Transcript Climate Change - climateknowledge.org

Climate Change: The Move to Action
(AOSS 480 // NRE 480)
Richard B. Rood
734-647-3530
2525 Space Research Building (North Campus)
[email protected]
http://aoss.engin.umich.edu/people/rbrood
Winter 2010
April 6, 2010
Class News
• Ctools site: AOSS 480 001 W10
• On Line: 2008 Class
– Reference list from course
• Rood Blog Data Base
Projects
• Final presentation discussion;
– April 22, 12:00 – 4:00, Place TBD.
• After class meetings
– 4/6: Near-term solutions
– 4/8: Michigan’s response
– 4/13: Transportation
– 4/15: Near-term solutions
Events
• Jim Hansen
Global Climate Change What Must We Do Now?
– April 6, 2010
– Blau Auditorium, Ross School of Business,
– Time: 4:00 - 5:30, Reception following
• Interest is high. Seats for sure, arrive 3:45
Events
• Pollack and Rood, Author’s Forum
– A World Without Ice: A Conversation with
Henry Pollack & Richard Rood
• Wednesday, April 14, 2010
• 5:30PM
• Library Gallery, room 100, Harlan Hatcher
Graduate Library
– For more info visit www.lsa.umich.edu/humin
News of Climate Interest
• New Federal Automobile Mileage
Standards
• Off-shore drilling and national security
Readings on Local Servers
• Assigned Readings
– Dembach: Climate Change Law: An
Introduction
• Very important Reading
– Farber: Legal Status of Climate Models
Readings on Local Servers
• Assigned
– Supreme Court: Massachusetts versus EPA
– Sigman: Liability and Climate Policy
• Of Interest
– Massachusetts Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court
– US Govt Response to Massachusetts Petition
• Foundational Reading
– University of Pennsylvania Law Review (2007)
From Last Time
• Kyoto and why it is still relevant …
– Kyoto Protocol did set the foundation for a marketbased approach to control CO2
– Raised the level of attention to mitigation of climate
change
– Encouraged strategies to avoid deforestation
• Refine relation of development and responding to climate
change
– Reduced CO2 emissions from what they might have
been
– Define political positions – positive and negative
Beyond 2012
• Pew: International Climate Efforts Beyond
2012: Report of the Climate Dialogue at
Pocantico
– This is a report published by Pew of a
collection of experts on climate change
– It is very soft in its recommendations
• Like keep the international community together
• Identification of what is important in any viable
treaty
• Important problem, keep international attention
Beyond 2012
• Conference of Parties, Copenhagen 2009
• Copenhagen Accord
Scales: Time scale and “spatial” scale
GLOBAL CONSEQUENCES
LOCAL POLICY
(ADAPTATION)
SURFACE WARMING
GLOBAL POLICY
(MITIGATION)
GREEN HOUSE GAS INCREASE
Scale
• What is the best scale to measure vulnerability
and adaptive capacity?
– National:
• inform states on needed policy response; allow for better
decision making; allows for comparison of differential
vulnerability
– Regional
• Impacts are likely not to be defined by national borders
– Local
• Ground truth
• Allows for the understanding of the local factors that mediate
sensitivity and resilience
Thanks to Maria Carmen Lemos
Regional based Initiatives
• Changing very rapidly
• Prone to a bubble burst?
• Pew Center on Global Climate Change
– State and Regional Updates
Scales of Policy: U.S.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Pew: Interactive State Emission Goals
–Pew: State-based Initiatives (Update, 2007)
Basic constraint on carbon policy
1990 by 2020
Motivations for State Activity
• Economics
– States (and cities) are very aggressive at
promoting policy that they perceive as offering
economic advantage.
– Branding: To attract, for instance, the “creative
class”
• Belief and Culture
– Reflection of political constituencies
States can be viewed as:
(from Rabe (2006)) What has changed?
• Hostile to climate change policy
– Michigan (Auto industry, manufacturing)
– Colorado (coal and energy)
• Stealth interest?
– Texas (aggressive renewable portfolio)
– Nebraska (sequestration site)
• Out in front
– California (Water, water, water?)
– Northeast alliance
Policy: Regional and State and Local
• California Climate Change
• Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
• United Conference of Mayors
– U.S. Mayors: Climate Protection Agreement
• Map of US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement
• Cool Cities
Policy: Regional and State and Local
• Local Governments for Sustainability
– International Council for Local Environmental
Initiatives (ICLEI)
– ICLEI’s CO2 Reduction / Climate
• National Governors Association (NGA)
– NGA Transportation and Land Use
– NGA Environmental Best Practices
Regional-National-Global Policy
• Policy often starts on a local scale, for the
reasons, outlined above
• Fragmented policy often interferes with
business and trade
• Call for national policy to remove the
fragmentation
– Interstate commerce in the U.S.
– World Trade Organization Internationally?
The Uncertainty Fallacy
• That the systematic reduction of scientific
uncertainty will lead to development of
policy is a fallacy.
– Uncertainty can always be used to keep
policy from converging.
Motivators for Policy
• More is needed than scientific knowledge
to motivate the development of policy.
– A policy accelerator or catalyst is needed to
promote convergence of policy.
• Apparent benefit
• Excess risk
– What are important sources of benefit and
risk? What are the policy accelerators?
Brief return to Economics
• We introduced the idea of “dangerous”
climate change
– We ended up using a report on economics to
define dangerous
• Argue over discount rate and valuation of the
environment, and how much it will really cost.
– What are other ways to define dangerous?
The role of economics
• An assertion: When thinking about responding
to climate change we often first think of policy.
When we think about how to promote policy
where do our thoughts first land?
–
–
–
–
–
–
Conservation?
Public Health?
Water Resources?
Agriculture?
Economics?
…
From Class NOTES
• Economy – climate change impacts security, leads to
uncertainty in economic system, agriculture, energy
security
• Economy – when economy is bad climate change takes
back burner, energy security, national security, green
energy
• Leadership change
• Disasters – how good is the data, can we make
attribution, link to climate change
• Process takes longer – short term dominate, long term
• Framing as opportunity
• More … ?
The convergence to economics
• Conservation, public health, etc., touch
economy.
• Hence it is sensible to place attention on
the economics of climate change.
– Production, Distribution, and Consumption of
goods and services
– Macroeconomics is generally the summation
of the economy of states, regions, countries,
world.
• Measured broadly by gross domestic product
Where we sit at a national level
SEC. 16__. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON CLIMATE CHANGE. (2005)
(a) Findings.—Congress finds that—
1) greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere are causing average
temperatures to rise at a rate outside the range of natural variability and are
posing a substantial risk of rising sea-levels, altered patterns of atmospheric
and oceanic circulation, and increased frequency and severity of floods and
droughts;
2) there is a growing scientific consensus that human activity is a substantial
cause of greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere; and
3) mandatory steps will be required to slow or stop the growth of greenhouse
gas emissions into the atmosphere.
(b) Sense of the Senate.—It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should
enact a comprehensive and effective national program of mandatory,
market-based limits and incentives on emissions of greenhouse gases that
slow, stop, and reverse the growth of such emissions at a rate and in a
manner that—
1) will not significantly harm the United States economy; and
2) will encourage comparable action by other nations that are major trading
partners and key contributors to global emissions.
Economy
• We have built economy into our response
to climate change.
• States cite economic incentives as a
reason for developing policy.
Global economic analysis
– Stern Review: Primary Web Page
– Stern Report: Executive Summary
– Nordhaus: Criticism of Stern Report
– Tol and Yohe: Deconstruction of Stern Report
Stern Report
• Draws on recent science which points to
‘significant risks of temperature increases above
5°C under business-as-usual by the early part of
the next century’ — other studies typically have
focused on increases of 2–3°C.
• Treats aversion to risk explicitly.
• Adopts low pure time discount rates to give
future generations equal weight.
• Takes account of the disproportionate impacts
on poor regions.
Dangerous climate change?
Stern, 2006
Stern Report
• Considered a radical revision of climate change
economics.
– If we don’t act now it will cost between 5% and 20%
of gross domestic product (an aggregate measure of
economy.)
• Stands in contrast to many studies that usually
come to numbers of closer to 1%
– The idea that initiation of a policy with a slow growth
rate will have little impact on the economy or
environment in the beginning, but will ultimately
become important when the nature of expenditures is
more clear.
Stern Report included very small discount rate.
Exponential Discount
120
Dollars
100
(1) percent
80
(2) percent
60
(3) percent
40
(5) percent
20
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
The discount rate of Stern Report is very small.
(Represents high valuation of ethical issues. Assumptions
about value of environment.)
(represented qualitatively by the red line)
Impact of low discount rate
• Amplifies the impacts of the decisions we
make today.
– Note: Even a 1% discount rate over 100 years
generally leads to the conclusion that what we
do today does not matter to the economy.
• Also brings attention to our poor explicit
valuation of the environment.
Stern Review: Criticisms
• Document is fundamentally political: An
advocacy document.
• Not up to the standards of academic
economic analysis
• Not based on empirical observations of the
economy
– Observed discount rates
– Observed behavior
Strengths of Stern Review
• Explicitly linked economic goals and
environmental goals
– Considered a major flaw of the Kyoto Protocol
• (Recall: Kyoto did include market mechanisms)
• Showed explicitly the necessity of having
the cost of carbon dioxide, the cost of
greenhouse gases, the valuation of the
environment in environmental policy.
Return to the interface with policy
Climate Science-Policy Relation
CLIMATE SCIENCE
UNCERTAINTY
PROMOTES / CONVERGENCE
OPPOSES / DIVERGENCE
KNOWLEDGE
POLICY
Economics-Policy Relation
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
UNCERTAINTY
KNOWLEDGE
POLICY
PROMOTES / CONVERGENCE
Economic analysis is not the
compelling catalyst to converge the
development of policy – at least on
the global scale.
OPPOSES / DIVERGENCE
Different story on the local scale.
Think for a minute
• What are the things that we do that
connect us together?
Energy-Economy-Climate Change
ECONOMY
ENERGY
CLIMATE CHANGE
THESE THREE ARE BIG
WHAT ARE THEIR ATTRIBUTES? ______________________________
HOW ARE THEY RELATED?
______________________________
A moment with time scales
ENERGY
CLIMATE CHANGE
ECONOMY
0 years
25 years
50 years
75 years
100 years
We keep arriving at levels of granularity
WEALTH
LOCAL
TEMPORAL
NEAR-TERM
LONG-TERM
GLOBAL
SPATIAL
Small scales inform large scales.
Large scales inform small scales.
Back to: What are the things that connect us together?
Things that permeate society
• Law also permeates society. There are
some significant consistencies in law.
• But also there are remarkable differences
in law.
From Farber: Legal Status
• Climate models establish a lower end estimate for global
temperature impacts, but the distribution is less clearly
bounded on the high side – or in simpler terms, the highend risk may be considerable. The models are better at
predicting temperature patterns than precipitation
patterns, and global predictions are considerably firmer
than more localized ones.
• Economic models are much less advanced, and their
conclusions should be used with caution. Unfortunately,
economists are not always careful about incorporating
uncertainty into their policy recommendations.
From Farber: Legal Status
• Climate scientists have created a unique institutional system for
assessing and improving models, going well beyond the usual
system of peer review. Consequently, their conclusions should be
entitled to considerable credence by courts and agencies.
• Model predictions cannot be taken as gospel. There is considerable
residual uncertainty about climate change impacts that cannot be
fully quantified. The uncertainties on the whole make climate change
a more serious problem rather than providing a source of comfort.
The policy process should be designed with this uncertainty in mind.
For instance, rather than focusing on a single cost-benefit analysis
for proposed regulatory actions, the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), which oversees federal regulatory policy, might do
better to require the development of standardized scenarios for
agencies to use.
In the past couple of years
• The picture of polar bears in the sea
motivated a lot of discussion about the
Endangered Species Act ...
– but, legal approaches have a difficult
path,cause and effect, who are the damaged
and damaging parties, what laws are relevant
...
Polar Bear as Endangered Species
So what are the legal pathways?
•
•
•
•
Public nuisance
Clean Air Act
National Environmental Policy Act
Federal policy of pre-emption
– Less stringent federal regulations rather than more
stringent state regulations
• Like tobacco liability litigation
• Like gun liability litigation
• Endangered Species Act
National Environmental Quality Act (1969)
• Purpose
• Sec. 2 [42 USC § 4321].
• The purposes of this Act are: To declare a
national policy which will encourage productive
and enjoyable harmony between man and his
environment; to promote efforts which will
prevent or eliminate damage to the environment
and biosphere and stimulate the health and
welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of
the ecological systems and natural resources
important to the Nation; and to establish a
Council on Environmental Quality.
What are the obstacles?
• Political Question / Judicial Competence
– Court being asked, essentially, to make policy
• Standing
– The ability to show particular, or personal
harm.
• Causation
– Demonstration that a particular, say, power
plant or manufacturer has caused the harm
An interesting set of papers
• The complete issue of University of
Pennsylvania Law Review (Vol, 155, 2007)
– Intersection of climate science, economics,
and law.
University of Pennsylvania Law Review (2007)
A case that received a lot of attention
• Connecticut versus American Electric
Power
– Public nuisance
– Determined that court was being asked to
address what was essentially a policy
question.
• Senator Imhoff a principal in having the case
thrown out
A case that continues to attract attention
• Massachusetts versus US Environmental
Protection Agency
– Clean Air Act
A case that continues to attract attention
• Relevant text of Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act” "The
Administrator [of EPA] shall by regulation prescribe . . . standards
applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or
classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which
in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare."
• Section 302(g) of the Clean Air Act defines "air pollutant" as "any air
pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any
physical . . . substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise
enters the ambient air." 302(h) states that "effects on welfare"
include "effects on soils, water, crops, . . . wildlife, weather . . . and
climate . . .”
California and Clean Air Act
• When the Clean Air Act was written
California was given the ability to make
more stringent standards.
– States can choose either the California
standard or the less stringent national
standard
(A motivator for federal policy is often the
existence of many state and local
policies.)
Supreme Court Decision
• Supreme Court found in favor of Massachusetts
– Had argued that they were threatened by sea level
rise.
• There was standing.
– Had argued that carbon dioxide was a pollutant.
• Supreme Court said carbon dioxide is a pollutant based on
the definition in the Clean Air Act.
– EPA did have the regulatory authority to regulate CO2.
Bush EPA Arguments
• That to control carbon dioxide from cars was an
issue of efficiency, which was the sole domain of
the Department of Transportation.
• That for the EPA to act would be a piecemeal
approach to the problem, against the President’s
wishes.
• That taking action on cars would have no real
effect because of other sources of CO2,
including China.
• That there was a political history that precluded
EPA from acting.
Since then
• California Attorney General Petition to EPA
– “Global warming threatens California's Sierra
mountain snow pack, which provides the state
with one-third of its drinking water. California
also has approximately 1,000 miles of
coastline and levees that are threatened by
rising sea levels.”
Since then
• 2008: EPA has not, formally, taken action,
and even their own lawyers have been
quoted in the press as saying that EPA is
not on solid legal grounds for doing
nothing.
– A political decision.
• 2009: EPA Pressing using Clean Air Act to
regulate CO2
Where does litigation sit in the climate problem?
• Motivator for the development of policy.
• Law works on short-term and local scales.
– Does not, often, extend to long-term and
global scales.
• Deliberative, case-by-case
Law vs Policy
• Law, at least with U.S. EPA, leads to the
idea of regulation.
– In general, “people” prefer policy to
regulation business risk?
• Currently in U.S. Obama is pushing EPA to
exercise its ability to regulate CO2 as a
pollutant.
– Bush administration did not require EPA to do
this
Some recent activity
• <a href=
http://www.eenews.net/public/25/14495/features/documents/2010/02
/26/document_gw_01.pdf >block the EPA</a>
• <a href= http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/02/26/26greenwiretwo-key-house-dems-move-to-block-epa-regulator-62739.html >see
also</a>
• And a <a href=
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61Q2QU20100227?type=pol
iticsNews > group of Senators</a> are looking to propose
something different from a cap and trade market (<a href=
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/02/26/AR2010022606084.html?hpid=topne
ws >more</a>).
Exponential Growth and Decay
Exponential Growth
Exponential Growth
300
Dollars
250
1 percent
200
2 percent
150
3 percent
100
5 percent
50
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
U.S. views 2-3% Growth / year as a Stable Economy
Consider this gross domestic product (GDP)
Do you know the rule of 72?
Exponential Discount
Exponential Discount
120
Dollars
100
(1) percent
80
(2) percent
60
(3) percent
40
(5) percent
20
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
This is how we discount the value of investments into the future.
Exponential Discount
Exponential Discount
120
Dollars
100
(1) percent
80
(2) percent
60
(3) percent
40
(5) percent
20
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
This is how we discount the value of investments into the future.
How to value future return on investment versus near-term focus on investment.
Exponential Discount
Exponential Growth
300
250
Dollars
Exponential Discount
120
Dollars
100
80
60
40
2 percent
150
3 percent
100
(1) percent
50
(2) percent
0
(3) percent
1 percent
200
5 percent
1
3
5
(5) percent
20
7
9
11
Years
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
Economic growth versus discount
In general. must also account for inflation or deflation
13
15
17
19
21
Exponential Discount
Exponential Growth
300
250
Dollars
Exponential Discount
120
Dollars
100
80
60
40
20
3 percent
100
50
(2) percent
0
(5) percent
2 percent
150
(1) percent
(3) percent
1 percent
200
5 percent
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
Years
Real growth of wealth must address the loss of wealth through inflation, taxes, discounting.