a system that heavily relies on electricity as an energy carrier, many industries such as iron or cement making are not yet ready to be powered by electricity, and hence rely heavily on fossil fuels.

Unlike other RES, biomethane shares almost all its characteristics with natural gas, making it interchangeable and suitable for industry applications, whilst using the existing gas transmission network.

As part of the quest to diversify its energy mix and increase its energy independence, the European Union is encouraging the development of methanation. Germany was the first country to get on board, and France is now joining its neighbour on this path. However, the urgent need for decarbonisation framed by the Paris Agreement seems to push all stakeholders into acting too quickly, leaving space for abusive practices and for things to get out of hand, to the detriment of sustainable agriculture practices.

In order to reach net zero emissions, do we alter the electricity infrastructure to increase electric vehicle market penetration or promote the adoption of electric vehicles?

The Paris Agreement at COP21 highlighted that, despite the reductions in carbon emissions recorded in other sectors, in the transport sector they have steadily increased, trending toward a 50% increase by 2030. Globally, the transport sector is still heavily dependent on fossil fuels, accounting for around 17% of the world’s emissions. Thus, the topic of electric vehicles (EVs) has been the focal point of discussions in decarbonising the sector. However, there have been many critiques of the plausibility of transitioning to EVs and whether we should, (1) change the electricity generation grid, or (2) facilitate the transition to EVs by dismissing the emissions of the unchanged electricity generation mix. Will the transition be of environmental benefit? And what comes first: introducing large-scale EV adoption to facilitate decarbonisation through fiscal policies, or changing the infrastructure to stimulate the adoption of electric vehicles?

The potential for blockchain technology to profoundly disrupt the world as we know it is enormous. The financial system is often seen as the most vulnerable industry primed for disruption. This technology has the potential to disrupt a variety of industries, including aerospace and defence, supply chain and logistics, and energy management, most notably decentralised micro-grid systems.

Background

• Examine the common misconceptions about the environmental impact of Blockchain mining
• Analyse the options for transitioning blockchain mining away from fossil fuels and towards variable renewable energy sources (vRES)