CIAO DATE: 11/99

Powering Asia: Is Gas the Answer?

Loren Cox, Moderator and Rapporteur
John A. Riggs, Program Director

Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy
14th Annual Pacific Rim Workshop
November 1–November 4, 1997
Bandar Seri Begawan, Negara Brunei Darussalam

The Aspen Institute

 

Table of Contents

1. Foreword

2. Moderator’s Report

3. Agenda

4. Participants

5. The Aspen Institute: Program on Energy, The Environment and the Economy

 

1. Foreword

In February, 1983, a group of experts from government, industry, and academia in ten countries met in Punalu’u on the Big Island of Hawaii for a Workshop on Energy Fuels Trade on the Pacific Rim. The richness of the dialogue and the value of the shared information proved to be so fruitful and satisfying to the participants that the convener, the Energy Program of the Aspen Institute, established the Pacific Rim Energy Workshops, a series of annual meetings.

In subsequent years, workshops were held in six other countries as well as additional locations in the United States, and participation was broadened to include representatives of several additional Asian nations. As the availability of energy information increased during these years, the discussions in the workshops became progressively deeper and more policy oriented.

The objective of the workshop, as with all Aspen Institute policy programs, is, ultimately, to improve the quality of leadership and policy formulation. To achieve this goal, a group of participants, diverse in nationality, employment, and academic training, come together to analyze energy problems and solutions in an atmosphere that fosters the free exchange of opinions and information.

At the invitation of the Government of Brunei Darussalam, the 14th Pacific Rim Energy Workshop was held November 1–4, 1997, in Bandar Seri Begawan. Reflecting the current interest in developing additional electricity capacity throughout Asia and the recent improvements in gas turbine technology, the workshop took as its theme, Powering Asia: Is Gas the Answer? More broadly, the participants explored a range of factors affecting fuel choice in new power plants.

The workshop was ably chaired by Loren C. Cox, Associate Director of the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research. His broad knowledge of energy issues and of developments in specific Pacific Rim countries allowed him to focus the discussion on key points and to elicit relevant information from the wide variety of participants. His firm direction, combined with good humor and an affable manner, resulted in a meeting that was efficient, participatory, and enjoyable. His innumerable contributions to the planning of the meeting helped ensure its success, and in this report he skillfully extracted the major themes from a wealth of valuable presentations and discussions.

To encourage candor and open discussion, the workshop was conducted under a not–for–attribution rule, with no quotation or identification of participants’ views without their express permission. In addition, the participants were not asked to reach specific conclusions nor to agree on policy recommendations. The Moderator’s report that follows thus represents only his attempt to capture the major points of the discussion.

A report on the workshop would not be complete without recognizing gratefully the support of the Bruneian Government and its Ministry of Development. By their initial enthusiasm and the high–level attention given to the meeting, they helped ensure a successful outcome. The graciousness of Pengiran Indera Wijaya Pengiran Dr. Haji Ismail Bin Pengiran Haji Damit, Minister of Development and Permanent Secretary Dato Paduka Haji Othman Bin Haji Yaakub in hosting dinners for the participants was appreciated by all who attended. Special thanks also go to the Ministry staff, and especially Dayangku Norliha, for the advance planning and attention to details that contributed to the pleasure and efficiency of the meeting.

The Aspen Institute also gratefully acknowledges those whose financial support made the workshop possible. Without the support of Brunei Shell Petroleum, who generously underwrote the hotel and meal costs for the workshop, the meeting would not have been possible. In addition, a grant from Exxon Gas International made it possible to provide transportation to the meeting for some Asian participants.

John A. Riggs, Director
Program on Energy, the Environment
and the Economy

 

2.  Moderator’s Summary Report

The 14th Aspen PacRim Energy Workshop directed attention to continued strong prospects for growth in electric demand, and thus increased need for major additions to generation capacity. In particular, the meeting focused on the potential role of natural gas/LNG in the fuel mix for new generation capacity in the region. This Moderator’s summary represents my views only in attempting to capture key points of the discussion; any errors or distortions are mine alone.

The presentations and discussions affirmed that there would be continued strong growth in electric demand in all counties of the region, and that this growth rate would be higher than other regions of the world. However, it was noted that the recent turmoil in financial markets likely will have an impact on the rate of economic growth in the Asia region, and this impact would lower (at least temporarily) the rate of increase in electricity demand in most countries in the region. It was also noted that electric demand elasticities are higher than energy/GDP relationships, so that electric demand may be less affected by the financial disruptions. In addition, new electric hook–ups bring a higher rate of demand than any other factor, and several Asian countries have large populations currently without electricity supply. As these populations are brought into service, consumption could increase rather sharply, depending, of course, on supply availability.

Further, financial uncertainties resulting from fluctuating exchange rates, weakness in banking sectors, policy changes, and other factors will likely slow the rate of external investment flows into power generation projects. Several externally financed IPP project delays, deferrals and even cancellations have been reported, and it is expected that more will likely follow. These project cancellations and deferrals, as well as slowed economic growth, will affect fuel supply arrangements for new electric generation capacity, perhaps even including some LNG export arrangements.

Competition among fuels for new electric generation remains robust, with coal, natural gas, fuel oil, crude oil, LPGs, Orimulsion and nuclear (in at least some counties) all remaining potentially viable choices. It was also noted that existing generation plants will probably continue to utilize the fuels for which they were originally designed and built. Thus, existing installed capacity for electric generation will remain in place for another 20 or more years, so new fuel choices largely will be limited to facilities constructed from this point forward.

There also was a general agreement that domestic energy sources tend to be favored in fuel selection for both price and supply security reasons, and that this is a tendency that will remain for the foreseeable future. In the absence of domestic energy resources, imports generally will be utilized on the basis of lowest cost, price stability and supply security considerations. In some cases, environmental considerations will bias imported fuel choice, but not at any cost.

Because energy resource endowments vary widely by country, imports of energy will remain a prominent feature of this region. In assessing the competitive differences among imported fuels, it appeared that gas was ranked high in preference for all countries— if the price were competitive with other fuel and technology alternatives. Continued technical progress and falling prices appear to have made natural gas/combined cycle plants increasingly competitive for electric generation— and for IPP projects in particular. Natural gas also has benefits in promoting better air quality, reinforcing the preference for this fuel when natural gas is available at a competitive price.

Because natural gas resources are less available in a number of countries with rapidly growing electric demand (China and Thailand particularly —and India, a potential competitor for exported gas), imports are a requirement. Due to distance from natural gas resources, gas must be sent either by LNG or very long pipelines. The cost of import facilities for LNG and for long distance pipelines must be added to the cost of the gas itself, and the resulting price of delivered gas has slowed penetration beyond wealthy east Asian economies despite a preference for this fuel. Again, the economic slowdown due to currency crises will raise barriers to LNG imports at current price levels. Because LNG export prices have been denominated in U.S. dollars, they have become more expensive to potential importers in the region. Such exchange rate movements likely will have to be absorbed by exporters if there is to be substantial expansion of LNG trade —either to existing importers, and certainly to new import markets.

Coal has remained a vigorous competitor in new electric generation, to the surprise of many. Domestic coal resources receive particular attention in those cases where ample reserves are available, and lost fuel costs are a powerful incentive for use in new electric capacity. The low fuel cost of coal is partially offset by higher capital costs and longer lead times in building new generators, and environmental controls add further costs to such facilities. However, stable costs and security of supply concerns help to keep coal–fired generation in active consideration. Even imported coal remains a strong competitor, since world coal prices have been in a stable–to–declining path. International coal markets are based on large reserves in several countries, so coal imports receive high marks for supply security.

One of the reasons that coal remains competitive with natural gas is the high cost of facilities to move gas to potential consuming countries. Over the past 20 years, LNG export projects have been built in several countries (Abu Dhabi, Alaska/U.S., Australia, Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia) for sales in Japan, Republic of Korea and Taiwan. The majority of output from these projects have gone to Japan (80+%), with Korea and Taiwan taking up the remainder. LNG import growth has greatly decreased in Japan, but is stronger in Korea and Taiwan (though from much lower bases). All three of these countries have long–established LNG receiving terminals, storage and regasification facilities, so that incremental imports within existing facility capacity limits make such imports competitive to other imported fuels. LNG import prices for these countries are linked to a crude oil price formula, which has brought considerable price volatility over the past 20 years —with the price going well above imported coal during the period.

The discussion included a review of technology advancements that seem to hold promise for lowering the cost of long distance gas pipelines. Though shallow subsea pipes lead the cost reductions, similar advances may help the economics of land–based systems. Because pipeline gas imports do not entail the cost of LNG liquefaction, transport and receiving facilities, gas supplies within 3,000 kilometers, or even more, appear to offer some competition to LNG imports. Pipeline distances of these magnitudes may make available major reserves from within the region as well as from the FSU and Russia.

While the current three LNG importers have built extensive transmission and distribution systems, other potential importers must also build these facilities in order to receive either LNG or pipeline deliveries. The need for capital for both import facilities as well as internal distribution have some negative impact on future expansion of natural gas use in the region.

In addition, facilities to use natural gas for electric generation also must confront electricity markets which have been heavily regulated, and which have often been subjected to direct and cross subsidies to various classes of customers. To get a return on the capital invested in an electric plant, it is crucial that retail electric markets reflect open market realities. Some countries in the region have freed electricity prices from price controls, and this has enhanced prospects for IPP activities. Other countries have retained general price controls, but have permitted power purchase contracts from new IPPS which reflect open market conditions. Though some concern was expressed about the risk of contract abrogation in the latter case, IPP investors care mainly about the price they receive for electricity generated and sold by the IPP, so are relatively indifferent to full market deregulation. Of course, these same barriers are present for generation by any fuel, but the availability of financing does put a premium on a firm and competitive fuel supply source in order to secure sufficient funds for the power generation facility itself.

Note was taken of recent IPP activities where a firm, long–term fuel contract was crucial to total project financing, and failure to have such in hand was a major barrier to obtaining such financing. The discussion also indicated that for IPP projects, first cost is a crucial issue in obtaining both project approval and financing. While coal–fired generation has higher capital costs, most countries in the region have infrastructure for coal delivery/distribution. In those cases where natural gas infrastructure is not yet developed, ipp projects slated to use natural gas must either bear part of these costs up front or be able to demonstrate that delivery facilities will be available. Where natural gas is not currently available, the need for such a requirement can be a barrier to gas use. This is a classic chicken–and–egg problem, and one which potential exporters must be prepared to help solve if new natural gas/LNG markets are to be expanded. Other innovations in natural gas disposition were also discussed, notably several gas–to–middle distillates, gas–to–methanol and even gas–by–wire (gas–fired generation at the gas field, with electricity exported by high voltage —DC— transmission). It did appear, however, that the latter idea was of limited application, and would be in competition with pipeline gas exports. In all three cases, the appeal of such technologies would be for countries with large and remote gas reserves, and offered a way for them to realize economic value. It is less clear that countries interested in gas imports would find such technologies of great interest —except where the gas application in these countries could be substituted less expensively by the technology output.

The issue of government regulation of energy markets remains a key point in how quickly external capital may be made available for projects. While it is clear that all countries in the region are moving at some pace toward markets that are open to world prices, it is apparent that restrictions on open markets which still exist are limiting the rate of external funds for investment in the power and gas distribution sectors. In addition, recent turmoil in exchange rates and financial institutions in the region will be a further disincentive to many potential investors. Clear and consistent rules on such matters as currency repatriation, tax regimes, contract compliance, and exchange rate protection are required to limit the risk perceived by external investors; these are key items irrespective of the fuel choice issue. Clear steps to address such market imperfections will be important in encouraging external investment in key infrastructure projects in the region.

In addition to power generation, the PacRim region also faces significant challenges with respect to the oil market. Rapid growth in transport fuels has strained current regional refining capacity, and increasing imports of such products appear likely unless major refinery upgrading and capacity additions are undertaken. The region also is growing increasingly short of local production, and rapidly increasing reliance on Middle Eastern oil supplies will raise import costs for both products and crude oil. These costs, taken together with capital needed for refinery expansion and upgrading, will certainly increase financing competition for the electric generation sector. While external capital sources are readily available, the economic turmoil mentioned earlier will give pause to such investors. As a result, there will be growing competition for domestic funds for all required investments, with inflationary pressure on the economies.

The discussions found general agreement that opening energy markets will have beneficial results on economies in the region, especially in view of the high capital requirements to expand energy infrastructure —especially in the electric utility and natural gas sectors. Though the transition from strong government control, subsidies, and restrictions on investments and ownership from abroad may be complicated, the resulting efficiencies and increased economic growth are well worth the effort.

Though not identified as a separate item on the program, environmental matters recurred throughout the discussions. Such matters as air quality are increasingly important in urban areas, and are affecting fuel choice (or coal clean–up) for electric generation. Similarly, vehicle fuel standards are changing rapidly to minimize emissions from mobile sources. New and renewable energies remain of interest, though applications of such technologies as photovoltaics at the present seem limited to remote locations where the higher cost is competitive with extending electricity transmission lines. Wind power economics are increasingly competitive, but also limited to sites of favorable wind, transmission and distribution considerations. In general, it was agreed that while several renewable technologies may be of importance in the future, a substantial contribution was possibly several decades away.

Discussion of possible greenhouse gas emission restrictions emerging from the Kyoto meetings was limited, but most agreed that if restrictions were agreed to, it would have an impact on interfuel competition —certainly for new facilities, but less likely for existing ones. Which countries agreed to such restrictions also would make a difference. It was pointed out that newly industrializing countries considered threats from such a potential problem to be of little importance to them, and that there would be little likelihood of voluntary compliance with any policies arising from Kyoto. Thus, unless these countries agreed to any proposals in Kyoto, it was less likely that interfuel competition would be altered in a significant way for them. While several participants felt strongly that there was inadequate scientific data to support the assertion of a human impact on global temperatures, others felt there was a basis for concern, and still others thought carbon–limiting policies were possible in any event —at least by the industrial countries.

In summary, the PacRim discussions suggested that gas does have a major role to play in the electric generation sector (and in other sectors in some counties as well). However, the competition will remain vigorous from other fuels, especially coal in new, large generation facilities. Due to design factors, it is unlikely that further fuel switching will occur in existing power plants, so new locations will be the battleground in fuel selection. It is likely that LNG exports will remain attractive in existing markets which have a fully developed infrastructure, but price swings as a result of price linkages to oil imports remains a problem. Infrastructure costs in new markets will require very competitive pricing for LNG to succeed in opening such opportunities. Not only is coal (especially domestic, but also imports) a contender in such markets, but the economics of long distance pipelines is making such transportation increasingly attractive. There are no obvious winners among fuels in such competitive interfuel markets, and each new facility will be strongly contested.

 

3.  Workshop Agenda

• Saturday, November 1
  • Welcoming reception and dinner, Centrepoint Hotel
     

• Sunday, November 2
  • Session I — Fuel Choice for Electric Generation in Asia
    • “A Snapshot of Electricity Demand in Southeast and East Asia to 2010” Tsutomu Toichi, Director, Japan Institute of Energy Economics

    • “Fuel Choice for Independent Power Projects” George V. Neill, Division Head and CEO, Black & Veatch Asia

    • Power Division.

    • “LNG for Power Development,” Dr. Ian Torrens, Head, International Development, Shell International Gas Ltd.

    • “Long–distance Gas Pipelines vs. LNG” Mark Schwartz, Exxon Company International, Gas Division
       

  • Session II — Other Fuel Markets
    • Natural Gas Outside Electric Generation Markets
      • “Propects for Increased Interconnection” Donna Bobbish, U.S. Department of Energy

      • “Prospects of Natural Gas and LNG in Asia Pacific” Shigeru Muraki, Gas Resources Department, Tokyo Natural Gas Company

    • Coal
      • “Using Coal in Independent Power Projects” Ian Coddington, Coddington International Pty. Ltd.

    • Oil
      • “Oil Demand: Big and Getting Bigger” Tilak K. Doshi, ARCO, Corporate Planning
         

• Monday, November 3
  • Country–by–country discussions (with discussion starter)
    • Australia (Michael Schwager)

    • Brunei (John Darley)

    • China (Dai Lin)

    • Indonesia (Harijono Djojodihardjo)

    • Japan (Tsutomo Toichi)

    • Malaysia (Ungku Ainon Ungku Tahir)

    • Mexico (Juan Eibenschutz)

    • Philippines (Rufino Bomasang)

    • Taiwan (Jui–hsiang Yao)

    • United States (Donna Bobbish)
       

• Tuesday, November 4
  • Concluding discussion

 

Participants

• Ernesto M. Aboitiz
  Former Chairman
  National Power Commission
  Aboitiz & Company, Inc.
  P.O. Box 65
  Cebu City, Philippines

• Haji Hussin Bin Ahmad
  Public Affairs Advisor
  Brunei Shell Petroleum Company
  36/37 Bangunan Maya Puri
  Jalan Sultan
  Bandar Seri Begawan 2085
  Negara Brunei Darussalam
  

• Phillip J. Anderson
  Consultant
  Poten & Partners, Inc.
  885 Third Circle
  New York, NY 10022–4875
  

• Haji Damit Bin Haji Abu Bakar
  Jurutera Damit Beca
  Negara Brunei Darussalam
  

• Donna Bobbish
  Senior Director
  Domestic & International Regulatory Policy
  Office of Policy & International Affairs
  U.S. Department of Energy
  Washington, DC 20585

• Rufino Bomasang
  President & CEO
  PNOC Exploration and Production Corporation
  PNPC Complex
  Merritt Road
  Fort Bonifacio
  Metro Manila, Philippines

• Michael Clegg
  Cambridge Energy Research Associates
  31 Prince Consort Dr.
  Ascot, Berkshire SL5 8AW
  United Kingdom

• Ian Coddington
  Managing Director
  Coddington International Pty, Ltd.
  P.O. Box 578
  Milson Point NSW 2061
  Australia

• Loren C. Cox (Moderator)
  Associate Director
  MIT Center for Energy & Environmental Policy Research
  350 Belaire Court
  Punta Gorda, FL 33950

• Ms. Dai Lin
  Assistant Professor
  Energy Research Institute
  Shahe Changping County
  Beijing 102206
  People’s Republic of China

• John Charles Darley
  Managing Director
  Brunei Shell Petroleum Company
  Seria 7082
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Haji Awang Bin Haji Md Daud
  Cooper MacDonald Daud
  Sendirian Berhad
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Gregor Dixon
  President and Managing Director
  Unocal Borneo Utara, Ltd.
  302B, 3rd Flor
  Wisma Jaya
  Jalan Pemancha
  Bandar Seri Begawan 1999
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Prof. Dr. Ir. Harijono Djojodihardjo
  Deputy Chairman for Technological Development
  Agency for the Assessment & Application of Technology
  BPPT II Building
  22nd floor
  Jl. M.H. Thamrin No. 8
  Jakarta, Indonesia

• Tilak K. Doshi
  Director
  Economic & Industrial Analysis Atlantic Richfield Company
  515 S. Flower Street, #4759
  Los Angeles, CA 90091

• Juan Eibenschutz
  Subdirector de Distribucion Y Comercializacion
  Luz Y Fuerza Del Centro
  Melchor Ocampo 171–8
  11379 Mexico, D.F.

• Robert Foster
  Bob Foster Consultancy
  30A Vautier Street
  Elwood,Victoria 3184
  Australia

• Steven Hall
  Vice President
  Mobil Eastern Exploration & Development, Inc.
  3 Killiney Rd.
  #10–00 Winsland House
  Singapore 239519

• Haji Abd Aziz Bin Haji Abd Hamid
  Deputy Director of Electrical Department
  Ministry of Development
  Negara Brunei Darussalam
  

• Hjh Suraya Bte Dato Haji Abd Hamid
  Director
  Integrated Environmental Consultants
  Unit 8, Block H, 1st Floor
  Abdul Razak Complex
  Gadong 3180
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Robert Alan Harrison
  Technical Director
  Jasra International Petroleum
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Chua Huang Huat
  M&E Director
  Petar Perunding
  Unit 4, Block E, 1st Floor
  Abdul Razak Complex
  Gadong 3180
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• John F. Imle, Jr.
  President
  Unocal Corporation
  Level 21 Tower 2
  MNI Twins
  11 Jalan Penang 50450
  Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  

• Haji Zakaria Bin Haji Abd Latif
  Director
  Electrical Department
  Ministry of Development
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Pablo Malixi
  Project Director
  Leythe Geothermal Project
  Energy Development Corporation
  PNPC Complex
  Merritt Road
  Makati City, Philippines

• Shigeru Muraki
  Chief Manager
  Research & Project Development
  Gas Resources Department
  Tokyo Gas Company, Ltd.
  1–2–1 Hagoromo–Cho
  Naka–ku Yokohama–Shi
  231 Japan

• George V. Neill
  Chief Executive Officer
  Black & Veatch
  Asia Power Division
  12th floor, Rasa Tower
  555 Phaholyothin Rd.
  Ladyao, Chatuchak
  Bangkok 10900 Thailand

• Chris Newton
  Commercial Manager
  JASRA–FCE Joint Venture
  Fletcher Challenge Energy Borneo, Ltd. 309A. 3rd Flr. Wisma Jaya
  Jim Pemancha
  Bandar Seri Begawan 2085
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Shotaru Okawara
  Assistant Manager
  Fuel Planning Group
  Fuel Department
  Tokyo Electric Power Company, Inc.
  1–3, Uchisaiwai–cho, 1 Chome
  Chiyoda–ku, Tokyo, 100 Japan
  

• Hj Md Jamil Bin Hj Salleh
  Head – Engineering Front
  Brunei Shell Petroleum Co.
  Jalan Utara, Seria 7082
  Negara Brunei Darussalam
  

• Michael Schwager
  Assistant Manager
  APEC Section — Energy Division
  Australian Department of Primary Industries & Energy
  GPO Box 858
  Canberra ACT 2601
  Australia

• Mark Schwartz
  Advisor
  Exxon Company International
  200 Park Ave.
  Florum Park, NJ 07932
  

• Mr. Nobuhito Sekine
  General Manager
  Brunei Liaison Office
  Mitsubishi Corporation
  Unit 501–506, 5th Floor
  Jalan Sultan Complex
  Bandar Seri Begewan 085
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Alan R. Smith
  Regional Director — Far East
  Pennzoil Exploration & Production Company
  PO Box 2967
  Houston, TX 77252–2967

• Tsutomu Toichi
  Director
  Institute of Energy Economics
  Shuwa Kamiyacho Bldg. 3–13
  Toranomon 4– Chome, Minato–ku
  Tokyo 105, Japan

• Dr. Ian Torrens
  Head — International Development
  Shell International Gas, Ltd.
  Shell Centre
  London SE1 7NA
  United Kingdom

• Ms. Ungku Ainon Ungku Tahir
  Senior Manager
  Petroleum Nasional Berhad
  31st Floor Menara Dayabumi
  Jalan Sultan Hishamuddin
  50778 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  

• Svein Utskot
  Venture Manager — Far East
  Exxon Exploration Company
  233 Benmar
  Houston, TX 77060

• William R. Wells
  Assistant General Counsel
  Exxon Exploration Company
  P.O. Box 4778
  Houston, TX 77210

• Haji Hamdillah Bin Haji Abd Wahab
  OPD Production Superintendent
  Brunei Shell Petroleum Company
  Negara Brunei Daurussalam

• Mr. Abd. Shawal Bin Yaman
  Researcher–Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre
  The Institute of Energy Economics
  Shuwa Kamiyacho Building
  4–3–13 Toranomon, Minato–ku
  Tokyo 105 Japan

• Jui–hsiang Yao
  Chief, Energy Economics Section
  Energy Commission
  Ministry of Economic Affairs
  13th Fl./No. 2
  Fu–Hsing North Rd.
  Taipei, Taiwan

• William Voon
  Head of Electrical Engineering
  Baharuddin & Associates Consulting Engineers
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Haji Nordin Bin Haji Md Yussof
  Jurutera Tempatan
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

• Salleh–Bostaman Bh Zainal–Abidin
  Maintenance Superintendent
  Brunei Shell Petroleum Company
  Seria 7082
  Negara Brunei Darussalam

 

5.  Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy

The mission of The Aspen Institute is to enhance the quality of leadership through informed dialogue about the timeless ideas and values of the world’s great cultures and traditions as they relate to the foremost challenges facing societies, organizations, and individuals. The Seminar Programs enable leaders to draw on these values to enrich their understanding of contemporary issues. The Policy Programs frame the choices that democratic societies face in terms of the enduring ideas and values derived from those traditions.

The Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy, one of the Institute’s policy programs, provides neutral ground for dialogue among diverse participants from the energy industry, government, environmental and other public interest groups, research institutions, the media, and elsewhere. Meetings in a non–adversarial setting encourage positive, candid interaction and seek areas of consensus or improved mutual understanding.

The annual Energy Policy Forum is the flagship of the Program. Now in its 21st year, its high level participation, lively discussion, and congenial setting cause some of the most influential leaders in the energy sector to return again and again to grapple with timely topics facing energy policy makers. Session chairs and speakers serve only as discussion starters; participants with different perspectives contribute to and enrich the dialogue, with the goal of enhanced understanding and, where possible, consensus on policy recommendations.

The Pacific Rim Series consists of annual workshops for experts from industry, government, and other institutions to discuss Asian energy issues. The meeting in Brunei was the 15th since the inception of the series.

The Central and Eastern European Series begun in Prague in 1995 and continued with the Krakow meeting in 1997, convenes diverse participants from the newly democratic states of the region and a few Western experts for workshops on energy problems and opportunities.

The Series on the Environment in the 21st Century is a continuing dialogue among business, environmental, and government leaders about developing a new, less prescriptive, and more effective environmental protection system for the United States. The Series recently issued a report, The Alternative Path: A Cleaner, Cheaper Way to Protect and Enhance the Environment, outlining a proposal to give companies or other regulated entities the flexibility to tailor a potentially less costly environmental management plan if the plan is developed in an open, consensus–based stakeholder process and will ensure the attainment of better environmental performance. The current phase of the Series is examining material resources and natural systems, and the economics drivers that affect their use and disposition.

Representatives of corporations and financial institutions, along with a small number of government, NGO, and academic representatives, are meeting periodically in New York in the Financial Series: Valuing the Environment. They are discussing ways for corporations to communicate the strategic value of their environmental behavior ad for financial markets to recognize, measure, and reward improved environmental management.

John A. Riggs is Director of The Aspen Institute’s Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy. Prior to joining the Institute he was Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy in the U.S. Department of Energy and staff director of the Energy and Power Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives. He has also taught energy and environmental policy at the University of Pennsylvania.

Susan OMalley Wade is Senior Associate at the Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy. With specialties in natural resources management and planning and environmental dispute resolution, she has worked as an environmental consultant in the private sector, with the California Environmental Protection Agency, and on the staff of a U.S. House of Representatives Committee.