Connect with us

Energy

Active participation of women essential to the global energy transformation

Published

on

Yumiko Murakami

By 2050, IRENA projects that there will be around 40 million jobs directly related to renewable energy and energy efficiency worldwide, a more than four-fold increase from today. Women comprise roughly half the world’s population, and their full inclusion is vital to ensuring that the new energy economy is based on the largest pool of talent, knowledge and skills. Moreover, energy poverty has a disproportionate effect on women, and one of the most effective ways to ensure that renewable energy policies and practices consider the gendered impacts of energy is to empower women to shape them.

In 2016, IRENA conducted a survey of renewable energy companies worldwide and found that women represented an average of 35% of the workforce, a share greater than in the traditional energy sector, but lower than in the broader economy. In general, women are severely underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields and across the clean energy sector. The disparity is even greater at the management level.  An index by Ernst & Young shows that in 2016, women comprised only 16% of the boards of the world’s largest power and utility companies

The reasons for this are numerous, interwoven and context-specific. One factor is that women spend a disproportionate amount of time in unpaid care work and this constrains their ability to engage in education and income-generating activities. Workplace conditions, such as flexibility of work hours, equal pay, and support for childcare, and a lack of gender-sensitive policies are also important. Energy poverty also reduces the ability of women the participate in the workforce by creating health risks (for example related to indoor air pollution from burning fuels) and lower educational outcomes (for example due to lack of lighting to study by).

In the access context, however, women should not be seen as only beneficiaries but also as agents of change.  For example, in Indonesia, women, who are generally the decision makers on energy issues at the household level, have been empowered as “Wonder Women” through the sale of solar technologies.  Another, in Mali, is activating women as social entrepreneurs by giving them access to renewable-energy-based income-generating activities.

To better understand the challenges and potential solutions to full and equal participation of women in the renewable energy sector, IRENA sat down with Yumiko Murakami, Chief of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development OECD Japan Centre.

Ms. Murakami has been the head of the OECD in Tokyo since 2013. Prior to taking the leadership position, she worked for 18 years as an investment banker in London, New York and Tokyo. Ms. Murakami also has experience within the United Nations, as part of a peacekeeping operation in Cambodia.

IRENA: How do you see the energy sector changing in Japan, and in Asia in general, and what are the implications for women, both as consumers of energy or as those working in the industry?

Ms. Murakami: Japan has just updated its long-term energy policy for 2050, so it is a timely question. One can tell from the energy plan for 2050 that the momentum for the renewable energy sector is stronger than ever now in Japan because the plan specifically calls for the achievements of the goals set by the Paris Agreement as well as the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Japan is not unique in this regard. Many other countries in Asia have started to shift gears toward renewable energy as well.

In this context, implications for women are quite interesting. Japan lags behind many countries when it comes to gender equality. Particularly the energy sector is more male-dominated than the rest of the economy. However, the landscape is changing for women today as there is a stronger need for the economy to have more women at work place due to shrinking work force on back of aging demography. In fact, the female labour market participation rate of Japan has been steadily increasing in the recent years and it is now higher than that of the United States. As more and more women join the workforce, we have a very good chance that many of them will find fruitful careers in the renewable energy sector.

Being a new growth business, it is a very attractive industry for forward-looking individuals, as well as women who may prefer to work in an environment without cultural biases. From the consumer perspective, women also play a critical role to promote clean energy choices. The retail market for electricity has been recently deregulated in Japan, giving consumers more choices for energy source alternatives. Often times, the ultimate decision for various energy options is in the hands of women. It is critical to inform and educate women on long term implications of the choices they make.

IRENA: Last year, three of the four biggest renewable energy lenders in the world were Japanese. What are some of the ways that Japan can use this influence to drive greater gender equality in renewable energy?

Ms. Murakami: There is increasing awareness among investors for the role of finance in many of the areas specified by the sustainable development goals (SDGs). The fact environmental, social and governance (ESG) theme investment is becoming one of the most powerful forces in the global capital markets is very encouraging. Companies in Japan, including financial institutions as well as operational firms, realize they have the fiduciary responsibility to ensure their investments meet all expectations to promote the SDGs. Gender equality is clearly one of the most important areas for them to watch. It is highly desirable for the Japanese lenders to set clear standards and guidelines for gender equality for the projects they finance. It is also important to note that a diverse work place tends to encourage innovations, which can in turn improve productivity, ultimately giving lenders higher return on their investment in a long run.

IRENA: The energy economy of the future will be renewables-based, connected, and digital, and this requires a STEM-advanced workforce.  Despite efforts, these fields remain male-dominated. What, in your view, are some of the ways that governments can support the engagement of women in STEM fields?

Ms. Murakami: This is a big challenge in Japan. Less than 15% of engineering students in Japan are female. While there is almost no difference between men and women in their educational attainment today, male students are 10 times more likely to choose technology-related fields compared to female students. Governments need to start gender mainstreaming at a much earlier stage than university or work place. It includes early career education, encouraging both girls and boys to consider STEM fields as well as efforts to eradicate unconscious gender biases, such as introducing female role models in STEM occupations at school and at home. The role of government continues to be important beyond education, too.

In Japan, a new bill was introduced last year to promote female leadership in business. It requires enterprises with more than 300 employees to set goals and action plans to improve gender balance in the work force.  The newly revised Corporate Governance Code also demands listed companies to have at least one female board member. This type of initiative is helping gender equality.

IRENA: You have worked, and excelled, in traditionally male-dominated fields, such as finance and international diplomacy.  What were some of the barriers that you faced and how did you overcome them?

Ms. Murakami: I spent most of my career on Wall Street. Although the investment banking industry is perhaps one of the most male-dominated businesses, I was fortunate to have colleagues and bosses who mentored and sponsored me. When you are minority, you need to step out of your comfort zone and identify people who can support you on your professional growth. They may not find you unless you find them: it is up to you. Another important element is to understand your competitive advantage and make sure you are adding value by differentiating yourself from the rest. Because you are a minority, often the only woman in your team or division, you may bring something unique to the table. This is not the same as using the gender card. This is all about making diversity work.

IRENA: What advice, from your own experience, can you give to other women looking to advance their careers in the energy sector?

Ms. Murakami: As mentioned earlier, women need to realize that they have so much to offer because they are (at least at this point) minority and different from men. The only way for the energy sector to improve productivity is through innovation. Innovation requires diversity. Sometimes women may feel as if they need to behave like men to be accepted by their male colleagues. I think this is a mistake. Women should feel free to be themselves. Their thought process, ideas and feelings maybe different from those of men. That is exactly what work place needs: a wide range of views.

Sourse: IRENA

Continue Reading
Comments

Energy

China’s Unorthodox Intervention in the Global Oil Market

Published

on

Apparently, China has been the talk of the town for quite some time. While the entire yesteryear passed in a flurry of blame game over the pandemic, this year has been nothing short of a blessing for Xi’s regime. However, while China rapidly compensated for the drastic slump last year, the bustling economy has now cooled down – though a bit prematurely. Due to the expansive outbreak of the delta variant, China – like most countries around the world – now faces surging inflation and a crippling shortage of raw materials. However, while one might get a bolder vibe from China’s recent crackdown on industrial giants, the supposed Second Cultural Revolution’ seems on a divergent path from the government’s latest aspirations for the domestic industry.

China seems to be on a path to harness growth that appears to be slowing down as the global economy battles uncertainty. However, while many expected China to take orthodox measures to prolong growth, hardly anyone expected a drastic change of strategy: intervening in a close-knitted global market like never before.

China recently posted its most robust trade surplus in history, with a record rise in exports jumping 25.6% from last year to stand at $294.3; $10 billion more than any previous month. However, while the glowing figures imply sturdiness, the underlying fragility of the Chinese economy is not disguised. In the past few months, China’s production engine has taken a toll as surging energy costs have inhibited production capacity. The factory-gate inflation stands at a 13-year-high which has forced factories to cut output. Amid declining domestic demand due to covid restrictions, manufacturing surveys show that China’s export orders are eroding as supply bottlenecks coupled with energy costs have weighed heavily on the production function. To counter the problem, China recently supplied its reserves into the domestic market; undercutting the surging global price tag dictated by the petroleum giants.

Last Thursday, China’s National Food and Strategic Reserves Administrator made a press release, confirming that the world’s second-largest economy tapped into its crude reserves – estimated at 220 million barrels – to “ease the pressure of rising raw material prices.” While China is known to intervene in commodity markets by using its strategic reserves, for example, Copper, Aluminium, or even grains.

Recently, China tapped into its national reserves to intervene in the global commodity market of industrial metals for the first time since 2010. The intervention was situated as a release to normalize surging metal prices and retain domestic manufacturers’ margins. However,  it is a novelty that a national agency confirmed an active supply of petroleum buffer via an official press conference. And while no additional details were offered, it is presumed by global strategists that the press release referred to the 20-30 million barrels allegedly poured into the domestic industry around mid-July: when Xi’s government offered to supply crude to the OPEC.

Furthermore, China’s Stockpile Agency claimed that through open auctions, China’s reserve crude was intended to “better stabilize the domestic demand and supply.” It was apparent that as China ventured through a supply crunch when Brent Crude – Global Crude Index/Benchmark – breached the $76 bpd mark, the country instead resorted to utilizing its own stockpile instead of relying on expensive imported petroleum. Thus, it shapes a clear picture of how China managed to clock a phenomenal trade surplus despite not importing its usual crude quota.

While it is common knowledge that economies like the US and Europe maintain strategic petroleum reserves, the buffers held by China were utilized to actively manipulate the price in a ‘normalized’ oil market instead of their designated usage in supply crunches or wars. The situation today is anything but critical for the oil market to warrant such an intervention. As OPEC+ has boosted its output by 400,000 bpd starting August, output has bloomed beyond its peak since the price war back in April 2020. While the oil market is still well below the output capacity, mutually curbed by the OPEC+ alliance, the demand is still shaky and an equilibrium seems set. Yet, when we observe China – the world’s largest oil importer – we extricate reason that despite a growing economy, China continues to experience massive shortages: primarily in terms of oil, gas, coal, and electricity.

Furthermore, with the ensue of Hurricane Ida, massive US crude reserves have been wiped which has majorly impacted China as well. The US and China rarely stand on the same page on any front. However, even the White House recently asked OPEC to pump more crude into the market due to the rising gasoline prices in America. The same scenario is panning in China as energy shortages have led to surging costs while domestic demand is diminishing. The brunt is thus falling on the national exchequer: something China is not willing to haggle. While it is highly unorthodox of China to explicitly announce its intervention, many economists believe that it was a deliberate move on part of China’s communist brass to amplify the impact on the market. The plan seemingly worked as Brent fell by $1.36 to stand at $71.24 on Thursday.

If China’s commitment to normalize domestic energy prices is this significant, it is highly likely that another intervention could be pegged later in the fourth quarter. Primarily to counteract the contraction in export orders by cutting imports further to maintain a healthy trade surplus. In my opinion, it is clear that both the US and China are not willing to let Brent (and WTI) breach the $70-$75 bracket as key industries are at stake. However, while one takes a passive approach, the other is touted to go as far as pouring another 10-15 million barrels of crude by the end of 2021. Yet revered global commodity strategists believe that the downturn in prices is “short-lived” just like any other Chinese intervention in a variety of other commodity markets globally. And thus, experts believe that the pump is simply “not enough physical supply” to quite strike a permanent dent in an inherently flawed market mechanism.

Continue Reading

Energy

Energy Forum Seeks To Analyze Africa’s Energy Potentials And Utilization

Published

on

African Energy Week (AEW) 2021 in Cape Town, fully endorsed by the Government of South Africa, is committed to accelerating Africa’s energy growth with the aim of establishing a secure and sustainable energy future for every individual on the continent. Accordingly, AEW 2021 firmly believes in the role that oil and gas will continue to play in Africa and will emphasise the continent’s upstream market through a collaborative, International Oil Company (IOC) forum. Led by IOC executives, as well as government representatives from notable energy markets in Africa, the IOC forum aims to address the upstream challenges faced in Africa, providing solutions and strategies to drive exploration and make Africa more competitive for investment.

With the discovery of sizeable oil and gas reserves across the continent in recent years, regional and international explorers are turning an eye to the world’s final frontier market – Africa. Nigeria’s 200 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of gas reserves and 37.2 billion barrels of oil (bbl); Mozambique’s 11 tcf of gas; Senegal’s 450 billion cubic meters of gas; Libya’s 48 billion bbl and 53.1 tcf; and Egypt’s 77.2 tcf of gas have all made Africa the ideal destination for hydrocarbon exploration. What’s more, with many African countries making significant steps to enhance their regulatory environments, implementing legislation to create an enabling environment for investment, the continent has become a highly competitive market for exploration and production. Nigeria’s recently implemented Petroleum Industry Bill, Gabon’s new Hydrocarbon Code, and Angola’s inclusive petroleum regulation, to name a few, have all ensured a competitive and highly attractive market.

With the world’s six oil ‘supermajors’ – BP, Chevron, Eni, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell and TotalEnergies – all actively present in mature and emerging markets across Africa, the continent has become an upstream hotspot. AEW 2021 aims to accelerate this trend, promoting new upstream opportunities and ensuring both National Oil Companies (NOC) and IOCs drive the continent into a new era of energy and economic success. Accordingly, Africa’s premier energy event will host an upstream-dedicated IOC forum in Cape Town, led by IOC executives and government representatives. The IOC forum aims to address key challenges in Africa’s upstream market, whereby the diverse speaker panel will offer up solutions to expand exploration and production, while ensuring the continent remains competitive for investment in a post-COVID-19, energy transition era.

In addition to the discussion on upstream activities, the forum aims to highlight the role of IOCs in enhancing capacity building, whereby emphasis will be placed on IOC-NOC collaboration. IOCs have a critical role to play in Africa, not only regarding resource development, but human capital and local business development. In order for the continent to become truly sustainable and competitive, NOCs require support from IOCs. Accordingly, the forum aims to identify strategies to enhance cooperation and partnerships, with IOCs taking the lead in Africa’s energy development.

“AEW 2021 in Cape Town will offer a real discussion on Africa. Oil and gas are critical in Africa’s development and the African Energy Chamber (AEC) will not succumb to the misguided narrative that Africa should abandon its potential. The IOCs in Africa have demonstrated the continent’s potential, and by sharing strategies to enhance growth, address challenges, and accelerate upstream activities, they will be key drivers in Africa’s energy future. The IOC forum will not only offer a description of African reserves, but will provide clear, attainable solutions to exploitation, exploration and production with the aim of using energy to enact stronger economic growth. By coming to Cape Town, attending the IOC forum, and interacting with African ministers from across the continent, you will be able to be a part of Africa’s energy transformation,” stated NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the AEC.

Continue Reading

Energy

Nord Stream 2: A Geopolitical Tension between Russia and Ukraine and the European Dependence

Published

on

nord stream

Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline is a 1,230-kilometer direct linkage between the Russian natural gas producers and the consumer market of Europe. The model was made keeping in mind the successful operation of the existing Nord Stream pipeline after a thorough analysis by Nord Stream AG. The main aim of NS2 is said to be the increase in the annual capacity of the existing pipeline up to 110 billion m³. The pipeline starts from the Russian region of Ust-Luga then stretches through the Baltic Sea and ends at the area of Greifswald in Germany. It is due to this route that the project is mainly considered to be controversial. Bypassing directly through the Baltic Sea, the importance of Ukraine for Russia for exporting natural gas to the European market would reduce significantly which will end the $3 billion transit fees gained by the Ukrainian government in the year 2018 alone, causing a sudden and huge strain on the GDP of the country.

This project worth $11 billion would double the market of Russia in Germany which is the largest market in Europe, possessing a key position in international politics. It is said by the Russian officials that the pipeline has almost been completed and it may get operational by the end of August in the year 2021. Some analysts and International Relations experts have considered this as a geopolitical weapon that gives leverage to Russia to influence future events in the region particularly the ones related to the Crimean annexation.

Threat to Ukraine

Recently in a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the President of Ukraine appeared to be displeased by the Western recognition of the NS2 pipeline. He called it a “dangerous political weapon” in the hands of the authoritative regime of Russia which has already annexed an integral part of their country to fulfill their geopolitical and economic desires. The desperate opposition of this project by the Ukrainian government has several underlying factors which are very important to discuss.

Firstly, the transit fees earned by Ukraine just by giving passage to the gas going from Russia to Europe make up a fine amount of the GDP of the country. If projects like NS2 get operational then the importance of Ukraine will decline, causing an end to the $3 billion transit fee. Although Russia has ensured to still use Ukrainian passage for the export of their gas, this does not seem to be happening in the future. States are after their national interests and Russia would prefer the direct linkage with the European market instead of paying billions to the Ukrainian government. Currently, out of the quarter of natural gas transported to Europe, around 80% has to pass through the Ukrainian territory.

Secondly, after the expiry of the transit deal between Russia and Ukraine in 2024, it would depend upon the negotiations between the two parties to revive the fate of this deal. Although Kremlin’s Spokespersons have ensured the revival of this deal after its expiry in 2024, debates still exist about the prospects. No one can claim with certitude about the future of this deal between the two states.

Thirdly, Ukraine is intimidated by the future of the country if the Russian gas pipeline bypasses its territory. There already exist many gas-related disputes between the two states which resulted in the cut-off of the gas supply in 2014 and later on in 2015. Russia can pressurize Ukraine for accepting their demands to get their gas supplies back. Recently, Ukraine has started to reduce its dependence on Russian natural gas by switching back to European gas. But this would not be beneficial in any sense if the Russian monopoly over the gas market increases through the NS2 pipeline.

And lastly, the dependence of European markets on Russian gas can undermine the Crimean cause. Once a state has to depend on the other state for the necessities, it has to let go of many important causes and decisions. As Angela Merkel has repeatedly called the NS2 pipeline a geo-economic project rather than a geopolitical “weapon” that can be used by the Russian government as a decisive tool at times of disputes and crises, this already shows the drowning picture of the cause. In addition to this, previously the US administration was very aggressive towards the pipeline but the current government despite its opposition, is unable to do much for stopping the project which can get operational very soon.

Role of US and NS2 Pipeline

The United States of America is well aware of the changing dynamics of the region and the intentions of resurgent Russia. The Republican government under Trump proved to be very destructive for the project. The US did not only oppose the gas pipeline openly but also imposed sanctions on entities aiding Russia in the development of this gas pipeline. In January 2021, Trump imposed sanctions on the gas-pipeline laying ship, “Fortuna” and its owner under the Counter American’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). Previously, work on the pipeline had to be suspended as the US imposed sanctions on the main company, Allseas. President Biden was one of the many policy-makers who opposed this pipeline and considered it dangerous for the US and its allies. Although it was not clear what Biden’s policies would be, Blinken ensured to use “persuasive tools” against the pipeline, after acquiring the office. President Biden indeed imposed sanctions on the Russian ships and other companies involved in the laying of pipeline, but analysts think this would not cause any impact on the project as it is almost running towards completion. Rather, anti-sanction policy-makers consider it more important to waive off these sanctions and get into formal negotiation talks with the Russian government.

In May 2021, the President of the US and the Chancellor of Germany gave a joint statement for the agreement signed between the two countries related to the NS2 project. Some of the main features incorporated in the agreement are the announcement of sanctions on Russia in case it violates the peaceful use of the pipeline and utilizes it as a weapon against Ukraine. Germany would not only oppose such a step but would also press on the EU to take counter-measures. Similarly, it was decided to revolutionize the energy sector of Ukraine by the creation of a Green Fund for Ukraine by Germany worth $1 billion. Initially, it was decided that Germany would contribute an amount of $175 million. Also, it is said that Germany would use all its leverage to ensure an extension of the current transit agreement (which is going to expire in 2024) between Russia and Ukraine for at least up to 10 years. This would continue the role played by Ukraine as a transit state, helping its GDP and putting off the security threat over it. There is a sharp criticism on the Biden administration over this agreement which did not involve Poland and Ukraine while deciding their future. Also, the deal does not put any process of hindering the pipeline which is against the aspirations of all Americans and most of its allies.

In addition to limiting the role and influence of Russia in the European continent, the US is also looking forward to the opportunities of fulfilling its national interest. If the US becomes successful in hindering the operation of NS2, it can expand its gas buyers in the European countries. This way, like the post-war era the US can get a strategic and decisive role in this part of the world which can ultimately help it to counter the threats related to the rise of China and the Sino-Russian nexus. We can say that the US cannot only use this as an economic incentive but also utilize its importance in the future of great power rivalry.

Why states are against this Pipeline Project?

Along with the direct impacts of this project on Ukraine and Poland (to some extent). The major concerns of the states which oppose the NS2 pipeline include the additional leverage which Russia will gain when its national gas firm would directly export gas supplies between Russia and the European continent. This may result in a sudden disruption of the supplies, influenced by the changing dynamics of the region. The Russian authorities had cut off the gas supplies of Europe in the winters of 2006 and 2009, leaving millions without gas for days. Similarly, the increased dependence of Europe on Russian gas can be counter-productive and may hinder the interests of the states and the US soon. This situation can be utilized by both Russia and China to exploit the bonding between the US and its allies.

From the security perspective, the presence of Russia and its naval forces can cause a security threat to the states surrounding the Baltic Sea. The unsettled conditions may lead to chaos and problems in the region.

If Russia was to get a high stake in the energy market of Europe, this would also allow it to exploit the situation and create a monopoly over the market. This may not also lead to political outcomes and consequences but can also end the game of local and international gas market players in the continent. This is the biggest threat that is encouraging the US to make NS2 a security threat for itself and its allies.

Way Forward

Keeping in view the nature of international politics and changing economic dimensions to the project, the only possible way forward is an agreement between Russia and the US related to the pipeline and the future of Ukraine. If developments can be made over the existing US-Germany agreement then concerns of the states can be mitigated to a huge degree. The options of imposing sanctions on the pipeline are no more practical and can be counter-productive for the US concerning its allies especially Germany.

Conclusion

The Nord Stream 2 Pipeline despite its economic benefits cannot be separated from its geopolitical aspects and consequences. In international politics, the hardest thing to do is to trust the intentions of the other state, especially when it was a superpower previously and has several examples of violating the sovereignty and rights of neighboring states. But presently, all those who oppose the pipeline have no other option than to allow its proper functioning under certain terms and conditions.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending