* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Diapositiva 1
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
100% renewable energy wikipedia , lookup
Kyoto Protocol wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Energiewende in Germany wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in New Zealand wikipedia , lookup
Carbon governance in England wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
United Nations Climate Change conference wikipedia , lookup
Paris Agreement wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Views on the Kyoto Protocol wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change wikipedia , lookup
Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Business action on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Rio, Kyoto, Copenhagen, Cancun, Durban ..... what's next? A skeptical view on climate negotiations. Carlo Carraro President, University of Venice Vice Chair, IPCC WG III Chairman, Scientific Advisory Board, FEEM Introduction - Climate change problem is an important but difficult challenge for human beings/our societies - Climate change control is a global public good - Long term dimension of the problem - Pervasive uncertainties on the physical and economic dimensions of the climate change problem 1 International Negotiations In 1997 all UNFCCC countries (189) approved the Kyoto Protocol that entered into force in 2006. The Kyoto Protocol however has a minor impact on GHG concentrations and temperature At the G8 meeting in L’Aquila, then in Pittsburgh at MEF, and finally in Copenhagen at COP XV, main countries agreed to stabilise temperature increase at 2°C (no more than 2°C...) Same principles have been reaffirmed in Cancun at COP XVI. However, G8/G20 countries failed to deliver an international agreement on policy and measures to achieve such target. 2 3. The arithmetics of climate Concentrations of GHG (ppm CO2-eq) Most Likely Very Likely Above (>90%) Likely in the Range (>66%) 350 450 550 650 750 1000 1200 1.0 2.1 2.9 3.6 4.3 5.5 6.3 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.8 3.1 0.6 - 1.4 1.4 - 3.1 1.9 - 4.4 2.4 - 5.5 2.8 - 6.4 3.7 - 8.3 4.2 - 9.4 Table 1. Most likely, likely and very likely bounds/ranges of global mean equilibrium surface temperature increase in degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperature for different levels of CO2 equivalent concentrations (ppm). Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, WG I, Chapter 10, Table 10.8 . The present level of concentrations is about 430 ppm CO2-eq Uncertainty of the emissions-temperature nexus is relevant 3 2 °C target … some basic numbers According to IPCC, in order to keep temperature increase below 2°C with good probability, concentrations of GHGs should not exceed 380-390 ppm CO2-eq. If we accept the possibility of overshooting the target, the level of concentrations can be higher but not greater than 450 ppm. The present level of GHG concentration is 430 ppm CO2-eq (390 CO2 only), well above the 380-390 ppm level necessary to make a temperature increase above 2°C unlikely. 450 ppm CO2-eq will be reached within six years, whatever world leaders decided in L’Aquila and in Copenhagen. If 550 ppm CO2-eq are reached, there is little chance to stay below 2°C. 4 Reality check…. - If we assume that emissions will halve by 2050, declining at a constant pace from 2010, concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere will be 40 ppm higher in 2050. - This implies that all GHG concentrations will reach 470 ppm CO2-eq in 2050, assuming that emissions of non CO2 gases are heroically cut to zero starting from 2010. - The emissions path envisaged by MEF leaders is thus in line with a 550 ppm target by the end of the century. Hence, more than 2 degrees... 5 Even a 550 ppm target would be very difficult to achieve… Given the projected dynamics of world population and economic growth, the objective of limiting concentrations below 550 ppm CO2eq implies that average per capita emissions in the second half of this century are to be reduced from about 2 to about 0.3 tC per year. In other words, the world will have to emit not more than today’s India’s average – quite a significant reduction for most industrialised countries (US average per capita emissions are about 6 tC) and for countries that aim at similar lifestyle standards. Just to provide another benchmark, 0.3 tC is the amount of GHGs emitted by an individual flying – one way – from the EU to the US East coast! 6 Required emission reductions 1200 1000 GtC 800 600 400 200 0 emissions since 1751 abatement to 2100 7 If China and India don’t reduce their own emissions, there is no chance to reach even the 550 ppm target 18 16 BaU 14 Other Non Annex 1 12 Gton C SASIA 10 Targets China 3.7 Rad Forcing 8 6 3.5 Rad Forcing OECD countries Total India Other LDCs 4 2 0 2005 China 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 8 9. The climate equation in brief Emissions Concentrations Temperature Climate Emissions of Greenhouse Gasses (carbon dioxide, methane, ...) remain in the atmosphere for decades or even centuries Natural absorption is very slow for carbon dioxide Temperature is a function of concentrations, not of emissions In order to achieve the most ambitious targets (1.5 - 2.0*C) it is necessary to reduce the stock of GHGs: negative emissions 9 10. GHGs emissions Fonte: IPCC AR4 (2007). 10 Fonte: IPCC AR4 (2007). We need global action 11 What’s behind the increase in emissions? …strong pressure on energy supply Increasing role of renewables … but the energy mix will be dominated by fossil fuels if their negative environmental effects are not internalized through appropriate climate policies Source: WEO 2009 Increase will be large particularly in developing countries Source: WITCH model Energy poverty map About 1,8 million people without access to electricity … Population growth Three more billion people on Earth…. 16. Energy and development - 2 1979 6000 Energy use per capita (kg of oil equivalent) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 Carraro and Massetti (2010) 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 GDP per Capita 1960-2005 (constant 2000 US$) 16 World High Income Low & Middle Income 30000 17. CO2 emissions and development CO2 emissions per capita (Ton) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Carraro and Massetti (2010) 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 GDP per Capita 1960-2000 (constant 2000 US$) World 17 High Income Low & Middle Income 30000 Why it is hard to build an international agreement? 18 19. Why it is hard to build consensus? Strong inertia of the climate system requires to take costly measures now, to enjoy benefits one century from now: intergenerational coordination problem GHGs emissions get perfectly mixed in the global atmosphere: international coordination problem Large uncertainty on cost of mitigation 19 The most ambitious targets appear highly unrealistic: we are about to pass the level of concentrations that would prevent the attainment of the +2ºC target with high probability 20. Act now or later? 20 KAL's cartoon, Jun 17th 2010 | From The Economist print edition 21. The importance of participation NON-OECD Emissions Trajectories 18 16 14 GtC 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2010 2015 2020 2025 Stabilization at 550 ppm CO2-eq NON-OECD ‒10% at 2050 NON-OECD ‒30% at 2050 NON-OECD ‒50% at 2050 21 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 NON-OECD - BaU NON-OECD ‒20% at 2050 NON-OECD ‒40% at 2050 Figure 1. Emissions pathways compatible with a stabilization target at 550 ppm CO2 eq at 2100 and emissions trajectories of Non-OECD countries with various degrees of commitment. Source: WITCH model, FEEM. Carraro and Massetti. www.voxeu.org, 3 September 2009. 22. The cost of mitigation • Strong increase of costs as the target becomes more stringent Fonte: RECIPE Project (2009); Discounted consumption loss; 3% discount rate. Concentrations level of only CO2. 22 23. Delayed action If there is delay, or noncoordinated action costs increase considerably Delaying action beyond 2030 makes it impossible to achieve the 450ppm CO2 only target. Source: RECIPE Project (2009); Cost of stabilizing CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm, with different hypothesis of international cooperation. 23 24. The technology puzzle • Problems in the deployment of key carbon-free technologies increase costs 24 Source: RECIPE Project (2009); cost of stabilizing CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm, with different hypothesis on the availability of technologies. The incentives to participate in a global agreement 25 26. Climate change impacts Climate change impact 1.00 LAM Percentage loss in GDP 0.00 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090 2095 2100 SEASIA CHINA -1.00 SASIA -2.00 SSA -3.00 MENA TE -4.00 JPNKOR -5.00 AUCANZ -6.00 EEURO WEURO -7.00 USA -8.00 Time horizon The impacts of climate change are expected to vary widely across regions. Developing countries would be more affected than their developed counterparts Uncertainties are large, however, as reflected by the wide variance in damage estimates across studies 26 Discounted consumption loss2 27. Abatement costs - carbon tax Panel A. Annex I regions1 1.0 0.0 -1.0 -2.0 -3.0 -4.0 -5.0 United States Western EU countries Eastern EU countries Aus-Can-Nzl Japan-Korea Non-EU Eastern Europe -6.0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Carbon Tax (2005 $US / t CO2 eq) loss2 27 1.0 200 Japan-Korea Non-EU Eastern Europe 28. Abatement costs - carbon tax -6.0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Discounted consumption loss2 Carbon Tax (2005 $US / t CO2 eq) 1.0 Panel B. Non-Annex I regions 0.0 -1.0 -2.0 -3.0 -4.0 -5.0 Middle East and North Africa Africa South Asia China South East Asia Latin America -6.0 20 28 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Carbon Tax (2005 $US / t CO2 eq) 200 29. Free Riding Incentive on the GC 1.4% CHINA Free riding incentive 1.2% TE MENA 1.0% AUCANZ 0.8% 0.6% JPNKOR 0.4% SEASIA SSA EEURO LAM USA SASIA WEURO 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% GDP loss of a 100$/tCO2 tax 29 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% Towards a bottom-up architecture? 30 Future challenges: More energy, to meet an increasing energy demand A “clean” energy, to control climate change A more equally distributed energy to favour economic development in poorer region and thus global economic growth 31 Obstacles: High financial needs for investments in the energy sector Insufficient and weak governance of global issues implies unavoidable climate change (more than 2 degrees C) Resources are also needed for investments in adaptation to climate change 32 Investments in the energy sector to stabilize GHG concentrations at 450 CO2 eq. additional annual investment needs in lowLevel carbon technologies and energy efficiency total investment in the 450 scenario in low- incremental investment cost in relative to Reference Scenario to meet 450 carbon power generation over 2010-2030 GDP terms almost $ 6600 bln 2020: 0.5% of GDP (72% renewable, 19% nuclear, 9% CCS) 2030: 1.1% of GDP almost $ 3100 bln 2020: 0.4% of GDP (65% renewable, 20% nuclear, 15% CCS) 2030: 0.8% of GDP almost $ 1100 bln 2020: 0.5% of GDP (53% renewable, 27% CCS, 19% nuclear) 2030: 1% of GDP almost $ 1300 bln 2020: 0.3% of GDP (77% renewable, 7% CCS, 16% nuclear) 2030: 0.6% of GDP almost $ 200 bln 2020: 0.3% of GDP (50% renewable, 4% CCS, 46% nuclear) 2030: 0.6% of GDP almost $ 1500 bln 2020: 0.8% of GDP (73% renewable, 5% CCS, 22% nuclear) 2030: 1.5% of GDP almost $ 550 bln 2020: 0.9% of GDP (83% renewable, 2% CCS, 16% nuclear) 2030: 1.4% of GDP almost $ 220 bln 2020: 0.3% of GDP (58% renewable, 12% CCS, 30% nuclear) 2030: 1% of GDP Scenario in 2020 33 World $430 bln OECD+ $220 bln US $ 90 bln EU $ 70 bln Japan $ 17 bln China $ 80 bln India $ 25 bln Russia $ 8 bln Investments to adapt to climate change Source IIED (2009) SECTORS UNFCCC ESTIMATES NEW IIED COST ESTIMATES Agriculture $11.3-12.6 billions/year Adaptation deficit recovering it could cost up to $40-60 billions $11.3-12.6 + $40-60 billions Water $11 billions/year Transfer of water across countries, no adaptation to altered flood risk Significant underestimation, more studies needed Human health $4-12 billions/year Population grows but share of illnessrelated deaths remains constant 30-50% increase in costs Coasts $11 billions/year Infrastructures $8-130 billions/year Ecosystems 34 SOURCES OF UNDERESTIMATIONS $65-80 billions/year for protected areas Sea level rise (SLR) faster than foreseen, Overall costs could double residual damage estimation ($1 billion/year) depending on speed of SLR, residual too optimistic damage costs t $2-3 billions/year Infrastructural deficit removing could cost up $315 billions/year Besides deficit, $16-63 billions/year Exclusion of adaptation costs for nonprotected areas ($290 billions/year) $65-80 + $290 billions/year About 175 billions per year R&D investments 0.12% 0.10% 0.08% 0.06% Decarbonization 0.04% Efficiency 0.02% 1970 1980 1990 0.00% 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Historical BAU Tot Energy R&D A1 CC Energy Intensity R&D A1 CC Source: WITCH model Roughly 50 Blns a year of energy innovation investments in the next two decades 35 for a total of about 650 billions/year… Investments: some conclusions Climate policy will induce higher investments in the energy sector (with respect to the BaU scenario) Low-carbon world requires a new energy mix: conventional fossil fuels power plants are substituted by nuclear, coal power plants with CCS and renewable sources Large investments have to be diverted – in a relatively short time frame – towards complex and risky technologies Significant innovative efforts are required especially outside the power sector 36 Green stimulus of national recovery package Ratio of green stimulus of national recovery packages, absolute volumes in bn€ 37 The green share of the European recovery plan (58.7% ) is high wrt other countries’ package Source: GEF 2009, based on Bernard et al. 2009; data from HSBC 2009 Conclusions Both the increased energy demand and the climate challenge require additional investments in the energy sector At the same time, policy signals are necessary to divert investments that would be undertaken anyway The development and application of green technologies can be an opportunity for Europe: it does not require additional investments but a reshuffle of their mix Net positive effect on employment Investments in energy innovation and in climate adaptation are also necessary Carbon markets can be an important source of revenue to finance part of these investments Corso Magenta 63, 20123 Milano - Italia - Tel +39 02.520.36934 - Fax +39 02.520.36946 - www.feem.it Thank you! Corso Magenta 63, 20123 Milano - Italia - Tel +39 02.520.36934 - Fax +39 02.520.36946 - www.feem.it 40. Title The realism of negotiations’ objectives. Can the 2 degree targets actually be achieved? Is the focus on a global agreement meaningful? The incentives for different countries or regions to participate in a climate agreement The financial resources needed to stabilize GHG concentrations The time horizon of climate negotiations and the likelihood of a climate agreement in the next decade The possibility to move away from traditional global negotiations, by focusing on a bottom-up domestic policydriven approach The necessity to invest more resources on adaptation to climate change 40