Bridging biodiversity and the energy transition

"What benefits the climate does not always benefit nature." This dilemma was central to the discussions at the 16th United Nations Biodiversity Conference (CBD COP16), held in Cali, Colombia. The conference brought together global stakeholders to address the urgent need to halt biodiversity loss. Representing Utrecht University, Catalina Papari (PhD Candidate in Sustainable Finance and Innovation) followed the discussions. For Energy in Transition, a Pathways to Sustainability theme, she focused on how biodiversity conservation and energy transitions can - and must - work together.

Climate versus nature

Despite shared goals, the approaches to climate change and nature conservation often diverge. Climate strategies largely focus on reducing carbon emissions, with solutions like renewable energy and carbon offsets driving action. Nature conservation, on the other hand, considers the broader health of ecosystems, emphasizing biodiversity and the intricate balance of life forms.

While renewable energy technologies are crucial for decarbonization, they can still harm ecosystems. For example, wind and solar power generally have lower biodiversity impacts, but hydropower alters rivers and ecosystems, and mining for critical minerals like nickel and cobalt damages biodiversity hotspots.

At COP16, discussions highlighted that addressing biodiversity and energy transitions together is vital. This twin transition requires solutions that avoid trade-offs, such as reducing carbon emissions while harming ecosystems.

It can be done – case studies

Several examples showcased at COP16 exemplify how renewable energy can coexist with biodiversity goals.

• ReCoral Project, Ørsted - the world’s largest developer of offshore wind by number of built farms as of January 2022, is piloting the use of offshore wind turbine bases as habitats for coral reefs, supporting marine biodiversity while producing clean energy.
• SiteRight - The Nature Conservancy India - India can meet its renewable energy target by more than ten times by placing RE infrastructure on lower impact lands. This tracking tool identifies areas where solar and wind development is less likely to encounter socio-ecological conflicts, thereby helping to reduce project delays and cost overruns.
• California solar farms - a test project to grow native plants under solar panels is restoring prairie land and pollinator habitat at the site of a decommissioned nuclear power station.

Pathways forward

However, despite enthusiasm for synergies, implementation remains complex. A key barrier is the absence of clear definitions and standards for “nature-positive” actions, which leads to risks like greenwashing. However, regulatory frameworks like the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive are pushing companies to trace supply chain impacts and disclose their ecological footprints.

Another significant challenge discussed at COP16 is accessing and scaling up private finance for biodiversity projects. These projects are often perceived as niche investments with high risks and low returns. Blended finance has emerged as a realistic solution, connecting private actors with public financiers or impact investors to reduce their risks and incentivize demand.

Understanding the cost of capital for biodiversity-related projects is crucial for identifying where de-risking measures are most effective, thereby facilitating the scaling up of finance in this sector. This presents a significant opportunity for academic scholars to explore, and the energy transition serves as an excellent case from which to draw valuable insights and strategies.

Lastly, reducing harmful subsidies, such as those supporting intensive agriculture or resource extraction, can be another way forward. Redirecting these funds toward biodiversity-friendly energy projects could pave the way for cleaner, more sustainable practices.

Engaging local communities

Involving local and indigenous communities in energy and biodiversity initiatives is another important step. These communities often have practices for managing ecosystems and offer valuable insights into sustainable development. At COP16, indigenous groups were granted a formal role in negotiations, a significant step toward equitable solutions.

The needs of the Global South are different from those of the Global North. By listening to local voices and aligning projects with their priorities, biodiversity and energy transitions can be addressed together.

Holistic approach

Discussions at COP16 highlighted the interdependence of biodiversity and energy transitions, underscoring the need for a synergetic approach. Through innovative projects, community collaboration, and policy reforms, the global community has a chance to tackle both crises simultaneously.