84959 AUTHOR ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT FINAL PUBLICATION INFORMATION Energy in the Context of Sustainability The definitive version of the text was subsequently published in Daedalus, 142(1), 2013-01-02 Published by MIT Press THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE IS AVAILABLE ON THE PUBLISHER’S PLATFORM This Author Accepted Manuscript is copyrighted by the World Bank and published by MIT Press. It is posted here by agreement between them. Changes resulting from the publishing process—such as editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms—may not be reflected in this version of the text. You may download, copy, and distribute this Author Accepted Manuscript for noncommercial purposes. Your license is limited by the following restrictions: (1) You may use this Author Accepted Manuscript for noncommercial purposes only under a CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 Unported license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/. (2) The integrity of the work and identification of the author, copyright owner, and publisher must be preserved in any copy. (3) You must attribute this Author Accepted Manuscript in the following format: This is an Author Accepted Manuscript of an Article by Bierbaum, Rosina M.; Matson, Pamela A. Energy in the Context of Sustainability © World Bank, published in the Daedalus142(1) 2013-01-02 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc- nd/3.0/ © 2014 The World Bank Energy in the Context of Sustainability Rosina M. Bierbaum & Pamela A. Matson Abstract: Today and in the coming decades, the world faces the challenge of meeting the needs of a still- growing human population, and of doing it sustainably–that is, without affecting the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Energy plays a pivotal role in this challenge, both because of its impor- tance to economic development and because of the myriad interactions and influences it has on other crit- ical sustainability issues. In this essay, we explore some of the direct interactions between energy and other things people need, such as food, water, fuel, and clean air, and also some of its indirect interactions with climate, ecosystems, and the habitability of the planet. We discuss some of the challenges and potential unintended consequences that are associated with a transition to clean, affordable energy as well as opportunities that make sense for energy and other sustainability goals. Pursuing such opportunities is critical not just to meeting the energy needs of nine billion people, but also to meeting their other critical needs and to maintaining a planet that supports human life in the near and long term. The term sustainability–widely used today in cor- porate, academic, government, nongovernmental, and community settings–is de½ned in multiple ways. In the corporate sector, sustainability typi- cally refers to the triple bottom line, or “three- legged stool,” that incorporates concern for the economy, the environment, and social equity into industrial or economic activities. In development ROSINA M. BIERBAUM, a Fellow circles, the term often describes a pattern of devel- of the American Academy since opment that “meets the needs of the present with- 2007, is Dean Emerita and Profes- sor of Natural Resources and Envi- out compromising the ability of future generations ronmental Policy at the University to meet their own needs,”1 or that promotes human of Michigan. well-being while protecting and conserving the life support systems of the planet.2 Most biodiversity- PAMELA A. MATSON, a Fellow of the American Academy since 1992, conservation organizations embrace the strategy is the Chester Naramore Dean of that the International Union for Conservation of the School of Earth Sciences and Nature outlined in 1980 to integrate conservation the Richard and Rhoda Goldman and development objectives.3 Despite differences Professor of Environmental Stud- in these and other de½nitions, all share a common ies at Stanford University. concern: to maintain the planetary resources need- (*See endnotes for complete contributor ed to meet today’s needs as well as those of future biographies.) generations. © 2013 by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences 146 No resource is more fundamental to the critical inter-linkages between energy Rosina M. human development and well-being than use and other key issues, such as food, Bierbaum & Pamela A. energy. Energy is a key ingredient of water, health, national security, and pres- Matson almost all aspects of human existence, ervation of ecosystem services. It also ex- from producing food, to accessing and amines what may be energy’s largest long- purifying water, to heating and lighting term challenge to sustainability: namely, homes, to transporting materials and its impact on climate change. The rapidly people, to creating the goods and tech- evolving sustainability challenges on the nologies that humanity has come to rely planet–driven by the speed of change in on. Therefore, human well-being depends population, consumption, infrastructure on sustainable, reliable, and enduring development, and climate change, among forms of energy. Yet for many, access to other factors–threaten to outpace the affordable energy remains an aspiration: capacity of human and natural systems to there are still billions of people worldwide adapt. Thus, transformation of global who do not have access to electricity and energy systems must be quick, and it must modern forms of energy, and as a result, commence immediately. This essay dis- energy is among the most frequently cusses these factors and calls for enhanced cited sustainability challenges.4 As popu- public and private support of technology lation growth combines with increased development worldwide, as well as for a consumption patterns, demand for ener- workforce trained to solve interdiscipli- gy services will rise sharply.5 Moreover, nary problems, in order to achieve revolu- access to reliable sources of energy–even tionary–not evolutionary–advances in in areas that have had access in the recent energy and progress toward sustainability past–is a growing concern. Signi½cant goals. technical, economic, and national secu- rity issues affect the availability of fossil fuels–namely, coal, oil, and natural gas– A mong the many interconnections between energy and other resources, the that currently supply 82 percent of global nexus of energy and water is perhaps the energy and 85 percent of U.S. energy.6 most well studied and clearly document- The use of fossil fuels also has signi½cant ed.9 Energy is used to collect and pump environmental impacts, including the surface and groundwater; to transport and production of pollutants that affect the distribute water for multiple uses; to de- health of people and ecosystems from salinate seawater; to transport and treat local to global scales. wastewater; and to heat and cool water As a result of these burgeoning con- for industrial, commercial, and residential cerns, efforts are under way around the end use.10 Nearly one billion people do world to transform energy systems into not have access to clean water, and nearly something cleaner, more reliable, and two billion do not have access to sanita- affordable for all.7 This transformation is tion, so the demands for energy to help urgently needed, as global demand for provide these essential services will only energy will likely triple over this century.8 increase.11 How that energy is supplied and distrib- Water is also essential to many elements uted–and in what form–will determine of energy production. Among other uses, whether the next generation inherits a it is used to extract fuels and manage other sustainable planet. aspects of mining and geologic produc- This essay explores energy in the con- tion; for cooling in thermal electricity text of sustainability, focusing on some of generation (using coal, gas, nuclear, and 142 (1) Winter 2013 147 Energy in the other fuel sources); for producing geo- currently exceeds recharge levels, and Context of thermal and hydrothermal energy; for because global water consumption dou- Sustainability scrubbing pollutants in coal-½red plants; bled between 1960 and 2000 and contin- and in the steam turbines of power ues to grow rapidly, the energy/water plants. In turn, contamination of surface nexus will require more integrated and water and shallow groundwater from the innovative planning to manage these sys- production of energy resources is one of tems in the coming decades.18 the most critical sources of water pollu- tion.12 Acid mine drainage from coal mines has a long history of environmen- E nergy and food production are like- wise connected. Energy is critical to tal and health concerns, but newer tech- every step of the food supply chain,19 and nologies also raise concerns. Indeed, one food-related energy use across the cycle– of the most worrisome consequences of from production to use and disposal–is a hydraulic fracturing of shale for natural major and growing fraction of national gas production, which has recently sky- energy budgets. At the agricultural end of rocketed in the United States and else- this chain, energy is used to produce and where, is related to the large amounts of apply fertilizers; to pump and distribute water needed to carry out the fracturing irrigation water; to produce and apply process, as well as inadvertent contamina- pesticides; and to till the soil, harvest tion of surface water and shallow aquifer crops, and carry out other on-site manage- resources that can take place under poor ment practices. Among these, irrigation drilling practices.13 is often the most signi½cant consumer of The cautious good news is that ef½cien- energy. For example, a 2005 study estimat- cy of water use in traditional energy pro- ed that pumping groundwater for agricul- duction has been on the rise and is ex- ture represents one-third of annual energy pected to continue. In the United States, use in India; as a result, high-energy costs for example, the average amount of water can limit the use of irrigation pumping to withdrawn per kilowatt-hour of electrici- maintain and expand agriculture.20 Ener- ty production has decreased over the past gy use per “unit” output is much higher several decades. But because absolute for livestock systems than for cropping energy consumption has risen, the total systems because there are inef½ciencies amount of water consumed has also at several steps in the process. In 2008, increased.14 Some alternative energy ecologist David Pimentel and colleagues sources, such as solar photovoltaics and calculated that the fossil energy required wind, use relatively low amounts of water. to produce animal products consumed in Thus, diversifying the energy supply with the American diet accounts for 50 percent these alternatives will help reduce the of the nation’s total food-related energy water demand for energy production.15 demand.21 Some bioenergy sources, on the other Energy is used along the remainder of hand, use substantial amounts of water the food supply chain as well–from trans- in the growth, conversion, maintenance, portation, processing, and packaging to and harvesting of crops to produce fuels household food-related activities such as such as ethanol,16 raising concerns about travel for purchasing food, refrigeration, water shortages and the sustainability of freezer storage, and food preparation. Not biofuel energy production.17 surprisingly, given the close connection Given that more than one billion people between energy and food, rising energy live in river basin areas where water use costs lead to higher average food costs, 148 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences and spikes in oil prices are related to spikes fossil fuel combustion–can reduce life Rosina M. in food prices.22 Many opportunities exist expectancy. Air pollutants, especially vol- Bierbaum & Pamela A. for improving the ef½ciency of energy use atile carbon and nitrogen oxides from Matson (and other resource use) in food produc- stationary and mobile sources, drive tro- tion, but as is the case with water, increas- pospheric ozone pollution, with impacts es in ef½ciency can easily be offset by on lung function as well as agricultural population growth and shifts to less- systems.28 Although exposure to air pol- ef½cient consumption patterns. To meet lution damages the health of everyone, the estimated 70 to 100 percent increase numerous studies have shown that cer- in food needed by 2050 to feed the grow- tain groups–for example, the elderly, ing global population, many analysts sug- children, and those with underlying dis- gest that we must radically change the ease–are at greater risk of being affected way food is produced, processed, stored, by air pollutants.29 and distributed. In addition, methods for About 40 percent of the global popula- eliminating waste must be found; 30 to tion–often the poorest–relies on dung, 40 percent of food is lost to waste in both agricultural wastes, and wood fuels for developing and developed countries.23 cooking and heating.30 Exposure to emis- Such goals can have signi½cant conse- sions from these fuels in the home extracts quences for energy as well as food and huge health care consequences.31 Beyond water.24 the direct health concerns, the fact that Despite the clear influence of energy on poorer individuals expend proportionally the production, distribution, and cost of more of their income on energy, despite food, until recently the food/energy con- using far less energy than the rich, leads to nection was not well understood. Mod- insecurity in critical areas such as health ern biofuels have been heralded for their care, education, and food.32 Moreover, be- contributions to energy security and for cause higher energy prices inflate the prices reductions in environmental costs from of almost all other goods and services (and fossil fuels; but many analysts suggest can account for up to 15 percent of total that, at least for ½rst-generation biofuels prices of food, textiles, lumber, paper, and like corn ethanol, the return on invest- other necessities), the poor suffer not just ment may not yield signi½cant net energy in access to energy under rising prices, but bene½ts or greenhouse gas reductions. At in access to other essential needs.33 the same time, the manufacture of corn Energy also plays a signi½cant role in ethanol competes for valuable land with national security. All the issues discussed activities such as food production and thus far (energy and water, energy and biodiversity conservation.25 Moreover, food, and energy and health), in addition some studies have found that food prices to issues such as population migration, may rise as a result of increased competi- energy acquisition, and energy diversi½ca- tion for land between food and biofuels.26 tion, are key determinants of both nation- al and global security.34 The energy tran- There is a long litany of health impacts sition can either reduce or enhance the potential for conflict. In particular, the di- associated with energy use. More than ½ve million premature deaths annually versi½cation of energy supplies and the are attributable to air pollution and other transition to alternative sources of energy energy-related effects.27 In most devel- is critical–as suggested by the staggering oped countries, exposure to particulates– of½cial estimates that the Pentagon has predominantly sulfates and soot from paid $40 to $400 per gallon of fuel (includ- 142 (1) Winter 2013 149 Energy in the ing the cost to transport the fuel) to power to increase resilience to climate impacts. Context of a combat vehicle or aircraft in Afghan- Climate change poses great risks for a wide Sustainability istan.35 Ensuring that energy is readily range of resources and environmental available, sustainable, and resilient will systems, including freshwater resources, continue to be a key component of nation- agriculture and ½sheries, coastal environ- al and global security concerns.36 ments, and ocean and land ecosystems.38 For example, as the climate changes, dry The preceding sections illustrate some of places on the planet are expected to become drier and subject to more severe the most direct ways that energy choices affect our ability to meet other critical hu- drought, while wet places may experience man needs. Our energy choices also have increasing intensity of rainfall and asso- an impact on the life support capacity of ciated damages. Agricultural systems will the planet, including on our atmosphere face higher temperatures, which could and ecosystems (and the services they push certain crops out of historical pro- provide), and, perhaps most important, on duction zones; increased demand for climate–speci½cally, through the emis- water; and new disease vectors that could sions of greenhouse gases, principally disrupt production. Most models suggest carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide dramatic increases in the frequency of and particulates from combusting carbon- very hot temperatures,39 which could lead based fossil fuels. Climate change in turn to greater public health impacts from heat affects all components of human and nat- stress, increased demand for energy to ural systems, adding both complexity cool built environments, and greater risks and urgency to the search for sustainable of food shortages.40 energy solutions. A substantial body of The impact of climate change on the fre- evidence, accumulated through several quency and intensity of extreme weather decades of multidisciplinary research, events is of particular concern.41 During indicates that Earth’s global climate has the past several decades, the United States already warmed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit. has been subjected to a greater frequency Most of the warming can be attributed to of extreme weather.42 We have too often greenhouse gas emissions from the burn- seen how floods and droughts can affect ing of fossil fuels for energy as well as, to a global production of goods and services, lesser extent, emissions from land use thereby disrupting energy, water, and food and agriculture.37 The pace and magni- systems as well as global trade. Hurricanes tude of current changes are challenging Katrina and Rita, for example, shut down the historic tolerances of species and or suspended three-quarters of the more infrastructure; planning based on the cli- than four thousand offshore oil and gas mate of the past is no longer an option. platforms overseen by the U.S. Depart- Climate change is associated with a ment of the Interior.43 Moreover, recent broad spectrum of other changes, includ- droughts and floods in Pakistan and Thai- ing increases in extreme precipitation land have killed thousands, displaced events, more frequent hot spells, rising millions, and disrupted supply chains for sea levels, and shifts in ranges of crops, commodities as diverse as clothing, food, forests, and pests. The future severity of and computer hard disks.44 these and other impacts will depend on While strategies for achieving the sus- how much the climate changes, and that tainable production and supply of energy will depend on what humanity does both must seek to reduce greenhouse gas emis- to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sions and climate change, they will also 150 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences need to consider the energy system’s greenhouse gas emissions. A clean-energy Rosina M. resilience to climate-related impacts. transformation can go hand in hand with Bierbaum & Pamela A. Such efforts will be critically important other forms of sustainable development Matson across temporal and spatial scales; indeed, in developing countries.47 extreme events as well as slow-onset Whether developing countries embark events, such as sea level rise, can pose on a more sustainable development path serious challenges to the ability to meet will be heavily influenced by transition global energy demand. costs; higher-income countries must pro- International, national, and regional in- vide ½nancial and technical support. stitutions are, in many ways, ill-prepared Global cooperation will require more than to cope with current weather-related ½nancial contributions, however. Devel- disasters, let alone potential problems oping countries harbor the concern that such as a growing number of refugees integrating climate concerns with devel- fleeing environmental damages spawned opment decisions could erode existing by climate change.45 Concomitant with an development assistance or shift responsi- energy transition, society must improve bility for mitigation onto the developing natural resource management and pre- world. Enshrining a principle of equity in paredness/response strategies to deal regional or global deals would do much with future climatic conditions that will to dispel such concerns and generate be fundamentally different from those trust.48 Moreover, high-income countries experienced in the last hundred years. must bring their own indefensible energy footprints down to sustainable levels. Pursuing the energy transition in the A major concern of developing coun- context of sustainable development rais- tries is technology access. Innovation in es special challenges and opportunities. energy-related technologies remains con- Among these, equity among the more and centrated in high-income countries, al- less developed countries of the world and though developing countries are increas- trends in urbanization deserve special ing their presence. (For example, China is attention. Energy access across the planet seventh in overall renewable energy pat- is deeply uneven; the poorest on the ents, and an Indian ½rm is now the leader planet use about 5 percent of the energy in on-road electric cars.) In addition, de- consumed by the average U.S. citizen. veloping countries–at least the smaller or According to the World Bank’s Data Cata- poorer ones–may need assistance to pro- log, the United States used 7,000 kg of oil duce new technology or tailor it to their equivalent per capita in 2009. By compar- unique local circumstances. Internation- ison, India, China, South Africa, Ethiopia, al transfers of clean technologies have so and Bangladesh used 560, 1,700, 3,000, far been modest. They have occurred in, 400, and 200 kg of oil equivalent per capi- at best, one-third of the projects funded ta, respectively.46 However, many of the through the Clean Development Mecha- easiest and cheapest opportunities to re- nism, the main channel for ½nancing duce energy use, produce clean energy, investments in low-carbon technologies and reduce climate and other environ- in developing countries.49 mental changes can be found in develop- ing countries, where infrastructure has yet M eeting clean-energy objectives with- to be built, where there is potential to out detracting from other sustainability greatly improve ef½ciency of energy use, goals will require careful processes, tools, and where land-use practices can decrease and approaches for selecting among op- 142 (1) Winter 2013 151 Energy in the tions and recognizing competing demands risks associated with accidents and stor- Context of for land, water, energy, and a variety of age of waste material.57 Sustainability ecosystem services in the face of a grow- We must also carefully consider how fu- ing population.50 Over the course of the ture energy choices affect our ability both last few decades, progressive degradation to mitigate and adapt to climate change. of the environment by human activities As noted above, the range of clean-energy has been increasingly well documented. choices could reduce or mitigate climate Loss of biodiversity and overuse of natu- change but could also negatively affect the ral resources have already reduced or ren- preservation of biodiversity, natural re- dered less reliable some ecosystem ser- sources, and ecosystem services. At the vices, with signi½cant adverse impacts on same time, the effects of climate change society.51 The energy sources that we on food and water resources and ecosys- choose, where those sources are located, tem services could impede the use of these and the amount of water and land con- resources in the development of clean- sumed to access the sources will affect energy alternatives. Moreover, efforts to sustainability goals. meet human needs through adaptation to Certain types of biomass (ethanol, for climate change–for example, greater use example) currently compete with tradi- of electricity for air conditioning or water tional agriculture for access to limited land and energy resources for irrigation–could and water.52 This competition is projected have unintended impacts on energy use, to intensify as global demand for biofuels increasing greenhouse gas emissions. A rises; looking ahead, a fourfold increase sensible strategy should, on the one hand, in biofuel production, primarily in North seek to rapidly mitigate the pace and ulti- America and Europe, is expected by mate magnitude of climate change and 2030.53 Pressure to expand land for bio- other environmental degradation and, on fuels could lead to a massive conversion the other hand, adapt to unavoidable cli- of managed and unmanaged forests and mate changes already under way as well preserved areas, further jeopardizing in- as those that are yet to come.58 digenous cultures and biodiversity. Plac- ing a value on the carbon held in forests and soils could lessen this impact signi½- G rowing urbanization poses both op- portunities and challenges for the energy cantly.54 transition as well as for broader climate Large wind and solar developments also and sustainable development goals. Cities pose challenges.55 They consume large are major consumers of resources; they tracks of land, raise potential noise con- are also centers for job creation and eco- cerns associated with energy generation, nomic growth. Cities are responsible for and rely on a manufacturing process that two-thirds of global energy consumption, could produce toxic waste if new genera- and this proportion will continue to tion techniques are not created.56 Addi- grow.59 By 2050, eight billion of the nine tionally, wind and solar both face pressure billion people in the world will live in from nimby (“Not In My Backyard”) cities (with ½ve billion in the developing syndrome, whereby local residents want world). Today, one million people are to have access to these technologies but, added to the urban population each week. for aesthetic reasons, do not want new de- Such rapid urbanization is compatible velopments in their communities. Carbon with sustainability goals only if green capture and storage and nuclear energy infrastructure becomes a criterion for can also affect local landscapes and carry new buildings and retro½ts, and if nega- 152 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences tive consequences on food access and systems) through joint strategies for Rosina M. human health are avoided.60 resource management and public/private Bierbaum & Pamela A. Given the need to transform energy in ½nance. Matson the near term in order to reduce the most critical challenges of climate change, inertia in the built environment poses a Change in global energy systems that is concordant with sustainable development particular challenge. Infrastructure invest- will require policy and regulatory actions, ments are long-lived; existing factories, as well as other incentives, to be aligned. power plants, roads, and power distribu- For new technologies to be accepted in the tion networks will remain in place for de- market, they must be attractive–in terms cades. Decisions made today concerning of performance, convenience, and cost– land use and urban form (the structure to investors, purchasers, and users. Regu- and density of cities) will have impacts lations and standards that target perfor- lasting more than a century. And long- mance characteristics can help spur tech- lived infrastructure triggers investments nological development and improve mar- in associated capital (such as cars for low- ket attractiveness.61 density municipalities, or gas-½red heat Many of the alternative energy options and power generation capacity where needed to address the sustainability chal- there are gas pipelines), locking econo- lenge are available today. In the United mies into lifestyles and energy consump- States, existing energy-ef½ciency technol- tion patterns. ogies could more than offset the projected Because of their density, ef½ciency, and increase in energy consumption between ability to incorporate innovations and now and 2030, thereby substantially re- new technologies (in addition to the infra- ducing health impacts, greenhouse gas structural opportunities noted above), emissions, and expenditures.62 Globally, cities are ideal environments for enhanc- one dollar spent on energy ef½ciency saves ing quality of life, using land and water two dollars through investments in new more ef½ciently, and reducing green- supply, with the savings being even house gas emissions. Particularly for greater in developing countries.63 In ad- underserved communities, there are many dition, solar, wind, and geothermal tech- opportunities in cities to modernize deliv- nologies are rapidly becoming more ery of energy services while also priori- ef½cient and affordable, increasing their tizing more ef½cient infrastructure and viability.64 These three technologies use protecting and restoring green spaces. little water and can be scaled in size and Coordination of place-based policies can tailored to local contexts; thus, they can simultaneously enhance transportation help promote energy security while also choices, improve air and water quality, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from reduce waste, maintain a reliable water fossil fuels.65 Although still only a small and energy supply, advance public health percentage of installed energy supply, and awareness, enhance disaster pre- investments in clean energy grew by paredness and response, increase climate 5 percent in 2011, to a record $260 billion, resilience, use public resources more with a total of $30 billion in new solar and ef½ciently, help mobilize private invest- $30 billion in new wind investments put ment, and strengthen local decision- into place.66 making. Cities also offer opportunities The near-term transition to the cleanest for capturing cross-cutting ef½ciencies energy choices available requires policy (for example, across water and energy tools to enable and encourage sustainable 142 (1) Winter 2013 153 Energy in the energy development. Incentives must be ping ready-to-use equipment to develop- Context of tailored to the maturity and costs of tech- ing countries: it entails building absorp- Sustainability nologies as well as to national context. tive capacity and enhancing the ability of For example, most energy-ef½ciency mea- the public and private sectors to identify, sures are ½nancially viable for investors adopt, adapt, improve, and employ the at their current prices, but other barriers most appropriate technologies.70 To estab- must be overcome: the upfront capital lish these conditions, governments must necessary to install ef½ciency devices, lack implement enabling policies and build of ½nancing, market failures, and high regulatory frameworks–targeting public transaction costs.67 Regulatory reform, resources carefully–to leverage private such as updated standards and codes, and capital, reduce the risk associated with ½nancial incentives, such as fuel surcharg- investing capital, stimulate innovation, es and consumer rebates, are crucial to and create competitive and viable mar- alleviate these pressures.68 Many avail- kets for electricity and energy.71 able renewable energy technologies are economically viable but not ½nancially viable; that is, with the exception of I n addition to rapid transitions in cur- rent energy systems, addressing today’s hydroelectric power, they are not yet cost complex, interconnected sustainability competitive with fossil fuels. Global sub- challenges will require developing and sidies for fossil fuel production and con- deploying the next generation of tech- sumption, estimated to total $400 billion nologies and implementing the tools and per year, make it dif½cult for new tech- approaches needed to make good choices. nologies to compete.69 Therefore, policies A successful energy transformation calls that subsidize renewables or that reduce for greatly enhanced efforts to support subsidies to fossil fuels can help level the R&D, to ½nance incremental costs of new playing ½eld. technologies and approaches, and to facil- In theory, developing countries could itate technology transfer. Nothing short leapfrog to available clean-energy tech- of a paradigm shift is needed to promote nologies. However, low-income countries a “green growth” economy that can meet face signi½cant market barriers to tech- burgeoning energy demands, especially nology absorption. Meeting development for the world’s poorest, while also enhanc- goals and providing access to clean energy ing sustainable development. Poverty requires signi½cantly stepping up inter- reduction remains urgent but growth and national efforts to diffuse existing tech- equity can be pursued without relying on nologies and to develop and deploy new policies and practices that foul the air, ones. Public and private investment must water, and land and that degrade ecosys- be ramped up signi½cantly to several tem services.72 hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Technological innovation and its asso- “Technology push” policies that increase ciated institutional adjustments are key to public investments in R&D will not alone developing sustainable energy at a reason- be suf½cient; they must be matched with able cost. Strengthening national innova- “market pull” policies that create public- tion and technology capacity can provide and private-sector incentives for entre- a powerful catalyst for development. preneurship, for collaboration, and for High-income economies–the world’s ½nding innovative solutions in unlikely major emitters–can replace their stock of places. Diffusion of climate-smart tech- high-carbon technologies with climate- nology requires much more than ship- smart alternatives and invest in tomor- 154 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences row’s breakthrough innovations. Middle- solutions, and experiences with planners, Rosina M. income countries can invest in low-carbon managers, and policy-makers in a two-way Bierbaum & Pamela A. growth and ensure that their ½rms take dialogue that improves both research and Matson advantage of existing technologies to decision-making. There is a tremendous compete globally. Low-income countries opportunity to share “best practices” with can enhance the technological capacity other nations, regions, and localities. to meet sustainability goals and adapt to Communities and organizations faced climate change by identifying, assessing, with energy-sustainability decisions would adopting, and improving available tech- bene½t from regional sustainability hubs, nologies with local knowledge and know- or “clearinghouses,” that could integrate how. research and practice, share processes and Reaping the bene½ts of low-carbon approaches, and make available success technologies will require signi½cant stories and options from around the changes in individual and organizational world.76 behavior, as well as a host of innovative ap- Investments in new kinds of education proaches and policies to improve human and training will also be needed.77 Man- well-being, reduce human vulnerability, aging the interconnected issues that and manage natural resources.73 Current affect sustainability will require interdis- public expenditures on basic energy R&D ciplinary perspectives and “systems” amount to about $13 billion–roughly thinking. Integrative perspectives will be what Americans spend on pet food each vital in developing new technologies that year. Despite a recent upsurge in private can provide affordable, accessible clean spending on energy R&D, to about $60 energy while they conserve water, ensure billion per year, the total hovers around reliable food production, and preserve 0.5 percent of revenue. That remains an ecosystems and their services. The full order of magnitude smaller than the 8 per- suite of social and natural sciences and cent of revenue invested in R&D in the engineering must be galvanized to devel- electronics industry and the 15 percent op solutions that are technologically fea- that goes into the pharmaceuticals sec- sible, socially desirable, inclusive, and tor.74 For more than a decade, many politically and economically possible. reports have called for increasing money Fortunately, today’s college and gradu- directed toward basic energy research by ate students appear to be increasingly anywhere in the range of twofold to ten- interested in, and capable of, tackling fold.75 We will not be able to meet energy these complex interdisciplinary problems. needs while sustaining human and One-third of the graduate students in the ecosystem well-being without a substan- School of Natural Resources and Environ- tially increased and sustained investment ment at the University of Michigan have in new clean-energy technologies by chosen to pursue dual master’s degrees in both the public and private sectors. such disparate areas as natural resources, Certainly, knowledge institutions such engineering, business, economics, public as universities and research centers are policy, public health, and urban planning. engaged in research to help develop such Likewise, at Stanford University, approxi- technologies and approaches, but they mately one-third of undergraduates obtain can also help inform decision-making, degrees in interdisciplinary programs, and including the development of context- many graduate students select joint, dual, speci½c energy policies. Increasingly, uni- or interdisciplinary programs. The under- versities must strive to share knowledge, graduate Earth Systems Program and the 142 (1) Winter 2013 155 Energy in the graduate Emmett Interdisciplinary Pro- services, and greenhouse gas emissions for Context of gram in Environment and Resources, years to come.78 These issues are linked Sustainability both at Stanford, and the Program in the to one another. Efforts to address the Environment at the University of Michi- energy challenge–or any other sustain- gan help prepare students to address ability challenge–will be best served by a complex global challenges related to systematic and integrative approach, one energy, food, water, and environmental that seeks to understand costs, trade-offs, change. There is great promise in these and co-bene½ts across the range of criti- future problem-solvers working creatively cal concerns. Our choices about current toward a more sustainable world. and future energy sources need to be Today’s choices about energy produc- made in the context of the multiple goals tion and generation will influence, both of sustainable development. Indeed, the directly and indirectly, the trajectory of future of humankind and the planet water consumption, food production, depend on it. public health, national security, ecosystem endnotes * Contributor Biographies: ROSINA M. BIERBAUM, a Fellow of the American Academy since 2007, is Dean Emerita and Professor of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy in both the School of Natural Resources and Environment and the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan. She was appointed to the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in 2009. She is a World Bank Fellow, Chair of the National Climate Assess- ment’s chapter on adaptation, and a Review Editor for the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli- mate Change. Her publications include Sustaining Environmental Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy (2011), which she cochaired; World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change (2010), which she codirected; and Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable (2007). PAMELA A. MATSON, a Fellow of the American Academy since 1992, is the Chester Nara- more Dean of the School of Earth Sciences and the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Professor of Environmental Studies at Stanford University, where she is also a Senior Fellow of the Woods Institute for the Environment. She cochaired the National Academy’s Roundtable on Science and Technology for Sustainability, served on the National Research Council’s Board on Sus- tainable Development and Committee on America’s Climate Choices, and is a past President of the Ecological Society of America. She is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, a MacArthur Fellow, and a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Her publications include Seeds of Sustainability: Lessons from the Birthplace of the Green Revolution in Agriculture (2012) and America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change (2010). Her work has appeared in Science, Nature, and BioScience, among others. 1 World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987). 2 National Research Council, Policy Division, Board on Sustainable Development, Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 1999). 3 World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development (Gland, Switzerland: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1980). 4 World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change (Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2010); wehab Working Group, “A Framework for Actions on Energy,” paper prepared 156 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences for the World Committee on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, South Africa, August Rosina M. 2002, http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/documents/wehab_papers.html. Bierbaum & 5 The Royal Society Science Policy Centre, People and the Planet (London: The Royal Society, Pamela Matson A. April 2012). 6 2011 Key World Energy Statistics (Paris: International Energy Agency, 2011), http://www.iea .org/textbase/nppdf/free/2011/key_world_energy_stats.pdf; National Research Council, America’s Energy Future: Technology and Transformation: Summary Edition (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2009). 7 See Robert W. Fri and Stephen Ansolabehere, “The Alternative Energy Future: Challenges for Technological Change,” Dædalus 141 (2) (Spring 2012): 5–9. 8 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Limiting the Magnitude of Future Climate Change (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2010); Detlef van Vuuren, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Keywan Riahi, Abeeku Brew-Hammond, Dan Kammen, Vijay Modi, Måns Nils- son, Kirk Smith, “An Energy Vision: The Transformation Towards Sustainability–Inter- connected Challenges and Solutions,” Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 4 (1) (February 2012): 18–34; Brian Fisher, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Knut Alfsen, Jan Corfee Morlot, Francisco de la Chesnaye, Jean-Charles Hourcade, Kejun Jiang, Mikiko Kainuma, Emilio La Rovere, Anna Matysek, Ashish Rana, Keywan Riahi, Richard Richels, Steven Rose, Detlef van Vuuren, and Rachel Warren, “Issues Related to Mitigation in the Long-Term Context,” in Climate Change 2007–Mitigation of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC, ed. Bert Metz et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). 9 James E. McMahon and Sarah K. Price, “Water and Energy Interactions,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 36 (November 2011): 163–191; World Economic Forum, in part- nership with Cambridge Energy Research Associates, Energy Vision Update 2009: Thirsty Energy: Water and Energy in the 21st Century (Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum, 2009); Harvey Brooks and Jack M. Hollander, “United States Energy Alternatives to 2010 and Beyond: The conaes Study,” Annual Review of Energy 4 (November 1979): 1–70. 10 Report on the First Quadrennial Technology Review (Washington, D.C.: Department of Energy, 2011). 11 Meeting the MDG Drinking-Water and Sanitation Target: The Urban and Rural Challenge Target of the Decade (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; New York: The United Nations Children’s Fund, 2006); Coping with Water Scarcity: Challenge of the Twenty-First Cen- tury, Report for World Water Day 2007 (Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2007). 12 Lucy Allen, Michael J. Cohen, David Abelson, and Bart Miller, “Fossil Fuel and Water Qual- ity,” in The World’s Water: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources, vol. 7, ed. Peter H. Gleick (Washington, D.C.: Paci½c Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security, 2011). 13 Daniel P. Schrag, “Is Shale Gas Good for Climate Change?” Dædalus 141 (2) (Spring 2012): 72–80; Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, The SEAB Shale Gas Production Subcommittee Ninety-Day Report–August 11, 2011, http://www.shalegas.energy.gov/resources/081111_90 _day_report.pdf. 14 Estimating Fresh Water Needs to Meet Future Thermoelectric Generation Requirements, Report doe/ netl-400/2009/1339 (Pittsburgh, Penn.: National Energy Technology Lab, September 30, 2010). 15 Energy Demands on Water Resources: Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, 2006). 16 Gouri Shankar Mishra and Sonia Yeh, “Analysis of Lifecycle Water Requirement of Trans- portation Fuels: Corn-Based Ethanol–Model Version 1.1,” Research Report ucd-its-rr-10-11, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, 2010. 142 (1) Winter 2013 157 Energy in the 17 Winnie Gerbens-Leenes, Arjen Y. Hoekstra, and Theo H. van der Meer, “The Water Foot- Context of print of Bioenergy,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (2009): 10219–10223. Sustainability 18 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006: Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis (New York: undp, 2006); McMahon and Price, “Water and Energy Interactions”; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Our Human Planet: Summary for Decision-Makers (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2005). 19 Nathan Pelletier, Eric Audsley, Sonja Brodt, Tara Garnett, Patrik Henriksson, Alissa Kendall, Klaas Jan Kramer, David Murphy, Thomas Nemecek, and Max Troell, “Energy Intensity of Agriculture and Food Systems,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 36 (2011): 223–246. 20 M. Dinesh Kumar, “Impact of Electricity Prices and Volumetric Water Allocation on Energy and Groundwater Demand Management: Analysis from Western India,” Energy Policy 33 (1) (2005): 39–51. 21 David Pimentel, Sean Williamson, Courtney Alexander, Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Caitlin Kon- tak, and Steven Mulkey, “Reducing Energy Inputs in the U.S. Food System,” Human Ecology 36 (4) (2008): 459–471. 22 Donald Mitchell, “A Note on Rising Food Prices,” Policy Research Working Paper 4682 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank Development Prospects Group, 2008). 23 H. Charles Godfray, John Beddington, Ian Crute, Lawrence Haddad, David Lawrence, James F. Muir, Jules Pretty, Sherman Robinson, Sandy Thomas, and Camilla Toulmin, “Food Securi- ty: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People,” Science 327 (2010): 812–818. 24 Inclusive Green Growth: The Pathway to Sustainable Development (Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2012). 25 Timothy Searchinger, Ralph Heimlich, Richard A. Houghton, Fengxia Dong, Amani Elobeid, Jacinto Fabiosa, Simla Tokgoz, Dermot Hayes, and Tun-Hsiang Yu, “Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change,” Science 319 (2008): 1238–1240; Christian Azar, “Emerging Scarcities–Bioenergy-Food Competition in a Carbon Constrained World,” in Scarcity and Growth Revisited: Natural Resources and the Environment in the New Millennium, ed. R. David Simpson, Michael Toman, and Robert Ayres (Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 2005); Stefan Bringezu, Helmut Schütz, Meghan O’Brien, Lea Kauppi, Robert W. Howarth, and Jeff McNeely, Assessing Biofuels: Towards Sustainable Production and Use of Resources (Paris: United Nations Environment Pro- gramme–International Panel for Sustainable Resource Management, 2009). 26 Detlef van Vuuren, Ellie Bellevrat, Alban Kitous, and Morna Isaac, “Bio-Energy Use and Low Stabilization Scenarios,” Energy Journal 31 (2010): 193–222; Rosamond L. Naylor and Walter P. Falcon, “The Global Costs of American Ethanol,” The American Interest 7 (2) (2011): 66–76. 27 Kirk Smith, Kalpana Balakrishnan, Colin Butler, Zoë Chafe, Ian Fairlie, Patrick Kinney, Tord Kjellstrom, Denise Mauzerall, Thomas McKone, Anthony McMichael, Mycle Schneider, and Paul Wilkinson, “Energy and Health,” in Global Energy Assessment–Toward a Sustainable Future (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press; Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2012). 28 Ananth P. Chikkatur, Ankur Chaudhard, and Ambuj D. Sagar, “Coal Power Impacts, Technol- ogy, and Policy: Connecting the Dots,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 36 (Novem- ber 2011): 101–138. 29 Tanjima Pervin, Ulf-G Gerdtham, and Carl Lyttkens, “Societal Costs of Air Pollution-Related Health Hazards: A Review of Methods and Results,” Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 6 (2008): 19. 30 Van Vuuren et al., “An Energy Vision”; “Sustainable Biofuels: Prospects and Challenges,” Policy Document 01/08 (London: The Royal Society, 2008); Vijay Modi, Susan McDade, Dominique Lallement, and Jamal Saghir, Energy and the Millennium Development Goals (New 158 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences York: Energy Sector Management Assistance Programme, United Nations Development Rosina M. Programme, un Millennium Project, and The World Bank, 2006); Keywan Riahi, Frank Bierbaum & Dentener, Dolf Gielen, Amulf Grubler, Jessica Jewell, Zbigniew Klimont, Volker Krey, David Pamela A. McCollum, Shonali Pachauri, Shilpa Rao, et al., “Energy Pathways for Sustainable Develop- Matson ment,” in Global Energy Assessment. 31 Ambuj D. Sagar and Sivan Kartha, “Bioenergy and Sustainable Development?” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 32 (2007): 131–167. 32 World Development Report 2010. 33 Benjamin K. Sovacool and Marilyn A. Brown, “Competing Dimensions of Energy Security: An International Perspective,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 35 (2010): 77–108. 34 Rosina M. Bierbaum, John P. Holdren, Michael C. MacCracken, Richard H. Moss, and Peter H. Raven, eds., Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoid- able, report prepared for the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (Research Triangle Park, N.C.: Sigma Xi; Washington, D.C.: United Nations Foundation, April 2007); Energy for the War½ghter: Operational Energy Strategy (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Depart- ment of Defense, 2011). 35 Moshe Schwartz, Katherine Blakeley, and Ronald O’Rourke, “Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress” (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 2012); Nathan Hodge, “U.S.’s Afghan Headache: $400-a-Gallon Gasoline,” The Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2011, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529702049038045 77080613427403928.html (accessed June 15, 2012). 36 Quadrennial Defense Review (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Defense, 2010). 37 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2010); National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Summary Report (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2010); National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Limiting the Magnitude of Future Cli- mate Change; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007–The Physi- cal Science Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007); Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007–Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007); Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007–Mitigation of Climate Change. 38 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. 39 National Research Council, Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts over Decades to Millennia (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2011). 40 David S. Batissti and Rosamond L. Naylor, “Historical Warnings of Future Food Insecurity with Unprecedented Seasonal Heat,” Science 323 (5911) (2009): 240–244; National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. 41 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disas- ters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the IPCC (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012); Thomas C. Peterson, Peter A. Stott, and Stephanie Herring, “Explaining Extreme Events of 2011 from a Climate Perspective,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 93 (7) (2012), http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/ abs/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00021.1; Jessica Blunden and Derek S. Arndt, eds., State of the Climate in 2011: Supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 93 (7) (2012): S1–S264, http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2012/20120710_stateoftheclimatereport.html. 42 Jane Lubchenco and Thomas R. Karl, “Predicting and Managing Extreme Weather Events,” Physics Today 65 (3) (March 2012): 31–37. 142 (1) Winter 2013 159 Energy in the 43 Susan Tierney, “Adaptation and the Energy Sector,” presentation delivered at the 2007 Nation- Context of al Summit on Coping with Climate Change, School of Natural Resources and Environment, Sustainability University of Michigan, May 8, 2007, http://www.snre.umich.edu/sites/snre.umich.edu/ ½les/5.8_Tierney.pdf. 44 CDP Water Disclosure Global Report 2011: Raising Corporate Awareness of Global Water Issues (London: Carbon Disclosure Project, 2011); Shamshad Akhtar, “The South Asiatic Monsoon and Flood Hazards in the Indus River Basin, Pakistan,” Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 7 (2) (2011): 101–115; Danny Marks, “Climate Change and Thailand: Impact and Response,” Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs 33 (2) (2011): 229– 258. 45 Bierbaum et al., Confronting Climate Change. 46 World Bank Data Catalog (Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2012), http://data.worldbank .org/indicator/EG.USE.PCAP.KG.OE?order=wbapi_data_value_2009+wbapi_data_value&sort =asc (accessed June 7, 2012). 47 Inclusive Green Growth. 48 See Robert O. Keohane and David G. Victor, “The Transnational Politics of Energy,” in this issue. 49 World Development Report 2010. 50 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. 51 President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Report to the President: Sustain- ability Environmental Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy (Washington, D.C.: Executive Of½ce of the President, 2011). 52 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Summary Report; National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Adapting to the Impacts (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2010). 53 World Development Report 2010; World Energy Outlook 2006 (Paris: International Energy Agency, 2006). 54 Patrick Luckow, James J. Dooley, Marshall A. Wise, and Son H. Kim, Biomass Energy for Trans- port and Electricity: Large-Scale Utilization under Low CO2 Concentration Scenarios (Richland, Wash.: Paci½c Northwest National Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy, 2010). 55 See Roger E. Kasperson and Bonnie J. Ram, “The Public Acceptance of New Energy Tech- nologies,” in this issue. 56 Report on the First Quadrennial Technology Review. 57 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation: Special Report of the IPCC (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011); Mark Z. Jacobson, “Review of Solutions to Global Warming, Air Pollution, and Ener- gy Security,” Energy & Environmental Science 2 (2009): 148–173. 58 Ian Allison, Nathan Bindoff, Robert Bindschadler, Peter Cox, Nathalie de Noblet-Ducoudré, Matthew England, Jane Francis, Nicolas Gruber, Alan Haywood, David Karoly, Georg Kaser, Corinne Le Quéré, Tim Lenton, Michael Mann, Ben McNeil, Andy Pitman, Stefan Rahmstorf, Eric Rignot, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Stephen Schneider, Steven Sherwood, Richard Somerville, Konrad Steffen, Eric Steig, Martin Visbeck, and Andrew Weaver, The Copenhagen Diagnosis: Updating the World on the Latest Climate Science (Sydney, Australia: The University of New South Wales Climate Change Research Centre, 2009), 60; Timothy M. Lenton, “Early Warning of Climate Tipping Points,” Nature Climate Change 1 (2001): 201–209; Catherine P. McMullen and Jason Jabbour, eds., Climate Change Science Compendium 2009 (Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme, 2009); Malte Meinshausen, “What Does a 2°C Target Mean for Greenhouse Gas Concentrations? A Brief Analysis Based on Multi-Gas Emission Pathways and Several Climate Sensitivity Uncertainty Estimates,” in Avoiding Dan- 160 Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences gerous Climate, ed. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Wolfgang Cramer, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Rosina M. Tom Wigley, and Gary Yohe (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, Bierbaum & 2006), 265–279; National Research Council, Climate Stabilization Targets; Veerabhadran Pamela A. Ramanathan and Yan Feng, “On Avoiding Dangerous Anthropogenic Interference with the Matson Climate System: Formidable Challenges Ahead,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 105 (2008): 14245–14250; Bierbaum et al., Confronting Climate Change. 59 Energy Ef½ciency Policy Recommendations: In Support of the G8 Plan of Action (Paris: International Energy Agency, 2008). 60 Lucy Hens, “The Challenge of the Sustainable City,” Environmental Development and Sustain- ability 12 (2010): 875–876; McKinsey Global Institute, Urban World: Mapping the Economic Power of Cities (Washington, D.C.: McKinsey & Company, 2011). 61 National Research Council, America’s Energy Future: Technology and Transformation: Summary Edition. 62 Ibid. 63 World Development Report 2010. 64 Report on the First Quadrennial Technology Review. 65 Ibid. 66 Ceres, “Investor Summit on Climate Risk and Energy Solutions: Final Report” (New York: United Nations Foundation, United Nations Of½ce for Partnerships, and Ceres, 2012). 67 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Summary Report; World Development Report 2010. 68 World Development Report 2010; van Vuuren et al., “An Energy Vision: The Transformation Towards Sustainability. 69 Inclusive Green Growth. 70 World Development Report 2010. 71 U.S. Government, “Sustainable Development for the Next Twenty Years: United States Views on Rio+20,” Submission to the United Nations, November 1, 2011. 72 Inclusive Green Growth. 73 Ibid. 74 World Development Report 2010. 75 President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Panel on Energy Research and Development, Report to the President on Federal Energy Research and Development for the Challenges of the Twenty-First Century (Washington, D.C.: Executive Of½ce of the President, 1997); Presi- dent’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Panel on International Cooperation in Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment, Power Partnerships: The Federal Role in International Cooperation on Energy Innovation (Washington, D.C.: Execu- tive Of½ce of the President, 1999); Bierbaum et al., Confronting Climate Change. 76 Bierbaum et al., Confronting Climate Change; National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. 77 Pamela A. Matson, “The Sustainability Transition,” Issues in Science and Technology 25 (4) (2009): 39–42. 78 National Research Council, America’s Climate Choices: Summary Report. 142 (1) Winter 2013 161