Transcript Thinking `Paradigms` - Hong Kong Climate Change Forum

Rethinking the BAU energy paradigm
Six principles for change
Liam Salter
Head, Climate Programme
WWF Hong Kong
ICCC May 2007
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
The concept of business as usual energy paradigm
Technology mixes for climate protection
Six principles for reform
Hong Kong and the six principles
Conclusions
Thinking ‘Paradigms’
“At any time in history there is a ruling paradigm within the
constraints of which most thinking takes place.”
“When its effectiveness diminishes and it begins to break
down, a paradigm shift takes place and a new paradigm
comes into being.”
(Reddy, 2002)
Thinking ‘Paradigms’
• GROSSCON – GRowth Oriented,
Supply Sided, CONsumption
directed
• DEFENDUS – DEvelopment
Focused, END Use oriented,
Service directed
The late Amulya
Reddy
Thinking Paradigms
• Hard energy path – the more
energy we use the better off
we are
• Soft energy path – energy is
a means to social ends.
Energy services are tailored
to needs.
Amory Lovins
“… any plausible BAU scenario entails continuing increases
in global temperatures, well beyond levels previously
experienced by humankind …” (Stern Report)
IEA WEO 2004
US DOE EIA 2007
WWF 400 ppm CO2e
WWF Climate Solutions Report (2007) www.panda.org/climate
45
0_
no
_C
CS
Az
ar
_4
50
_C
CS
Az
ar
_4
50
_B
EC
Az
S
ar
_3
50
_n
o_
CC
S
Az
ar
_3
50
_C
CS
Az
ar
_3
50
_B
EC
S
va
n
Vu
ur
en
Na
_4
kic
50
en
ov
ic_
A1
T_
Na
45
kic
0
en
ov
ic_
B1
_4
Na
00
kic
en
ov
ic_
B2
IM
-4
CP
00
_4
50
_D
EM
ET
IM
ER
CP
_4
50
_D
NE
IM
21
CP
+
_4
50
_G
IM
CP
ET
_L
_4
FL
50
_IM
AG
E/
TI
M
ER
IM
CP
_4
50
_E
3M
G
Az
ar
_
Total primary energy use (EJ/y)
Ambitious climate scenario technology
mixes vary ….
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
wind/solar/hydro
Biomass
Solar H2 + solar electricity
Renewables excluding Solar
solar H2 only
renewables
Coal
Oil
Gas
fossil
Nuclear
Hohne and Hoogwijk, (2005)
2050
800
600
400
200
0
Common features of low carbon scenarios
• No technology silver bullet
• In the short to medium term the bulk of emissions reductions come from
massive improvements energy efficiency.
• The structural shift towards a low carbon energy supply tends to
dominate the reduction potential over the longer term. Preparing low
carbon supply technologies for substantial increases in market share
post - 2050 was a key priority in the short-medium term.
• Key common supply technologies across many models were renewable
energy and carbon capture and storage.
Back to paradigm thinking
• BAU / GROSSCON / Hard Energy Path will not protect us
from climate change
• What will it take to bring these technologies to market?
• Evidence suggests that there is no ‘policy bullet’ either
• Require a comprehensive rethink of BAU / GROSSCON /
Hard Energy Path that delivers on other energy policy
objectives such as access to energy and energy security
concerns
Rethinking energy system drivers
1. Valuation and pricing
2. Supply vs. demand
3. Consumer participation
4. Infrastructure
5. Planning
6. Technology development
Using principles and techniques already in use today
2 caveats:
Not intended as an exhaustive list
Limitations of power sector oriented analysis
Valuation and pricing:
Internalising True Costs
True costing in practice
• Carbon emissions trading
• USD 24 billion in 2006 and potentially the world’s largest commodity
market
• Can deliver the true cost of carbon only if linked to ambitious
compliance targets
• Suite of measures is required to reflect even partial true
cost to all consumers
• Taxes
• Emissions charges
• Technology standards
• Uncertainty often cited as the reason for avoiding a holistic
approach to true costing
Supply and demand:
Efficiency first
Efficiency first
Packages and tools vary by country and sector
Policy targets critical to evaluate performance of packages e.g. China’s
11 Five Year Plan
Minimum standards – appliances, buildings, automobiles
Sector specific programmes e.g. China’s top - 1000 programme
Consumer engagement and labeling
Financing schemes
Public procurement
True costs
Rethinking the consumer:
Promoting participation
“Economics drive customers. Customers drive markets. But
first, they must be informed, educated and challenged”
Rose McKinney-James, former President and CEO of the
Corporation for Solar Technology and Renewable
Resources, Nevada.
"We must understand clearly that public participation is the
right and interest of the people endowed by law. The
government has the obligation to respond to and to protect
this right.“ Pan Yue, SEPA Vice-Minister
Participation in practice
• ‘Community Choice’
Laws passed in Massachusetts, Ohio, and New Jersey and Rhode
Island in recent years,
One programme involving over half a million customers has already
achieved a 33% greenhouse gas reduction in its electricity without a
rate increase.
12 Californian cities, 3 million residents finalising Ordinance to
achieve 40% green electricity from green power
• Civil society watchdogs supporting power sector regulation in
Maharashtra, India
1999-2000 - Civil society analysis of MSEB tariff proposals revealed
accounting irregularities and allowed the regulator to insist on
enhanced energy efficiency
Remaining 3 principles
• Decentralisation
• Master planning
• Bringing critical technologies to market
Principle
Paradigm Checklist
Hong Kong power
sector
Rating
0 = no action
1 = pilot activities, policy
intention
2 = firm policies and case
studies
3 = broad practice
True Costs
Voluntary emissions trading
Power plant emissions targets
1
Efficiency first
Appliance labelling proposed
Out of date building codes
No targets
0
Participation
Consultation without implementation
1
Decentralisation
Monopoly power providers, no SPP
rules, almost no installed capacity
0
Master planning
No energy policy or power
development plan
0
Bringing critical
technologies to market
No significant programme
supporting technology choice
1
Total
GROSSCON alert!!!
3 (/ 18)
Conclusions
‘Its not that we need new ideas, but we need to stop having old ideas’.
Edwin Land
A paradigm shift using DEFENDUS or Soft Energy Path style logic is required to
protect the world from climate change. ‘Tinkering around the edges’ will not
bring the major shifts in technology required to cut emissions.
Paradigm shift must go beyond technology analysis and understand the systemlevel issues that drive technology choice
Beyond technology paradigm shift can be defined concretely in terms of specific
principles which can be used as the basis for energy policy analysis and
development
Can a focus on principles move us out of our ‘technology boxes’? And
actually improve our ability to build consensus?
Thank You!
[email protected]