katya petropavlova (adapted from mark jaccard’s public talk presentations) school of resource and...
Post on 13-Jan-2016
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Katya Petropavlova (adapted from Mark Jaccard’s public talk
presentations)
School of Resource and Environmental Management
Simon Fraser University
July 4, 2012
Responding to Climate Change: Difficulties and
Opportunities
EMRG
Energy and Materials Research Group Simon Fraser University
2
Outline
1. The climate change threat and our motives for action
2. The details – emissions, concentrations, temperature, and impacts
3. Political promises and their implications for energy & emissions
4. Reasons for the failure to act on climate change
5. Opportunities and strategies for effective climate action
EMRG
3
Outline
1. The climate change threat and our motives for action
2. The details – emissions, concentrations, temperature, and impacts
3. Political promises and their implications for energy & emissions
4. Reasons for the failure to act on climate change
5. Opportunities and strategies for effective climate action
EMRG
EMRG
Mar/2012 4
emrgemrgenergy and materials research group
emrgemrgenergy and materials research group
Today
Tipping point?
5
1. Self-interest – catastrophic impacts on us and our offspring
2. Responsibility for the biosphere – mass extinctions due to climate change
3. Responsibility for other humans – rich countries developed by burning fossil fuels but initial impacts are in poor countries
Motives for actionEMRG
Feb/2012 6
Responsibility by country in cumulative carbon
emissions
Patz JA, Gibbs HK, Foley JA, Rogers JV, Smith KR, 2007, Climate change and global health: Quantifying a growing ethical crisis, EcoHealth 4(4): 397–405, 2007.
EMRG
Feb/2012 7
Climate-related mortality per million people by
2000
EMRG
8
Prescription vs. prediction
Values are “prescriptions” for how humans ought to act
Need to recognize human tendencies to:
• Hold beliefs that favor one’s interests (self-interest bias)• Overlook inconvenient logical connections (cognitive dissonance)• Think uncritically (susceptibility to misinformation)• Have institutions incapable of long-term collective pursuits
Need to exercise in “prediction,” not wishful thinking
EMRG
9
Outline
1. The climate change threat and our motives for action
2. The details – emissions, concentrations, temperature, and impacts
3. Political promises and their implications for energy & emissions
4. Reasons for the failure to act on climate change
5. Opportunities and strategies for effective climate action
EMRG
10
Details: emissions, concentrations,
temperatures, impacts to 2100 +
Level CO2 (ppm) CO2 e (ppm) Likely tempΔ
Pre-1750 280 ? 0 C
2010 level 390 460 2.2 C (1.2 in 2010)
critical level 350 450 2 C
Stern target 450 550 -> 3 C?
Realistically? 550 650 -> 3 C + ?
Sources: IPCC, Energy Modeling Forum, Anderson & Bows, 2009
Source of confusionCO2 e = CO2 + methane + nitrous oxide + others
current path ≈650-770 ≈750-850 4 – 6 C
Scientists contemplate 4C beyond 2100
www.eci.ox.ac.uk/4degrees
350.org
EMRG
11
Past sea level vs. temperature: long-term
response lags
Source: Archer
Long-term effect
EMRG
12
Uncertainty of exact temperature change,
but not of temperature change
Source: Ronald Prinn, MIT
EMRG
13
Outline
1. The climate change threat and our motives for action
2. The details – emissions, concentrations, temperature, and impacts
3. Political promises and their implications for energy & emissions
4. Reasons for the failure to act on climate change
5. Opportunities and strategies for effective climate action
EMRG
14
Political promises & implications
Promises:• 2°C increase (max 450 CO2e) – Copenhagen, 2009• 80% GHG reductions by 2050 - most rich countries (65% in Canada)
Implications:• 550 CO2e (with only 50% chance of not exceeding 2°C limit) global emissions must fall 60% by 2050 (Stern)• Emissions of poor countries must also fall by 20% relative to 2010 levels• But inertia in the global energy system
EMRG
15
CO2–free energy share to stabilize at 550 CO2e
by 2100
Source: Nakicenovic
15% in 201050% in 2030 80% in 2050
CO2-free energy share = biomass + other renewables + nuclear + fossil fuels with CCS
Only possible if all energy investment is CO2-free
from today
60% reduction from growing system requires 80% CO2-free globally
EMRG
16
CO2-free share by sector to stabilize at 550 ppm CO2e
by 2100
Electricity generation - 90% CO2-free by 2050(renewables, fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage, nuclear)
Buildings - 85% CO2-free by 2050(heat pumps, passive solar, biofuels, photovoltaics, solar hot water)
Vehicles - 80% CO2-free by 2050(electric, biofuel, hydrogen)
EMRG
17
Truth-testing our politicians:
the case of Canada
• Canada does not pursue the CO2-free technology at the rate to meet its goals• Canadian government promotes tar sands expansion
Question: Is government’s action consistent with 2050 promises of 65% reduction (or even just 50% reduction) and global promise of 2°C?
Answer: No (Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford, EMF 22)
EMRG
18
EMRG
• Modeled Canada’s tar sands under global 40% CO2e reduction policy • Emissions are higher 550 CO2e
19
World oil prices:40% CO2e reduction by
2050
Source: Chan et al, MIT 2010
World oil prices stay at today’s levels with global
climate policy
World oil prices rise under business-as-usual
EMRG
20
Hand-picked advisory body confirms MIT – models
Harper 65%
Source: National Roundtable on Environment & Economy, 2009
Canadian government targets
Emissions must fall today to reach targets
EMRG
21
Conclusions from independent and
government advisory studies
• World is not on the path to stabilize by 2100 at 450 CO2e or 550 CO2e
• Canada is not on a path to reduce emissions by 65% (or even 50%) by 2050 (tar sands + pipelines = government not acting truthfully)
• Canada / world are locking on to path to ≈800 CO2e by 2100 (+ 4-6 °C increase)
EMRG
22
Outline
1. The climate change threat and our motives for action
2. The details – emissions, concentrations, temperature, and impacts
3. Political promises and their implications for energy & emissions
4. Reasons for the failure to act on climate change
5. Opportunities and strategies for effective climate action
EMRG
23
Understanding the failure to act
Past “successes” with acid emissions, smog creating emissions, ozone-depleting emissions, lead emissions
Yet climate policy failure now approaching three decades
Question: Do climate-altering emissions present a more difficult problem?
Answer: Yes
EMRG
24
1.Global public good - individual initiatives of little value; need compliance enforcement mechanism
2. High starting costs – total transformation costs small, but high initial costs and risks to begin shift to CO2-free sources
3. Invisible benefits / uncertainty about “specific” impacts - but major outcome is virtually certain
4. Delayed effects – must act now to prevent future impacts, but human decision-making often myopic
5. Who pays - perceptions of equity aligned with self-interest (polluter pays vs. equal payment per capita or GDP vs. historical responsibility)
Specific challenges of climate issue
EMRG
25
Self-serving bias and efforts to discredit
climate science & policy“It is difficult to get a man to understand something
when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair
1.Anti-science bias – easy to convince people to disbelieve science when it conflicts with their self-interest
2.Greenwashing campaigns – alternative images of fossil fuels, i.e. “clean coal,” “ethical oil,” “transitional natural gas”
3.Anti-establishment bias – IPCC is portrayed as a conspiracy-like establishment
4.Anti-government bias – climate policy is portrayed as excessive regulation, higher taxes, and “social engineering”
EMRG
26
Outline
1. The climate change threat and our motives for action
2. The details – emissions, concentrations, temperature, and impacts
3. Political promises and their implications for energy & emissions
4. Reasons for the failure to act on climate change
5. Opportunities and strategies for effective climate action
EMRG
27
If we don’t take these biases into account, we will FAIL to motivate effective individual and political action on climate change
Strategy 1: being realistic about humans and self-
delusion
EMRG
28
Strategy 2: communicating science and risk
EMRG
29
Strategy 3: confronting the “what about the Chinese”
argument
Question for high school students: “Figure out how the international community achieves collective action on a public good when:”
• Some countries are much richer than others• The rich countries have much higher cumulative
emissions• The rich countries can use subsidies and trade
threats to get global compliance
Each year different students, but always the same answer:
• Rich countries go first with cutting their emissions thus lowering the costs of CO2-free technologies and fuels
• To ensure universal compliance with global effort, they can provide subsidies and apply trade measures
EMRG
30
Strategy 4: confronting the “our emissions are
small” argument
Canada is responsible for 2% of global CO2 emissions
In World War II, Canada was responsible for less than 2% of the Allied effort that defeated Germany and Japan
EMRG
31
Strategy 5: confronting the “we need the economic growth
& jobs” argument
EMRG
Question for elementary school students: “What happens when your job creation strategy destroys the planet?”
Economic growth has been used often to justify harm“Low carbon growth will
be more energy-secure, cleaner, safer, quieter and more bio-diverse. Low-carbon growth is the future growth story. High-carbon growth, on the other hand, will destroy itself.”
– Nicholas Stern
32
Strategy 6: confronting the self-interest bias of fossil
fuel regions
burning fossil fuels
No use of fossil fuels
extremely difficult/
impossible?
fossil fuels with CCS
difficult
CCS = carbon capture & storage
EMRG
33
Strategy 7: confronting the “we don’t need climate
policy” argumentCorporate social responsibility as solution – but businesses compete on the basis of bottom-line and fossil fuels are cheap
Green consumerism as solution – but virtually all human expenditures of income involve energy use at some stage
Energy efficiency is cheap as solution – but usually it is more expensive and inconvenient than simply burning fossil fuels
Carbon neutrality as solution – “false sense of progress”
Peak oil and high energy prices as solution – but the earth’s crust has a scary plentitude of fossil fuels and humans keep innovating to find and extract more
EMRG
34
A scary plentitude of fossil fuels: Global Energy
Assessment
Historical production through 2009
Production 2009
Reserves Resources Additional occurrences
[EJ] [EJ] [EJ] [EJ] [EJ] Conventional oil 6 647 166.7 4 900 – 7 610 4 170 – 6 150 n.a. Unconventional oil 607 23.1 3 750 – 5 600 11 280 – 14 800 > 40 000 Conventional gas 3 467 112.7 5 000 – 7 100 7 200 – 8 900 n.a. Unconventional gas 158 12.0 20 100 – 67 100 40 200 – 121 900 > 1 000 000 Coal 7 269 152.7 17 300 – 21 000 291 000 – 435 000 n.a.
Conventional uraniumb 1 333 25.6 2 339 7 420 n.a. Unconventional uranium
n.a. 4 100 2 600 000
1
EMRG
Strategy 8: confronting the “climate policy can’t work”
argument
Information and subsidies do not work – 20 years of evidence
Emissions pricing (carbon tax and/or cap-and-trade) – economically efficient but difficult politically
Regulations - successfully phased-out acid rain, smog, lead, ozone-depleting emissions
Design regulations (and pricing) to be efficient – e.g., BC’s carbon tax and BC’s zero-emission electricity policy
EMRG
36
Strategy 9: if government won’t act
(and perhaps is lying)
What is your moral duty as a citizen if independent evidence shows your government is not telling the truth and that the implications are disastrous?
• Public relations / social networking campaigns / boycotts – focus on popular culture, Hollywood • Legal action – 100 US coal plants delayed or postponed in past 5 years• Non-violent civil actions (350.org, Greenpeace, VTACC)
“Hope is not the conviction that action will turn out well, but the certainty that action makes sense, regardless how it turns out.”
Vaclav Havel
EMRG
37
Thanks for your attention!
Comments/ Questions?
EMRG
Mar/2012 38
Extra slides
EMRG
Mar/2012 39
Climate change economics
Abatement Costs
GDP in 2050 is 75% greater instead of 80%
Energy costs in 2050 perhaps 30% higher than otherwise.
Energy costs in typical household budget increase from 6% today to 8% by 2050.
Do Nothing Costs
Character of impactsBiodiversity loss with higher temp.Extreme weather events (drought, hurricane, heat wave)Ocean acidificationDisease surprisesGreater floods and coastal instability related to rising oceans
Timing, magnitude and GDP costHighly uncertain, but evidence we underestimate risks of extreme outcomesIn 2050 – 20% of GDP lost? 50%?In 2100 – catastrophic?
EMRG
Mar/2012 40
Actions and policies for greenhouse gas
reductionActions by households and firms
Energy efficiency (if using fossil fuels) Fuel switching (away from fossil fuels) Emissions capture and storage “The rest” (industrial processes, landfill
management, agriculture, forestry)
--------------------------------------------------------------------Policies by government to drive actions
Information Subsidies Regulations (command-and-control) Regulations (market-oriented, e.g. cap and trade) Emissions charges (carbon tax)
EMRG
Mar/2012 41 41Jaccard-Simon Fraser University 41
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Ca
na
dia
n G
HG
Em
iss
ion
s (
Mt
CO 2
e)
G7, Rio (1988)(1992)
World Conferenceon ChangingAtmosphere (1988)
Kyoto (1997)
GreenPlan
NationalActionProgram
ActionPlan2000
ProjectGreen
ClimateChange Planfor Canada
EcoENERGY
Canada’s climate policy failure:targets, policies, emissions
EMRG
Mar/2012 42
Energy consumption and new devices (US data)
Steve Groves, SFU – 2009
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Year
Ele
ctri
city
con
sum
pti
on p
er h
ouse
hol
d (
kW
h)
Telephone
Imaging
15 energy using devices
45 energy using devices
EMRG
1/2012 Jaccard-Simon Fraser University
43
Fossil fuelsEMRG
top related