天美传媒

That dramatic actions must be taken to combat climate with clean energy has, with a few notable exceptions, become an international consensus. Yet differences of opinion, and in degrees of optimism, persist among those working toward a solution.

An encouraging key takeaway of Thursday鈥檚 Energy Prospectives panel at 天美传媒 Madrid was that energy industry leaders advocating for sustainability agree both on the gravity of the problems caused by emissions and the urgent need for change. The event, organized in collaboration with the Naturgy Foundation, focused on decarbonization, the process aimed at expanding an economy based on low-carbon sources that will curtail greenhouse gas emissions.

Speaker Claudio Aranzadi, the former Spanish Minister of Industry and Energy, said that people must be made aware of the need to 鈥減ay [for decarbonization] now in order to prevent the grave damage done by climate change to their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.鈥�

Aranzadi would be viewed as a realist by some of his industry peers with loftier views of decarbonization鈥檚 cost-efficiency and, especially, the speed with which it could reshape the global energy and climate pictures. He emphasized the expenses of the shift, and that they鈥檒l rise over time, saying that decarbonization would not be a 鈥渇ree lunch.鈥� That鈥檚 especially true as it develops across nations with divergent carbon footprints and political and business attitudes toward the strategy and the alternative energy sources it relies on.

BloombergNEF founder Michael Liebreich followed Aranzadi by acknowledging the challenges of globalism. But he added that while globalism creates certain hurdles, it should also underscore the fact that when it comes to energy and the environments, 鈥淓veryone has the same problems.鈥�

That common ground should compel unified action. But how should we address those problems? And how skeptical should we be of a quick and easy transition to a low-carbon economy?

Liebreich is no cynic. 鈥淏y 2040, we will have what I call a three-third world,鈥� he said. 鈥淥ne-third of electricity will be wind and solar, one-third of cars will be electric and the economy will be one-third more energy productive.鈥� And that鈥檚 still not enough. Looking beyond a three-third world, he advocated for sustainability鈥檚 growth in sectors including agriculture, shipping and, crucially, 鈥渉eat, heat, heat.鈥�

Indeed, Liebreich praised a decentralized, country-by-country and sector-by-sector approach whose relatively small victories could be replicated on a larger scale. It鈥檚 the sort of incremental method that has yielded tremendous progress in the U.K., for instance, where power generated by coal has plunged from 40 percent to 5 percent of the market in just six years.

He added that rapid fire technological advances including the digitization of infrastructure, the increasing affordability of AI, the ubiquity of chips and sensors and practically free communications have the potential to speed up the transition to low-carbon economies.

During a discussion between Aranzadi, Liebreich and Prof. Xavier Vives following the individual presentations, Aranzadi said that he鈥檚 鈥渘ot a technological pessimist. But the decisions are incredibly complex. And there are many wrong paths to take. The response will have to be centralized. It鈥檚 necessary to meet the aggregated demand of challenges.鈥�

鈥淭here will be costs,鈥� Liebreich said. 鈥淚鈥檓 not denying that.鈥� Yet the pace of change today, and its growing pains, could auger well for sustainability. That鈥檚 not only thanks to new technology, but also the evolving role of regulators who now confront until recently unimaginable issues like Facebook鈥檚 advertising and data policies.

Differences aside, it was clear by the end of the event that both men agreed with Aranzadi鈥檚 assessment that鈥渄ecarbonization鈥檚 costs now pale against the potential social costs in the vulnerable future.鈥�