Transcript The Challenge of Stabilization

The Challenge of
Stabilization
Saving the World Without Losing
Our Mocha-Choco-Loco Espresso
Lattes
Tony Robalik (2007)
Dramatic Foreshadowing
• Only the B1 SRES scenario “come[s] anywhere near to
stabilization of concentration by 2100” (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.177)
• B1 world is:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
More integrated
More eco-friendly
Rapid economic growth, but towards service and info economy
Population peak of 9bn in 2050, then drops to 7bn by 2100
Reduction in material intensity
Introduction of clean and efficient tech
Emphasis on global solutions to economic, social, and enviro
sustainability
– NO POLICY INTERVENTIONS
•Our goal: to emit at a level consistent with natural CO2
sinks, i.e., no more than 5GtCO2e/yr (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.193)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRES
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1
Global Warming Potential (GWP)
Note: CO2-equivalent emissions are defined differently than CO2-equivalent
concentrations. Concentrations of CO2e consider the instantaneous effect of
any particular gas in the atmosphere. For example, while non-CO2 gases
account for only 23% of GWP, they account for 30% of total radiative forcing
today. Stern prefers CO2e concentrations.
Stern, 2006, p.198
~1850-2006
• 1850: atmospheric GHG concentrations were
280ppm CO2e
• 2006: 430ppm CO2e
• North America & Europe responsible for 70%
of CO2 from energy production
• Developing countries: less than 25%
• Our national hypocrisy:
– We’re the biggest culprits
– We’ve exported all our manufacturing overseas
Stern (2006)
Notice the slowdown in growth 1971-2002 associated with a
real increase in prices
Stern, 2006, p.175
Emissions per Capita
2000
World Average
by 2050
by 2100
0.6tC / yr (450ppm)
0.3tC / yr (450ppm)
0.7tC / yr (550ppm)
1tC / yr
Developed &
Transitional Economies
2.8tC / yr
--USA
5.5tC / yr
--American NonVegetarians compared to
Vegetarians
+1.5tC / yr 1.1tC / yr (550ppm)
(+27%)
Developing Countries
0.5tC / yr
•Assumed A1 or B1 scenario, in which world pop
peaks at 9bn in 2050 and drops to 7bn by 2100
•Does not consider feedback effects
A transition economy is an economy which is
changing from a planned economy to a free market
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_economy)
•Not clear if Houghton is referring to CO2 or CO2e
Houghton (2004), pp.255-7
Knickerbocker, 2007, citing Univ. of Chicago research
Feedback Effects
• Two important feedbacks
– Increased soil respiration as temp rises
– Forest die-back as climate changes
• Many stabilization scenarios do not consider these
effects
• If included:
– 450ppm CO2  550ppm
– 550ppm CO2  750ppm
• Not clear if Houghton is referring to CO2 or CO2e
• Currently, natural systems absorb ~1/2 anthropogenic
CO2, but CC might change global carbon cycle, reducing
this amount (Jones, 2006)
(Houghton, 2006, p.255)
Emissions by Source
•Greenhouse gas emissions by source, 2000
Stern (2006), p.171
Emissions Flowchart
WRI: http://cait.wri.org/figures.php?page=World-FlowChart&view=100
Selected Sectors: Land-Use
• Deforestation single largest source
– Indonesia: 30%
– Brazil: 20%
Stern (2006), p.171, Annex 7f
Land Use
• Peak in 1990 from forest fires in Indonesia
• “Countries will halt deforestation when only 15%
of their 2000 forest area remains” (Stern, Annex 7f, citing Houghton)
– Houghton’s “arbitrary assumption” (id.)
Stern (2006), p.171, Annex 7f
Land Use
Stern, 2006, Annex 7f
Selected Sectors: Ag & the
“Hidden” Sector
•Developing countries: 75% of all ag emissions
•Where do you think all your mangos and avacados come from?
Stern, 2006, Annex 7g
The “Hidden” Sector
• When you include the entire supply chain, livestock
account for 18% of all GHG emissions
– 9% of all CO2
– 37% of all CH4 (methane)
– 65% of all N2O (nitrous oxide)
• Includes, e.g.,
– Deforestation for pasture & feed (70% of deforestation
in Amazon  grazing)
– Fertilizers
– Energy to run slaughterhouses & processing plants
– Etc.
• 30% of the Earth’s land surface is devoted to
livestock
• Changes in dietary habits can have immediate
effects, as turnover rate for farm animals is very
short
18% of total
CO2e
cf. transport
sector, which
produces
only 14% of
total
http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html, 2007
The Psychology of Worry
•
“The affective system […] is the
wellspring of action” (p.104)
•
– Visceral reactions, like fear and
anxiety
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Personal experience is very
important
It functions automatically & without
training, unlike the analytic
system
Recent events given more weight
Evidence generated in favor of an
action interferes with generation of
evidence arguing against that
action
“[W]omen have been shown to
worry more than men about a host
of risks” (p.105)
Worry is a finite resource
One-action bias: worry goes
away when just one action is
taken
Three policy recommendations
(p.116):
– High Drama: concretize future
events and move them closer in
time and space to raise visceral
concern
– Improve process: need for
“guided protocols by which
decision makers consider
arguments for conservation and
climate change mitigation before
they are allowed to consider
arguments against such actions”
– Education & Eco-Literacy:
“better (environmental) science
and statistics education can
create the familiarity with the
scientific presentation of
information and mental habits that
will create citizens who give
greater weight to the output of
their analytic processing system”
•
The problem is, of course,
“ultimately self-corrective” (p.116)
Weber, 2006
Paths to Stabilization
Clearly shows the benefits of peaking early
Stern, 2006, p.199
Paths to Stabilization
•Stabilization at 450ppm CO2e would be very difficult – but so lovely!
•Stabilization at 550ppm CO2e (roughly double pre-ind) seems more
“reasonable”
Stern, 2006, p.200
CO2 and Temperature
“Maximum” and “minimum”
are based on probabilities
from “all eleven recent
studies”
•Note the significant
probability of exceeding +34°C for 550ppm CO2e
•450ppm CO2e would be
much safer, putting us in
+2-3°C range
•+2-3°C range is when
Amazon goes bye-bye
Stern, 2006, p.195
Warren, 2006
Drivers of Emissions Growth
• Income
• Population growth
• Fuel choice
– Affected by natural resource
endowments
– “Historic investment in
generation capacity”
• Sprawl, inefficient use of land
• Availability of alternatives (e.g.,
in transportation)
• Social choices (such as
willingness to bike or walk)
• Dietary choices
• Carbon intensity
• Technical developments
affecting fuel efficiency
• Economic growth --> rapid
urbanization & infrastructure
development
• Conversion of land from forest
to agriculture
– Subsistence ag in Africa
– Beef & Soya in S. Am.
– Coffee & timber in S. Asia
• Increased ag productivity
(more fertilizers and more N2O
from the soil)
Stern, 2006, Annexes 7b-g
Stern’s Prospects for Savings
• STRONG POLICY
• Carbon capture and storage
(CCS)
• Increased use of renewables
• Nuclear power
– If costs come down, and
– If “public acceptance issues
are resolved”
• Switching to less carbonintense FFs
• Reduced demand from endusers
• Improvements in fuel efficiency
(could account for ¾ of carbon
savings in transportation)
• Behavioral change
IEA-11: Australia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Italy,
Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States
• Efficiency: Among IEA-11
group of countries, 10%
reduction in energy demand
accompanied 88% increase in
manufacturing output (‘73-’00)
• Energy efficiency increases in
buildings could come at low
or negative costs
– Innovative design
– Good site design
– Better lighting, heaing, and
cooling systems
• Save the forests! (and plant
new ones)
• Dissemination of best
practices in agriculture and
forestry
Stern, 2006, Annexes 7b-g
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/30YearsSUM.pdf
“Wedges”
This stabilizes emissions but not concentrations
Stern, 2006, p.207
B1 Scenario
• The only SRES scenario that “come[s]
anywhere near to stabilization of
concentration by 2100”
• How can we make it better?
• What climate-specific policies should we
implement?
• What actions can planners & others take?
(Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.177)
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1
B1 Scenario
• B1 world is:
– More integrated
– More eco-friendly
– Rapid economic growth, but towards service and info
economy
– Population peak of 9bn in 2050, then drops to 7bn by
2100
– Reduction in material intensity
– Introduction of clean and efficient tech
– Emphasis on global solutions to economic, social,
and enviro sustainability
– WHAT POLICY INTERVENTIONS?
•Our goal: to emit at a level consistent with natural CO2
sinks, i.e., no more than 5GtCO2e/yr (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.193)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRES
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1
References
FAO. Livestock a major threat to environment: Remedies urgently needed. Retrieved 26
February 2007, from http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html
Knickerbocker, B. (20 February 2007). Humans’ beef with livestock: A warmer planet.
Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0220/p03s01ussc.html
Houghton, J. (2004). Global warming: The complete briefing, 3rd Edition. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press, pp.253-264.
IEA. “Executive Summary”. Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/30YearsSUM.pdf
Jones, C., Cox, P., & Huntingford, C. (2006). Impact of climate-carbon cycle feedbacks
on emissions scenarios to achieve stabilization. In Schellnhuber (ed.), 324-331.
“Special Report on Emissions Scenarios.” Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRES
“SRES: B1 storyline and scenario family.” Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1
Stern, N. (2006). Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change: Report to HM
Treasury. Retrieved 24 February 2007, from http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern
review_index.cfm
Warren, R. (2006). “Impacts of Global Climate Change at Different Annual Mean Global
Temperature Increases.” In Schellnhuber (ed.), 93-131.
Weber, E. (2006). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk:
Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change 77: 103–120.
WRI. World greenhouse gas emissions flow chart. Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from
http://cait.wri.org/figures.php?page=World-FlowChart&view=100