Download Presentation - Carbon-CAP

Some History of Energy and Emissions
Michael Grubb
Professor of International Energy and Climate Change Policy, UCL
Editor-in-Chief, Climate Policy journal
Keynote Presentation to international conference
Our Common Future under Climate Change, Paris, 7 July 2015
Key points
•
Energy-economy relationships in basic economic development
•
Patterns? - centrality of structural change
•
Projections? - history of forecasting errors
•
The bill? - relative constancy of national energy expenditures
•
Shares, shocks and shifts – emission trends and territory, from last 50 to last 5 years
Energy-GDP relationship: the Common Caricature
Many fascinating studies
of energy-indevelopment patterns eg.
Fouquet, Grubler, Smil
Vast majority of emissions
from countries now >
$10,000/cap;
developed econs > $30,000
Across time and countries, basic industrialisation is energy-intensive;
historically aggregated income – energy relationships often assumed to extend
- falling energy costs important feature of initial ‘industrial revolution’
- but global emissions dominated by modern economies > $10,000/cap
Sectoral and national developmental patterns suggest a different picture ….
‘The Pattern’ - profound structural changes with development
-
Industry rises to dominate over the
agricultural and domestic needs of
subsistence economies
“From Production ….
-
By c. $10,000 per capita: relative industrial
decline, growth in transport & services
…. to Pleasure”
Source: A. Schafer, Structural change in energy use, Energy Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, Pages 429–43
‘The Projections?’ Very poor record in energy / emissions forecasting,
particularly as countries move beyond basic industrialisation
US: energy consumption in 2000
UK: “Against projected 30% increase in UK GHG
turned out to be below the low end
emissions over the next decade … demanding
of all mid-70s forecasts
ambition to return emissions in 2000 to 1990 levels”
- Mrs Thatcher, 1990
Source: A. Schafer, Structural change in energy use, Energy Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, March 2005, Pages 429–43
‘The Bill’? At least amongst industrialised countries, long-run energy
expenditure / GDP quite constant despite wide price variations
Average end-use energy prices ($/t)
1000
Italy
900
Sweden
Japan
800
UK
Germany
700
600
EU 15
If energy prices kept too low (as
with former Soviet), waste /
‘satisficing’ behavior leaves
countries with high bills when
subsidies cannot be sustained
France
500
Netherlands
400
Korea
Australia
Hungary Czech Republic
Slovak Republic
USA
300
Poland
200
Line of constant energy
expenditure as % of GDP
100
“Bashmakov-Newbery constant”
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Average energy intensity (kgoe / GDP)
Eg. Japan spent the same %GDP on energy as the US despite end-user prices being more than
twice as high; so did France and Germany.
Figure 6-1 The most important diagram in energy economics
Countries
subsidised
energy
to keep
cheap
ended
spending
more.
Note: The graphthat
plots average
energy intensity
against
average it
energy
priceshave
(1990-2005)
for a up
range
of prices.
The dotted line shows the line of constant energy expenditure (intensity x price) per unit GDP over the period
Source:
et al.,with
Planetary
6.1 derived
from Newbery
Source: AfterGrubb
Newbery (2003),
updated dataEconomics,
from InternationalFigure
Energy Agency
and EU KLEMS
‘The Shares’ - IPCC AR5 Illustrated the rapid rise of CO2 from Upper-Middle
income countries (particularly China), but partly due to ‘embodied’ trade
High-income regions
generally net importers,
footprint significant
growth 1990-2010
Upper-middle and
lower income regions
in general growing
“embodied” exports to
high income countries
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 1: OECD per-cap emissions vs wealth,
through oil & financial shocks (1960 – 2014)
1973
1990
2008
2014
1960
tCO2 / capita
US
Trends in per-capita GDP and E-CO2 of different regions up to 2014,
territorial (from 1960) and consumption footprint (from 1970)
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 1: OECD per-cap emissions vs wealth,
through oil & financial shocks (1960 – 2014)
1973
1990
2008
US
tCO2 / capita
1960
Trends in per-capita GDP and E-CO2 of different regions up to 2014,
territorial (from 1960) and consumption footprint (from 1970)
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 1: OECD per-cap emissions vs wealth,
through oil & financial shocks (1960 – 2014)
1973
1990
2008
US
tCO2 / capita
1960
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 1: OECD per-cap emissions vs wealth,
through oil & financial shocks (1960 – 2014)
1973
1990
2008
US
1960
tCO2 / capita
Canada
Trends in per-capita GDP and E-CO2 of different regions up to 2014,
territorial (from 1960) and consumption footprint (from 1970)
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 1: OECD per-cap emissions vs wealth,
through oil & financial shocks (1960 – 2014)
1973
1990
2008
US
1960
Canada
1973
2008
tCO2 / capita
1990
1960
EU-15
Japan
OECD territorial p.c.
emissions now back
to level of 1960s;
consumption
emissions c 10%
below 2008 peak
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 2: Some advanced emerging economies have so
far kept emissions to a small fraction (2-4 tCO2/cap) of historical antecedants
1973
1990
2008
US
1960
Canada
2008
tCO2 / capita
1990
EU-15
1990
Mexico
2014
1990
Brazil
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
‘The shocks and shifts’, Part 3: Asian giants so far closer to the ‘old course’
1973
1990
2008
US
1960
Canada
2008
tCO2 / capita
1990
2014
China
1990
Mexico
India
Brazil
EU-15
China territorial
per-cap equals
EU-15, of
today and 1960!
1990
Territorial CO2
GDP (constant 2005 US$000 PPP) / capita
Mean of four major international Multi-Regional Input-Output
models, as convened and analysed by EU FP7 Carbon Cap
consortium, with particular thanks to NTNU and TNO.
Consumption CO2
footprint
Some History of Energy and Emissions: conclusions
Key points
Energy-economy relationships…
Energy essential to basic economic development
Patterns?
‘Production to pleasure’ phase shift around $10,000/cap with trend breaks
Projections?
A history of forecasting errors
The Bill?
Relative constancy of national energy expenditures / GDP
Shares, shocks and shifts – some determining questions
•
Will rich countries accelerate decarbonisation as part of recovery from recession?
•
Can ‘advanced emerging’ economies maintain rapid development within 2-4 tCO2/cap?
•
With China entering ‘industrial maturation’ can it make an early turn towards decarbonization
– and which path will India chart?
Michael Grubb
Professor of International Energy and Climate Change Policy, UCL
Editor-in-Chief, Climate Policy journal