久久精品国产亚洲7777小说_国产91成人精品亚洲精品_亚洲aⅴ久久久噜噜噜噜_久久精品亚洲精品无码_青青青视频免费_9191精品国产费久久_成人国产一区二区三区精品_99久久综合久中文字幕_免费黄色一级电影

Strategic Game Behind "Carbon Neutralization"

From November 1 to November 12, 2021, the 26th Global Climate Conference (COP26) will be held in Glasgow, Scotland, UK, and will be jointly organized by the British Central Government (together with the Scottish Autonomous Government) and the Italian Government. This meeting has merged three conferences of the parties to international conventions - the 26th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the 16th Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP16) and the 3rd Conference of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA3). In short, the purpose of COP26 is to set specific carbon reduction shares and timetables for each country. Zong Zongjun hopes to take this opportunity to talk about "carbon neutrality".

1、 Origin of "Carbon Neutralization"

In recent years, it is obvious that global climate change is intensifying. Floods, droughts, typhoons and even epidemic diseases may be directly or indirectly caused by climate. The theoretical premise of the global "carbon neutral" governance is that since the industrial revolution, human beings have burned a lot of fossil energy and released a lot of carbon dioxide, leading to the intensification of the "greenhouse effect" of the earth. If not effectively controlled, the average temperature of the earth in 2060 will be 4 ° C higher than the premise of the industrial revolution, which is equivalent to the occurrence of a nuclear war. At that time, the world will suffer disasters.

On December 12, 2015, 195 Member States of the United Nations signed the Paris Climate Agreement, replacing the Kyoto Protocol, with a view to jointly curbing global warming. The Paris Agreement stipulates that the global average temperature rise should be controlled within 2 ° C of pre industrialization, and strive to be controlled within 1.5 ° C, and the goal of global "carbon neutrality" should be achieved from 2050 to 2100, that is, the balance between the emission and absorption of greenhouse gases. To this end, countries need to formulate carbon emission reduction targets, namely "National Independent Contribution" (NDC), and update the progress of emission reduction every five years.

However, the Paris Agreement only reached a global consensus and did not specify the emission reduction targets and schedules of countries. Subsequently, some major countries and regions successively announced clear emission reduction targets:

In September 2018, California Governor Jerry Brown signed the Carbon Neutralization Order, and the state passed a law to achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2045;

In June 2019, the French National Assembly voted to incorporate the net zero target into the law. In the June 2021 report, the newly established High Climate Committee recommended that France must triple the rate of emission reduction to achieve the goal of "carbon neutrality";

In January 2020, after the Austrian coalition government was sworn in, it promised to achieve "climate neutrality" in 2040 and 100% clean electricity in 2030, based on the binding carbon emission target;

In March 2020, the European Commission published the draft of the European Climate Law and decided to make it clear in the form of legislation that Europe will be "carbon neutral" by 2050, that is, the net greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced to zero by 2050. The draft requires all EU institutions and member states to take necessary measures to achieve the above goals. According to the "Green Agreement" published in December 2019, the European Commission is working hard to achieve the EU's goal of zero net emissions by 2050. The long-term strategy will be submitted to the United Nations in March 2020;

In October 2020, Japanese Prime Minister Kan Yiwei announced in his first policy address to the National Assembly that Japan will achieve zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and fully realize carbon neutrality;

On October 28, 2020, South Korean President Moon Jae-in also said that he would complete carbon neutrality by 2050.

2、 Five main positions on climate governance

According to their willingness and ability, the positions of climate warming governance can be divided into five categories:

First, countries that actively support climate governance but have no actual capacity to participate mainly refer to island/island group countries distributed in the Pacific and Central America. For them, climate warming is a matter of life and death, because the greenhouse effect causes the melting of the Arctic and Antarctic glaciers, and even the rise of the earth's sea level, which may directly cause the islands they live in to suffer from "disaster". However, due to their small size and weak international influence, these countries, while firmly supporting climate governance, are unable to influence international decision-making. Once something goes wrong, they are likely to become "climate refugees" for the first time.

Second, we should actively support developed countries that are also capable of making rules for climate governance, such as France, Germany and the Democratic Party of the United States. Undoubtedly, the most enthusiastic group of countries for "carbon neutral" governance is undoubtedly Europe represented by France and Germany. At the same time, the United States, where the Democratic Party (Clinton, Obama, Biden) is in power, is also a supporter of climate change, because on the one hand, they have completed industrialization and the domestic low-end manufacturing industry chain has already been transferred, so the cost benefit ratio of "carbon neutral" governance is high, On the other hand, we also hope to use the shell of climate governance to formulate new international rules in the future.

Third, the initiative to support climate governance is also capable of governance, but the typical representative of developing countries that emphasize the division of responsibilities is China. In fact, China is the most firm supporter of "carbon neutral" governance outside the EU. The core reasons are as follows: First, China has basically completed basic industrialization and is in the process of transforming to a more advanced industrial chain. It needs to take the opportunity of "carbon neutral" to force its own industry to upgrade; Second, China needs to participate in, or even partially lead, the formulation of new international rules based on the framework through "carbon neutral" governance, and must not allow Europe and the United States to obtain monopoly rule making power in this field again; Third, as the representative of developing countries, China is a natural spokesman in the field of carbon governance. China emphasizes the division of responsibilities for climate governance, which is responsible for developing countries as a whole. After all, if Europe and the United States are completely allowed to set rules, there will be no opportunities for developing countries in the future.

Fourth, India is the most typical representative of developing countries forced to support climate governance but in an awkward situation. It has to be said that the developing countries represented by India, which have not yet completed basic industrialization, may suffer the most under the "carbon neutral" governance framework. Because the "carbon neutral" governance will put it in an awkward "development dilemma": if we continue to use the "demographic dividend" to undertake the transfer of the international industrial chain for industrialization, it will inevitably increase carbon emissions, which means that we will pay a high "carbon tax"; If we give up industrialization to pursue the original ecology, it is equivalent to completely "lying down", and the future can only be manipulated by people.

Fifth, Russia is a typical resource country that is forced to support climate governance but has completely opposite practical positions. This logic is very simple - "carbon neutrality" is bound to be accompanied by the rise of clean energy, that is, the decline of fossil energy represented by oil, which is naturally opposed by oil dependent countries represented by Russia, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, etc. Russia even fundamentally suspects that there is a relationship between the earth temperature rise and human industrial activities. Many Russian experts believe that the earth climate change is cyclical, and its main influencing factors are natural factors. The impact of human industrialization can almost be ignored. However, most of these resource countries have fallen into the so-called "resource trap", and they cannot play a leading role in the field of global governance.

3、 Strategic Game Behind "Carbon Neutralization"

First, the essence of "carbon neutrality" is the share allocation of developed countries for human future industrial development rights

The basis of the "carbon neutral" logic closed loop is to control the Earth's temperature rise in 2060 at 1.5 ° C - 2 ° C through the efforts of all countries, so that the allowable global carbon emissions in the 40 years from now to 2060 can be inversely deduced. The countries that make the "carbon neutral" share commitment and emission reduction schedule first are equivalent to taking the lead in cutting the cake, so the remaining share and time space left to other countries will be smaller and smaller. In other words, the countries that act earlier will be more active, and the countries that act later will be more passive. When the new global carbon governance rules are fully formed, I'm afraid that some countries will pay taxes to the international community for their own trees, COP26 has just passed the Glasgow Leaders' Declaration on Forests and Land Use, which covers a total area of more than 13 million square miles of forests. This decision is obviously very unfriendly to countries such as Brazil, which are rich in forest resources. Amazon forests are the lungs of the world. How can Brazilians pestle the lungs of the earth because of your own development?

Second, a new "green trade barrier": the EU's "carbon border" adjustment mechanism (CBAM)

The European Commission adopted the European Green Agreement on December 11, 2019, which stipulates that by the end of 2030, the EU's greenhouse gas emissions plan will be reduced by 50% - 55% from the 1990 level. The EU believes that other countries that are inconsistent with the EU's carbon emission goals will cause the risk of carbon leakage, that is, in the context of trade globalization, stricter climate policies in one region will lead to the transfer of high carbon products and related carbon emissions to another region. In order to prevent "carbon leakage", the EU has replaced the EU Emission Trading System (EU-ETS) with a "carbon border" adjustment mechanism to offset the "carbon leakage" risk by imposing import carbon tariffs on "carbon footprint" goods from outside the EU. The EU will impose carbon tariffs on cement, electricity, fertilizer, steel and aluminum imported from countries and regions with relatively loose carbon emission restrictions. CBAM is planned to be implemented from January 1, 2023, and a three-year transition period has been set. The carbon tariff will be formally levied from January 1, 2026.

The implementation mode of the carbon border regulation mechanism is that the competent authorities of EU member states sell CBAM certificates to importers of high emission goods in various countries on demand. The industries covered by CBAM include cement, steel, aluminum, fertilizer, electricity, etc. The essence of carbon tariff is trade measures. With the announcement of CBAM and its future implementation, carbon emission accounting rules and carbon tariff setting rules will become a new hotspot in the formulation of global trade rules. The "carbon border" adjustment tax will greatly increase the cost of China and other export-oriented countries' exports of carbon products to the EU, thus forming a "green trade barrier" between China and Europe.

The EU carbon border regulation mechanism can not effectively promote global emission reduction, and is essentially a "green trade protection" measure in the name of climate. After the establishment of the "carbon emissions trading" system market in the European Union, the transaction costs of carbon intensive industries have been rising, and the profit margins of enterprises have decreased accordingly. As a mandatory emission reduction measure, the "carbon border" regulation tax will increase the cost of production and trading links in emission reducing countries, thereby reducing their return on capital and leading to the loss of competitive advantage in their energy intensive industries. Therefore, in the global value chain pattern, developed countries such as the European Union will tend to transfer some energy intensive industries and pollution industries to other developing countries, namely, the so-called "cross-border transfer of pollution". These receiving countries could have used some of their comparative advantages, such as pursuing the development of labor-intensive or resource intensive industries and exporting products with high energy consumption, high carbon content and low added value. However, once the "carbon border" adjustment tax is implemented, the cost of the products of the above countries will rise significantly, which will eventually lead to the reduction of their export products' market share in Europe. In the long run, it will significantly restrain the enterprises with high carbon emissions in developing countries.

Third, establish a global unified cross-border carbon trading market: China has a 10-year catch-up period

On July 16, after seven years of pilot work, China's national carbon emission trading mechanism was officially launched, which is one of the important steps for China to strive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reach the peak of carbon emissions by 2030 and achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2060. The first performance cycle involves 2225 key emission units in the power generation industry, accounting for 30% of the national emissions, and will cover about 4 billion tons of carbon dioxide. The launch of China's carbon trading mechanism has doubled the proportion of carbon emissions included in global trading. In the future, China's carbon market is expected to develop into the largest carbon market in the world.

At present, most of the countries that have established carbon trading markets in the world are concentrated in developed countries, such as the United States, Canada, New Zealand, etc. The EU is the earliest, largest and most mature market. At present, there is no internationally unified carbon trading system, and each carbon trading system is more based on its domestic. China is one of the few economies that actively establish a carbon neutral market as a developing country.

Compared with the EU, China is still a latecomer in the field of carbon trading. From its own development stage and carbon neutralization schedule, there is a "time lag" between China and Europe. The EU is using this time lag to advance the layout of cross regional international carbon trading markets, and then tries to shape a unified global cross-border carbon trading market in the future with EU standards. If this plan is realized, the euro will become the main settlement currency in the field of international carbon trading, and the EU will also obtain the standard setting right of international cross-border carbon trading system.

The author judges that once the EU reaches a certain landmark carbon emission target, it will immediately try to promote the large-scale carbon cross-border trading system of EU standards globally. At present, 2030 is a very important time node. Therefore, the decade 2021-2030 is a period for China to catch up in the carbon neutral field. China must ensure that it also has a set of mature standards and forms a cross-border carbon trading network system of a certain scale around 2030.

Fourth, the biggest highlight of COP26: China and the United States reached an agreement -- the three "landlord" type carbon game relations between China, the United States and Europe

Western media generally believed that the biggest highlight of the COP26 meeting was the "accidental" agreement reached between China and the United States, which "gave practical significance" to the UN Climate Conference and prevented it from becoming a "talking shop".

Why is the media so highly rating the "carbon neutral" governance agreement between China and the United States? From the perspective of strategic game, the relationship between the three most important players in the "carbon neutral" field - the EU, the United States and China - is similar to the "landlord", but the EU is the "landlord", while China and the United States are more like "farmers" to some extent: the EU is the most advanced in the "carbon neutral" rule making field, with the most mature technology and regulations, and good policy coherence, To some extent, France and Germany have anchored the path of EU's re emergence as "carbon neutral"; China is obviously a "new player". Although it is still young in terms of technology and rules, its carbon emission volume is huge (the emission reduction effect is naturally the most obvious, and the volume associated with the carbon trading market is also the largest), and its future potential is also great; The United States is a player of "repeated leaps" and "half hearted". "Carbon neutrality" is not so much the national policy of the United States as the national policy of the Democratic Party. At the beginning, Clinton of the Democratic Party joined the Kyoto Protocol, George W. Bush of the Republican Party withdrew, Obama of the Democratic Party joined the Paris Climate Agreement, Trump of the Republican Party withdrew. Now Biden of the Democratic Party returned to the Paris Agreement, but it seems that he is difficult to re-election at present, However, Trump's support rate reached a new high. It is unknown that the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement again three years later.

To sum up, the three giants that will determine the future of "carbon neutrality" are China, the United States and Europe, and the relationship between the three is extremely complex. Sino US cooperation can effectively "balance" the EU's "carbon hegemony". At the same time, although the EU has technological, regulatory and policy advantages in climate governance, its share of carbon emissions is small due to the transfer of manufacturing, Therefore, China and the United States can jointly exert greater influence on the practical level of carbon governance. How to fight against landlords in carbon governance requires high strategic wisdom.

3、 "Carbon Neutralization" and China

What is the strategic significance of "carbon neutrality" for China?

First, China's internal economic transformation needs.

China's economic development is facing an important transition period, and is experiencing a transformation from quantitative growth to qualitative growth. "It requires not only golden mountains and silver mountains, but also green mountains and green waters". For a long time ago, China became the "world factory" by exchanging its cheap labor, environmental damage and pollution for the transfer of the international manufacturing industry chain. Now, China has completed the stage of capital accumulation and technology accumulation. The next step is to upgrade the overall industrial system, improve its position in the global industrial chain, remove more downstream polluting enterprises, and reshape the environmental ecology.

Second, participate in international rule making.

Since becoming the "world factory", China has naturally become the world's largest carbon dioxide emitter, which has been criticized by environmentalists in developed countries. On May 6, 2021, the report released by Rhodium Group, an American think tank, showed that China's greenhouse gas emissions in 2019 accounted for 27% of the world's total, exceeding the sum of developed countries, far exceeding the United States (11%), which ranked second, and India (6.6%), which ranked third. According to the above logic, since the signing of the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, in the field of limiting carbon emissions, although it seems that developed countries have not set clear emission reduction targets for developing countries because of their own restrictions, in fact, the more developed economies represented by the EU give priority to carbon control, the smaller the share of carbon emissions left to developing countries as a whole, It is equivalent to directly limiting the future development space of these countries (those that have not yet started the industrialization process or are only primary industrial countries), making the world division of labor stratum structure more solidified in a disguised way, and making the developed countries keep progressiveness towards the developing countries forever. Therefore, as the largest developing country, China must actively participate in the "carbon neutral" action, and even require itself to comply with the carbon limit standards of developed countries, aiming to participate in the formulation of new international rules and safeguard its right to development in the future.

Third, China's energy transformation needs.

As we all know, Europe is almost the most active group of developed countries in the carbon neutral action. One important reason is that Europe as a whole is similar to China in its energy structure, both of which are oil poor countries, and their oil and gas resources are highly dependent on imports. Therefore, it is urgent to change the energy structure and get rid of dependence on fossil energy as soon as possible. Therefore, the EU's demand for new energy transformation is greater than that of the United States with abundant oil reserves. This is why Europe (represented by France) is extremely persistent to the Paris Climate Agreement while the United States is wavering.

The situation faced by China in the energy field is very similar to that in Europe. More than 60% of oil resources depend on imports, and almost all of natural gas resources depend on imports, and the safety of related logistics channels is also worrying. China's own energy reserves and energy structure are dominated by coal, and the carbon dioxide pollution produced by coal combustion is the enemy of carbon neutralization. Therefore, China also urgently needs to reshape the energy structure by promoting carbon neutrality, and vigorously develop new energy such as nuclear energy and photovoltaic.

Fourth, "carbon neutrality" is expected to drive the new leading industry to overtake at corners.

Carbon neutralization will greatly restrict traditional industries such as railway infrastructure, steel, cement, coal, etc., and will also stimulate new industries. China is expected to overtake at corners in some new areas, gaining world-class competition opportunities. One of the most representative industries is new energy vehicles.

As we all know, China has always lagged behind developed economies such as Europe, the United States, Japan and South Korea in the field of traditional cars, but new energy vehicles in the context of "carbon neutral" may become a typical case of China's "overtaking at corners" in the automotive field of the new era. However, China and the EU will face new competition in this field. It is reported that Europe is becoming the pioneer of global electric vehicles. According to the latest "Electric Vehicle Index" issued by McKinsey Management Consulting Company, in 2020, the sales volume of electric vehicles in Europe will reach 1.4 million, an increase of 138% over the previous year, surpassing China and the United States. At present, Europe accounts for 43% of the global market share, slightly higher than China's 41%, and far higher than the United States' 10%.

Fifth, the new currency anchor in the post dollar era?

Since the establishment of the Bretton Woods system, the dollar has been playing the role of international currency because of its binding to gold; After the "Nixon shock", the US dollar was bound to OPEC, and from then on, the global seigniorage was collected by virtue of the "petrodollars". Today, since the United States has gradually withdrawn from Afghanistan and the Middle East, the world has ushered in a "post petrodollar era". At present, the United States has bound the dollar with US debt, which is obviously not a good currency anchor.

For the EU and China, there may be two windows based on which the euro or RMB will be internationalized in the future - "carbon settlement" and "digital sovereign currency". It seems that the euro will probably anchor "carbon settlement" as a new currency anchor in the future to promote the internationalization of the euro; For China's part, digital RMB has been implemented. As the largest carbon emitter, it is reasonable to anchor the "international settlement of carbon emission rights" in the future.

To sum up, carbon trading and carbon international settlement may become a new currency anchor for the internationalization of the euro and RMB in the future.

Author: Xia Guohan

Typesetting: YvelineWang