SWEX_Swep Exchange 2022

References 1. National Geographic (2020) ‘Pollution made COVID-19 worse. Now, lockdowns are clearing the air.’ 2. European Environment Agency (2020) ‘COVID-19 and Europe’s environment: impacts of a global pandemic’ 3. World Bank (2020) ‘Coping with a Dual Shock: COVID-19 and Oil Prices’ 4. Earth System Science Data (2022) ‘Global Carbon Budget 2021’ 5. International Energy Agency (2022) ‘Renewable Energy Tracking Report’ 6. OECD (2021) ‘Focus on Green Recovery’ 7. Energy Tracker Project (2021) ‘Track Public Money for Energy in Recovery Packages’ 8. World Resources Institute (2022) ‘Is Behavioral Science the Secret Ingredient for Effective Climate Action?’ number of institutes, leading to suggestions that concern about climate change has increased and that many people are more willing to alter their behavior for environmental 8 reasons . It may be that one positive outcome of this global tragedy will be an improved understanding of human behavior and an increased willingness to address future crises, including climate change and the energy transition. n mask protests and opposition to vaccines, the change in behavior was clear. Through a combination of communication and legal measures, entire countries were persuaded to, for example, stay indoors for long periods in order to protect vulnerable people. Post-pandemic research has identified behavioral patterns and biases, that, if better understood, could be be used to build more support for the energy transition. As well as teaching us about human behavior in times of crisis, research has also suggested that the pandemic may have changed individual attitudes to climate change. Cross- country research has been done by a

Working from home – a sustainable solution? The COVID-19 pandemic saw something of a revolution in remote working, driving the deployment of technological solutions and providing evidence that it could be a practical and productive way of working. It was widely held that remote working would also bring environmental benefits, such as reduced energy consumption, but this assumption has since been challenged. A review of recent research has shown that most studies indicate that working from home lowers energy use, but this is far from the whole story. The review points out that more robust research – that is, research that takes more factors into account – shows that teleworking can often increase total energy use. One of the main benefits of teleworking is reduced commuting, but working from home can also increase non-work travel. For instance, remote-workers can't stop to buy groceries on their way home from work. Instead, a separate trip is required. Similarly, poorly organized remote working practices can lead to homes and offices being open at the same time, so that more energy is used on things like heating and air conditioning. The conclusion is that remote working is likely to deliver only modest energy savings and that, in many cases, could actually increase total energy consumption.

Source: Andrew Hook et al (2020) Environ. Res. Lett. 15 093003

Is economic stimulus promoting the energy transition?

Fossil 41%

Other 21%

Public money for energy worldwide

Clean 38%

The Energy Policy Tracker NGO has been monitoring stimulus spending worldwide, to assess which forms of energy have received the most support. Somewhat surprisingly, they estimate that more has been pledged to fossil-fuel projects than clean energy.

Source: Andrew Hook et al (2020) Environ. Res. Lett. 15 093003

SWEP EXCHANGE 15