Download From Paris 2015 to EU 2030: Is Europe leading or lagging?

From Paris 2015 to EU 2030:
Is Europe leading or lagging?
CEDEC Congress, Brussels, 15 October
2015
Dr. Brigitte Knopf
Mercator Research Institute on Global
Commons and Climate Change (MCC),
Berlin
1
Overview
• IPCC 2014: The scientific background
• Paris 2015
• Europe 2030: Is Europe leading or lagging?
2
CLIMATE CHANGE 2014
Mitigation of Climate Change
Working Group III
Mitigation of Climate Change
Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
© Ocean/Corbis
The scientific background
There is far more carbon in the ground than emitted in any baseline scenario.
Based on SRREN Figure 1.7
4
Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
The disposal space of the atmosphere is limited. @MCC_Berlin
Based on SRREN Figure 1.7
5
Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Paris 2015
6
How to operationalize the 2°C target? IPCC Summary for Policymakers: “Scenarios […] consistent with a likely chance to keep temperature change below 2°C […] are characterized by lower global GHG emissions in 2050 than in 2010, 40% to 70 % lower globally, and emissions levels near zero GtCO2eq or below in 2100.”
EU Council Conclusions Sep 2015:
“to stay below 2°C, global GHG emissions need to peak by 2020 at the latest, be reduced by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 1990 and be near zero or below by 2100”. G‐7 Leaders' Declaration June 2015:
“Deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are required with a decarbonisation of the global economy over the course of this century. Accordingly […] we support […] the upper end of the latest IPCC recommendation of 40 to 70 % reductions by 2050 compared to 2010.”
UNFCCC Negotiating Text Oct 2015:
“Parties aim to reach by [X date] [a peaking of global greenhouse gas emissions][zero net greenhouse gas emissions][a[n] X per cent reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions][global low‐carbon transformation][global low‐emission transformation][carbon neutrality][climate neutrality]. “
7
Paris 2015: Where do we stand?
• New element: intended nationally determined by CarbonBrief
contributions (INDC); voluntary pledges
• (Nearly) all countries contribute; progress compared to Kyoto protocol
• INDC cover ~90% of global emissions
warming from the policies Governments have in place now) would see a warming of 3.6°C by 2100
• If fully implemented, INDCs would bring warming down to 2.7°C • But no economic mechanisms (e.g. carbon markets) mentioned in UNFCCC draft text
by Climate Action Tracker
• Current policy projection (which estimates 8
Paris 2015: Where do we stand?
Climate Action Tracker
9
Europe 2030
EU’s targets for 2030 • a 40% cut in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990 levels
• at least a 27% share of renewable energy consumption
• at least 27% energy savings compared to business‐as‐usual
10
CO2 reduction against 1990 [%]
EU 2030 targets: CO2 Emission reduction
ranges across 12 models
PRIMES / Energy Roadma
Knopf et al. (2013)
• Models show higher GHG reduction than 20% by 2020 • GHG reductions of at least 40% by 2030 are necessary within Europe as an effective milestone for reaching 80% by 2050
• A renewable target of 27% is the cost‐effective share for 40% GHG reduction
Europe is lagging…
• EU2030 targets in line with long‐term target of 80% reduction by 2050, but only rated as “medium” in terms of fairness* •  EU is a flagging frontrunner
• Negotiations have shifted towards G2 (US – China) •  EU lost diplomatic power
• China will have the largest ETS system worldwide by 2017 •  EU will lose one of its unique selling points
* by Climate Action Tracker
12
How Europe could lead…
• EU could show that carbon pricing works
•  This would need a different reform of the emissions trading scheme
•  sectoral expansion of carbon pricing has to be considered • EU could lead by example and be a laboratory for multilateralism
•  Develop fair (and potentially conditional) transfer schemes
• Europe could play a much stronger role within UNFCCC negotiations
•  EU could push for a strong monitoring and reviewing mechanism and transparency rules within the UNFCCC negotiations. Agreement should e.g. contain a dynamic five‐yearly mitigation ambition mechanism •  EU could push for a strong post‐Paris process where instruments such as carbon pricing for substantiating the voluntary pledges are implemented
13
Conclusions
• Emissions are increasing and fossil fuels are abundant. Therefore, pricing emissions is crucial for climate policy.
• There are promising steps towards a Paris Agreement. However, we are not on track for keeping 2°C. Measures such as carbon pricing are not part of the negotiations.
• EU lost diplomatic power. For gaining leadership, the EU could put carbon pricing on the UN or G20 agenda and push for strong transparency mechanisms.
14
by nature
15
Contact
Dr. Brigitte Knopf
Secretary General Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) gGmbH
Torgauer Str. 12–15 | 10829 Berlin | Germany
tel
+49 (0) 30 338 55 37 ‐ 101
mail knopf@mcc‐berlin.net
http://www.mcc‐berlin.net/en/institute/team/knopf‐
brigitte.html
MCC was founded jointly by Stiftung Mercator and
the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
16