2008
Blue Planet Prize
Dr. Claude Lorius(France)

Professor José Goldemberg(Brazil)

Director Emeritus of Research, CNRSMember of the French Academy of Sciences

Professor, Institute of Electrotechnics andEnergy, University of São PauloFormer Rector, University of São PauloNAVIGATION:
Our Planet
The Blue Planet where all of us live
Carrying life in infinite numbers
Journeying towards the eternal universe
Do we mankind impose ourselves
To deeply think
Of the blue spaceship of life
Where it is going?
Given life on this planet
A tiny life
Although tiny, are we been responsible?
To care for others
Helping each otherFor the destination
Of the “Ship of Life” Earth
We sincerely hopeThat the film
Helps you
In letting you think
Of the wake of the “Ship of Life” EarthOf the destination of the Blue Planet

Selected from the Slide Show Presented at the Openingof the Awards Ceremony
103

Their Imperial Highnesses Prince andPrincess Akishino at the Awards Ceremony
His Imperial Highness Prince Akishino congratulates
the laureates

Dr. Jiro Kondo, Chairman of the Presentation
Committee makes a toast
at the Congratulatory Party

Hiromichi Seya, Chairman of the Foundationdelivers the opening address

Dr. Hiroyuki Yoshikawa,
Chairman of the Selection Committee explains
the rationale for the determination of the year's
winners
Ambassador Mr. Philippe Faure of the French
Republic (left) and Ambassador Mr. Luiz Augusto
Castro Neves of the Federative Republic of Brazil,
congratulate the laureates

The prizewinners receive their trophies from Chairman Seya

Dr. Claude Lorius
104

Professor José Goldemberg

Profile

Professor José Goldemberg
Professor, Institute of Electrotechnics and Energy, University of São PauloFormer Rector, University of São Paulo
Education and Academic and Professional Activities
1928
Born in Santo Angelo, Brazil
1950
Graduated University of São Paulo1954
Earned PhD in Physical Sciences from University of São Paulo
1955-1967 Associate Professor University of São Paulo
1967Professor of Physics University of São Paulo
1970-1978 Director of the Institute of Physics University of São Paulo
1982-1986 President of the Energy Company of the State of São Paulo
1986-1990 Rector of University of São Paulo
1990-1991 Secretary of State of Science and Technology, Brazil
1991-1992 Minister of State of Education, Brazil
1991
Mitchell Prize for Sustainable Development
1992
Acting Secretary of State of Environment, Brazil
1995-2000 Chairman of the Board, International Energy Initiative
2000
Volvo Environmental Prize
2002-2006 Secretary of State for the Environment of the State of São Paulo(As of June, 2008)
Prof. Goldemberg was born in Brazil in 1928 and started his scientific activities in nuclear
physics at the University of São Paulo (USP) and obtained his PhD in 1954 at the USP. In the
60’s he spent two years in the High Energy Physics Laboratory of Stanford University. Therehe studied the scattering of electrons by nuclear magnetism. He then returned to Brazil andcontinued an active research in the field of nuclear research at USP.
The Brazilian government decided to introduce nuclear energy in the late 60’s. Prof.
Goldemberg was fully involved in the nuclear debate and this led him to a thorough study ofenergy problems, in order to better understand the possible alternatives for Brazil and theworld in general. And with his visit to the Center for Energy an Environmental Studies at
Princeton University in 1978, he completed his transition from a pure nuclear physicist to anenergy analyst, thus became to get involved in energy policies.
Prof. Goldemberg realized that while improvements in the efficiency of energy use
would be essential in order for the industrialized countries to reduce dependence on fossil fuel,for developing countries where energy demand itself was high, he proposed that the increased
demand should preferably come from renewable energy sources such as biomass, an approach
substantially different from the paradigms existing at that time.
125

In the 80’s, together with R. H. Williams and others, Prof. Goldemberg wrote a remarkable book: “Energy for a Sustainable World”, proposing a new vision on energy issues different from the past. Prof. Goldemberg et al, in this book, described the importance of a normative
approach to energy planning by incorporating from the start, broad societal goals aimed at
facilitating the achievement of, not merely a sustainable energy system, but what is morecrucial, a sustainable world. It defined that at the most fundamental level the level of goals ofsociety should be equity, economic efficiency, environmental harmony, long-term viability,
self-reliance, and peace. With the book he showed an image of the future in which it waspossible to build an energy future for the year 2020 where renewables play an important roleand the total world energy consumption and emission of greenhouse gases would possibly becontrolled. He expressed what was essential for this future was the adoption by the developing
countries, early in the process of their development, of efficient end-use technologies like theones used in the industrialized countries. As a consequence, he developed the “leapfrog
strategy”, by which a developing country could incorporate the available most efficient andmodern technologies, but also at the same time introducing innovative ones, leapfrogging oversome of the historic steps toward industrialization. Such vision exhibited by the book wasincorporated in the UN Brundtland report, that led to the UNCED-92 Conference of Rio deJaneiro, and his vision, innovative ideas and influence were recognized worldwide.
From 1986 to 1990, Prof. Goldemberg served as Rector of the University of São Paulo,
the largest of Brazil and perhaps the most respected of the southern hemisphere and directed
his effort in raising the scientific level and performance of the university. During his term, heestablished two academic units with great importance in issues such as energy, environment,
development and public policies. In the early 1990’s, Prof. Goldemberg was chosen by the
President as secretary of state for science and technology, and later as interim secretary of theenvironment. In that capacity he took a very active role in its preparatory process and the
Climate Convention adopted in Rio-92, showing leadership at the Earth Summit.
In 1993 he established the International Energy Initiative (IEI), which has a mandate in
the developing countries to disseminate a perspective on energy in which the level of energy
services is taken as the measure of development, and to initiate and strengthen technologicalcapability in energy analysis, planning, and implementation, influencing activities on energy
in developing countries.
Prof. Goldemberg has written numerous papers and articles, and he has been very
productive in the publication in the field of energy. Among them, especially important, is thebook printed in 2000, edited by him as the Chair of the meeting sponsored by the World
Energy Council and the United Nations titled “World Energy Assessment - Energy and theChallenge of Sustainability”.
From 2002 to 2006, he served as secretary of state for the Environment of the State ofSão Paulo and put into practice many of his ideas on sustainability, preservation and wise useof the environment.
Prof. Goldemberg states that the biggest environmental threat the world faces today is
global climate change and meeting this challenge will require not only new energy strategies
and policies but also the full involvement of major developing countries and abundant North-126

South cooperation. He has recognized the importance of climate-friendly energy strategies
and furthered securing cooperation of major developing countries such as Brazil and China,
contributing in forging the type of North-South partnerships, and his active contribution willcontinued to be seen in the future.

127

EssayRevisiting Technological “Leapfrogging”
Professor José Goldemberg
Technological learning and innovation in industrialized countries is usually a continuous
incremental process which can lead to lower costs for existing, new or higher quality productsthat can enhance productivity, competitiveness and growth.
However, successful companies with a monopoly on particular technologies are boundto take fewer risks and stand to lose their technological leadership role when competitors
willing to take more risks, adopt new technologies. Such are the “gales of creative destruction”
described by Schumpeter1, which are not necessarily successful, but increase technologicaloptions for development.
In developing countries, (“the periphery”) many of them former colonies, the usual
economic development followed a simple model: export of primary products (minerals andagricultural products) which did not involve advanced technology and import of manufactured
products originating from the industrialized countries (“the center”).
As the markets in such developing countries grew significantly, subsidiaries of theleading manufacturers installed factories for local production; frequently this was done bytransferring obsolete factories to the colonies or former colonies, which were due to be
dismantled in their countries of origin and replaced by modern ones.
The initial advantage of the “center” over the “periphery” is the technical and organizational superiority. In the short term, innovation and increased efficiency give to the “center”
greater profits and a faster growth. In the long term however, the rate of growth of the “center”
tends to decelerate and new economic activities migrate to the “periphery” which benefits, inthe words of Gerschenkron2, from the “advantages of the latecomers”. These countries caninitiate their industrialization process benefiting from lessons learned from the advanced
countries when they industrialized in the past and can therefore “leapfrog” over some stagesof development3.
Such behavior is illustrated in Figure 1 by the evolution of the “energy intensity” (E/GDP) of the economy which measures the amount of energy required to generate one unit of
GDP measured in tons of oil equivalent per thousand dollars.

128

Figure 1
The evolution in energy intensity (energy per income, I = E/GDP) over time reflects the
combined effect of structural changes in the economy, in the composition of energy sources andin the efficiency in energy use.
As Figure 1 shows, energy intensity grows during the initial phase of industrial development as heavy infrastructure is put in place, peaks, and then declines4,5.
In the United States and other industrialized countries the energy intensity increased as
the infrastructure and heavy industry developed, going through a peak and then a steady decline.
Latecomers in the industrialization process, such as Russia, China and other developing countries
peaked later and their energy intensity declined rapidly indicating early adoption of modern
more energy efficient industrial processes and technology. The energy intensity of most countries
is therefore converging rapidly.
The growth of electricity use is a characteristic of present consumption patterns which
partially explains such behavior6. Electronic equipment of all kinds, computers, television sets
as well as refrigerators, air conditioners and other domestic appliances are now found everywherearound the world. Electricity can be transmitted and distributed more easily than solid or gas
fuels and can reach the most hidden locations in houses, offices and industries. In addition to thatit can be converted with almost 100% efficiency to mechanical power in motors.

129

BOX
The energy intensity (I= E/GDP)
Despite being acknowledged as a very rough indicator, energy intensity has some attractive
characteristics: whereas energy and the GDP per capita vary by more than one order ofmagnitude among the developed and developing countries, energy intensity does notchange by more than a factor of two
The main factors determining the evolution of energy intensity are(i)dematerialization;(ii)
fuel use intensity; and(iii)
recycling.
Dematerialization of economy
Dematerialization of economy means to use less material for the same end. An exampleof this is the use of glass fiber to replace copper in telephone transmissions. Other examples
are the replacement of steel by polymers in automobiles or thinner sheets with higher
resistance alloys to replace thicker sheets of conventional steel. In the US, the participationof basic materials in the GNP decreased by nearly 30% since 1970.
Fuel use intensity
Fuel use intensity measures the amount of energy necessary to manufacture a given
product (as for example the fuel used per ton of steel or the power used per kilogram ofpolyethylene).
Recycling
Recycling expands the concept of dematerialization. The energy necessary for recycling a
few basic materials is usually smaller than that necessary to produce them. For example
aluminum recycling uses only a quarter of the energy needed to product it from the raw
mineral.

Source: Goldemberg, J. and Lucon, O. - “Energy Environment and Development” Earthscan
2010
The decline of the energy intensity is directly reflected in the decline of the carbon
intensity defined as
Ic = C/GDP
130

i.e the amount of carbon emitted per unit of GDP
The reason for that is that in most countries energy originates in fossil fuels (coal, oil,gas) which worldwide account for 80% of energy used.
Figure 2 shows the evolution of the carbon intensity of the OECD countries and the
BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, China, India and South Africa)7

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Figure 2
China and Russia, which are very dependent on coal, are making great progress in
reducing rapidly their carbon intensity (CO2/GDP) although their carbon intensity issignificantly higher than the one in OECD countries.
The carbon intensity of China and Russia is decreasing 3.3-3.9% per year. In India it isdecreasing at 1.5-1.9% per year, similar to the decrease in OECD countries.
South Africa is making small progress. India has a rather low carbon intensity being aless industrialized country. Brazil, excluding deforestation in the Amazonia, has a very low
carbon intensity the main reason being the fact that electricity is produced almost entirely131from hydroelectric plants. When the contribution to CO2 emissions due to the deforestation in
the Amazonia is included its carbon intensity rises considerably although it has been decreasing
significantly more in recent years.
There is therefore an overall decline in the carbon intensity of the major carbon emitterswhich raises hopes that ultimately the growth of carbon emissions will be reduced avoiding
some of the dire consequences of global warming.
It is clear therefore that developing countries which are latecomers in the industrialization
process can either mimic industrialized nations and undergo an economic development phasethat is dirty, wasteful, and creates an enormous legacy of environmental pollution, or they can“leapfrog” over some of the steps of development and incorporate currently available, modern,and efficient technologies into their development process.
This process is already taking place, as demonstrated by the amazing speed of adoption
and diffusion of innovative and state-of-the-art technologies in developing countries. A shining
example is the speed at which cellular telephones were introduced even in countries which did
not had traditional telephone systems particularly in rural areas. Another example can be seenin Indian villages where lighting is provided by fluorescent lamps instead of old inefficientincandescent light bulbs. Other less spectacular technologies, such as biogas produced in large
biogas units using waste products of the village, can serve several purposes such as power for
lighting, water pumping, fertilizer production and sewage treatment. Black-and-whitetelevision is becoming a thing of the past even in the remote areas of Amazonia. The same has
happened with cellular telephones which have bypassed wire-connected telephones in many
places.
The potential for leapfrogging is inherent in both processes and products. Often, there
is synergy between the two, as in between the use of renewable energy sources and energy
efficiency. Take, for example, lighting in isolated villages, typically supplied by kerosene
lanterns, batteries, or candles. Switching to a compact fluorescent light bulb (CFL), which isfour times as efficient as a conventional incandescent bulb, makes it economical to supply
power from a solar photovoltaic (PV) panel. Connecting to an electric grid - probably arequirement if inefficient conventional bulbs are used - is unnecessary, generating vast savingsin capital equipment. The resulting lighting system is much more satisfactory than either its
inefficient, low-tech predecessor (candles or kerosene) or inefficient, capital intensivealternative (incandescent lights and an electric grid). A PV-CFL system is some 100 times as
efficient as kerosene and a half-million times more efficient than candles.
What the data shows is that the technologies adopted in the economys of most countries(OECD+BRICS) is evolving approximately the same way which means that the latecomers in
the development process “leapfrogged” many of the steps followed in the past by theindustrialized countries and their growth is based now in modern and relatively non-polluting
technologies.
References
1. Schumpeter, J. - “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy” New York, Harper, (1942).
2. Gerschenkeron, A - Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective , Cambridge Becknap, UK (1962).
3. Goldemberg, J. - Leapfrog energy technology - Energy Policy 26 pp 729-741) (1998).

132

4. Martin, J. M. “L’Intensité Energetique de l’Activité Economique dan les Pays Industrialises: les Evolution detrês Longue Period Livrent - ells des Enseignements Utiles?” Economies ei Societés - Chaiers de l’ISMEA 22(4) 9-27 (1988).
5. BP Energy Outlook 2030 London (2011).
6. Goldemberg, J. and Prado, L. T. S - “The decline of the world’s energy intensity” Energy Policy 39 pp 18021805, (2011).
7. Goldemberg, J. and Prado, L. T. S - “The decarbonization of the world energy matrix” Energy Policy 38 pp
3274-3276, (2010).

133

Lecture

A Sustainable Energy Future
Professor José Goldemberg
What I will try to focus on in this lecture is the present “status” of the efforts leading toward asustainable energy future and my own efforts in that direction in a developing country such as Brazil.
After many years as a professor and researcher in the energy area at the University ofSão Paulo, I was appointed in 1982 CEO of the Energy Company of the State of São Paulo the most industrialized State of Brazil with a population of approximately 25 million people
at that time. It was my first experience in large scale management and it forced me not only topreach about new and more sustainable energy strategies but also to do something about it.
One of the activities of the company was to build hydroelectric generating stations
which brought me face to face with some unavoidable environmental and social impacts. In
one of our stations 20,000 hectares of virgin forest had been lost to an artificial lake resulting
from damming a river; we then decided to purchase another 20,000 hectares to compensate
that loss and convert it into a state park.
I learned through this experience that generating electricity - which was essential tosupply the needs of the population of São Paulo - could have negative environmental andsocial impacts such as displacing people, affecting the lives of others and leading to abiodiversity loss, while at the same time benefiting others, frequently more numerous.
Compromises had to be negotiated and reaching them could be quite expensive.
More generally speaking man’s impact on the environment in the past had been modest
except in some extreme circumstances where it was really destructive. The best example isprobably what happened in Easter Island. This isolated volcanic island in the Pacific wascolonized by Polynesian people before 900 CE and gave rise to a rather sophisticatedcivilization attested by the large number of immense and strange statues weighing up to 100
tons spread out all over the island. However when the western navigators reached the island in
1722 it was completely denuded of the forest cover it had in the past and which had sustained
the life of the estimated 30,000 people living there then: the few remaining islanders were
found to be in a very precarious state. (Figure 1)
The consequences of large populations dependent on limited agricultural resources wasstudied in the past and given a very special “status” by the work of Malthus in the 19th century.
Malthus argued that population growth reduces average “per capita” income, because heconsidered the globe, with its natural resources, a constant, so population growth would reduce
natural resources per head and increase mortality due to insufficient food production.
According to him “the carrying capacity” of the globe was finite and could not be exceeded.
The arguments of Malthus were given another version in the 20th century by the Clubof Rome which pointed out the “limits of growth” due to the eventual exhaustion of minerals
and other inputs essential to our civilization.
134

Figure 1
Easter Island
Table 1The Action of Humankind on the Environment

The basic argument of such current of thought is that human activities today have impacts
on the environment comparable to the impacts of natural forces. In other words the action ofhuman beings reached the level of geological forces. The basic reason for that is the following:in our regular activities around the year each person moves about 8 tons of materials; with 6.7
billion people on the earth today this corresponds to moving 54 billion tons/year, rather close to
the amount of material moved by geological forces (wind, erosion, volcaniceruptions, etc) of 50
billion tons/year. (Table 1)135

Figure 2
World Primary Energy Supply (2004)(shares of 11.4 billions tons of oil equivalent)
The energy production is an important fraction of man’s action on nature due to the factthat approximately 80% of all energy used in the world is of fossil origin. Figure 2 shows thesources of the world energy supply.
Traditional renewables used in primitive form in many less developed countries accountfor 8.5% of the consumption and “new”, i.e. modern renewables (wind, solar, etc) for 3.4%.
The 2004 average “per capita” energy consumption was 1.74 tons of petroleum
equivalent per year or 20% of all materials moved around. Such amount of energy corresponds
to 50,000 kcal/day, 25 times the subsistence level of prehistoric men of 2,000 kcal/day.
The consequences of the large consumption of fossil fuels can be daunting giving rise
to local, regional and global pollution.
Local pollution originates in impurities in coal and oil and is very visible in the air
quality of São Paulo, Los Angeles, Beijing and other large cities. The health consequences ofsuch problems are well documented.
Regional pollution is less visible but is becoming an important issue in Southeast Asia,
where a “brown cloud” has been formed due mainly to emissions from coal burning in China
and India.
Global problems were clearly identified only in the last 20 or 30 years particularly
global warming. In this case the main culprit is also the use of fossil fuels. The consequencesof our dependence on fossil fuels are leading to the point of reaching the limits of the “carrying
capacity” of the atmosphere, not unlike Malthus’ concerns in the 19th century.

136

Figure 3
Projections of the Energy Consumptions until 2030
To aggravate our present concerns International Energy Agency (IEA)’s projections forenergy consumption are alarming: present energy consumption should almost double by 2030
added to an increasing contribution from developing countries with a continuing dependence
on fossil fuels. (Figure 3)
This is not only alarming but is also not a sustainable energy future since it cannot lastfor more than the estimated life of present fossil fuel reserves of 50-100 years.
The solution to this problem - probably the most serious our civilization faces today lies in the fact that, as in the case of Malthus, the “carrying capacity” is not a constant because
there can be substitution between different resources. The type of possible substitution depends
on the particular resource endowment and other conditions for resource transfer or invention
in the region under investigation.
A sustainable energy system as defined in the Brundtland Report in 1987 must comprisefour components characterized as:• Physical, related to securing supplies adequate to meet future energy needs andextending their lives;• Environmental, related to the use of present supply sources at local, regional andglobal levels including averting global warming and catastrophic climate change;• Geopolitical, related to security risks and conflicts that could arise from an escalatingcompetition for unevenly distributed energy resources and• Equitable, not strictly an energy problem, but similar to the one of access to food andother amenities provided by modern civilization.

137

Regarding equity Figure 4 indicates the progress made in different regions of the worldin the period 1971-2004.

AfricaLatin
America

India

Asia

China Non-OECD Fomer
Europe USSR

Middle Non OECD OECD OECD
East
North Pacific
America

OECD
Europe

OECS
Total

World

Figure 4
Evolution of the Energy Consumption “per capita” (1971 - 2004)
The average world primary energy consumption has approximately reached 1.74 toe/capita but there is a serious problem of distribution. The OECD North America region has 6
toe/capita and Asia (non OECD), Africa and India less than 1 toe/capita in primary energy
consumption. The political consequences of such wide differences in consumption cannot be
discussed and the energy consumption growth is unavoidable in developing countries
particularly in China and India.
One could ask what energy would be necessary to offer the population of developing
countries as an acceptable level of living. A possible answer can be given by analyzing therelationship between the Human Development Index (HDI) and the per capita consumption
displayed in Figure 5.

Figure 5
Relationship between HDI and per capita Energy Use, 1999/2000138

As one can see in this figure the industrialized countries have an HDI above 0.9 reachedwhen the “per capita” energy consumption is above 3.5 toe/capita, approximately twice thepresent average world consumption of 1.74 toe/capita. To reach that level in 20 years a growthrate of 3%/year energy consumption would be needed - which is rather modest compared to
growth rates used in most projections of future energy consumption in developing countries.
Even so if such growth follows the patterns adopted in the past by the industrialized countries
in the 20th century when fossil fuels were cheap and abundant, environmental problems would
be greatly amplified.
The contrast of today’s industrialized countries with a large “per capita” consumption
and the majority of the world’s population consuming less than needed can be tackled by a twopronged approach:i.
the reduction of consumption in the industrialized countries through energy
efficiency measures that can lead to supplying the energy needed for the desiredend uses with less primary energy inputs andii.
the introduction of renewable energy sources in large scale.
Energy efficiency was clearly identified as the “low hanging fruit” of the energy system,
after the first (1973) oil crisis and it became an important element of energy policy in the mid
1970’s. The enormous increase in oil prices and the resultant problem of oil shortages forced
a reexamination of the way energy - and particularly fossil fuels - was used. The result was thatmany opportunities were found to increase production efficiency and energy use. On the
supply side, it was found that the transformation of primary energy sources (coal, oil and gas)
into electricity could be greatly improved. On the demand side, innumerable opportunities
were identified (in lighting, building construction, transportation, domestic appliances) toperform the tasks and services needed with less energy.
The success of energy savings in the OECD is clearly displayed in Figure 6.

Figure 6
Energy Economy in the OECD (1973 - 1998)

139

Figure 7Long-term Trends in Energy Intensity of Industrialized Countries**Commercial energy includes all energy that is the subject of monetary transactions (generally coal, oil, gas, nuclear andhydro). Only commercial energy is considered in this graph.

Energy efficiency however is not a solution “per se” but can buy time for the world todevelop a “low energy path”, which should be the foundation of the future global energy, as
the Brundtland Report pointed out.
The strategy of promoting energy efficiency, i.e. performing the same task with lessenergy and successful in OECD countries since 1973, is necessary but not sufficient fordeveloping countries. As they build modern economies with attendant industrial infrastructure,transportation systems, and urban development, growth in commercial energy consumption isinevitable.
However, developing countries have an alternative: they can either mimic the industrialized nations and go through an economic development phase that is dirty, wasteful, thus
creating an enormous environmental pollution legacy, or they can leapfrog over some of thesteps originally followed by industrialized countries and early in the process of development,
incorporate modern and efficient technologies into their development process. LDCs areimportant theaters for innovation and leapfrogging, especially in energy-intensive, basic
material industries such as steel, chemicals, and cement.
Such process is occurring to some extent since the 19th century as can be seen in Figure
7 which displays the energy intensity in the UK, USA, Germany, France and Japan over theyears. The energy intensity is an indicator that measures the energy needed to produce one unitof the gross national product in monetary units.
In the UK - the first country to industrialize - the energy intensity grew rapidly from1850 to 1880 because the large infrastructure built in that period (railways, steel mills, etc)
required large amounts of energy. After 1880 the energy intensity declined as the economic
activity switched to less intensive energy activities. Germany and the USA - which industrialized later - benefited from the UK’s experience and were less energy intensive. France and140

Japan benefited from the two above ones and were even less energy intensive. One could seehere the advantages of latecomers in the industrialization process.
The potential for leapfrogging is inherent in both process and products. Often, there issynergy between the two, as between the use of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency.
Take, for example, lighting in isolated villages, typically supplied by kerosene lantern batteries,
or candles. Switching to a compact fluorescent light bulb (CFL), four times as efficient as aconventional incandescent bulb, it makes it more economical to supply power from a solar
photovoltaic (PV) panel. Connecting to an electric grid - probably a requirement if inefficientconventional bulbs are used - is unnecessary, thus generating vast savings in capital equipment.
Another major dividend from leapfrog technologies derives from the avoided costs oflong-term environmental clean-up. Most current environmental expenditures (approximately$100 billion per year in the USA) go to mopping up old toxic sites, scrubbing coal power
plants, and so on. A significant fraction of health care costs are linked to environmental
pollution and degradation. Using leapfrog energy technologies minimizes these future costs.
Technological leapfrogging requires information knowledge and insights on the technologies in use around the world. This is why it is so important for developing countries tohave an elite of scientists in all areas capable of making choices - thus the role of leading
universities. My own efforts as Rector of the University of São Paulo in the late 80’s wereentirely dedicated to that.
It is however in the realm of renewable energy that great opportunities exist. They were
described in the Brundtland Report in 1987 as the “untapped potential” and the report pinned
great hopes on them since they “offer the world potentially huge primary energy sources,
sustainable in perpetuity and available in one way or another to every nation of the world”.
They are indeed the fastest growing source of energy (an average of 11% per year in the
period 2002-2006) while total energy production grew only 1.6% per year in the same period.
(Figure 8)

Figure 8
Average Annual Growth Rates of Renewable Energy Capacity, 2002-2006
141

If such growth was to persist over two decades, new renewables could represent 20% of
the world’s energy consumption in 2030. (Figure 9)

Figure 9Modern Renewables(including small hydro, excluding large projections for 2010 and 2020 based on growth 2001-2005)(REN21 and WEA 2004 Update)
One of the most impressive examples of technological leapfrogging in the area of
renewables is given by the alcohol program in Brazil through which approximately 50% of thegasoline used in the country was replaced by sugarcane derived ethanol.
Ethanol is superior to gasoline in some respects and being produced from an agricultural
product is renewable on a life cycle basis except for the small inputs of fossil fuels (less than10%) used in its preparation in the form of fertilizers. My own work in 1978 on the energybalance of ethanol production from sugarcane, maize and other crops clearly established thesugarcane advantages over other crops. The sugarcane bagasse is used as fuel to produce
steam and electricity needed in the ethanol preparation. The ethanol cost in Brazil becamecompetitive to gasoline when petroleum reached the cost of 40 dollars per barrel. (Figure 10)142Figure 10
The Economic Competitiveness of
Alcohol Fuel Compared with Gasoline
Ethanol was used originally in two ways in Otto cycle automobiles:i.
as an additive replacing petroleum derived additives at a few percentages up,
without any changes in current motors orii.
as pure ethanol in adapted motors
Presently, with flex-fuel motors and electronic injection, any mixture of ethanol withgasoline is used and the mix is determined on the basis of the fuel price which since 2004 is
fully competitive to gasoline, even after all subsidies - which had been required when theethanol program started in the late 70’s - had been removed.
Greenhouse gas emission in Brazil from the urban sector (excluding the deforestation
contribution of Amazonia) has been reduced by 15%.
This leapfrogging strategy was developed entirely in Brazil but does not have to be
restricted to this country; it could be replicated in many other tropical ones. Actually countries
where sugarcane do not grow - which is the case of Japan - could import ethanol and use it in
its gasoline consumption and thus reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.
One should be aware of course of the several problems that a large expansion of ethanol
production from sugarcane could generate if proper measures and policies are not adopted.
These problems are being widely discussed today since ethanol production in the world
has already reached the level of 1 million barrels of oil equivalent per day (approximately 1%of the world’s oil production) and it is bound to increase substantially in the next few years.
The first of these problems is the amount of land used for ethanol production which
could replace other crops and thus generate a conflict between fuel “versus” food. Just looking
at the numbers will dispel such concerns. Ethanol production today uses 10 million hectaresof land (half in Brazil, half in the United States) but the total agricultural area in use in the143world is approximately 140 times larger (1,400 billion hectares) and there are still 800 million
hectares of land suited for agriculture where many types of crops could expand.
Another concern that deals particularly with Brazil is that the expansion of sugarcane
could reach the Amazonia region and lead to further deforestation. This is not taking placebecause sugarcane does not grow well in the very rainy conditions of Amazonia and also
because the sugarcane expansion is taking place in degraded pastureland 10 million hectaresof which only in São Paulo and 200 million hectares in overall Brazil.
One could wonder why it has taken so many years to materialize the expansion in theuse of renewables. One of the reasons for that was the misconception that “new renewables”
were significant only for small scale decentralized applications and that developing countries
were used by industrialized countries as testing grounds (or “guinea pigs”) for new technologies
such as solar, wind and photovoltaics, primarily in isolated remote villages far from theelectricity grid. Thus the false dichotomy was created i.e. that centralized application was forindustrialized countries and decentralized solutions for developing countries.
For wind and photovoltaics, the solution to this problem came from Germany, Denmark,Japan and the United States which supported the wind and PV development by creating a large
market for these products which the developing countries could not do with a small number ofdecentralized installations. In these countries, the wind and PV were linked to the grid solving
thus the intermittency problem inherent in these sources. As production increased, costs
decreased opening the way for the introduction of theses technologies in a large scale indeveloping countries mainly in China and India which have installed manufacturing industries
in their countries. Other renewable energy sources using mature technologies such as
minihydros to generate electricity as well as geothermal energy (for heat and electricity) are
spreading fast in many Asian, Latin American countries, the Philippines and Indonesia andgenerally speaking they are economically competitive. Solar heating is a technology that reallycaught on in decentralized application, particularly in China.
A real understanding of the role of renewable energies in reducing poverty andcontributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emission was reached in the United Nations
Johannesburg Conference in 2002 (World Summit and Sustainable Development) whichmarked the 10th anniversary of the adoption of the Climate Convention in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.
At the conference, the Government of Brazil presented a proposal - originated in myoffice of Secretary for the Environment of the State of São Paulo - to adopt a 10% target ofrenewables in the world’s energy mix by the year 2010; in 2002 renewables represented only
3% of the world’s energy matrix which meant that the contribution of renewables would haveto contribute approximately an additional 1% per year in the 7 years between 2002 and 2010
which didn’t seem unrealistic. The proposal was strongly supported by the European Unionand many other countries but was not adopted due to the opposition of a few countries heavily
committed to the use of fossil fuels. Nevertheless it strengthened the adoption of such targets
by the European Union and many other countries in the world as well as some states of theUnited States of America.

144

Table 2
Some Policy Options to Speed-up the Diffusion of Renewables

Table 2 lists some of the policies adopted and their status in 2005 and estimates for2007.
In terms of investments, renewables in 2007 represented approximately 150 billion
dollars more than 10% of all investments in energy.
In conclusion, what I would like to convey is that the growth and development which
are sought by three quarters of the world population outside of the OECD can be reconciledwith the protection of the environment and that a sustainable development course is possible
if the proper approach is adopted and benefited by the adoption of modern and non-polluting
technologies.
I do not believe the energy future of mankind is set and immutable and that it is in ourhands to shape this future.

145

Major Publications
Professor José Goldemberg
The role of biomass in the world’s energy system J. Goldemberg - M. S. Buckeridge and G. H. Goldman (eds),
Routes to Cellulosic Ethanol., DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-92740-4_1 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC,
2011.
Technological Leapfrogging in the Developing World J. Goldemberg - Georgetown Journal of International Affairs- Winter/Spring 2011 pp135-141.
Cancún: fracasso ou sucesso? - J. Goldemberg- Revista do Memorial da América Latina nº 41, 2011/2º trimestre
pp58-61.
The decline of the world’s energy intensity J. Goldemberg E Luiz Tadeo Prado - Energy Policy vol. 39 pp. 18021805, 2011.
News and Views: Perspectives for Nuclear Energy in Brazil After Fukushima Goldemberg, J., Sociedade Brasileirade Física SBF - Nuclear Physics - Edit. Springer 2011 DOI 10.1007/s13538-011-0027-0.
Has the situation of the Have nots improved? J. Goldemberg and Jannuzzi, M. Gilberto in publication.
Climate Change & Energy: Nuclear Power After Fukushima - Opinions Reality check shows nuclear energy is thewrong path Science and Development Network 28 September, 2011. http://www.scidev.net/en/climate-changeand-energy/nuclear-power-after-fukushima/opinions/reality-check-shows-nuclear-energy-is-the-wrongpath-1.html.
O future da energia nuclear J. Goldemberg REVISTAUSP
setembro/outubro/novembro catástrofes 2011 pp. 06-15.
Sugarcane ethanol: strategies to a successful program in Brazil Goldemberg, J Editor, Springer book project:
Advanced Biofuels & Bioproducts.
James W. Lee, PhD Adjunct Professor Whiting School of Engineering Johns Hopkins University in publication.
Renewable energy options in developing countries Goldemberg, J. O, Lucon. - Making it - Industry for Development
Magazine, number 2 pp. 16-18 - April 2010 - ISSN 2076-8508. http://www.makingitmagazine.net.
São Paulo: the other Brazil: Different Pathways on Climate Change for State and Federal Governments - J.
Goldemberg, O. Lucon. The Journal Environment and Development 2010 DOI: 10.1177/1070496510378092
The online version of this article can be found at: http://jed.sagepub.com/content/19/3/335.
The decarbonization of e world’s energy matrix. J. Goldemberg E Luiz Tadeo Prado - Energy Policy vol. 38 pp.
3274-3276, 2010. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.040.
Defining a standard metric for electricity savings Environmental Research Letters Create an alert RSS this journal
Issue Volume 5, Number 1.
Citation Jonathan Koomey et al 2010 Environ. Res. Lett. 5 014017doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/5/1/014017.
COP-15 em Copenhague: As Posições do Governo Brasileiro J. Goldemberg, Revista Interesse nacional, Ano 2,
Número 8 janeiro-março, 2010 pp. 16-24. www.inteessencaional.com.
Copenhague: Um post mortem - J. Goldemberg, Revista Política Externa vol. 18 nº 4 Mar/Abr/Mai 2010 pp.15-24
ISSN 1518-6660 www.politicaexterna.com.br.
Are biofuels ruining the environment? - J. Goldemberg, Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Biofuels, Bioprod. Bioref. 4:109-110 (2010); DOI: 10.1002/bbb.
Renewable Energy Sources abd Biofuels: The Brazilian Ethanol - S. T. Coelho, C. Brighenti & J. Goldemberg Geographische Rundschau International Edition Vol.6 nº 4, pp22-27, 2010.
O TNP e o Protocolo Adicional J. Goldemberg Revista Política Externa vol. 19 nº2 pp.115121 Set/Out/Nov, 2010.
Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency and Emissions Trading J., Goldemberg, Harnessing Renewable Ebergy inElectric Power System, Theory, Practice, Policy Edited by Boaz Moselle, Jorge Padilla and Richard Schmalensee- ISBN 978-1-933115-90-0 Chapter 6 pp.94-110, 2010.
Renewable energy options in developing countries Goldemberg, J. O, Lucon. - Making it - Industry for Development
Magazine, number 2 pp. 16-18 - April 2010 - ISSN 2076-8508 http://www.makingitmagazine.net.

146

As perspectivas Brasileiras no Controle de Materiais Nucleares - Mafra, O., Alvim F. C. and Goldemberg, J. International Panel on Fissile Materials - IPFM Spring 2009 Workshop on Fissile Materials and Nuclear
Disarmament - Princeton, May 8-10, 2009 publicado em Revista Economia e Energia nº 73 ano XIII abril/junho 2009 pp.20-31 - ISSN: 1518-2932 - http//ecen.com.
O uso de carvão vegetal na indústria siderúrgica brasileira e o impacto sobre as mudanças climáticas Uhlig, A.,
Goldemberg, J., T. Coelho, Suani, - Revista Brasileira de Energia, Vol. 14, nº 2, 2º Sem. 2008, pp. 67-85, 2009.
The potential for first-generation ethanol production from sugarcane Goldemberg, J. and P. Guardabassi - Published
online in Wiley InterScience.
(www.interscience.wiley.com); DOI: 10.1002/bbb.186 Biofuels, Bioprod. Bioref. (2009).
Renewable Energy in Latin America and the Caribbean Goldemberg, J. - Energlac Magazine, Year 1 nº 1 pp. 15-17- OLADE october 2009 ISSN: 1390-5171. http://www.olade.org.
The Brazilian Experience with Biofuels. - J., Goldembergb Innovations. Fall Volume 4, issue 4 pp 91-107 2009.
http://mitpress.mit.edu/innovations/.
Nuclear energy in developing countries - J., Goldemberg - Dædalus Fall 2009 Issue 138 pp. 71-80, http://www.
mitpressjournals.org/toc/da7ed/138/4.
The Sustainability of ethanol production from sugarcane Goldemberg, J. T. Coelho, Suani and Guardabassi, P.
Energy Policy 36 pp 2086-2097, 2008.
Are biofuels a feasible option? - Goldemberg, J., P. Guardabassi - Energy Policy 37 (2009) 10-14 .
Iluminando o caminho: um sistema energético sustentável - Goldemberg J. Nossa America - Revista do memorial
da América Latina nº 29 - pp. 58-62 2008.
The challenge of biofuels - Goldemberg, J. - Energy & Environmental Science Sci., 2008, Vol.1, Nº 5 523-525 DOI
10.1039/b81417a, 2008 - Royal Society of Chemistry.
The Brazilian biofuels industry - Goldemberg, J. Biotechnology for Biofuels 2008, 16 DOI 10.1186/1754-6834-16 - This article is available from: www.biotechnologyforbiofuels.com/content/1/16.
Sustainable Biofuels Redux - Goldemberg, J. et al - Policy Forum Science vol. 322 pp.49-50 october 2008.
Pumping Renewables - Goldemberg, J. Pressure Point TWAS Supplement to Nature Publishing Group A World ofScience in the Developing World p. 26-27, 2008.

147