chatham house quiz
DESCRIPTION
Chatham house quiz. If Paris delivers a genuine global commitment …. Is it realistic to reduce emissions in line with a “likely” chance ofTRANSCRIPT
Chatham house quiz
If Paris delivers a genuine global commitment …
Is it realistic to reduce emissions in line with a “likely” chance of <2°C?
What’s the earliest date non-Annex 1 nations could peak emissions?
What’s the earliest date global emissions could peak?
What is the maximum annual reduction in carbon intensity i.e. the reduction in carbon emissions per unit of GDP?
Numerical context …
IPCC “likely” 2°C budget range is 630-1180GtCO2 for 2011-2100
Emissions from 2011 to the end of 2014 will be ~144GtCO2
Total CO2 from deforestation (with optimistic policy) ~ 130-200GtCO2
Emission growth 2000-2012 was just over 3% p.a. including an economic slowdown only second to the Great Depression
Paris 2015 mitigation focus is on post 2020 at best
By end of 2020, remaining 2°C budget range will be ~100 to 600GtCO2
That is ~ 2 to 12 years at 2020 emission levels
… and with even weak equity criteria, the implications for Annex 1 nations will be much more challenging still
University of ManchesterSept 2014
Kevin Anderson
web: kevinanderson.info twitter: @KevinClimate
The Ostrich or the Phoenix? ... cognitive dissonance or creativity in a changing climate
My headline conclusion:
Avoiding “dangerous climate change” (stabilisation at 2°C) remains a feasible goal of the international community
just
… with economic (oikonimia), but not financial (chrematisitc), benefits
Fredag in Stockholm: IPCC science report released
Offered neither surprise nor solace to our fossil-fuel hungry world
The science message for policy-makers, business leaders and civil society has changed very little during the last twenty years
Small adjustments and refinements have occurred – but this is a mature science
So what has changed?
An additional 200 billion tonnes of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere
since last report (AR4 2007)
Annual emissions ~65% higher than at time of the first report in 1990
Atmospheric CO2 levels higher than during past 800 thousand years
Yet we repeatedly recommit to:
… make our fair contribution to…
“To hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees
Celsius, and take action to meet this objective consistent
with science and on the basis of equity”
Copenhagen Accord, 2009
… to meet this objective,
we need radical and immediate reductions in energy demand
But surely…
we can deliver 2°C mitigation through low-carbon energy supply?
… in 2014, it’s all about timing!
reduction targets for 2050 dangerously misguide policy makers
temperature is about cumulative emissions / carbon budgets
for Annex 1 nations
there is insufficient carbon space for gas as a transition fuel
CCS emissions are too high (LCA levels of >80gCO2/kWh)
Thinking about this ‘graphically’
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
UN
Clim
ate
chan
ge p
anel
est
ablis
hed
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
UN
Clim
ate
chan
ge p
anel
est
ablis
hed
R
IO E
arth
Sum
mit
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
UN
Clim
ate
chan
ge p
anel
est
ablis
hed
R
IO E
arth
Sum
mit
R
oyal
Com
mis
sion
(60%
by
2050
)
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
UN
Clim
ate
chan
ge p
anel
est
ablis
hed
R
IO E
arth
Sum
mit
R
oyal
Com
mis
sion
(60%
by
2050
)
Cop
enha
gen
Acco
rd
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
UN
Clim
ate
chan
ge p
anel
est
ablis
hed
R
IO E
arth
Sum
mit
R
oyal
Com
mis
sion
(60%
by
2050
)
Cop
enha
gen
Acco
rd
Rio
+ 2
0 … despite economic downturn, emissions continue to rise 5% in 2010; 2-3% p.a. since.
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
UN
Clim
ate
chan
ge p
anel
est
ablis
hed
R
IO E
arth
Sum
mit
R
oyal
Com
mis
sion
(60%
by
2050
)
Cop
enha
gen
Acco
rd
Rio
+ 2
0 … so what of future emissions?
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1) Energy system design lives (lock-in)
Power stations Large scale infrastructures Built environment Aircraft & ships
30-100 years
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
Extrapolation of 3.5%, 3, 2, 1% … (i.e. globalisation + unconventional fossil fuel
& late transition to low carbon energy)
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
Extrapolation of 3.5%, 3, 2, 1% … (i.e. globalisation + unconventional fossil fuel
& late transition to low carbon energy)
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
c.f. highest IPCC’s emission scenarios
RCP8.5 is 2% p.a. growth from 2020
(i.e. 1.5% below pre-recession rate)
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
consider the UK (a leading nation on CC?)
Tax breaks for shale gas development
Chancellor proposes 30+ new gas powerstations
Highest investment ever in North Sea oil
Reopening of Scottish coal mines
Expanding aviation & more ports
Emission standards for cars watered down
Supporting Arctic exploration for hydrocarbons
Opened a consulate in Alberta (tar sands)
… but are such rising emissions realistic?
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
i.e. we’re set to emit …
between 2000 to 2050 >2500GtCO2
and for 2000 to 2100 ~5000+GtCO2
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
i.e. 4°C to 6°C by 2070-2100
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
Yet for a “likely” chance of <2°C we can emit only ~600 to 1200GtCO2 (AR5)
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
i.e. no emissions after ~2030 at the latest
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
and possibly as early as ~2022
So recent history supports the IEA view
… that the CO2 trend “is perfectly in line with a
temperature increase of 6 degrees Celsius, which would have devastating consequences for the planet.”
Fatih Birol - IEA chief economist
… but what about 2°C?
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
4°C to 6°C
“likely” chance of 2°C
Optimistically using the higher of the IPCC’s budget range …
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
Too early for new
low carbonsupply &
demand
Reduce Demand
Supply
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
But this is a global analysis
& demand
Reduce Demand
Supply
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GCP new data
YEAR
Carb
on d
ioxi
de fr
om fo
ssil
fuel
& ce
men
t (Gt
CO2y
r-1)
& demand
Reduce Demand
Supply
“To hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees
Celsius, and take action to meet this objective consistent with
science and on the basis of equity”
Assuming poorer (non-Annex 1) nations:
1. Collectively peak their emissions by 2025
2. Reduce thereafter at 6-8% p.a.
… then, for 2°C, wealthy (Annex 1) nations require:
At least 10% reduction in emissions year on year, i.e.
40% reduction by ~2018 (c.f. 1990)70% ~202490+% ~2030
i.e. RADICAL EMISSION REDUCTIONS
Why does orthodox analysis give such different results?
Probability of exceeding 2°C is much higher (60-80%)
– i.e. bigger carbon budgets (~2x)
Inequitable apportionment of global emissions to Annex 1
Machiavellian peaks (2010-2016, & before 2020 for China)
Emission reduction rate universally dictated by economists
Geoengineering is widespread in low carbon scenarios
EU
Why aren’t scientists whistle-blowing these fudges
1. We are collectively applying Thomas Moore’s maxim"Qui tacet consentiret": Silence gives consent
2. We are culpable as a research community of a ‘conspiracy of silence’,– we don’t agree with what’s going on but don’t want to bite the hand that feeds us
3. We are ignorant of some of the fundamental underpinnings for our research
4. We don’t care – and anyway flagging up these concerns would likely raise difficult questions about our own lifestyles
… what about a 4°C future? (i.e. a larger carbon budget and lower rates of mitigation)
If 2°C looks too difficult
What are potential 4°C impacts?
Global impacts: 4°C
+8°C
Europe
+6°C
China
+10-12°C
N. America
Hottest days
… add to heat-wave temps’
Global impacts: 4°C
Sea level rise80cm rise,
higher in low
latitudes
Global impacts: 4°C
Food crops… up to 40% reduction in
maize, wheat & rice yields in low latitudes.
There is a widespread view that 4°C is… Incompatible with an organised global community
Beyond ‘adaptation’
Devastating to eco-systems
Unlikely to be stable (‘tipping points)
… consequently …
4°C should be avoided at ‘all’ costs
Returning to 2°C … is it still a viable goal?
Hypothesis: yes
Equity a small group to make radical & early reductions
Technology demand side can deliver early & large reductions
Growth there are alternative measures of a good life
… just
Equity: Pareto’s 80:20 rule
80% of something relates to … 20% of those involved
~80% of emissions from ~20% of population
run this 3 times
~50% of emissions from ~1% of population
Or more realistically:
~40% to 60% from ~1% to 5%
who are the high-emitters?
Climate scientists OECD (& other) academics (GPs … etc?) Anyone who takes an annual flight or two …
2°C mitigation is principally a short-term challenge;
i.e. really now to 2025 - so is mostly about the few not the many
… it is a consumption and not a population issue!
Technology
A++ rated fridge uses ~85% less energy than an A rated
Efficient IC cars 85-100gCO2/km; UK fleet 168gCO2/km
(i.e. efficient petrol/diesel car uses 50% less fuel than the average)
Appliances typically have under 8 year replacement cycles
Growth: a misguided proxy?
Stern, CCC & others: ‘Mitigation of over 4% p.a. incompatible with economic growth’
but the economist’s economy has stalled!
self-regulated markets have failed to self regulate
£350 billion of QE has been squandered (c.f. retrofit)
We have an unprecedented opportunity to think differently
Welfare (health, life expectancy)
Employment/income
Equity
Literacy rates
Safety (low crime)
Growth makes the heterogeneous homogeneous in itself it has no meaningful value
Growth subsumes real social goods, including:
… low carbon energy supply can’t be built in time for 2°C, but…
Radical reductions in energy demand/emissions in a decade are possible
Extending the window for transitioning to low carbon energy supply
A Radical Plan for 2°C
A Radical Plan – 2 phases
1. Radical reductions in energy demand from now to ~2030
2. Marshall plan build programme of low-carbon energy supply
… with 100% penetration by 2030-40
We must escape the shackles of a twentieth century mind-set if we are ever to resolve twenty-first century challenges
This will demand leadership, courage, innovative thinking, engaged teams & difficult choices
Ultimately …
“at every level the greatest obstacle to transforming the world is that we lack the clarity and imagination to conceive that it could be different.”
Robert Unger
and a message of hope to finish …
Thank you
University of ManchesterSept 2014
Kevin Anderson
web: kevinanderson.info
twitter: @KevinClimate