2009年1月3日土曜日
2009年1月2日金曜日
2008年12月30日火曜日
再生可能エネルギーの国際機関、日本が不参加方針
再生可能エネルギーの国際機関、日本が不参加方針
12月30日3時3分配信 読売新聞
政府は２９日、太陽光や風力などの利用拡大を目指して来月発足する国際再生可能エネルギー機関（ＩＲＥＮＡ）に参加しない方針を固めた。
日本が事務局長を出している国際エネルギー機関（ＩＥＡ）との機能重複などを理由にしての不参加だが、国際社会から環境問題に後ろ向きとの批判を受けかねないと懸念する指摘も出ている。
ＩＲＥＮＡはドイツが中心となって設立される。地球温暖化や化石燃料の枯渇に対応するため、参加国間で再生可能エネルギーに関する技術移転や資金調達、情報交換などを進める。
日本はドイツから再三、参加を求められてきたが、「再生可能エネルギーの利用拡大は既にＩＥＡで取り組んでおり、新機関は不要」（外務省幹部）との判断から、当面は参加を見送ることにした。毎年数億円の資金拠出を求められる可能性があることも、厳しい財政事情の中で二の足を踏む要因となっている。
ただ、ＩＥＡは先進国中心の２８か国で構成しているのに対し、ＩＲＥＮＡには途上国を含め数十か国が参加する見通しだ。地球温暖化対策では、先進国の取り組みと同時に、途上国をいかに取り込むかが課題で、政府内にはＩＲＥＮＡの積極活用を求める考え方もある。「ＩＲＥＮＡに参加すれば、太陽光発電などの分野で日本の技術の普及に役立つ」（政府関係者）と、日本の産業への利点があるという指摘も出ている。
米国もＩＲＥＮＡに不参加の方針とされるが、オバマ次期米大統領は化石燃料から再生可能エネルギーへの転換を重視しており、新政権発足後の方針転換を予想する見方がある。
12月30日3時3分配信 読売新聞
政府は２９日、太陽光や風力などの利用拡大を目指して来月発足する国際再生可能エネルギー機関（ＩＲＥＮＡ）に参加しない方針を固めた。
日本が事務局長を出している国際エネルギー機関（ＩＥＡ）との機能重複などを理由にしての不参加だが、国際社会から環境問題に後ろ向きとの批判を受けかねないと懸念する指摘も出ている。
ＩＲＥＮＡはドイツが中心となって設立される。地球温暖化や化石燃料の枯渇に対応するため、参加国間で再生可能エネルギーに関する技術移転や資金調達、情報交換などを進める。
日本はドイツから再三、参加を求められてきたが、「再生可能エネルギーの利用拡大は既にＩＥＡで取り組んでおり、新機関は不要」（外務省幹部）との判断から、当面は参加を見送ることにした。毎年数億円の資金拠出を求められる可能性があることも、厳しい財政事情の中で二の足を踏む要因となっている。
ただ、ＩＥＡは先進国中心の２８か国で構成しているのに対し、ＩＲＥＮＡには途上国を含め数十か国が参加する見通しだ。地球温暖化対策では、先進国の取り組みと同時に、途上国をいかに取り込むかが課題で、政府内にはＩＲＥＮＡの積極活用を求める考え方もある。「ＩＲＥＮＡに参加すれば、太陽光発電などの分野で日本の技術の普及に役立つ」（政府関係者）と、日本の産業への利点があるという指摘も出ている。
米国もＩＲＥＮＡに不参加の方針とされるが、オバマ次期米大統領は化石燃料から再生可能エネルギーへの転換を重視しており、新政権発足後の方針転換を予想する見方がある。
No Furnaces but Heat Aplenty in ‘Passive Houses’
No Furnaces but Heat Aplenty in ‘Passive Houses’
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
DARMSTADT, Germany — From the outside, there is nothing unusual about the stylish new gray and orange row houses in the Kranichstein District, with wreaths on the doors and Christmas lights twinkling through a freezing drizzle. But these houses are part of a revolution in building design: There are no drafts, no cold tile floors, no snuggling under blankets until the furnace kicks in. There is, in fact, no furnace.
In Berthold Kaufmann’s home, there is, to be fair, one radiator for emergency backup in the living room — but it is not in use. Even on the coldest nights in central Germany, Mr. Kaufmann’s new “passive house” and others of this design get all the heat and hot water they need from the amount of energy that would be needed to run a hair dryer.
“You don’t think about temperature — the house just adjusts,” said Mr. Kaufmann, watching his 2-year-old daughter, dressed in a T-shirt, tuck into her sausage in the spacious living room, whose glass doors open to a patio. His new home uses about one-twentieth the heating energy of his parents’ home of roughly the same size, he said.
Architects in many countries, in attempts to meet new energy efficiency standards like the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard in the United States, are designing homes with better insulation and high-efficiency appliances, as well as tapping into alternative sources of power, like solar panels and wind turbines.
The concept of the passive house, pioneered in this city of 140,000 outside Frankfurt, approaches the challenge from a different angle. Using ultrathick insulation and complex doors and windows, the architect engineers a home encased in an airtight shell, so that barely any heat escapes and barely any cold seeps in. That means a passive house can be warmed not only by the sun, but also by the heat from appliances and even from occupants’ bodies.
And in Germany, passive houses cost only about 5 to 7 percent more to build than conventional houses.
Decades ago, attempts at creating sealed solar-heated homes failed, because of stagnant air and mold. But new passive houses use an ingenious central ventilation system. The warm air going out passes side by side with clean, cold air coming in, exchanging heat with 90 percent efficiency.
“The myth before was that to be warm you had to have heating. Our goal is to create a warm house without energy demand,” said Wolfgang Hasper, an engineer at the Passivhaus Institut in Darmstadt. “This is not about wearing thick pullovers, turning the thermostat down and putting up with drafts. It’s about being comfortable with less energy input, and we do this by recycling heating.”
There are now an estimated 15,000 passive houses around the world, the vast majority built in the past few years in German-speaking countries or Scandinavia.
The first passive home was built here in 1991 by Wolfgang Feist, a local physicist, but diffusion of the idea was slowed by language. The courses and literature were mostly in German, and even now the components are mass-produced only in this part of the world.
The industry is thriving in Germany, however — for example, schools in Frankfurt are built with the technique.
Moreover, its popularity is spreading. The European Commission is promoting passive-house building, and the European Parliament has proposed that new buildings meet passive-house standards by 2011.
The United States Army, long a presence in this part of Germany, is considering passive-house barracks.
“Awareness is skyrocketing; it’s hard for us to keep up with requests,” Mr. Hasper said.
Nabih Tahan, a California architect who worked in Austria for 11 years, is completing one of the first passive houses in the United States for his family in Berkeley. He heads a group of 70 Bay Area architects and engineers working to encourage wider acceptance of the standards. “This is a recipe for energy that makes sense to people,” Mr. Tahan said. “Why not reuse this heat you get for free?”
Ironically, however, when California inspectors were examining the Berkeley home to determine whether it met “green” building codes (it did), he could not get credit for the heat exchanger, a device that is still uncommon in the United States. “When you think about passive-house standards, you start looking at buildings in a different way,” he said.
Buildings that are certified hermetically sealed may sound suffocating. (To meet the standard, a building must pass a “blow test” showing that it loses minimal air under pressure.) In fact, passive houses have plenty of windows — though far more face south than north — and all can be opened.
Inside, a passive home does have a slightly different gestalt from conventional houses, just as an electric car drives differently from its gas-using cousin. There is a kind of spaceship-like uniformity of air and temperature. The air from outside all goes through HEPA filters before entering the rooms. The cement floor of the basement isn’t cold. The walls and the air are basically the same temperature.
Look closer and there are technical differences: When the windows are swung open, you see their layers of glass and gas, as well as the elaborate seals around the edges. A small, grated duct near the ceiling in the living room brings in clean air. In the basement there is no furnace, but instead what looks like a giant Styrofoam cooler, containing the heat exchanger.
Passive houses need no human tinkering, but most architects put in a switch with three settings, which can be turned down for vacations, or up to circulate air for a party (though you can also just open the windows). “We’ve found it’s very important to people that they feel they can influence the system,” Mr. Hasper said.
The houses may be too radical for those who treasure an experience like drinking hot chocolate in a cold kitchen. But not for others. “I grew up in a great old house that was always 10 degrees too cold, so I knew I wanted to make something different,” said Georg W. Zielke, who built his first passive house here, for his family, in 2003 and now designs no other kinds of buildings.
In Germany the added construction costs of passive houses are modest and, because of their growing popularity and an ever larger array of attractive off-the-shelf components, are shrinking.
But the sophisticated windows and heat-exchange ventilation systems needed to make passive houses work properly are not readily available in the United States. So the construction of passive houses in the United States, at least initially, is likely to entail a higher price differential.
Moreover, the kinds of home construction popular in the United States are more difficult to adapt to the standard: residential buildings tend not to have built-in ventilation systems of any kind, and sliding windows are hard to seal.
Dr. Feist’s original passive house — a boxy white building with four apartments — looks like the science project that it was intended to be. But new passive houses come in many shapes and styles. The Passivhaus Institut, which he founded a decade ago, continues to conduct research, teaches architects, and tests homes to make sure they meet standards. It now has affiliates in Britain and the United States.
Still, there are challenges to broader adoption even in Europe.
Because a successful passive house requires the interplay of the building, the sun and the climate, architects need to be careful about site selection. Passive-house heating might not work in a shady valley in Switzerland, or on an urban street with no south-facing wall. Researchers are looking into whether the concept will work in warmer climates — where a heat exchanger could be used in reverse, to keep cool air in and warm air out.
And those who want passive-house mansions may be disappointed. Compact shapes are simpler to seal, while sprawling homes are difficult to insulate and heat.
Most passive houses allow about 500 square feet per person, a comfortable though not expansive living space. Mr. Hasper said people who wanted thousands of square feet per person should look for another design.
“Anyone who feels they need that much space to live,” he said, “well, that’s a different discussion.”
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
DARMSTADT, Germany — From the outside, there is nothing unusual about the stylish new gray and orange row houses in the Kranichstein District, with wreaths on the doors and Christmas lights twinkling through a freezing drizzle. But these houses are part of a revolution in building design: There are no drafts, no cold tile floors, no snuggling under blankets until the furnace kicks in. There is, in fact, no furnace.
In Berthold Kaufmann’s home, there is, to be fair, one radiator for emergency backup in the living room — but it is not in use. Even on the coldest nights in central Germany, Mr. Kaufmann’s new “passive house” and others of this design get all the heat and hot water they need from the amount of energy that would be needed to run a hair dryer.
“You don’t think about temperature — the house just adjusts,” said Mr. Kaufmann, watching his 2-year-old daughter, dressed in a T-shirt, tuck into her sausage in the spacious living room, whose glass doors open to a patio. His new home uses about one-twentieth the heating energy of his parents’ home of roughly the same size, he said.
Architects in many countries, in attempts to meet new energy efficiency standards like the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard in the United States, are designing homes with better insulation and high-efficiency appliances, as well as tapping into alternative sources of power, like solar panels and wind turbines.
The concept of the passive house, pioneered in this city of 140,000 outside Frankfurt, approaches the challenge from a different angle. Using ultrathick insulation and complex doors and windows, the architect engineers a home encased in an airtight shell, so that barely any heat escapes and barely any cold seeps in. That means a passive house can be warmed not only by the sun, but also by the heat from appliances and even from occupants’ bodies.
And in Germany, passive houses cost only about 5 to 7 percent more to build than conventional houses.
Decades ago, attempts at creating sealed solar-heated homes failed, because of stagnant air and mold. But new passive houses use an ingenious central ventilation system. The warm air going out passes side by side with clean, cold air coming in, exchanging heat with 90 percent efficiency.
“The myth before was that to be warm you had to have heating. Our goal is to create a warm house without energy demand,” said Wolfgang Hasper, an engineer at the Passivhaus Institut in Darmstadt. “This is not about wearing thick pullovers, turning the thermostat down and putting up with drafts. It’s about being comfortable with less energy input, and we do this by recycling heating.”
There are now an estimated 15,000 passive houses around the world, the vast majority built in the past few years in German-speaking countries or Scandinavia.
The first passive home was built here in 1991 by Wolfgang Feist, a local physicist, but diffusion of the idea was slowed by language. The courses and literature were mostly in German, and even now the components are mass-produced only in this part of the world.
The industry is thriving in Germany, however — for example, schools in Frankfurt are built with the technique.
Moreover, its popularity is spreading. The European Commission is promoting passive-house building, and the European Parliament has proposed that new buildings meet passive-house standards by 2011.
The United States Army, long a presence in this part of Germany, is considering passive-house barracks.
“Awareness is skyrocketing; it’s hard for us to keep up with requests,” Mr. Hasper said.
Nabih Tahan, a California architect who worked in Austria for 11 years, is completing one of the first passive houses in the United States for his family in Berkeley. He heads a group of 70 Bay Area architects and engineers working to encourage wider acceptance of the standards. “This is a recipe for energy that makes sense to people,” Mr. Tahan said. “Why not reuse this heat you get for free?”
Ironically, however, when California inspectors were examining the Berkeley home to determine whether it met “green” building codes (it did), he could not get credit for the heat exchanger, a device that is still uncommon in the United States. “When you think about passive-house standards, you start looking at buildings in a different way,” he said.
Buildings that are certified hermetically sealed may sound suffocating. (To meet the standard, a building must pass a “blow test” showing that it loses minimal air under pressure.) In fact, passive houses have plenty of windows — though far more face south than north — and all can be opened.
Inside, a passive home does have a slightly different gestalt from conventional houses, just as an electric car drives differently from its gas-using cousin. There is a kind of spaceship-like uniformity of air and temperature. The air from outside all goes through HEPA filters before entering the rooms. The cement floor of the basement isn’t cold. The walls and the air are basically the same temperature.
Look closer and there are technical differences: When the windows are swung open, you see their layers of glass and gas, as well as the elaborate seals around the edges. A small, grated duct near the ceiling in the living room brings in clean air. In the basement there is no furnace, but instead what looks like a giant Styrofoam cooler, containing the heat exchanger.
Passive houses need no human tinkering, but most architects put in a switch with three settings, which can be turned down for vacations, or up to circulate air for a party (though you can also just open the windows). “We’ve found it’s very important to people that they feel they can influence the system,” Mr. Hasper said.
The houses may be too radical for those who treasure an experience like drinking hot chocolate in a cold kitchen. But not for others. “I grew up in a great old house that was always 10 degrees too cold, so I knew I wanted to make something different,” said Georg W. Zielke, who built his first passive house here, for his family, in 2003 and now designs no other kinds of buildings.
In Germany the added construction costs of passive houses are modest and, because of their growing popularity and an ever larger array of attractive off-the-shelf components, are shrinking.
But the sophisticated windows and heat-exchange ventilation systems needed to make passive houses work properly are not readily available in the United States. So the construction of passive houses in the United States, at least initially, is likely to entail a higher price differential.
Moreover, the kinds of home construction popular in the United States are more difficult to adapt to the standard: residential buildings tend not to have built-in ventilation systems of any kind, and sliding windows are hard to seal.
Dr. Feist’s original passive house — a boxy white building with four apartments — looks like the science project that it was intended to be. But new passive houses come in many shapes and styles. The Passivhaus Institut, which he founded a decade ago, continues to conduct research, teaches architects, and tests homes to make sure they meet standards. It now has affiliates in Britain and the United States.
Still, there are challenges to broader adoption even in Europe.
Because a successful passive house requires the interplay of the building, the sun and the climate, architects need to be careful about site selection. Passive-house heating might not work in a shady valley in Switzerland, or on an urban street with no south-facing wall. Researchers are looking into whether the concept will work in warmer climates — where a heat exchanger could be used in reverse, to keep cool air in and warm air out.
And those who want passive-house mansions may be disappointed. Compact shapes are simpler to seal, while sprawling homes are difficult to insulate and heat.
Most passive houses allow about 500 square feet per person, a comfortable though not expansive living space. Mr. Hasper said people who wanted thousands of square feet per person should look for another design.
“Anyone who feels they need that much space to live,” he said, “well, that’s a different discussion.”
Win, Win, Win, Win, Win ...
Win, Win, Win, Win, Win ...
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
How many times do we have to see this play before we admit that it always ends the same way?
Which play? The one where gasoline prices go up, pressure rises for more fuel-efficient cars, then gasoline prices fall and the pressure for low-mileage vehicles vanishes, consumers stop buying those cars, the oil producers celebrate, we remain addicted to oil and prices gradually go up again, petro-dictators get rich, we lose. I’ve already seen this play three times in my life. Trust me: It always ends the same way — badly.
So I could only cringe when reading this article from CNNMoney.com on Dec. 22: “After nearly a year of flagging sales, low gas prices and fat incentives are reigniting America’s taste for big vehicles. Trucks and S.U.V.’s will outsell cars in December ... something that hasn’t happened since February. Meanwhile, the forecast finds that sales of hybrid vehicles are expected to be way down.”
Have a nice day. It’s morning again — in Saudi Arabia.
Of course, it’s a blessing that people who have been hammered by the economy are getting a break at the pump. But for our long-term health, getting re-addicted to oil and gas guzzlers is one of the dumbest things we could do.
That is why I believe the second biggest decision Barack Obama has to make — the first is deciding the size of the stimulus — is whether to increase the federal gasoline tax or impose an economy-wide carbon tax. Best I can tell, the Obama team has no intention of doing either at this time. I understand why. Raising taxes in a recession is a no-no. But I’ve wracked my brain trying to think of ways to retool America around clean-power technologies without a price signal — i.e., a tax — and there are no effective ones. (Toughening energy-effiency regulations alone won’t do it.) Without a higher gas tax or carbon tax, Obama will lack the leverage to drive critical pieces of his foreign and domestic agendas.
How so? According to AAA, U.S. gasoline prices now average about $1.67 a gallon. Funny, that’s almost exactly what gas cost on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. In the wake of 9/11, President Bush had the political space to impose a gasoline tax, a “Patriot Tax,” to weaken the very people who had funded 9/11 and to stimulate a U.S. renewable-energy industry. But Bush wimped out and would not impose a tax when prices were low or a floor price when they got high.
Today’s financial crisis is Obama’s 9/11. The public is ready to be mobilized. Obama is coming in with enormous popularity. This is his best window of opportunity to impose a gas tax. And he could make it painless: offset the gas tax by lowering payroll taxes, or phase it in over two years at 10 cents a month. But if Obama, like Bush, wills the ends and not the means — wills a green economy without the price signals needed to change consumer behavior and drive innovation — he will fail.
The two most important rules about energy innovation are: 1) Price matters — when prices go up people change their habits. 2) You need a systemic approach. It makes no sense for Congress to pump $13.4 billion into bailing out Detroit — and demand that the auto companies use this cash to make more fuel-efficient cars — and then do nothing to shape consumer behavior with a gas tax so more Americans will want to buy those cars. As long as gas is cheap, people will go out and buy used S.U.V.’s and Hummers.
There has to be a system that permanently changes consumer demand, which would permanently change what Detroit makes, which would attract more investment in battery technology to make electric cars, which would hugely help the expansion of the wind and solar industries — where the biggest drawback is the lack of batteries to store electrons when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining. A higher gas tax would drive all these systemic benefits.
The same is true in geopolitics. A gas tax reduces gasoline demand and keeps dollars in America, dries up funding for terrorists and reduces the clout of Iran and Russia at a time when Obama will be looking for greater leverage against petro-dictatorships. It reduces our current account deficit, which strengthens the dollar. It reduces U.S. carbon emissions driving climate change, which means more global respect for America. And it increases the incentives for U.S. innovation on clean cars and clean-tech.
Which one of these things wouldn’t we want? A gasoline tax “is not just win-win; it’s win, win, win, win, win,” says the Johns Hopkins author and foreign policy specialist Michael Mandelbaum. “A gasoline tax would do more for American prosperity and strength than any other measure Obama could propose.”
I know it’s hard, but we have got to stop “taking off the table” the tool that would add leverage to everything we want to do at home and abroad. We’ve done that for three decades, and we know with absolute certainty how the play ends — with an America that is less innovative, less wealthy, less respected and less powerful.
Maureen Dowd is off today.
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
How many times do we have to see this play before we admit that it always ends the same way?
Which play? The one where gasoline prices go up, pressure rises for more fuel-efficient cars, then gasoline prices fall and the pressure for low-mileage vehicles vanishes, consumers stop buying those cars, the oil producers celebrate, we remain addicted to oil and prices gradually go up again, petro-dictators get rich, we lose. I’ve already seen this play three times in my life. Trust me: It always ends the same way — badly.
So I could only cringe when reading this article from CNNMoney.com on Dec. 22: “After nearly a year of flagging sales, low gas prices and fat incentives are reigniting America’s taste for big vehicles. Trucks and S.U.V.’s will outsell cars in December ... something that hasn’t happened since February. Meanwhile, the forecast finds that sales of hybrid vehicles are expected to be way down.”
Have a nice day. It’s morning again — in Saudi Arabia.
Of course, it’s a blessing that people who have been hammered by the economy are getting a break at the pump. But for our long-term health, getting re-addicted to oil and gas guzzlers is one of the dumbest things we could do.
That is why I believe the second biggest decision Barack Obama has to make — the first is deciding the size of the stimulus — is whether to increase the federal gasoline tax or impose an economy-wide carbon tax. Best I can tell, the Obama team has no intention of doing either at this time. I understand why. Raising taxes in a recession is a no-no. But I’ve wracked my brain trying to think of ways to retool America around clean-power technologies without a price signal — i.e., a tax — and there are no effective ones. (Toughening energy-effiency regulations alone won’t do it.) Without a higher gas tax or carbon tax, Obama will lack the leverage to drive critical pieces of his foreign and domestic agendas.
How so? According to AAA, U.S. gasoline prices now average about $1.67 a gallon. Funny, that’s almost exactly what gas cost on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. In the wake of 9/11, President Bush had the political space to impose a gasoline tax, a “Patriot Tax,” to weaken the very people who had funded 9/11 and to stimulate a U.S. renewable-energy industry. But Bush wimped out and would not impose a tax when prices were low or a floor price when they got high.
Today’s financial crisis is Obama’s 9/11. The public is ready to be mobilized. Obama is coming in with enormous popularity. This is his best window of opportunity to impose a gas tax. And he could make it painless: offset the gas tax by lowering payroll taxes, or phase it in over two years at 10 cents a month. But if Obama, like Bush, wills the ends and not the means — wills a green economy without the price signals needed to change consumer behavior and drive innovation — he will fail.
The two most important rules about energy innovation are: 1) Price matters — when prices go up people change their habits. 2) You need a systemic approach. It makes no sense for Congress to pump $13.4 billion into bailing out Detroit — and demand that the auto companies use this cash to make more fuel-efficient cars — and then do nothing to shape consumer behavior with a gas tax so more Americans will want to buy those cars. As long as gas is cheap, people will go out and buy used S.U.V.’s and Hummers.
There has to be a system that permanently changes consumer demand, which would permanently change what Detroit makes, which would attract more investment in battery technology to make electric cars, which would hugely help the expansion of the wind and solar industries — where the biggest drawback is the lack of batteries to store electrons when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining. A higher gas tax would drive all these systemic benefits.
The same is true in geopolitics. A gas tax reduces gasoline demand and keeps dollars in America, dries up funding for terrorists and reduces the clout of Iran and Russia at a time when Obama will be looking for greater leverage against petro-dictatorships. It reduces our current account deficit, which strengthens the dollar. It reduces U.S. carbon emissions driving climate change, which means more global respect for America. And it increases the incentives for U.S. innovation on clean cars and clean-tech.
Which one of these things wouldn’t we want? A gasoline tax “is not just win-win; it’s win, win, win, win, win,” says the Johns Hopkins author and foreign policy specialist Michael Mandelbaum. “A gasoline tax would do more for American prosperity and strength than any other measure Obama could propose.”
I know it’s hard, but we have got to stop “taking off the table” the tool that would add leverage to everything we want to do at home and abroad. We’ve done that for three decades, and we know with absolute certainty how the play ends — with an America that is less innovative, less wealthy, less respected and less powerful.
Maureen Dowd is off today.
＜中国＞ミャンマーのパイプライン経営権を取得
＜中国＞ミャンマーのパイプライン経営権を取得
2008年12月26日、毎日新聞
ミャンマーを経由して中国の雲南省昆明に石油･天然ガスを運ぶパイプライン計画について、ミャンマー軍事政権が中国に経営権を付与した事が2008年12月26日明らかになった。ミャンマーが資源産業の経営権を外国に与えるのは初めて。軍事政権の「後ろ盾」となってきた中国は資源の見返りを手に入れた形になった。
計画は、中国が中東などからタンカーで輸送してきた石油と、ミャンマー沖で産出される天然ガスを2本のパイプラインで中国に輸送する。ミャンマー西部チャウピューから中部マンダレーなどを通り、昆明を結ぶ。パイプラインを設置･運営する企業の詳細はこれまで明らかでなかったが、中国商務省によると、中国石油天然ガス集団（CNPC）が過半数の50･9％、ミャンマー国営石油ガス企業（MOGE）が残る49･1％を出資する事で合意。中国側が事実上、経営権を握る事になった。
エネルギーの需要急増が見込まれる中国にとって、安全上の懸念があるマラッカ海峡を迂回するミャンマー経由のパイプライン建設は長年の「悲願」（中国紙）だった。近く着工し、2013年の稼働を目指す。
天然ガスはパイプラインの起点に近いミャンマー沖のベンガル湾で韓国・大宇グループなどが開発するシュエ･ガス田から供給する計画で、大宇グループと中国のCNPCなどが24日、30年間の売買契約に調印した。中国は2007年1月、シュエ･ガス田の主要17鉱区のうち、CNPCが3鉱区計1万㎡の探査権をミャンマー側から譲り受けていた。この譲渡契約が結ばれる直前には、国連安全保障理事会でミャンマー民主化要求決議案が提出され、安保理常任理事国の中国が拒否権を行使したことから、事実上の見返りと見られていた。
2008年12月26日、毎日新聞
ミャンマーを経由して中国の雲南省昆明に石油･天然ガスを運ぶパイプライン計画について、ミャンマー軍事政権が中国に経営権を付与した事が2008年12月26日明らかになった。ミャンマーが資源産業の経営権を外国に与えるのは初めて。軍事政権の「後ろ盾」となってきた中国は資源の見返りを手に入れた形になった。
計画は、中国が中東などからタンカーで輸送してきた石油と、ミャンマー沖で産出される天然ガスを2本のパイプラインで中国に輸送する。ミャンマー西部チャウピューから中部マンダレーなどを通り、昆明を結ぶ。パイプラインを設置･運営する企業の詳細はこれまで明らかでなかったが、中国商務省によると、中国石油天然ガス集団（CNPC）が過半数の50･9％、ミャンマー国営石油ガス企業（MOGE）が残る49･1％を出資する事で合意。中国側が事実上、経営権を握る事になった。
エネルギーの需要急増が見込まれる中国にとって、安全上の懸念があるマラッカ海峡を迂回するミャンマー経由のパイプライン建設は長年の「悲願」（中国紙）だった。近く着工し、2013年の稼働を目指す。
天然ガスはパイプラインの起点に近いミャンマー沖のベンガル湾で韓国・大宇グループなどが開発するシュエ･ガス田から供給する計画で、大宇グループと中国のCNPCなどが24日、30年間の売買契約に調印した。中国は2007年1月、シュエ･ガス田の主要17鉱区のうち、CNPCが3鉱区計1万㎡の探査権をミャンマー側から譲り受けていた。この譲渡契約が結ばれる直前には、国連安全保障理事会でミャンマー民主化要求決議案が提出され、安保理常任理事国の中国が拒否権を行使したことから、事実上の見返りと見られていた。
＜環境税＞肯定派が上回る 大企業調査、９１年以来初めて
＜環境税＞肯定派が上回る 大企業調査、９１年以来初めて
【毎日新聞ニュース速報 2008/12/28 20:42:00 506字】
大企業を対象にした環境省の調査で、企業活動などに伴う二酸化炭素（ＣＯ２）排出量に応じて課税する「環境税」導入に肯定的な企業の割合が、否定的な企業の割合を９１年の調査開始以来初めて上回った。０９年度与党税制改正大綱では環境税導入が見送られたが、同省は「地球温暖化対策としての環境税への理解が企業の間に広がってきた」と分析している。
調査は７月、上場企業と従業員５００人以上の非上場企業など計６４８４社を対象に実施。２８１９社から回答があった（回答率４３．５％）。
環境税導入については「賛成」が７％、「内容次第だがどちらかといえば賛成」が３３．６％で、肯定的な回答が４割を超えた。「反対（１１．１％）」「どちらかと言えば反対（２５．８％）」の合計は３６．９％で、肯定派が初めて上回った。税収の使い道は「温暖化防止対策」６１％、「企業の省エネルギーへの投資」１７・８％などで、環境以外の分野にも使う「一般財源」との回答は４％にとどまった。
企業の環境への取り組みの意義については「企業の社会的責任（ＣＳＲ）」が８２．６％を占め、「ビジネスチャンス」「業績を左右する戦略」との回答はいずれも１０％に満たなかった。【大場あい】
【毎日新聞ニュース速報 2008/12/28 20:42:00 506字】
大企業を対象にした環境省の調査で、企業活動などに伴う二酸化炭素（ＣＯ２）排出量に応じて課税する「環境税」導入に肯定的な企業の割合が、否定的な企業の割合を９１年の調査開始以来初めて上回った。０９年度与党税制改正大綱では環境税導入が見送られたが、同省は「地球温暖化対策としての環境税への理解が企業の間に広がってきた」と分析している。
調査は７月、上場企業と従業員５００人以上の非上場企業など計６４８４社を対象に実施。２８１９社から回答があった（回答率４３．５％）。
環境税導入については「賛成」が７％、「内容次第だがどちらかといえば賛成」が３３．６％で、肯定的な回答が４割を超えた。「反対（１１．１％）」「どちらかと言えば反対（２５．８％）」の合計は３６．９％で、肯定派が初めて上回った。税収の使い道は「温暖化防止対策」６１％、「企業の省エネルギーへの投資」１７・８％などで、環境以外の分野にも使う「一般財源」との回答は４％にとどまった。
企業の環境への取り組みの意義については「企業の社会的責任（ＣＳＲ）」が８２．６％を占め、「ビジネスチャンス」「業績を左右する戦略」との回答はいずれも１０％に満たなかった。【大場あい】
再生エネルギーの国際機関 １月に設立、５０カ国参加
再生エネルギーの国際機関 １月に設立、５０カ国参加
【共同通信 2008/12/26 18:25:08 665字】
太陽光や風力などの自然エネルギーの普及や研究開発を促進するための新たな国際機関「国際再生可能エネルギー機関（ＩＲＥＮＡ）」が設立されることが２６日までに決まった。来年１月にドイツのボンで設立会合を開く。
再生可能エネルギーの発電効率などの性能を評価する国際基準づくりも進める予定で、地球温暖化対策やエネルギー安全保障上、重要度を増しつつある再生可能エネルギーの普及や国際協力に弾みがつくと期待される。
参加国は欧州諸国やオーストラリア、韓国のほか、中国、インドなどの発展途上国を含め５０以上の見通しだが、日本は既存の国際機関との重複や新たな資金負担が生じることを理由に参加に消極的。関係者からは「国際的な流れから後れを取りかねない」との懸念の声も出ている。
ドイツ政府を中心にした国際交渉でまとまった条約案によると、再生可能エネルギーの開発と普及の促進を通じ、温暖化対策や貧困廃絶に取り組むことがＩＲＥＮＡの目的。
バイオマスや地熱、水力、波力などのエネルギーも対象とし、技術の性能を評価、比較するための国際的な基準づくりに取り組む。
また途上国への技術移転の推進、開発と普及のための資金メカニズムの研究なども進め、国際的な政策協調体制の確立を目指す。ＩＲＥＮＡには、すべての国連加盟国の参加が可能で、恒常的な事務局を設置する。
エネルギー関連の国際機関としては、国際エネルギー機関（ＩＥＡ）や国際原子力機関（ＩＡＥＡ）があるが、再生可能エネルギー専門の国際機関の設立は初めて。
米国のオバマ次期政権は参加するかどうかの姿勢を明確にしていない。
【共同通信 2008/12/26 18:25:08 665字】
太陽光や風力などの自然エネルギーの普及や研究開発を促進するための新たな国際機関「国際再生可能エネルギー機関（ＩＲＥＮＡ）」が設立されることが２６日までに決まった。来年１月にドイツのボンで設立会合を開く。
再生可能エネルギーの発電効率などの性能を評価する国際基準づくりも進める予定で、地球温暖化対策やエネルギー安全保障上、重要度を増しつつある再生可能エネルギーの普及や国際協力に弾みがつくと期待される。
参加国は欧州諸国やオーストラリア、韓国のほか、中国、インドなどの発展途上国を含め５０以上の見通しだが、日本は既存の国際機関との重複や新たな資金負担が生じることを理由に参加に消極的。関係者からは「国際的な流れから後れを取りかねない」との懸念の声も出ている。
ドイツ政府を中心にした国際交渉でまとまった条約案によると、再生可能エネルギーの開発と普及の促進を通じ、温暖化対策や貧困廃絶に取り組むことがＩＲＥＮＡの目的。
バイオマスや地熱、水力、波力などのエネルギーも対象とし、技術の性能を評価、比較するための国際的な基準づくりに取り組む。
また途上国への技術移転の推進、開発と普及のための資金メカニズムの研究なども進め、国際的な政策協調体制の確立を目指す。ＩＲＥＮＡには、すべての国連加盟国の参加が可能で、恒常的な事務局を設置する。
エネルギー関連の国際機関としては、国際エネルギー機関（ＩＥＡ）や国際原子力機関（ＩＡＥＡ）があるが、再生可能エネルギー専門の国際機関の設立は初めて。
米国のオバマ次期政権は参加するかどうかの姿勢を明確にしていない。
登録:
投稿 (Atom)