1

Long-term challenge and short-term struggle towards low carbon society

Berlin, 23 February 2008

Norichika Kanie, Ph.D.Associate Professor

Graduate School of Decision Science and TechnologyTokyo Institute of Technology

Two Divided Perspectives on BK Institution

Environmental Interests– Antipollution social movement

from late 60s-

Taking a lead in the field of environment (as a result of non-military tradition): Host KyotoLead/represented by MOEEnvironmental conservation

Economic Interests– Closer economic

partnership/competition with/against US

– Close Military Alliance after WWII

Successful energy efficiency improvementLead/represented by METIEconomic Competition First (looking at US/China)

Keep KyotoChange the Institution 2

Sub-committee on international climate strategy

Central Environmental CouncilFuture framework should be based on the Kyoto Protocol and its mechanisms, with country-based numerical targets.UN-based multilateral forum is important as the climate change is a global issueLarge amount of GHG reduction is necessary in the long-term.

Interim report of the central environmental council (2004)

3

Special Committee of the Global Environmental Sub-Committee Industrial Structure Council

It is dangerous to start long-term target debate with 2 �, as there are still scientific uncertainties.Rather than specifying a long-term target, actual effects of policies should be considered.

Interim report (2004)

4

Two Divided View within One GovernmentProblem

Parallel Arguments; no substantial structure to coordinate / bridge the gap– Coordination by the Cabinet Office (politics) in 1997 as

JPN was the Host , but, for BK…?– It was political power game that decided Japan’s position

on Kyoto, not so much with the scientific evidence– Dialogue may be possible for MOE / METI, but NOT for

the national level…BUT, it also represent the world’s situation

Japanese domestic situation somewhat mirrors international situation (US-METI – EU-MOE)……Exemplary playing field?

5

External environment is changing

Noticeable impact (that may be accused to ) climate changeMedia influenceScientific progress: Gleneagles G8 process / IPCC AR4Climate Security …

6

Climate Security

Climate change (output) … threatsConstraint to energy useimpact

inter-linked

Energy deficit (input) … threatsEnergy politics (input) … threats1.Building a new order over (renewable) energy source2.Related technology

7

Climate Security

Change the dynamics of IR

Debate over the Post-2012 Institutional Framework

Europe: Climate Policy and FrameworkUS: Energy Policy and Framework (pretending to be climate policy)

Addressing both climate and energy under climate security is needed to eliminate the emerging threats

8

CC has become high-politics issue

April: Security Council DebateSummer: G8 SummitSeptember: APECSeptember: GAAutumn: ASEAN+3

IPCC / Al Gore Nobel Peace Prize

9

External pressure (GAIATSU) works for Japan

10

“As the chair of the G8 Summit, I am resolved to take on the responsibility in working towards (…) the setting of fair and equitable emissions target.”

“Within that context, Japan will (…) set a quantified national target for the greenhouse gas emissions reductions to be realized from now on.”

11

12

http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/abespeech/2007/05/24speech_e.html

Implications for Japan : Emission Reduction Path for Halving in 2050

13Halving from 1990 level for Case1,2; 2000 for Case3,4; 2004 for Case5,6

Global Environment Vol 12http://www.airies.or.jp/publication/index.html

GHG reduction required for Japan, per capita emission convergence in 2050

2050���� 2030����

1990�� 2000�� 1990�� 2000��

Case1 �2.2�� 85.2% 85.9% 65.4% 67.2%Case2 �2.4�� 85.0% 85.7% 51.6% 54.1%Case3 �2.3�� 82.9% 83.8% 61.9% 63.9%Case4 �2.5�� 82.9% 83.8% 49.5% 52.1%Case5 �2.4�� 81.4% 82.3% 58.6% 60.7%Case6 �2.6�� 81.4% 82.3% 43.1% 46.0%

14

GHG reduction required for Japan for halving global emissions in 2050 (equal GHG emission reduction ratio per GDP)

2050���� 2030����

1990�� 2000�� 1990�� 2000��

Case1 �2.2�� 92.0% 92.4% 79.4% 78.3%

Case2 �2.3�� 91.9% 92.3% 71.2% 69.6%

Case3 �2.2�� 90.8% 91.3% 77.1% 75.9%

Case4 �2.4�� 90.8% 91.3% 69.7% 68.1%

Case5 �2.3�� 90.0% 90.5% 75.0% 73.7%

Case6 �2.6�� 90.0% 90.5% 65.6% 63.8%

Implications for other countriesC&C 2050

Japan US EU Russia AI China India Brazil S.Korea

Case1 �2.2�� 85% 88% 83% 94% 88% 35% -89% 62% 73%

Case2 �2.3�� 85% 88% 83% 94% 88% 35% -91% 61% 73%

Case3 �2.2�� 83% 86% 80% 93% 86% 26% -118% 56% 69%

Case4 �2.4�� 83% 86% 80% 93% 86% 26% -118% 56% 69%

Case5 �2.3�� 81% 85% 78% 92% 85% 19% -137% 52% 66%

Case6 �2.6�� 81% 85% 78% 92% 85% 19% -137% 52% 66%

GHG reduction required for 50% reduction in 2050

15

JapanJapanLowLow--

Carbon Carbon SocietySocietyProjectProject

BaU GHG-475ppm GHG-500ppm GHG-550ppm GHG-650ppm

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

” N

‰·ŽºŒø‰ÊƒKƒX”r�o—Ê (“ñŽ_‰»’Y‘fŠ·ŽZ�F G

tC/”N )

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

2110

2120

2130

2140

2150

” N

‹C‰·�ã�

(199

0”N =0

.6�Ž )

GHG475ppm

GHG: Greenhouse gases50% reduction

650

550500

BaU

Tem

pera

ture

rais

e(a

bove

the

pre-

indu

stria

l lev

el)

Year

GH

G e

mis

sion

s (G

t-Ceq

)

475

650550500

BaUGlobal GHG emissions should Global GHG emissions should be reduced by 50% in 2050be reduced by 50% in 2050

Calculated by AIM model

To control temperature raise To control temperature raise below 2below 2ooCC

Year

Japanese reduction

target in 205060-80%

Large GHG cut is possible in JapanLarge GHG cut is possible in Japan

Possible trendPossible trend--breaking options breaking options to achieve to achieve 70% reductions toward 2050 in Japan70% reductions toward 2050 in Japan

US

Canada

UK

France

China

India

W orld

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

CO

2 per

cap

ita e

mis

sion

s (t-C

/cap

)

GermanyMETI, Japan2030 scenario

Current per capita CO2 emissions and Target

Target for Low Carbon SocietyIB1

IA2

Japan 2050 scenario

US: delay for tech development, global warming business

EU: Initiatives toward LCSJapan: Need long-term vision

Developing countries: earlierguidance toward LCS is key

$200/t-C scenario

Shuzo Nishioka, Junichi Fujino; NIES COP11 and COP/MOP1 side eventGlobal Challenges Toward Low-Carbon Economy (LCE), Dec.3, 2005

How to structure How to structure global participation global participation

Junichi Fujino, Jan 12 2007 at Iddri, Paris, fuji@nies.go.jp

Intensity Imp. (CI)

Imp. (EE)Carbon

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

• Advanced fossil fueled plants + CCS• Hydrogen supply using fossil fuel + CCS

EE & CI• Motor-driven mobiles: Electric battery vehicles, Fuel cell battery vehicles

Energy Efficiency • Efficient air-conditioner, Efficient water heater, Efficient lighting system

• Fuel cell system• Photovoltaic on the roof

Carbon Intensity Imp. (CI)

• Fuel switching from coal/oil to natural gas

Demand growth by activity level change

• High economic growth• Decrease of population and number of households

Soci-ety

Carbon Intensity Imp. (CI)

Reduction of service demands (SD)

Reduction of service demands (SD)

Energy Efficiency Imp. (EE)

Factors Class.

• Nuclear energy• Effective use of electricity in night time with storage• Hydrogen supply with low-carbon energy sources

Energy Transform

ation

• Intensive land-use, Concentrated urban function• Public transportation system

Trans-portation

• High insulation dwelling and building• Home/Building energy management system

Residential and com

mercial

• Energy efficient improvement of furnace and motor etc.

Industrial

Main factors to reduce CO2 emissions

Intensity Imp. (CI)

Imp. (EE)Carbon

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

• Advanced fossil fueled plants + CCS• Hydrogen supply using fossil fuel + CCS

EE & CI• Motor-driven mobiles: Electric battery vehicles, Fuel cell battery vehicles

Energy Efficiency • Efficient air-conditioner, Efficient water heater, Efficient lighting system

• Fuel cell system• Photovoltaic on the roof

Carbon Intensity Imp. (CI)

• Fuel switching from coal/oil to natural gas

Demand growth by activity level change

• High economic growth• Decrease of population and number of households

Soci-ety

Carbon Intensity Imp. (CI)

Reduction of service demands (SD)

Reduction of service demands (SD)

Energy Efficiency Imp. (EE)

Factors Class.

• Nuclear energy• Effective use of electricity in night time with storage• Hydrogen supply with low-carbon energy sources

Energy Transform

ation

• Intensive land-use, Concentrated urban function• Public transportation system

Trans-portation

• High insulation dwelling and building• Home/Building energy management system

Residential and com

mercial

• Energy efficient improvement of furnace and motor etc.

Industrial

Main factors to reduce CO2 emissionsActivity

31

CO

2em

issi

ons

in 2

000

SD29

EE84

CI27

EE & CI73

CCS42

CO

2re

duct

ions

in e

nerg

yen

d-us

e se

ctor

�M

tC�

CO

2re

duct

ions

in e

nerg

ytra

nsfo

rmat

ion

sect

or�

MtC

�

Red

uctio

n of

CO

2em

issi

ons �M

tC�

Incr

ease

of

CO

2Em

issi

ons

22

9

19

28

610

34

12

73

42

EE: Energy Efficiency Improvement, CI: Carbon Intensity Improvement, SD: Reduction of Service Demand

CO

2em

issi

ons

in 2

050

16

Back-casting from future target world

2020 20502000

Long-term target year

Release of A

IM result

Technology development,socio-economic change projected by historically trend

Forecasting

Back-casting

Normative target world

Reference future world

Service demand change

by changing social behavior, lifestyles

and institutions

Mitigation Technology

developmentRequiredPolicy

intervention and Investment

required intervention policy and measures

Envi

ronm

enta

l pre

ssur

e

Checkingyear(2015)

Checkingyear(2025)

Requ

ired

inte

rven

tion3. We need

“Trend Breaks”to realize visions

2. We need“Visions”

1.Target may be tough

50% reductionsIn the world

17

What shall be Japan’s actions to stabilize the climate?

1990

2000

2020

2050

2010

BAU Scenario

De-carbonizationScenario

efficiencyNewenergy

Energy efficiency Structural Change

Life-styleChange

Tech Innovation

Green BuildingUrban Structure

Decentralized Service

Urban Team

Environmental ConsciousEffective Communication

Dematerialization

IT

Integrated research on technology and social innovation

De-CarbonizationTargetLong-term

Scenario R&D

Social and economic model building, Economic and Technology scenarios

CO

2em

isio

ns

Target-setting, andFeasibility Research

-1

135— LŒ ø

�t• ½

‘ Ó –

Œ ø— ¦

GHG ReductionTarget research

Mid-term target Long-term Target

Next generation transportation

Effective transportation

Transport

De-carbonization 2050 Research Project, JapanAdvisory Board

5 Teams, Approx.60 Researchers

FY 2004-2006 (+2yrs), Funded by the Ministry of the Environment

Long-term, Sustainable Environmental Policy

PL: Shuzo Nishioka (NIES)

18

Vision A “Doraemon” Vision B “Satsuki and Mei”

Vivid, Technology-driven Slow, Natural-orientedUrban/Personal Decentralized/Community

Technology breakthroughCentralized production /recycle

Self-sufficientProduce locally, consume locally

Comfortable and Convenient Social and Cultural Values

2%/yr GDP per capita growth 1%/yr GDP per capita growth

As for LCS visions, As for LCS visions, we prepared two different we prepared two different but likely future societiesbut likely future societies

Akemi Imagawa

Doraemon is a Japanese comic series created by Fujiko F. Fujio. The series is about a robotic cat named Doraemon, who travels back in time from the 22nd century. He has a pocket, which connects to the fourth dimension and acts like a wormhole.

Satsuki and Mei’s House reproduced in the 2005 World Expo. Satsuki and Mei are daughters in the film "My Neighbor Totoro". They lived an old house in rural Japan, near which many curious and magical creatures inhabited.

When it comes to regional, many difficulties in the Asian context

Diverse size [physical size / economic level (absolute terms, per capita) / population, etc.] – Implications for environmental issues

(environment or development / trans-boundary air pollution or urban air pollution)

– Capacity [technological / negotiation skill]Different regimes (ideological difference)HistoryCulture

19

20

Countries 2000

Cambodia 3,655,794,000

China 1,198,480,000,000

Indonesia 165,020,500,000

Japan 4,746,067,000,000

Korea, Rep. 511,658,500,000

Lao PDR 1,735,147,000

Malaysia 90,319,740,000

Mongolia 946,532,700

Philippines 75,912,540,000

Russian Federation 259,708,500,000

Thailand 122,725,200,000

Vietnam 31,172,520,000

Source: World Development Indicators database

GDP(current US$)

21

Countries 2000

Cambodia 280

China 930

Indonesia 590

Japan 35,140

Korea, Rep. 9,800

Lao PDR 280

Malaysia 3,430

Mongolia 390

Philippines 1,040

Russian Federation 1,710

Thailand 1,990

Vietnam 380

Source: World Development Indicators database

GNI Per Capita

G20Australia, China,

Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea,

Turkey

G15Algeria Chile EgyptIran

Jamaica Kenya

MalaysiaNigeria

Peru Senegal

Sri LankaVenezuela

G8Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia,

United Kingdom, United States of

America, European Union

Argentina, Brazil, India,

Indonesia, Mexico,

Overlap between G20, G15 and G8

Poland, Spain

G20 of Gleneagles are underlined, 13 nations from MEM are in red, Asians are in italic

22

When it comes to regional, many difficulties in the Asian context

Diverse size [physical size / economic level (absolute terms, per capita) / population, etc.] – Implications for environmental issues

(environment or development / trans-boundary air pollution or urban air pollution)

– Capacity [technological / negotiation skill]Different regimes (ideological difference)HistoryCulture

23