Download Document 8904500

Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Urban
Development in Asia and the Pacific: Towards a New
Urban Agenda, 2‐3 December 2014
Key messages from global assessments on
urbanization and cities relevant to Asia in climate
change mitigation
Shobhakar Dhakal, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Energy Field of Study
[email protected], [email protected]
* Coordinating Lead Author, IPCC AR5 WGIII, Chapter on Human Settlements
** Lead Author, Global Energy Assessment, Chapter on Urban Systems
*** Co-chair, 2nd Assessment Report on Cities and Climate Change
©http://www.unicef.org/sowc2012/urbanmap/
Implications of urbanization
• Unfolding urbanization has serious implications to
environment‐ Air pollution, energy, GHG emissions,
congestion, resources etc.
• Urban areas account for between 67‐76% of global energy use
and 71%‐76% of CO2 emissions from energy use (IPCC, 2014)
– China: Urban CO2 from energy as high as 85%, US 80%, Europe 70%
(IEA 2008, Dhakal 2009, Parshall 2009)
• Out of 12.6 GtCO2 global CO2 addition in 2006‐30, cities
contribute 11 Gt or 87% of new addition (IEA, 2008)
– 90% of cumulative increase in 2006‐2030 in urban CO2 comes from
non‐OECD countries (IEA, 2008)
– Asia and Asian urbanization is a global hotspot (IPCC, 2014; GEA 2011)
• Low carbon cities need to “avoid”, “shift” and “reduce” GHG
emissions
Next two decade is crucial for global urban
CO2 interventions‐ especially in Asia
• Urbanization is an opportunity
• Demographically, 2.8 billion new urbanites in 2010‐2050 (DESA,
2013)
• Urban physical expansion (IPCC, 2014; Schneider et al., 2009; Angel et al., 2011;
Seto et al., 2011, 2012; Potere and Schneider, 2007)
– Urban land expansion is taking place at twice the rate of urban pop growth
– 55% of the total urban land in 2030 is expected to be built in the first three
decades of the 21st century
– Nearly half of the global growth in urban land will occur in Asia‐ 55% of this
growth to take place in China and India alone
• Economically, urban GDP contribution rise from 80% in 2005 to
far higher (Downscaled: Grubler et al 2007, GEA, 2011)
• Developing and rapidly urbanizing regions provide enormous
opportunities to shape urbanization, urban form and
associated infrastructure ‐ Cities are being built; not to lock‐in urban
form/design and infrastructure in high carbon pathways (IPCC, 2014; GEA, 2011)
Opportunities
• Right urban form/design affect the ‘operational energy’ related CO2
emissions as well as CO2 ‘emitted to produce materials’ for
infrastructure (IPCC, 2014)
– The existing infrastructure stock of the average Annex I resident is 3 times that of the
world average and about 5 times higher than that of the average non‐Annex I resident
(Müller et al., 2013)
– The build‐up of massive infrastructure in developing countries will result in significant
future emissions ‐ Infrastructure related emission in developing countries could
contribute 1/3 of the carbon stock/space (@1000 GTCO2) that we have from now to
2050 to stay under 2⁰C by 2100 (Müller et al., 2013)
• The urban form is crucial‐ low carbon cities are determined
collectively by density, land use mix, accessibility and connectivity
(IPCC, 2014)
– Density is necessary but not sufficient; ‐ve externalities of density require better mgmt
• Spatial planning is key for low carbon cities/urbanization (IPCC, 2014)
– Planning tools/instruments at different levels are available; many instruments are even
revenue positive, other are revenue neutral and negative
– Mitigation is expected to be most effective when policy instruments are bundled
Key issues
•
Thousands of cities are undertaking Climate Action Plans and mitigation
commitments but their aggregate impact on urban emissions is uncertain
(IPCC, 2014)
– Little systematic assessment on their implementation & the extent to which reduction
targets are being achieved or emissions reduced
– Focus largely on energy efficiency and end‐of‐pipe small low impact options
– Limited consideration to systemic elements‐ land‐use planning strategies and other
cross‐sectoral measures
– There are lots of rhetoric out there !! But these are needed for gathering momentum‐
but we need to rise above rhetoric now
•
Need to look beyond narrow view of mitigation, cross boundary linkages
and implications are key‐‐‐‐‐ expand the horizon of environmental
sustainability beyond cities
•
Consumption dimensions are key in cities – a new measure for evaluating
low carbon cities are necessary – industrial cities are not bad, someone
has to produce !!!!! But they have more challenges
Tokyo consumption emissions
Total, mn tCO2
Per capita
mn tCO2
+ CO2 emissions
embedded in
consumed goods
and services
5 times 3 times
2 times
Direct CO2
emission
Tokyo direct + indirect CO2 emissions
Using Economic I-O analyses
+ CO2
emitted in
electricity
prod
outside
‐ CO2 emissions
embedded in
exported goods
and services
Just over the
national
figure of 9
Tokyo Gov’s
estimate is
close to this
Consumption emission
of commercial cities
are very high
Kaneko & Dhakal, donot quote, under publication
Consumption and production CO2
emission in Shanghai and Beijing, 2007
Shanghai
Beijing
•
•
•
•
•
Per capita direct emissions of Shanghai
(12.4 tCO2) is higher than Beijing (8 tCO2)
but per capita consumption emission (9
tCO2) is lower (10.4 tCO2)
Shobhakar Dhakal and Shinji kaneko, Under publication, please do not quote
60% of carbon in‐flow of
Shanghai is exported
54% of total carbon
inflow in Beijing is
imported
Shanghai emits more
direct emissions than
Beijing
Consumption emissions
of Shanghai is lower
than direct emission
Other issues
• Climate change is just an ‘additional stressor’ but an
overarching one‐ Action on urban‐scale mitigation
strongly depends on our ability to relate to local co‐
benefits
• Aggressive deployment of best practices
technologies
• Key is to solve the ‘Governance paradox’
‘Governance paradox’ and need for a comprehensive
approach (IPCC, 2014)
‘Systemic changes’ in urban areas have large mitigation opportunities
but hindered by current patterns of urban governance, policy
leverages and persisting policy fragmentation
The feasibility of spatial planning instruments for climate change
mitigation is highly dependent on a city’s financial and governance
capability
The largest opportunities for GHG emission reduction lie in the urban
areas where governance and institutional capacities to address them
are the weakest
•
•
•
•
•
•
Governance and institutional capacity are scale and income dependent, i.e., tend to be
weaker in smaller scale cities and in low income/revenue settings
The bulk of urban growth momentum is expected to unfold in small‐ to medium‐size
cities in non‐Annex‐I countries, especially in Asia
For designing and implementing climate policies effectively,
institutional arrangements, governance mechanisms, and financial
resources all should be aligned with the goals of reducing urban GHG
emissions
Thank you
[email protected]
[email protected]
PM10 Exposures in 3200 Cities
Only 160 Million
breathing clean air.
More than 1 billion
need improved
urban air quality.
740 Million above
minimum WHO air
quality standard
Exposure: PM10 concentration*City population (capita.µg/m3)
Size of circle indicates exposure (Quintiles)
Color of circle indicates underlying PM10 Concentration (µg/m3) range: 7‐358 µg/m3
Source: C. Doll, 2009, based on World Bank data; Global Energy Assessment KM18
Technology portfolio and costs in 2030 world‐ many
cost effective urban options are still available..
Urban related technologies
McKensey Global GHG abatement cost curve v2.1
12
Future infrastructure emissions alone
could require about a third of the 2°C
emission budget.
Total CO2 emissions (per capita) needed to build up today’s infrastructure
Future CO2 emissions if developing countries catch up to
average developed country level.
Müller et al., 2013; IPCC 2014
The feasibility of spatial planning instruments for climate change
mitigation is highly dependent on a city’s financial and governance
capability
Sources: Bahl and Linn (1998); Bhatt (2011); Cervero (2004);
Deng (2005); Fekade (2000); Rogers (1999); Hong and
Needham (2007); Peterson (2009); Peyroux (2012); Sandroni
(2010); Suzuki et al. (2013); Urban LandMark (2012); U.S. EPA
(2013); Weitz (2003).
Key aspects of environmentally
sustainable cities
Reduce
Reducing
environmental
burden locally
& enhance env
amenities
Optimizing
urban, semi‐
urban and rural
linkages in each
city settings
Reducing
consumption
and
environmental
burden outside
of cities
• Prevailing
approaches lie
on local and
narrow
framework
In decisions making, the policy leverages do not often
match with the largest mitigation opportunities
Source: synthesized from (Jaccard et al., 1997; Grubler et al., 2012)
Systemic changes have more mitigation opportunities but
hindered by policy fragmentation
GEA 2012, IPCC 2014
Enormous urban population live in slums
UNEP (2011). Keeping Track of Our Changing Environment: From Rio to Rio+20 (1992‐2012).
Urban Electricity Access and Poverty‐ yet a large urban
population without electricity access
North Africa
Sub-Saharan
Africa
China & East Asia
South Asia
other dev.
Countries
Developing total
Ind. Countries
urban population (Million), 2002
with
without
TOTAL
electricity access
% electrification
73
1
74
98.8
125
696
271
117
29
119
242
725
390
51.5
96.0
69.4
433
1597
1085
9
275
0
441
1872
1085
98.1
85.3
100.0
Total Urban
2682
275
2957
90.7
Total Rural
1876
1347
3223
58.2
Minimum access investments: 1.5 trillion $
Source: IEA, WEO, 2004 estimates; Global Energy Assessment/KM 18