Download Emissions - CARBOOCEAN

CARBOOCEAN, Solstrand October 8 2009, Erling Moxnes
Misperceptions of climate
change dynamics
Erling Moxnes
Professor in System Dynamics
University of Bergen
Outline
Mental models
– Non-communicated assumptions
1. Misperceptions of CO2 accumulation
– Laboratory experiments
– Information
2. Misperceptions of saturation in absorption
– Laboratory experiments
– Information
3. Misperceptions of delays
– Laboratory experiments
– Information
Mental models
• Using 6 matches you should form 4 triangles
with equal sides. All triangles should have
the same size as the triangle below.
Solution
• Mental model or “theory-in-use”: 2 dimensions
• Not communicated:
3 dimensions
• Dynamics represent a non-communicated ”third
dimension”
1. Misperceptions of CO2 accumulation
Sketch needed CO2 emissions from 2000 to 2050
to reach each of the three desired developments of
anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere
400
CO2 in atmosphere
300
Desired 1
200
Desired 2
Historical
Desired 3
100
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
20
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Emissions
15
10
Historical
?
5
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Illustrate graphically the relationship between
emissions and amount of CO2 in atmospheric
?
Typical emission paths in CO2 tasks
400
CO2 in atmosphere
300
Desired 1
200
Desired 2
Historical
Desired 3
100
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
• Pattern matching
or
• Correlation
CO2 concentration
Typical graphical illustration
160
140
CO2 concentration versus emissions, data
from 1900 to 1998, correlation coeff.=0.98
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0.00
-20
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
Emissions
“The more emissions the higher concentration and vice versa”
Test of linear instantaneous relationship
Stock=a*Emissions+b
200
150
1
1
100
2
1
2
2
1 2
Historical_stock_of_CO2
1
50
1 2
1 2
1 2
Correlated_CO2_stock
2
0
1,940
1,950
1,960
1,970
Time
1,980
1,990
2,000
Test of nonlinear instantaneous relationship
200
150
1
2
1
100
1
2
1
1 2
Historical_stock_of_CO2
50
1 2
1
2
2
1 2
CO2-stock as non-linear
function 1,980
of emissions
1,970
1,990
0
1,940
1,950
Auxiliary_hypothesis
1,960
250
2,000
Time
200
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Emissions
8
Stock and flow model
dS/dt = E - S/T
Stock of CO2
Emissions
Absorption
Residency time
1. Explicit about absorption
2. Explicit about accumulation
Test of dynamic model
Residency time = 40 years
Important insights
• The instantaneous model is not consistent with
the real system
• A simple dynamic model explains history very
well
• Absorption is the sum over land and ocean –
and is difficult to measure (?)
• Historical absorption can be estimated with high
accuracy
A= S/40 years
Emission paths from dynamic model
400
CO2 in atmosphere
300
Desired 1
200
Desired 2
Historical
Desired 3
100
0
1970
1980
1990
20
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Emissions
15
10
Desired 1
Historical
5
Desired 2
Desired 3
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Policy implications
are very different
from what most
people expect!
Experiment: design and results
Desired amount
Max.emissions
Results of experiments
• Sterman & Sweeney (2002, 2007)
– Little effect of IPCC summary
– Little use for information about absorption
• Moxnes & Saysel (2009)
–
–
–
–
No effect of phase diagram
No effect of balloon analogy
Little use for information about absorption
Effect of “cognitive conflict” and analogy
Cognitive conflict
ppm
Gtons/year
350
6.5
CO2 Concentration in atmosphere
6.0
340
CO2 Emissions
5.5
330
5.0
320
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
4.5
1987
Anthropogenic emissions do not matter?
Need for explanation
Analogy
CO2 concentration
360
355
350
345
340
335
330
325
320
1970
1975
Gtons C/year
1980
1985
1990
1995
CO2 emissions
7
6
5
4
3
Absorption
2
1
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
Not sufficient to reduce growth in emissions
Not sufficient to stabilize emissions
?
1995
Conclusion on accumulation
• Information needed
– emissions versus
– absorption!
• Conceptual change for effect
– Challenge instantaneous model
– Analogies to explain dynamic model
• Future absorption?
2.Misperceptions of non-linearity in
absorption? (or saturation)
Stock of CO2
f(S)
Emissions
Absorption
Example case: Reindeer St.Paul Alaska
Number of reindeer
2000
1500
Population
1000
500
Killing
0
1910
1920
1930
1940
No “tragedy of the commons”
1950
Historical experiences: Canada
The American Society of Mammalogists:
“... urges that the Canadian Government not
undertake the introduction of reindeer into
Ungava. Before any introduction is seriously
considered, those persons involved in any
planning are urged to make a thorough study
beforehand of the problems of integrating lichen
ecology, reindeer biology, and native culture serious problems that have not been solved to
date on any workable scale on the North
American continent.''
Example: Reindeer grazing
Lichen
Grazing
f(L)
Growth
Grazing per animal
Number of reindeer
Median subject in experiment
Herd and lichen grow th [annual takeouts per year]
2000
History
1500
1000
500
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Lichen density [g/m2]
Source: Moxnes 2004
No “tragedy of the commons”
The case of Snøhetta district
Herd and lichen growth [annual takeouts per year]
Snøhetta
1944-1997
15000
Grazing
10000
5000
Growth
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Lichen density [g/m2]
Source: Moxnes et al. 2002
Experts warning
No “tragedy of the commons”
Conclusion non-linearity
• Non-linearity (or saturation)
– Accelerating growth in CO2
• Forecasts of absorption needed
– IPCC 75 years residency time
• Conceptual change for effect
– Challenge instantaneous model
– Analogies to explain dynamic model
3.Misperceptions of delays
- and loss of personal welfare
even when the “tragedy of the
commons” is not present
Simple strategy – no delay
Goal:
full
glass
Feedback
control
Simple strategy – with delay
Goal:
full
glass
Feedback
control
Nearly perfect analogy for alcohol
Goal:
a little
drunk
Nearly perfect analogy for alcohol
Mental model:
Few think of the
stomach as a
funnel for alcohol
Goal:
a little
sober
Experimental results - high school students
Average BAC, g/L
1.6
Long delay
Verbal information
1.2
0.8
Short delay
0.4
Cognitive
conflict and analogy
Goal
0.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
15 minute period
Source: Moxnes and Jensen (2009)
8
Stock and flow diagram
Alcohol in stomach
Drinking rate
Desired alcohol
in blood
Alcohol in blood
Absorption rate
Feedback
control
Metabolic rate
Simple strategy explains results
BAC, g/L
1.6
Long delay
1.2
Short delay
0.8
0.4
0.0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
15 minute period
Source: Moxnes and Jensen (2009)
8
People dealing with delays
• underestimate lengths of delays (sum)
• do not adjust policies for delays
• do not learn quickly
– wrong mental model (external factors)
– lack of data
– infrequent experiences
Delays in climate change
Feedback
GHG in atmosphere control?
Emissions
Absorption
Emission capacity
Heat in atmosphere
In-radiation
Climate policy
Out-radiation
Climate
Acceptable
climate
Discarding
Investment
Change in policy
Desired policy
Long delays in stopping growth in GHGs
Challenges caused by delays
• science and expert advice
• awareness of delays
• conceptual change
– from events to behaviour to structure
Thank you
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
Moxnes, Erling, 2004. Misperceptions of basic dynamics, the case of
renewable resource management. System Dynamics Review, 20(2), 139162.
Moxnes, Erling and Jensen, Lene C., 2009. Drunker than intended;
misperceptions and information treatments. Drug and Alcohol Dependence,
105, 63-70.
Moxnes, Erling and Saysel, Ali Kerem, 2009. Misperceptions of global
climate change: information policies. Climatic Change, 93(1-2), 15-37.
Sterman, J. D., 2008. Economics - Risk communication on climate: Mental
models and mass balance. Science, 322(5901), 532-533.
Sterman, J. D. and Booth Sweeney, L., 2002. Cloudy skies: assessing public
understanding of global warming. System Dynamics Review, 18(2), 207-240.
Sterman, J. D. and Sweeney, L. B., 2007. Understanding public complacency
about climate change: adults' mental models of climate change violate
conservation of matter. Climatic Change, 80(3-4), 213-238.
More “invisible hands”
Green tax
+
-
Emissions
Transport efficiency
“taxes”
-
Demand
Oil prices
+
+ Costs to
+ truckers
- Other
-
-
Profits to
+ truckers
Price of
transportation
+
Investments
in new trucks
-
Competition
+
Normal
profits
-
Trucks
+
Invisible hand takes care of profits (=normal profits)
Cost reductions reduce price and structural change
Alternative energy technology policy
Green tax
Price
+
Competitor
costs
Production
costs -
-
-
Profit
margin
+
Production
+
R&D
+
Scale+
Learning
Accumulated
production
+
Current profit margin is misleading
Must think of technology development as investment
Example: Photovoltaics
Source SEMI:
http://www.semi.org/en/P039751
Price of electricity given by competitor costs
Photovoltaic costs drop over time (path dependence)
Investment perspective
Cash flow
Time
Time before earning money depends on policies
Early customers with special needs
Reduce risk by developing many technologies