Transcript Science, Politics and Action by Dr Sharachchandra Lele

Climate Change &
Bangalore:
Science, Politics and Action
Sharachchandra Lele
Env & Dev group
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the
Environment
Outline 1: Science
• how climate works and role of GHGs
• historical temperatures and
evidences of change
• Projections
• Likely impacts
Earth’s Energy Balance
Model 1:  /4 =  T4.  = 1368 W/m2  T= 279K
Model 2: (1-a)  /4 =  T4.
a = 0.31  T= 254K.
(Adding an albedo is better science but gives a worse result.)
Actual Te = 288K. Missing: An atmosphere with a
greenhouse effect (responsible for 34K of warming).
Greenhouse Gases (GHG)
• Carbon Dioxide & Water Vapour
• Methane, ozone, nitrous oxide,
chlorofluourocarbons (CFC)
Note
• Greenhouse gases make life on Earth
possible, but too much is bad
Differences in GHGs
• Different effectiveness of warming
– Depends on lifetime in atmosphere
– Efficiency of molecule
• Described by global warming potential
(GWP)
• Different contributions
• CO2 around 60%~80% of historical
warming
Evidence of CC
Mauna Loa CO2 data, 1958-2004
Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/mlo145e_thrudc04.pdf
Temperature Rise
Figure SPM.3
Temperature, CO2, and methane
track each other
CO2,CH4 and estimated
global temperature
(Antarctic ΔT/2
in ice core era)
0 = 1880-1899 mean.
Source: Hansen, Clim.
Change, 68, 269, 2005.
Projections
IEA Projection for World Primary
Energy Demand
18 000
16 000
14 000
Oil
Mtoe
12 000
10 000
8 000
Gas
6 000
Coal
4 000
2 000
0
1970
1971
Other renewables
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
Nuclear
Hydro
2030
Oil and gas together account for more than 60% of the growth in energy demand
between now and 2030 in the Reference Scenario
World Energy-Related CO2
Emissions
20 000
Mt of CO2
16 000
12 000
8 000
4 000
0
1970
OECD
1980
1990
2000
Transition economies
2010
2020
2030
Developing countries
Global emissions grow 50% between now and 2030, and
developing countries’ emissions will overtake OECD’s in the 2020s
Energy-Related CO2 Emissions
2030
2003
India
4%
Other
11%
MENA
6%
India
6%
Other
16%
MENA
8%
China
16%
China
19%
Transition
economies
11%
OECD
52%
24 Gt
Transition
economies
OECD
42%
9%
37 Gt
Global emissions grow by just over half between 2003 & 2030, with the
bulk of the increase coming from developing countries
Predictions
Multi-model averages and assessed ranges
for surface warming
Continued emissions
will lead to further
warming of
1.8ºC to 4ºC over
the 21st century,
depending on
different scenarios
IPCC
Impacts (Global)
• Average temperature rise (old focus)
• Increased frequency of extreme
evenets (more cyclones, more
droughts)
• Melting of polar ice
• Stopping of gulf stream (ice age in
Europe)
• Sea level rise, coastal inundation
Impacts (India)
• NOTE: we know very little of the details
• Melting of Himalayan ice stocks, and
permafrost in Tibet>>changes in river
flows
• More monsoon failures, or extreme events
in an already monsoonal climate
• Collapse of monsoon system?
• Increased ET >>crop stress
• Sea level rise and resulting inundation
• Complex effects: e.g., disease vectors
What is required to
avert ‘catastrophic CC’?
• Catastrophic CC tentatively defined
as >2deg C rise
• 50%-85% reduction in global
emissions of GHGs required by 2050
• Many are now saying even this will not
be sufficient
Politics of climate change
• Who is to blame and how much?
• Who should respond and how?
Who has contributed?
• Historically, LDCs have contributed only 20% or
less
• In recent year: India ~1,750 million tCO2e in
2005 = 5% of the global GHG emission rate
• In per capita terms, India = 1.3 tCO2e in 1994,
rising to 1.9 tCO2e in 2004 (still using 1994
population),
• So India is ranked 146th amongst all countries.
• In contrast, per capita emissions of the USA were
around 23 tCO2e in 2004.
• European countries are lower than USA but still
much higher than LDCs
Where do we need to go?
• In per capita terms, to avert
catastrophic CC requires limiting
GHG emissions to ~3 tCO2e/yr
Core problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
Non-acceptance of CC as a probem (USA
position till recently!)
Refusal to think in per capita terms or some
such equitable responsibility framework
Equity has many dimensions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Historical contributions or present emissions only?
Per capita using which population?
Capacity to respond (affluence) or simply equal
Extent of impact (e.g., coastal) or simply equal
Etc etc
BUT, whatever the model, North has to cut
back drastically and help the South also
Core problems 2
• If commitments are to be made,
North insists on trading
Indian position so far
• We did not create the problem
• We are not currently contributing much (‘6th
largest emitter language makes little sense’)
• Even if we introduce dramatic changes, our
contribution to the desired reductions will be
small
• We cannot afford to cut back
• We have a right to pollute in order to develop
• We are anyway doing a lot
• We need a lot of financial and tech transfer
• Best way to adapt is to develop
• We will not make binding commitments but we are
willing to make some money out of trading (?!)
Limitations of this
position 1
• Science:
– if the goal is 3 tCO2e/cap, we will have
to move away from business-as-usual
anyway
• TERI 2008: ~5 tCO2/capita in 2031 under
business-as-usual
– Current policies will put in place huge
infrastructure that will be difficult to
change
– North does not have the technology to
help us anyway
Limitations 2
• Ethical:
– There is no undifferentiated “we”:
Indian elite is emitting at high level
– We cannot use Northern inaction to
sidetrack us from environment-worthy
actions today
– LARGER PICTURE: current
developmental model needs to be
questioned anyway!
– CC overlaps with other problems
Limitations 3
• Strategic:
– We will feel the burden of impact
heavily, so some compromise that leads
to a climate treaty will be ok
– At least invest in adaptation
– We are early in the curve: develop
technologies that we can actually
market to the North
Bangalore level issues
• Focus on Mitigation or adaptation?
• Dilemmas of unilateral mitigation
efforts (national or local)
– How does it help if no one else is doing
it
– Will we get co-opted, or undermine
our equity position?
• Can we find win-win with other local
issues?
Possible overlaps
• Air pollution and CO2 emissions
• Traffic and CO2 emissions
• Electricity scarcity, building energy,
& CO2 emissions
• Water scarcity and CC adaptation