d3.3: a final brief of 14 country case...

TRANSITIONS PATHWAYS AND RISK ANALYSIS FOR CLIMATE

CHANGE MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION STRATEGIES

D3.3: A final brief of 14 country case studies

Project Coordinator: SPRU, Science Policy Research Unit, (UoS) University of Sussex

Work Package 3 Leader Organisation: SPRU

Contributing authors and organisation: See Appendix A for full list of contributors. Introduction

and editing by Ed Dearnley (SPRU).

August 2018

D3.3: A final brief of 14 country case studies Page 2

TRANSrisk

Transitions pathways and risk analysis for climate

change mitigation and adaptation strategies

GA#: 642260

Funding type: RIA

Deliverable number

(relative in WP) 3.3

Deliverable name: A final brief of 14 country case studies

WP / WP number: 3

Delivery due date: Month 36 (31st August 2018)

Actual date of submission: 23rd August 2018

Dissemination level: Public

Lead beneficiary: SPRU (WP3 Leader)

Responsible scientist/administrator: Jenny Lieu (SPRU)

Estimated effort (PM): 1 (Production of this Deliverable only)

Contributor(s): See Appendix A

Estimated effort contributor(s) (PM): 1 (Deliverable write up only)

Internal reviewer: Ed Dearnley (SPRU)


Preface

Both the models concerning the future climate evolution and its impacts, as well as the models

assessing the costs and benefits associated with different mitigation pathways face a high degree

of uncertainty. There is an urgent need to not only understand the costs and benefits associated

with climate change but also the risks, uncertainties and co-effects related to different mitigation

pathways as well as public acceptance (or lack of) of low-carbon (technology) options. The main

aims and objectives of TRANSrisk therefore are to create a novel assessment framework for

analysing costs and benefits of transition pathways that will integrate well-established approaches

to modelling the costs of resilient, low-carbon pathways with a wider interdisciplinary approach

including risk assessments. In addition TRANSrisk aims to design a decision support tool that should

help policy makers to better understand uncertainties and risks and enable them to include risk

assessments into more robust policy design.

PROJECT PARTNERS

No Participant name Short Name Country code Partners’ logos

1 Science Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex

SPRU UK

2 Basque Centre for Climate Change BC3 ES

3 Cambridge Econometrics CE UK

4 Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands ECN NL

5 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (funded by Swiss Gov’t)

ETH Zurich CH

6 Institute for Structural Research IBS PL

7 Joint Implementation Network JIN NL

8 National Technical University of Athens NTUA GR

9 Stockholm Environment Institute SEI SE, KE

10 University of Graz UniGraz AT

11 University of Piraeus Research Centre UPRC GR

12 Pontifical Catholic University of Chile CLAPESUC CL


Executive Summary

This Documents presents the results of TRANSrisk’s 14 country case studies. It builds on the earlier

D3.2 ‘Context of 15 country case studies’, which detailed the background to each of the case

studies.

Here we provide an overview of each case study using a common template. Each case study

provides a brief description of its background, research methods and findings. Detailed outputs

are provided in associated documents for each case study (links are provided); these aim to

disseminate case study findings to a wide variety of audiences. Case study leaders have been

encouraged to produce documents aimed at both technical and non-technical audiences, with

outputs including (but not limited to):

Technical audiences:

Journal papers.

Contributions to a special issue of ‘Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions’.

Chapters in the TRANSrisk books “Case study narratives on risks and uncertainties

associated with climate mitigation pathways” and ‘Understanding risks and uncertainties

in energy and climate policy: Multidisciplinary methods and tools towards a low carbon

society’.

Conference presentations and posters.

Non-technical audiences:

Policy briefs.

Conference presentations (e.g. trade conferences).

Newsletter articles (e.g. TRANSrisk, organisation’s own, trade press, etc).

Articles for the EU research dissemination website climatechangemitigation.eu

One-to-one meetings with key actors.

Each case study also briefly explains its key outreach activities, and details any research impact

achieved at the time of writing. Note that, as case studies are currently in the process of finalising

their work, in many cases it is too early to capture significant research impacts.

Several of the dissemination documents associated with the case studies are currently in

development. This is especially the case for those with long publication processes such as book

chapters and journal articles. Drafts can be provided on request. Further to this, the Deliverable

will be updated at the end of TRANSrisk (December 2018) to provide updated links and include

further outputs developed during TRANSrisk’s dissemination period (September to December

2018).


Table of Contents

1 EC Summary Requirements ................................................................... 10

1.1 Changes with respect to the DoA ....................................................... 10

1.2 Dissemination and uptake ............................................................... 10

1.3 Short Summary of results (


6.1.2 Research Methods ...................................................................... 44

6.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 45

6.2 Case Study Outputs ....................................................................... 48

6.3 Case Study Outreach and Impact (also Expected Outreach and Impact) ....... 49

7 Greece: Solar Power, Buildings and Micro-Generation & Storage ..................... 50

7.1 Case Study Summary ...................................................................... 50

7.1.1 Context/ Background .................................................................. 50


7.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 52



8 India: Solar & Wind Power .................................................................... 62




8.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 64



9 Indonesia: Transition Pathways Through Biogas Development ......................... 68




9.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 69


9.3 (Expected) Case Study Outreach and Impact ........................................ 74

10 Kenya: Geothermal Power and Sustainable Charcoal .................................... 75

10.1 Case Study Summary ................................................................... 75



10.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 76

10.2 Case Study Outputs ..................................................................... 78

10.3 Case Study Impact and Expected Impact ........................................... 81

11 The Netherlands: Low Emission Transition Pathways in the Livestock Sector ...... 82




11.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 84



11.3 Case Study Outreach and Impact (also Expected Outreach and Impact) ..... 89

12 The Netherlands: Solar Energy ............................................................... 90




12.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 91


12.3 Case Study Outreach and Impact (also Expected Outreach and Impact) ..... 94

13 Poland: Power Sector .......................................................................... 95




13.1.3 Findings .................................................................................. 96


13.3 Case Study Impact and Expected Impact .......................................... 103

14 Spain: Renewable Energy .................................................................... 104

14.1 Case Study Summary .................................................................. 104

14.1.1 Context/ Background ................................................................ 104

14.1.2 Research Methods .................................................................... 105

14.1.3 Findings ................................................................................ 105

14.2 Case Study Outputs .................................................................... 108


15 Sweden: Decarbonisation of Road Freight ................................................ 112




15.1.3 Findings ................................................................................ 113



16 Switzerland: Nuclear Exit .................................................................... 117




16.1.3 Findings ................................................................................ 119


16.3 Case Study Outreach and Impact (also Expected Outreach and Impact) .... 123


17 United Kingdom: Nuclear Expansion Versus Nuclear Phase Out ...................... 125




17.1.3 Findings ................................................................................ 127


17.3 Case Study Outreach and Impact (also Expected Outreach and Impact) .... 131

18 Appendix A – Full List of Contributors ..................................................... 133


Figures

Figure 1 Poverty Rate of households, using three chosen indicators .................................. 35

Figure 2 Compensating variation households for the highest price of electricity, Millions of dollars

................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 3 Risks on both pathways: household biogas and large-scale biogas for electricity ........ 71

Tables

Table 1: TRANSrisk’s Case Studies .......................................................................... 12

Table 2 Summary of links between case studies (WP3) and Deliverables in other WPs ............. 16

Table 3 Households in Energy Poverty, according to the "Ten Percent Rule," after the

implementation of the CO2 tax .............................................................................. 36

Table 4 Basic design of two low emission transition pathways ......................................... 82


1 EC SUMMARY REQUIREMENTS

1.1 Changes with respect to the DoA

There are no changes with respect to the DoA.

1.2 Dissemination and uptake

This Deliverable serves as a concise overview of TRANSrisk’s case studies, and provides links to a

diverse body of work documenting their outputs. Taken as a whole, this Deliverable can be used

in one of two ways:

To gain an overview of TRANSrisk’s 14 country case studies.

As a library of links to documents associated with each case study, which provide more in-

depth results of their findings. Generally, our case study leaders have produced

publications aimed at both technical (e.g. journal articles and book chapters) and non-

technical audiences (e.g. policy briefs, newsletter articles, etc).

1.3 Short Summary of results (


1.4 Evidence of accomplishment

This Deliverable and associated documents.


2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 The TRANSrisk Case Studies

The core of the TRANSrisk project is 14 country case studies; each one examines specific

technologies in different country contexts. In addition to their value as individual pieces of work,

the case studies have fed into TRANSrisk’s overall investigation of risk and uncertainty in low

carbon transitions. They have also acted as testbeds for the policy development tools and

techniques pioneered by the project.

Table 1 lists the case studies and the sectors they covered. TRANSrisk deliberately selected a

diverse range of case studies from across the world: from Europe and North America to the fast

growing economies of Asia, Africa and South America. Case studies were divided into ‘full’ and

‘limited’ categories depending on the resources applied to them. In practice the boundary

between the two categories has become somewhat blurred, with several limited studies providing

a more detailed study than originally envisaged.

Table 1: TRANSrisk’s Case Studies

Country/Region

Sector covered Full case study

(≥ 15 interviews; ≥

1 workshop)

Limited case

study

(≤ 15 interviews;

optional workshop)

1. Austria Energy and steel X

2. Canada Oil Sands/ energy X

3. Chile Energy and industry X

4. China Building sector X

5. Greece Solar power and building sector X

6. India Solar power and wind X

7. Indonesia Biomass and cook stoves X

8. Kenya Geothermal and charcoal X


9. Netherlands Solar PV and integrated manure

management X

10. Poland Energy sector X

11. Spain Transport, biofuels, biomass X

12. Sweden Solar and Wind X

13. Switzerland Renewable energy electricity

14. UK Nuclear power X

15. Global & regional overview

General discussion on direction of

global trends, climate agreements X

* Part of D3.2 only

Note that both the Greece and Netherlands case studies are comprised of two separate parts, i.e.

they study two separate technology sectors. In this Deliverable the Netherlands studies are

described separately in sections 11 and 12, whilst the Greece studies are described together in

section 7.

A complete introduction and context for each case study is available in D3.2 ‘Context of 14 country

case studies’, which was submitted in November 2016.

2.2 Research Approach

At the start of the TRANSrisk project a common research approach was agreed to guide the case

study work. This approach was detailed in D3.1 ‘Matrix of technological innovation systems for

14 country case studies’ and D3.2 ‘Context of 14 country case studies’. Here we briefly recap the

research statements and questions used across all case studies.

The 3 research statements, as summarised in Box 1, were used to guide the background analysis

required for each case study, ensuring each case study was grounded in a common understanding

of the global and local context. Research statements 1 and 2 help to set the stage by describing

global and regional targets and agreements. Here we acknowledged the risks of continuing on the

current pathway, and provided the global and regional case study to ensure a common

understanding of the issues. The case studies then explored research statement 3 by providing the

context for each country case study, as documented in D3.2


BOX 1: Research Statement (RS) background analysis: setting the stage

RS1: Understand the risks of climate change. Reference IPCC 2°C target in The Global & Regional Case Studies.

RS2: Understand the risks of continuing on the current pathway. Reference existing research in The Global & Regional Case Studies

RS3. Understand how we got here and where we are now

a. What is our current energy mix, what are the technological lock-ins, and what are the (natural) resource constraints/opportunities?

We then developed an overarching research questions and, under this, 4 more sub-questions.

These are shown in Box 2.

BOX 2: Overarching Research Question (RQ):

What are the costs, benefits and risks associated with transitions pathways for climate change mitigation policies/strategies at the global, regional level and the national level?

RQ1. What are possible future(s) in our case study country/sector context and how might we get there? a. What are the economic, social and environmental priorities to be considered in a low-

carbon transition to arrive at our desired future(s)? RQ2. What changes are required for us to get to our desired future(s)? a. Which specific transition pathways are to be examined, each ensuring the future we want,

while considering our priorities? b. What are the, costs, benefits, risks and opportunities of the low-carbon options included

in the pathways (e.g. economic, social and environmental impacts)? c. What are the interests and capabilities of actors involved and what are the external

pressures that may influence the identified changes?

RQ3. What are the policy options for realising pathway(s) and what are their risks, uncertainties and opportunities?

a. What policy options can help accelerate implementation of the identified pathways? b. What are the uncertainties involved, in which dimensions are these uncertainties and what

are they dependent on? c. What are the risks & opportunities of the policy options connected to these transition

pathways, given the uncertainties?

RQ4. How can we prepare to deal with these risks and options, and what policy tools and actions could we take within and across transition pathways?

Each case study explored research questions 1, 2 and 3, which identify: possible futures; changes

that are needed; and the potential policy options. However, case studies did not intend to explore

research question 4 in detail, as it is more concerned with implementation, which is generally

beyond the scope of the TRANSrisk project. This research question was formulated to pave the

ground for future research based on answering the first three research questions.

Each case study considered the overarching research questions, whilst also developing country

specific research questions. More detail is provided in the summaries of each case study provided

later in this report.


2.3 Documenting the TRANSrisk Case Studies

To reach the widest possible audience, case study leaders have been encouraged to document

(‘write up’) their case studies using a variety of methods and media. This Deliverable therefore

contains only a summary of each case study, with the bulk of each case study’s documentation

available as supplementary documents. These documents fall into two main categories:

Technical documents. These are aimed at audiences with a science background, and

include (for example) journal articles, book chapters (Springer book) and presentations

from scientific conferences.

Non-technical documents. These are aimed at groups such as policy makers, NGOs,

journalists, etc. who do not necessarily have a scientific background. They include (for

example) policy briefs, book chapters (Routledge book) newsletter articles, videos and

media interviews.

In addition to existing opportunities to publish results (such as scientific journals) TRANSrisk has

directly developed several opportunities for case study leaders to showcase their work. These

include:

Two scientific books to be published in late 2018/ early 2019: “Case study narratives on

risks and uncertainties associated with climate mitigation pathways”, to be published by

Routledge; and “Understanding risks and uncertainties in energy and climate policy:

Multidisciplinary methods and tools towards a low carbon society”, to be published by

Springer.

A special issue in the Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions (EIST) journal, with

the title “Assessing risks and uncertainties of low-carbon transition pathways”.

A TRANSrisk policy brief and working document series.

climatechangemitigation.eu, a website showcasing the work of H2020 funded climate

change project (established by the CARISMA project in partnership with TRANSrisk and

several other H2020 projects).

The exact mix of documents has been decided by each case study leader, working in partnership

with TRANSrisk’s dissemination team. Note that at the time of this Deliverable’s submission some

of these documents are yet to be published. This Deliverable will be updated towards the end of

the project to provide a final list of supplementary documents and associated web links.

2.4 Case Study Inputs to Other TRANSrisk Deliverables

In addition to their individual outputs, the case studies have been used to provide input for many

of TRANSrisk’s Deliverables. They have also been used to test the tools and approaches developed

by the project to aid development of low carbon pathways. These inputs are summarised in Table

2 below:


Table 2 Summary of links between case studies (WP3) and Deliverables in other WPs

Country/Region D2.3 D2.5 D4.2 D4.3 D4.4 D5.2 D5.3 D5.4 D5.5 D6.1 D6.2 D6.3 D6.4 D6.5

(TBC)

D7.1 D7.2 D7.3

1. Austria X X X X X

2. Canada X X X

3. Chile X X X X

4. China X X

5. Greece X X X X X X X X X X

6. India X X

7. Indonesia X X X X X X

8. Kenya X X X X X X X X X

9. Netherlands X X X X X X

10. Poland X X X X X

11. Spain X X X X

12. Sweden X X X

13. Switzerland X X X X X X

14. UK X X X X X X


3 AUSTRIA: DECARBONISING THE IRON & STEEL AND ELECTRICITY SUPPLY SECTOR

3.1 Case Study Summary

3.1.1 Context/ Background

For achieving the EU’s 2050 decarbonisation goals, steeper emission reductions after 2030 are

required than before. Therefore not only combustion, energy-related emissions (e.g. from burning

gasoline) and emissions from agriculture and forestry have to be reduced, but also industrial

process emissions (i.e. chemical processes like reduction of oxygen from iron ore). If the demand

of process-intensive products cannot decrease, the only way to reduce emissions is a radical switch

to alternative technologies. This involves a wide spectrum of risks and uncertainties, not only for

this sector but (due to economic and energy interdependencies) also for other sectors. The iron &

steel sector and the electricity supply sector comprise nearly half of Austrian greenhouse gas

(GHG) emissions (ETS and outside the ETS), and contribute 16% to the real gross domestic product

(GDP) (Anderl et al., 2017; Statistics Austria, 2017).

The Austrian case study therefore focuses on these sectors and explores the impacts, risks and

uncertainties of transition pathways thereof. The analysis builds on an extensive stakeholder

involvement throughout the entire project. This included developing transition pathways,

exploring risks and uncertainties (as well as measures to overcome or minimise them), and the

perpetual dialogue between stakeholders and scientists in order to refine specific technology

scenarios and discuss modelled impacts. This brought together sector specific insights with

macroeconomic impacts - the latter had not previously been considered in decisions on the

business or political level.

The “deep decarbonisation” pathway explored combines an electricity sector transition towards

almost 100% renewables with the iron and steel industry simultaneously going for zero-process

emission steel production (i.e. a switch from coke-based to hydrogen-based technologies).

3.1.2 Research Methods

We applied a transdisciplinary approach linking macroeconomic modelling with heavy stakeholder

involvement over the course of two years.

Qualitative methods were bilateral calls, semi-structured interviews, a survey and two workshops,

which were at the core of the stakeholder dialogue. The overarching method applied is

“participatory backcasting” which starts with a shared vision of a desired future and then develops

pathways and milestones along these pathways to get there.


Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to gain understanding and learn about the

case study context prior to the workshops. We applied several settings within the two workshops,

e.g. card surveying, group work, World Café, silent feedback method, with the aim of developing

transition pathways, exploring risks and uncertainties, prioritising risks and developing measures

to reduce or overcome the main risks.

Qualitative methods were strongly integrated and iterated with quantitative modelling work. The

WEGDYN model (Mayer et al., 2017) - a global multi-regional, multi-sectoral computable general

equilibrium (CGE) model - was applied to assess the economy-wide effects of economic (e.g.

sectoral) system interventions of the transition pathway.

3.1.3 Findings

In our TRANSrisk case study work on the steel and electricity sector we found out, that

implementation risks – i.e. barriers to low-carbon pathways being implemented – are relatively

more prominent than consequential risks. The most important implementation risks are the

absence of a solid, reliable national long-term policy framework (leading to reluctant investment

for consumers and business) and missing cross-sectoral policy integration. We have learned that

industry is more willing to mitigate climate change, as it sees many opportunities for innovation

and first-mover-advantages than politicians have perhaps failed to yet identify.

Part of what stakeholders refer to as implementation risks can be traced back to perceived

consequential risks, like the fear of unemployment. In quantifying consequential risks in our

analysis, we attempted to put these perceived impacts of the transition pathways in perspective:

GDP growth decreases slightly in all deep decarbonisation scenarios (range in between -0.02% and

-0.07%-points). Unemployment rates are in the same vein but tend to converge to baseline

numbers in the long run.

Other consequential, high ranked risks comprise risks of lock-in effects for industries in specific

technologies and value chains, the risk of play–off between social justice and climate mitigation,

risks associated with storage and the risk of instability of grids when choosing the deep

decarbonisation pathway. Stakeholders identified an additional electricity demand of 33TWh in

2050 (i.e. about half of national electricity production in 2017) as a major risk. However,

quantitative analysis showed that this number halves when indirect feedback effects within the

economy system are considered. This shows how stakeholders could benefit from modelling work

and. conversely, that modeller’s work is not possible without ongoing exchange and reflection on

technological and cost assumptions enabling more realistic pathways for transition.


3.2 Case Study Outputs

Output Category Date Link

Routledge book chapter ‘Austria: Designing a low-carbon

transition pathway focusing on energy supply for the iron

and steel sector’

Book chapter July 6th 2018 Submitted (under revision)

Presentation of ‘Macro-economic implications of a 2°C-

compatible transition path in the European iron and steel

industry’ at the ‘AUROE - Nachwuchsworkshop’;

University of Basel (SUI)

Conference

presentation

14th February

2017

http://www.auroe.info/documents/2017_Nachwuch

sworkshop_Programm.pdf



industry’ at the ‘EcoMod Conference 2017’; University of

Ljubljana (SLO)

Conference

presentation

5th July 2017 https://ecomod.net/conferences/ecomod2017




industry’ at the ‘International Energy Workshop 2017’;

University of Maryland (USA)

Conference

presentation

13th July 2017 http://www.internationalenergyworkshop.org/meeti

ngs-10.html

Presentation of ‘Macroeconomic implications of

switching to process-emission-free iron and steel

production in Europe’ at the ‘World Congress of

Environmental and Resource Economists’; University of

Gothenburg (SWE)

Conference

presentation

27th June 2018 https://www.eaere-conferences.org/

1st TRANSrisk Stakeholder Workshop (Vienna) Organisation

and

Presentation

4th November

2016

Agenda and Short Report available on request

2nd TRANSrisk Stakeholder Workshop (Vienna) Organisation

and

Presentation

17th November

2017

Agenda, Short Report available on request



Poster

presentation

24th April 2018 https://www.ccca.ac.at/de/dialogformate/oesterr-

klimatag/


production in Europe’ at the ‘CCCA Climate Day Austria’;

University of Salzburg (AUT)

Presentation at the lunchtime seminar to European

Commission (DG CLIMA)

Presentation

at a seminar

7th March 2017 Agenda available on request

EIST paper ‘Risk Assessment of Low Carbon Transition

Pathways for Austria’s Steel and Electricity Sectors –

Insights from a Co-Production Process’

Scientific

paper

16th July 2018 Submitted (under revision)

Climatechangemitigation.eu article, ‘The carbon bubble

and investment risk – getting capital costs ‘right’ in

Europe’s electricity sector transition’

Website

article

25th June 2018 http://climatechangemitigation.eu/2018/06/the-

carbon-bubble-and-investment-risk-getting-capital-

costs-right-in-europes-electricity-sector-transition/



production in Europe’ at the ‘EAERE-ETH Winter School’;

Ascona (SUI)

Winter school

presentation

1st February

2018

http://www.resec.ethz.ch/research/eaere-eth-

european-winter-school/2018-winter-school1.html

TRANSrisk working document ‘Macroeconomic

implications of switching to process-emission-free iron

and steel production in Europe’

Working

paper

30th November

2017

https://ideas.repec.org/p/grz/wpaper/2017-

14.html


TRANSrisk working document ‘The economy-wide effects

of deep decarbonisation and their uncertainties - The

case of the European iron and steel industry’

Working

paper

Apr-18 Available on request

TRANSrisk working document ‘The carbon bubble and

investment risk – getting capital costs ‘right’ in Europe’s

electricity sector transition’

Working

paper

Apr-18 Available on request


3.3 Case Study Outreach and Impact (also Expected

Outreach and Impact)

Preliminary findings of the macroeconomic modelling of the decarbonisation pathways were

presented and discussed among the scientific community. On the international level presentations

were given on the EcoMod Conference 2017 at the University of Ljubljana

(https://ecomod.net/conferences/ecomod2017), the International Energy Workshop 2017 at the

University of Maryland (http://www.internationalenergyworkshop.org/meetings-10.html), the

World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists 2018 in Gothenburg

(https://www.eaere-conferences.org/) and the AUROE-Workshop 2017 at the University of Basel

(http://www.auroe.info/documents/2017_Nachwuchsworkshop_Programm.pdf). On the national

level results were presented at the CCCA Climate Day Austria 2018 in Salzburg.

Besides discussions and presentations among the scientific community, we estimate the impacts

of our work even more important through the continuous involvement of stakeholders. This took

place throughout the entire research process, starting with the development of pathways, then

exploring and prioritising risks, refining technology scenarios and developing measures. By means

of bilateral interviews, surveys and two Stakeholder Workshops held on November 4th 2016 and

November 17th we created a forum for the most relevant stakeholders from the energy sector

(leading energy supply companies), the steel and iron companies, NGOs as well as from

administration and politics – such a forum was unique for Austria. As a positive side-effect,

stakeholders from NGOs and the industry were brought together and discussed common solutions,

this after a long term history of cooling of relations. We carried out additional stakeholder

interviews with non-Austrian steel companies in May and June 2018 to validate our results.

A detailed description of the stakeholder process that can be transferred to and applied for other

case studies led into a paper submitted to a special issue of ‘Environmental Innovation and Societal

Transitions’. Furthermore, the research team has been invited to the ‘Future of Steel Dialogue’

with NGOs and leading steel and iron companies to present modelling results (October 2017).

After the second workshop, it was very evident that there was strong demand for continuing these

neutral fora to discuss issues of transition and work on measures to overcome risks. Opportunities

for an in depth exchange across sectors seemed very scare, but were highly needed for a deep

decarbonisation. Annual meetings within the same stakeholder group are now planned for the

future, organised by the different industries involved. TRANSrisk’s work showed that a role of

increasing relevance for scientists is to arrange such fora and act as mediator between agents

(industry, administration, and policymaking) besides providing research results, especially when

politics does not identify this need.

https://ecomod.net/conferences/ecomod2017http://www.internationalenergyworkshop.org/meetings-10.htmlhttps://www.eaere-conferences.org/http://www.auroe.info/documents/2017_Nachwuchsworkshop_Programm.pdf


References:

Anderl, M., Burgstaller, J., Gössl, M., Haider, S., Heller, C., Ibesich, N., Kuschel, V., Lampert, C.,

Neier, H., Pazdernik, K., Poupa, S., Purzner, M., Rigler, E., Schieder, W., Schneider, J., Schodl,

B., Stix, S., Storch, A., Stranner, G., Vogel, J., Wiesenberger, H., Winter, R. and Zechmeister, A.,

2017a. Klimschutzbericht. (2017). [online] Wien: Umweltbundesamt. Available at:

[Accessed 22

Jan. 2018].

Mayer, J., Bachner, G., Steininger, K.W., 2017. Macroeconomic implications of switching to

process emission-free iron and steel production in Europe. Graz Economic Papers 2017-14.

Statistics Austria, (2017). Gross Domestic Product by sectors, current prices. [online] Available at:

http://statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/wirtschaft/volkswirtschaftliche_gesamtrechnungen/brutt

oinlandsprodukt_und_hauptaggregate/jahresdaten/019715.html> [Accessed 18 May 2018].


4 CANADA: OIL SANDS



Canada contributes 1.6 % of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and it is one of the top ten

emitters - on both total and per capita - in the world. Fossil fuel production and transportation

are the largest contributors to this total, with 27 % and 23 % respectively. The province of Alberta

contributed to 37.4 % of national emissions in 2014, representing the biggest emitter among all

provinces in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2006). Canada has the second largest oil reserves in the

world, most of which primarily exist in the form of crude bitumen. The majority of proven reserves

are found in oil sands in Western Canada. Unproven (expected) reserves, however, are considered

to be significantly larger and are likely to reside in Alberta’s oil sands. The oil sands production

process emits significant GHGs and pollution, and this has led to damaging environmental and

health impacts. The industry has been making efforts to address the problem by developing new

technologies to cut GHGs, but environmental degradation persists. Clear links have not yet made

between oil sand production and health impacts.

This case study explored both the broader environmental impacts of the oil sand production in

Alberta as well as the environmental, economic and social impacts. The case study intended to

explore the complex issues of First Nations interests, and the vested interests of oil sand

developers, by engaging a wide range of stakeholders in the study. In addition, the case study

aimed to gain a better understanding of how Alberta can meet climate change goals by exploring

the current fossil fuel energy system. In doing so it helped by identifying risks and uncertainties

in potential low carbon transitions pathways.


The approach selected for the development of the narrative consisted of two stages: pathway

development and elicitation of preference and risks associated with the pathways. The broader

public sentiment with regards to climate action policies and low-carbon futures for the oil sands,

was collected through media articles including newspapers, blogs and websites from government,

industry and institutional (NGOs, companies). We also collected information from Statistics

Canada, the government’s national statistics body. The three pathways represent three distinct

views originated from policy makers, an Indigenous community (Fort McKay First Nation) and

institutions (including firms, electricity regulators, experts and NGOs) with regards to potential

solutions for decreasing the environmental impact of the oil sands. The pathways were developed

from existing policies and studies that consulted a range of stakeholders.


Aside from including existing policies and research initiatives, we have independently carried out

17 open ended interviews with stakeholders over the period of November 2016 to April 2018. These

included: academics (4 interviews), Indigenous Community members (6 interviews), industry

players (5 interviews), a non-profit organisation (1 interview) and a policy maker (1 interview).

We also carried out a risk elicitation by capturing the opinion of stakeholders during two public

workshops. The first workshop was part of an existing conference, the Alberta Ecotrust

Environmental Gathering. Researchers carried out a ‘Solution Forum’ to explore how consensus

can be reached within groups with various perspectives about sustainable development of natural

resources in Alberta. The event took placed on Mount Royal University on March 10th, 2018. There

was a total of 24 participants. The attendees consisted of government bodies, politicians, industry

members, researchers and NGOs. Reponses were captured through small group role-playing

exercises and a live polling. The second workshop ‘Creating a common language for low-carbon

futures in Alberta’ was organised within an existing seminar series run by the Graduate Collages

at the University of Calgary. The workshops consisted of a panel discussion. The interview panel

included an industry representative, a policy consultant, an Elder from the Fort McKay community,

a representative from the Fort McKay Sustainability Office and an academic. The panel discussion

took place on March 12th, 2018.

4.1.3 Findings

Three main low-carbon pathways scenarios were identified for the Canadian oil Sands sector. One

followed the official proposal from the provincial government, one was based on Indigenous needs

and priorities and one was based on a combined strategy created by collaboration of several groups

and aligned with the federal strategy. Within these pathways, implementation and consequential

barriers were captured from stakeholders as potential risks for this future to materialise. These

barriers were mostly concentrated around economic losses, environmental degradation, social

imbalance and health impacts. Also, the visibility of each risk was dependant on the point of view

of each stakeholder. However, a bigger risk is based in the lack of consensus among stakeholders

and the absence of a pathway capable of unify and represent all view points.

From the pathways studied, the Indigenous communities, most directly impacted by the oils sands

development (the sector uses traditional land in the vicinity of their communities), was the least

represented among all. Although efforts to consult and include Indigenous communities has been

made for all narratives, true inclusion or representation is not evident in their actions plans. This

means that Indigenous communities, who are most impacted by any action or policy towards

reducing emissions in the oil sands sector, will have little ability to influence their fate. Such

realities call for urgent action in incorporating Indigenous/local communities in the process of co-

developing policies effective to meet the commitments of Canada in the Paris Agreement.

As a way forward, a consensus-building framework - The Consensus Building Engagement Process

(CBEP) - focused on step-by-step consensus building through consultation and inclusion of all


affected stakeholders, could serve as an important tool to maintain the interest and commitment

of the participants. In one of our outputs we have presented a CBEP framework that includes

Indigenous consensus, knowledge, interests and rights as a focal point of a consultation process

required for decision making. The consultation process is presented within the context of land use

decisions impacting on a low carbon future for oil sands development. The framework is based on

seeking consensus from all parties involved and aims to help to reduce risks resulting from

decisions that do not consider the interests and rights of communities most impacted by resource

development or climate mitigation pathways. The framework could consider Indigenous needs,

priorities and knowledge and, by building consensus along the planning and execution of the

project/initiative. Understanding the local values and allowing local communities to have an

active role in the developing process, could generate benefits in the area of effectiveness, social

support, and finding innovative ways to promote climate action.

The results of this study indicate that the three pathways could be successful in reducing carbon

emissions. However, this reduction may not be enough to meet the NDC goals if the social

priorities, such as economic and environmental security, are not considered during the policy

development stage. Social acceptance and unfavourable policy frameworks were identified as

relevant risks to meet the sustainability goals. Global climate action is expected to negatively

impact the oil sands sector and the Canadian economy, increasing the risks of rejection of low-

carbon policies in Canada. Nevertheless, economic contraction is expected to be accentuated if

Canada takes no action on climate change. Regional analysis from model outputs showed that the

future of Canadian climate goals and economic development is highly impacted by foreign actions,

stressing the need for innovations in the development of natural resources to decrease exposure

to foreign market decisions. These findings point to the need for low-carbon policy development

based on factors relatable to the local communities and supported by evidence based from model

outputs based and stakeholder knowledge.

The study of the multiple pathways shared by stakeholders in the Canadian oil sands, highlights

the need for developing effective climate action capable to incorporate and represent local

interests and concerns. Although, efforts have been done in the past to improve representation of

several sectors, even-leveled participation through incorporation and consensus could be more

effective that simple inclusion. A process to consider local communities as equal participants in

the co-development process of policy could be more effective to those changes implemented so

far that have brought plenty of criticisms for the lack of community representation. There is no

formula for this approach, since such action would require acknowledging varying cultures and

worldviews. However, if policies are developed and/or implemented with this notion, the

evidence gap between climate policy and real impact could be decreased.




COP23 Side Event, ‘UK pavilion’, ‘The case

of the oil sands in Alberta’

Conference

presentation

09th November 2017 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-at-

cop23-in-bonn

Stakeholder Engagement, Solution Forum,

‘What is the best way to reach consensus

within groups with various perspectives

about sustainable development of natural

resources in Alberta?’

Conference

presentation

10th March 2018 https://albertaecotrust.com/gathering2018/

Stakeholder Engagement, Panel discussion,

‘Creating a common language for low-

carbon futures in Alberta’

Panel discussion 12th March 2018 https://arctic.ucalgary.ca/creating-common-

language-low-carbon-futures-alberta

Presentation at the 2018 HELORS

conference, ‘Consensus building in

stakeholder engagement processes for

natural resources management’

Conference

presentation

14th June 2018 http://eeee2018.maich.gr/


Presentation at the 2018 HELORS

conference, ‘Mixed methods for assessing

risks in low-carbon futures for the

Athabasca Oil Sands, Canada’

Conference

presentation

15th June 2018 http://eeee2018.maich.gr/

TRANSrisk Policy Brief, ‘Low carbon future

for the oils sands sector’

Policy brief Nov-18 TBC

Springer book chapter, ‘Consensus Building

in Engagement Processes’ for reducing risks

in developing sustainable pathways:

Indigenous interest as core elements of

engagement’ (in progress)

Scientific book chapter Sep-18 www.springer.com/gp/

Routledge book chapter, ‘Developing a

common low-carbon language. Inclusion of

Indigenous knowledge in the energy futures

of the Athabasca Oil Sands, Canada’ (in

progress)

Scientific book chapter Sep-18 https://www.routledge.com/


EIST Paper, ‘Mixed methods for assessing

risks and uncertainties for low-carbon

futures in the Athabasca Oil Sands,

Canada’ (in progress)

Scientific paper Sep-18 www.sciencedirect.com/journal/environmental-

innovation-and-societal-transitions/

Talanoa Dialogue, Non-Party stakeholders’

inputs Submission – Alberta, Canada

UNFCC Submission 10th April 2018 https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-

paris-agreement/2018-talanoa-dialogue-platform




Preliminary results of the case study findings have been presented to Mr. Neal Tanna,

Environmental Assessment & Management Professional, who was part of the initial generalists

interviewed. Following this meeting, we have been invited to present the obtained evidence to

the COSIA (Canada’s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance - https://www.cosia.ca/) Scientific Committee,

a group formed by scientists specialising in GHG emissions from oil sands, which will provide a

platform to share our results to the most important oil producers in Alberta. Details about this

meeting are currently in planning stage.

We have been invited to host a seminar to disseminate our case study results as part of the

ConocoPhillips IRIS Seminar Series of the Haskayne School of Business of the University of Calgary

(https://haskayne.ucalgary.ca/research-centres/ccs/events/conocophillips). This event aims to

share sustainability research to industry and community audiences. The event is being planned for

November 29th 2018, and details about the format and agenda are currently in progress.


5 CHILE: RENEWABLE ENERGY AND ENERGY POVERTY


Chile is facing increasing demands on energy resources to respond to the expected social,

environmental and economic welfare of the population; as well as to contribute to the global

efforts to deal with climate change and improving the environment. For these purposes, the

Chilean government is trying to improve the use of its resources by increasing the efficiency and

quality of energy generation and exploring different technological options that support its

ambitions to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions.

This case study attempted to answer the overarching research question, “How can Chile move

towards a more efficient use of energy resources to support sustainable growth?”. There were two

major strands to our work, which were:

Exploration of the links between air quality (public health) and climate change, the results

of which were detailed in TRANSrisk Deliverable 4.4.

Investigation of the impacts of energy policies on energy poverty, which is summarised

here in D3.3 with more detail provided in associated documents.


Over the last five years, most nations have become increasingly committed to improved

environmental policies. Both international and local actions have been taken to improve

environmental indicators. An example is the 2015 Paris agreement. Emerging countries such as

Chile are characterised by their active participation in, and proactive contribution to, the

international environmental agenda. Nevertheless, these countries face complex challenges in

maintaining both economic growth and environmental standards, which regularly pull in opposite

directions.

Chile, as a member of the UNFCCC, has committed to reducing GHG emissions by 30% by 2030

(Gobierno de Chile, 2015). The mitigation efforts should occur in different sectors that produce

GHGs, focusing on:

Energy, industry, mining and other sectors using fossil fuels;

Processes in the industrial sector;

Use of land; and

Waste.

To achieve the reduction in GHGs by 2030, Chile has made the following commitments:


Chile will reduce its greenhouse emissions by 30% vis-à-vis its 2007 levels, provided it is

possible to keep its economic growth pace, and implement the required policies to achieve

the objective.

Chile will reduce its GHGs emissions by 35% to 45% vis-à-vis its 2007 levels, provided it is

possible to keep economic growth pace and obtain international grants to finance the

additional required measures to attain the objective.

In the land management sector, Chile commits to the restoration of 100,000 hectares of

forestry, which corresponds to the reduction of 600,000 tons of GHGs emissions per year.

The primary Chilean energy mix is oil (32.9%), coal (24.4%), wood and biomass (23.7%) and

hydroelectricity (6.4%) (Ministerio de Energía de Chile, 2014). It is important to notice that 95% of

oil is imported, and thus the primary energy matrix is heavily dependent on international

resources. During 2014, the primary energy supply reached 314,163 teracalories (TCal).

Chile’s GDP per capita has increased at a fastest pace than its Latin American neighbours. Chile

experienced average per capita GDP growth of 3% between 1980 and 2013, a higher rate than

other countries such as Uruguay (2%), Colombia (1.9%), Argentina (1.4%), Brazil (0.9%), Venezuela

(-0.1%) and Haiti (-1.2%), among others.

Chile aims to increase its GDP per capita to converge with advance economies,1 which represents

an important economic challenge for the country. This might require doubling its current level of

GDP per capita. At current rates, and discounting population growth, Chile would require almost

70 years to double its actual per capita income. Thus, a main challenge is to increase its long-

term GDP growth. In addition, Chile has a large income inequality. Its GINI index is around 0.5,

and there are social and political pressures to expand fiscal expenditure and engage in social

reforms to reduce income inequality. Thus, a second economic challenge is to implement

economic policies that favour the poor and decrease income inequality, but without hurting the

performance of the economy and avoiding the middle-income trap (Eichengreen, Park and Shin,

2014).

Energy policy is at the heart of public policies in Chile. Energy is seen as a potential driver of

economic growth and productivity. In fact, energy issues may be one the reasons behind depressed

total factor productivity over the past few years. As an example, the former Finance Minister

Alberto Arenas2 suggested that lower growth, at least since 2014, was due partially to the large

1 The World Bank, Data. How does the World Bank classify countries?, [online] Available at https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/378834-how-does-the-world-bank-classify-countries [Accessed 28 November 2016] 2 Electricidad. La revista energética de Chile: http://www.revistaei.cl/2014/03/12/ministro-de-hacienda-lamenta-altos-costos-de-energia-y-baja-productividad/[Accessed 09 November 2016].

https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/378834-how-does-the-world-bank-classify-countrieshttps://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/378834-how-does-the-world-bank-classify-countrieshttp://www.revistaei.cl/2014/03/12/ministro-de-hacienda-lamenta-altos-costos-de-energia-y-baja-productividad/http://www.revistaei.cl/2014/03/12/ministro-de-hacienda-lamenta-altos-costos-de-energia-y-baja-productividad/


marginal cost of energy. The current Minister of Energy, Maximo Pacheco, has a similar view.3

Therefore, a decrease in marginal costs of energy could provide a fresh driver for economic

growth.

Climate change is not a principal driver of public policy to address GHGs reduction in Chile.

People’s perceptions of climate change are very important, and public views were taken in a 2015

survey (MMA, 2016a). 65% of the citizens surveyed identified the top three most severe

environmental challenges as air pollution, urban waste and noise. Only 1% of the surveyed citizens

perceived that the climate change was a severe environmental challenge.


Our work focused on the impact of energy policy, and a proposed carbon tax, on energy poverty

in Chile.

To start, we identified suitable, well established indicators for energy poverty and calculated

baselines for Chile. The three indicators selected were:

(1) The Ten Percent Rule (TPR). As proposed by Boardman (1988), a household is considered in

energy poverty when it dedicates more than 10% of its disposable income to pay for an

adequate level of energy services.

(2) An adaptation of the indicator based on the lowest minimum income standard (MIS). As

proposed by Moore (2012), this refers to the minimum income that allows the members of the

household to choose and consume to satisfy the needs implied in a society.

(3) The Low Income and High Cost (LIHC), which is the recent indicator recommended and

adopted by Hills (2012) and is now the official energy poverty indicator for England. Here

households are in energy poverty if they experience a combination of relatively low income

and relatively high energy expenditure.

The results of these, for Chile as a whole, are shown by income decile in Figure 1 below. Overall

energy poverty with the TPR indicator is 12.9%; with the MIS, it is 15.7%; and, with the LIHC, it is

5.2%.

3 La Tercera newspaper: http://www.msn.com/es-xl/noticias/other/ministro-pacheco-sin-energ%c3%ada-no-es-posible-crecer-lo-que-la-econom%c3%ada-de-chile-puede-crecer/ar-AAPBvK [Accessed 09 November 2016].

http://www.msn.com/es-xl/noticias/other/ministro-pacheco-sin-energ%c3%ada-no-es-posible-crecer-lo-que-la-econom%c3%ada-de-chile-puede-crecer/ar-AAPBvKhttp://www.msn.com/es-xl/noticias/other/ministro-pacheco-sin-energ%c3%ada-no-es-posible-crecer-lo-que-la-econom%c3%ada-de-chile-puede-crecer/ar-AAPBvK


Figure 1 Poverty Rate of households, using three chosen indicators

Source: Own elaboration based on Hills (2012)

Note that energy poverty varies significantly by household type and location. For example, single-

person households have higher rates of fuel poverty in the Metropolitan Region (18.3%) than in

other regions (13.7%). In contrast, households with larger numbers of people, whether adult or

dependent, have a substantially higher fuel poverty rate in other regions (15.1%), compared to

the poverty rate in the Metropolitan Region (12.7%).

Having calculated our baselines, we considered four scenarios. These varied according to different

assumptions of levels of uncertainties in investment in the energy sector. The sources of

uncertainty are (1) the cost of solar investment, (2) liquefied natural gas (LNG) prices, and (3) the

potential use of hydroelectricity in the most southern area of Chile.

The first scenario is a moderate case in terms of solar investment costs and LNG prices, but the

development of large hydroelectric projects in the south of Chile is not considered. Similarly, the

second scenario, does not consider hydroelectric projects in the south, although, unlike scenario

1, it entails relatively low solar investment. Scenario 3 is similar to scenario 1, but it considers an

additional potential of 2,750 MW from hydroelectric projects in southern Chile. Finally, scenario

4 is like scenario 1, but it is more optimistic in terms of LNG prices.

Our analysis then proceeded in two stages. First, we used the results of Benavides, Gonzales et al

(2015), which simulate the level of increase in electricity prices for consumers when a CO2 tax is

implemented. In this paper, scenarios are simulated for tax levels of 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 US

dollars per ton of CO2.

In a second stage, and, with the simulated electric price increase range, we proceeded to calculate

the increase in electricity expenditure of each household. For this exercise, we used the price-


elasticity for residential electricity demand presented in Agostini et al (2016) equal to (-0.38 to -

0.40)4 - the increase in electricity costs in each household increases according to the increase in

electric prices. We then calculate how many households increase their energy expenditure, after

the implementation of the carbon tax, and assessed whether they were then energy poor,

according to the MIS criterion.

The model used in this exercise consisted of two environments. The first was a Dynamic Stochastic

General Equilibrium model that represents the Chilean economy with a simple representation of

the energy sector. The second environment is a minimising electricity cost model. The interaction

of these two models is described in detail in our associated documents (see 5.2).

5.1.3 Findings

The results of our energy poverty calculations under the different scenarios and levels pf carbon

tax are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Households in Energy Poverty, according to the "Ten Percent Rule," after the implementation of the CO2 tax

CO2 Tax 5 10 20 30 40 50

Scenario 1 15.85% 15.89% 15.94% 16.00% 16.11% 16.16%

Scenario 2 15.86% 15.89% 15.94% 15.99% 16.06% 16.11%

Scenario 3 15.85% 15.89% 15.94% 15.98% 16.06% 16.11%

Scenario 4 15.85% 15.89% 15.94% 16.00% 16.11% 16.19%

It is interesting to note that poverty rates do not vary significantly between energy scenarios, but,

rather by tax levels. The scenario of a CO2 tax of US $5 corresponds to energy poverty rates of

15.85%, whilst with the US $50 tax per ton of emissions the energy poverty rate reaches 16.1% -

an increase of 11,900 households. These households that fall into poverty after the tax are

vulnerable to energy policy. In this way, there are households that are harmed by the

implementation of the policy, due to increases in electricity prices.

4 This estimation is in line with previous works like Benavente et al (2015) and Marshall (2010)


We then examined how compensation could be provided to households by means of some fiscal

transfer, maintaining the tax of US $5 per ton of CO2 emissions. This would allow the emission

reduction generated by the policy, without affecting households. Table 3 shows the fiscal cost of

compensating households in each of the income deciles for the increase in electricity prices.

Under this compensation scheme, the negative effect on family budgets is avoided, and a rising

rate of fuel poverty is prevented. The results are shown in Figure 2. Interestingly, the fiscal cost

per decile, and even the total fiscal cost of compensating these households, is very limited and is

never greater than 28.5 million dollars for the different scenarios. In this case the net tax

collection would be US $151.5 million. Focusing solely on the first four deciles, the total fiscal

cost of compensating would be US $9.3 million. Conversely, focusing on the first six deciles would

reach a higher fiscal cost, of US $ 15.5 million.

Figure 2 Compensating variation households for the highest price of electricity, Millions of dollars

To summarise, our study shows that energy expenditure by households experiencing (or at risk of

experiencing) energy poverty would be higher if a carbon tax is implemented, causing harm to

these households. However, it is possible to compensate them by means of subsidies, for example,

through household electricity bills. This policy has a limited fiscal cost and, therefore, allows the

state to retain a significant portion of the tax revenue from the carbon tax policy implementation.

These compensation schemes allow the offsetting of some of the negative effects of this type of

policy.

The compensation policy does not correct negative effects on production, which were illustrated

in Benavides et al. (2015), but does, at least, compensate consumers. From this point of view, to

assess the feasibility of compensating for the negative effects, it is important that all taxes on the

energy sector, as well as on other public policies, include not only an impact assessment on the


economy and productivity (something that the Government of Chile has advanced in recent years)

but also an impact assessment on individuals and households. This is something that must still be

incorporated into our public policies.




Stakeholders meeting Note in web page 9th June

2017

http://www.clapesuc.cl/intensa-agenda-

transrisk-chile/

Op Ed in La Tercera Op Ed article 29th June

2018 Not available

Article JiQ Magazine ‘Magazine on climate and sustainability’ Policy Brief July 2017 http://jin.ngo/jiq-magazine/10-jiq-

magazine/200-jiq-july17

TRANSrisk Policy Presentation Seminar, ‘Cambio Climático y

Desarrollo Sustentable en Chile’ ClapesUC Policy presentation

8th June

2018

http://www.clapesuc.cl/investigaciones/

seminario-cambio-climatico-desarrollo-

sustentable-chile-ppt-luis-e-gonzales/


TRANSrisk Workshop ‘Assessing Uncertainties and Risk in the

Transition to Low Carbon and Sustainable Societies’ at Basque

Center for Climate Change BC3

Presentation

3rd and

4th July

2017

http://www.clapesuc.cl/clapes-uc-

participa-seminario-espana/

Article in EMOL newspaper, ‘Estudio revela que casi 500.000

hogares en Chile están expuestos a la vulnerabilidad energética’ Press article

19th June

2017

http://www.emol.com/noticias/Economi

a/2017/06/19/863303/Vulnerabilidad-

energetica-480000-hogares-en-Chile-

estan-expuestos-a-ella.html

Article in La Tercera newspaper Press article 19th June

2017

http://www2.latercera.com/noticia/chil

e-vulnerabilidad-energetica/

Springer book chapter, ‘Nuclear safety developments in

Springfield’’

Scientific book

chapter

To be

publish

TRANSrisk Paper, “Socioeconomic Impacts of Air Pollution in the

Chilean Metropolitan Area” Scientific Paper

9th May

2017

http://www.transrisk-

project.eu/sites/default/files/Document

s/4.4.2_Socioeconomic%20Impacts%20of%

20Air%20Pollution%20in%20the%20Chilean

%20Metropolitan%20Area.pdf


Working paper, ‘Pobreza energética e impuesto a las emisiones

de Co2 en Chile’ ClapesUC Scientific paper

6th June

2017

http://www.clapesuc.cl/assets/uploads/

2017/06/27-06-17-cerda-y-gonzales-

2017-vf.pdf

Presentation ‘Desarrollo Productivo, Justicia Social y

Sostenibilidad Ambiental’ at Universidad Catolica Boliviana

Seminar

Participation

10th

October

2017

TRANSrisk Workshop, ‘Cambio Climático y Desarrollo Sustentable

en Chile’ Video of Workshop

12th June

2017

http://www.clapesuc.cl/video/seminario

-cambio-climatico-desarrollo-

sustentable-chile/

Tackling climate change can improve public health Website article

(CCM.eu)

2nd June

2017

http://climatechangemitigation.eu/2017

/06/tackling-climate-change-can-

improve-public-health/




Preliminary findings from our case study were presented at the TRANSrisk Seminar organised by

Centro Latinoamericano de Políticas Económicas y Sociales (ClapesUC) (link). Stakeholders from

civil society, academics and government participated in the seminar. In particular, the Chilean

sub secretary of Energy Mr Ricardo Irrarazabal was one of the speakers in the panel. Following this

we were invited to present our results in several instances at government Ministries and we were

interviewed by the newspapers El Mercurio On Line (EMOL) (link) and La Tercera (link).

After this media coverage we were invited to participate in the Red de Pobreza Energética (RedPE)

together with multidisciplinary members from all over the regions in Chile (link). Subsequently,

the government proposed our work as official policies to work on energy vulnerability during their

four years term (link).

http://www.clapesuc.cl/video/seminario-cambio-climatico-desarrollo-sustentable-chile/http://www.emol.com/noticias/Economia/2017/06/19/863303/Vulnerabilidad-energetica-480000-hogares-en-Chile-estan-expuestos-a-ella.htmlhttp://www2.latercera.com/noticia/chile-vulnerabilidad-energetica/http://redesvid.uchile.cl/pobreza-energetica/miembros/https://www.latercera.com/opinion/noticia/encarando-la-vulnerabilidad-energetica-paso-mas-hacia-desarrollo/225153/


6 CHINA: GREEN BUILDING



China has become both the world’s largest energy producer and consumer. It has a comprehensive

energy supply system based on coal, electricity, oil, natural gas and renewable energy, meeting

the basic demands for socio-economic development. However, China’s energy production and

consumption are also facing difficult challenges to decarbonise, due to its rapid economic

development, abundant endowment of coal, population growth and urban development.

The country has experienced the quickest economic expansion of any major economy in the world,

and has taken 500 million of its population out of property (World Bank, 2018). Today, China is

the second largest economy in the world, with an overall GDP of 67.67 trillion yuan (11.06 trillion

US Dollars) in 2015 (Bureau, 2016a). This growth has been accompanied by increasing energy

demand. Economic growth is now slowing, falling to 6.9% in 2015 compared with the average rate

of 9.7% from 1979 to 2014. During the “13th Five Year Plan” (2016-2020) period, China’s potential

average growth rate is expected to drop to 6.3%, indicating that China’s economy is transitioning

from high growth to medium-high growth.

China also has substantial resources of coal. Even though the energy supply and consumption

structure has been improving in China, long term socio-economic development will still rely on

coal consumption, resulting in rising carbon emissions. Energy consumption in the building,

transport and daily living sectors in particular will keep on increasing. As of 2014, transport and

housing have become the largest growth areas for energy consumption in China (Li, 2014).

In addition, as the world’s most inhabited country, China’s population exceeded 1.38 billion in

2016. Urbanisation levels reached over 57% - around 3% higher than the global average. (National

Bureau of Statistics of China, 2018a) Although the speed of urbanisation has slowed somewhat -

down from nearly 4% in 2010 to around 2.5% in 2016 - the urban population is expected to reach

65% by 2020 (THUBERC). Along with urban population growth, rising living standards in cities,

locked-in energy infrastructure and transport related activities will contribute significantly to

increasing carbon emissions. Cities will therefore need to make major carbon emission reductions

in the present and future.

Increasing urban population and density had fuelled the rapid development of the building

industry, and has driven energy consumption growth in China. The construction industry

contributed 26.4% of China’s GDP, and building energy use accounted for 33% of the total energy

use in China in 2015 (Yuan, Zhang et al. 2017). Total carbon emission from China’s building sector


have increased from 985 million tons of CO2 in 2005 to 3,754 million tons in 2014. Between 2001

and 2014, both primary energy consumption and electricity consumption in China’s building sector

increased more than two-fold. Rapid urbanisation and economic development has driven the

demand for higher quality living space, including improved indoor comfort, with a corresponding

increase in energy consumption. Therefore, energy conservation in new buildings and increasing

demand in the existing building stock has become one of the largest challenges for China’s energy

conservation and emissions-reduction work (IEA 2015). Building energy conservation plays an

important role in ensuring emissions peak before 2030, a commitment set by the Chinese

government in China’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement.

Guidance and support from government policies are crucial for achieving the energy conservation

targets for the building sector. Through national regulations and plans related to building energy

conservation, this research describes the low carbon transition pathways of building sector in

China.

The transition pathway presented in this narrative will focus on residential buildings in urban

areas. Energy consumption in public and commercial buildings represents a dominant share in

China’s building sector, which is almost three times that of residential building in rural or urban

areas. However, rapid urbanisation has boosted continuous development and scaled-up the

construction industry, especially in residential buildings. Among the new buildings in China, the

construction areas of residential housing accounted for about 75% and public buildings 25%

(Bureau, 2016c). Furthermore, residential buildings in urban areas reached the highest energy

consumption. For instance, space and water heating in the north urban buildings is the largest

energy consumer, making up 52% of the total building energy consumption. In addition, demand

for space heating for southern households in urban areas has been increasing rapidly due to climate

change and higher living space comfort (China Statistical Yearbook on Construction, 2014；2015

Annual Report on China Building Energy Efficiency, 2015).

A low-carbon transition in residential buildings is more complicated than other building categories.

The increased complexity is due to: the wide range of housing types; differences in household

demographics; varying climate conditions across China that impact households’ ability to regulate

indoor temperature; and economic-social contexts such as the housing rental market, social

custom and culture.


The study was based on a qualitative research design that includes two methodical approaches:

stakeholder analysis (workshop and interviewing) and policy document analysis.

The data collection started with governmental documents, archives and related literature reviews

that covered the more than 50 documents issued by national governments and more than 19

regulations or programs in the local level. These documents helped identify key factors, processes,

actors and the political framework of the building context. Based on that, a key set of questions


was discussed with stakeholders in workshops and interviews, which developed a general

understanding of transition pathway in building sector:

(1) Is the current policy mix deemed adequate for achieving the desired green transition in the

building sector? What additional policies are required to promote the transition pathway?

(2) What are the barriers and challenges in the implementation of transitioning the building

sector? What are the criteria from the stakeholders for estimating them?

(3) What are the (positive or negative) impacts of green transitions on the social-technological

structures?

Furthermore, the participatory research approach contributed to provide a multiplicity of opinions

and perceptions about the driver factors, implementation risks, consequential risks and

uncertainty under green building pathways in different climate zones.

Three workshops and two focus group interviews were held in Beijing and Shanghai respectively.

The participants in each focus group were invited from different stakeholder groups including local

governments, architects, constructors, NGOs, experts for green building design, urban planning

and low-carbon technologies and researchers. The events counted a total of 189 participants,

including 132 governmental officials, 18 experts, 6 architects, 6 NGOS, 4 constructors, 8 residents

and 21 researchers. The workshops helped in identifying the transition pathway, achieving a

general understanding of the drivers for uptake by stakeholders and barriers to green transition.

In the interview part, it aimed to gain in-depth expert and practitioner knowledge. Most of the

participants came from the local administration and experts in Beijing and Shanghai’s building

sectors, which identified the risk categorisations (implementation and consequential risks, as well

as uncertainty) and their potential impacts under the transition pathway for the building sector.

As a third step, under the qualitative outline of the pathway and its risks (or uncertainties),

quantitative modelling may help in addressing the potential impacts from the risks in the multiple

scenarios. Further validation of the model’s output would be improved by feedback and comments

from the stakeholders.

6.1.3 Findings

From the pathways studied, the low carbon transition pathway in China’s green building sector

emphasises the present policy ambition to scale up green buildings through increasing energy

efficiency and promoting renewable energy in buildings. The pathway considers the existing

energy policies and urbanisation strategies in China and explores the risks and uncertainties in the

green building transition pathway, drawing on examples from cities in northern and southern

climatic regions.

From the risk analysis of the transition pathways, implementation risks identified differed between

stakeholders’ perspectives; stakeholders included those from government (local and national),

construction firms, public residents and area experts. However, implementation risks mainly


derived from four clusters including: policies, technology innovation, financing and energy

consumption behaviour. In the low carbon building pathways, the stakeholders highlighted lack of

policies for green building operation and financial policies to incentivise renewable energy use as

a priority risk. However, the locked-in behaviour of building end-users and technological

innovation would be the main barriers in the future transitions of green new buildings and

retrofitting existing buildings.

Stakeholders also mentioned that energy saving technologies for the enclosure structure and

equipment systems often failed to consider the local needs to control indoor temperature based

on the local climate zone. Energy efficiency measures in northern regions, which has relatively

dry cold and hot conditions, cannot be directly replicated in the more humid southern regions

where building require additional ventilation.

Aside from different user needs, awareness of cost-benefits analysis for green buildings is still

weak in the design of Chinese buildings. Besides this, stakeholders from the governmental and the

public groups considered that the efficiency of equipment systems still suffer from a lack of

innovation. This especially applies to passive energy saving technology and heating (air

conditioning) system based on the full use of renewable energy such as solar and wind. For

instance, most buildings still rely on air conditio