solving the climate-energy problem

Solving the Climate-Energy Problem:Germany, Europe and the World

John Schellnhuber, Potsdam Institute, Oxford University, Tyndall Centre

Ottmar Edenhofer, Potsdam Institute

Sustaining the WorldBrandenburg‘s Research Contributions

3 October 2006, London

0054Tipping Points in the Earth System

Volume of GIS: 2.8 x 1015 m3

Time-scale 1000 years ⇒ 2.8 x 1012 m3/yr ≈ 0.1 Sv

Accelerated Greenland Melt-Down

Current volume loss: 2.2 x 1011 m3/yr ≈ 0.007 SvHas doubled over past decade

Tibetan Plateau

Projected Amazon Die-Back Drought of 2005

0008

Arabian Sea

Southwesterly Summer Monsoon

Northeasterly Winter Monsoon

Image: WJ Schmitz, WHOI

Worst Case Scenario for Monsoon Development

Roller-Coaster Trajectory

Zickfeld et al. 2005, GRL 32, 15707 (see also Ball 2005, Nature, August 15th)

Wet Regime Bi-stability

Dry Regime

The Oceans Turn Sour

One third of all anthropogenic CO2 goes into the oceans

Acidification by CO2 endangers oceans’ organisms

Riebesell et al. 2000

0055Teleconnections and Feedbacks

ENSOTriggering

IndianMonsoon

Transformation

Bodele DustSupply Change?

Bistability ofSaharan

Vegetation

Bistability /Collapse ofAmazonian

Forest?

ReducedPerformance

of MarineCarbon Pump

TibetanAlbedo Change?

ertzrtzertzertzetzertztzetrtzerztetzTeleconnections and Feedbacks

Atlantic DeepWater Formation

Southern Ocean Upwelling /Circumpolar Deep Water Formation

Instability of West AntarcticIce Sheet?

Instabilityof Methane

Clathrates

Instability ofGreenland Ice Sheet?

ENSOTriggeringBodele Dust

Supply Change?


Vegetation


Forest?

ReducedPerformance



IndianMonsoon

Transformation


Vegetation

IndianMonsoon

Transformation


Forest?


Vegetation




ReducedPerformance



ReducedPerformance




ENSOTriggering




ENSOTriggering




Runaway Greenhouse Dynamics?

AnthropogenicGreenhouse Gas

Emissions

Energy Poverty Map(Electricity Consumption, kWh per Capita, 2003)

Mitigation Gap for the 2° C Target

Models in the IMCP

Computational general equilibrium models (CGE)

IMACLIM-R

Static equilibrium + recursive dynamics

Simulation modelsE3MG

Initial value problems

Energy system modelsMESSAGE-MACROGET-LFLDNE21+

Cost minimization

Optimal growth modelsENTICE-BR FEEM-RICEDEMETER-1CCSAIM/Dynamic-GlobalMIND 1.1

Welfare maximization

Bottom UpTop DownCalculus

Technological detail

Department of Global Change & Social Systems

Sour

ce: E

denh

ofer

, Les

sman

n e

t al.

2006

Mitigation Costs with Induced Technological Change

„Some models suggest there would be no cost; others that global output could be as much as 5 % lower by the end of the century than if there were no attempt to control emissions. But most estimates are at the low end – below 1 %. The technological and economic aspects of problem are, thus, not quite challenging as many imagine. The real difficulty is political. Climate change is one of the hardest problems the world have ever faced…“

The Economist September 9th 2006, p. 9

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 2 3 4 5 6

Temperature

in %

GD

P

Source: OECD (2003) and Kemfert (2004)

Economic Damages in % of GDP

Temperature Increase

Nordhaus

NaturalScientists

Kemfert (high)

Environmental Scientists

Tol

SocialScientists

Kemfert (low)

Results for Nordhaus / Boyer damage fct.

Losses BAU: GWP - 0.84% / 8.5% (2175-2195)

Losses CBA: GWP - 0.8% / 1.8% (2050) ; Cons. - 1.2% / 3.3%(2050)

An Overview of Geo-Engineering Options(here: including Carbon Management)

Captured CO2 and Total CO2Emissions

Sour

ce: E

denh

ofer

, Les

sman

n et

al.

2006

Source: Obersteiner, M., Azar, C., Möllersten, K., Riahi, K. (2002): Biomass Energy, Carbon Removal and Permanent Sequestration – A ‚Real Option‘ for Managing Climate Risk, IIASA Interim Report IR-02-042

The carbon cycle of bioenergywith carbon capture and sequestration

Berndes et al., Biomass and Bioenergy 25 (2003)

Biomass energy supply potential(A synthesis of existing studies)

Stabilization of

GHG concentration

at 450 ppm in

2100 will require

~400 EJ biomass

energy

Area requirement for 400 EJ biomass energy(Back-of-the-envelope calculations with three single crops)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Maize Sugar cane Poplar

Prim

ary

ener

gy y

ield

(GJ

per

ha)

High potential for carbon plantations and biofuels in Former Soviet Union and Eastern Asia (Schaeffer et al. (2006): Climate impacts of carbon and biomass plantations, GBC).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Maize Sugar cane Poplar

Mill

ion

sqkm

Area required for 400 EJ (million sqkm) Current area

1.40.2

Total forest

Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production

Haberl et al. (2006)

Biofuel Projections for 2100: 400 EJ/yr = 7-9 GtC/yr>50% of current total HANPP

Natural (GtC/yr)ActualHuman alterationHuman harvestHuman firesTotal HANPP

Backflows

100%90%10%11%

2%23%

2%

= 270 EJ/yr(caloric) (incl. 35-55 EJ/yrbiofuels)

65.559.2

6.37.21.1

14.7

1.5

Comparative advantagesand trade barriers in

bio-ethanol production

Henke, IfW 2005

Current production costs for bio-ethanol

Import tariffs on ethanol

Responsibility, Innovation and Partnership

• Low Stabilisation Target: 450 ppm

• Innovation Induced by Climate Policy

• Closing the Gap between North and South

Proposal for the German Twin Presidency

• Targets and time tables for a Kyoto Plus regime

• Extension of ETS to a global "Coalition of the Willing"

• "Technology Protocol" for Renewables

• Fair competition on the European electricity market, setup of modern and efficient network structures

• Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy

• Pilot projects for coupling bioenergy production with CCS

• Climate-energy partnerships with India, Mexico and South Africa

• National plan for adaptation to climate change

solving the climate-energy problem

Documents