re-framing theframing the climate change debate...climat the tyndall cen cli t hclimate change a...

climat

The Tyndall Cen

Cli t hClimate change a

Re-framing theRe framing the ate change debate

Dr Sarah Mandetre for Climate Change Research

The University of Mancheste

d i tiand energy: a marine perspectiveJanuary 2010

Talk o

1) Dangerous climate change ) g g

2) Cumulative emissions

3) Global GHG pathways

4) UK responses to the challenge

outline

e

What is dange

UK & EU define

B t

UK & EU define

But:

2°C impacts at the worst end… 2 C impacts at the worst end

… ocean acidification devastati

… failure to mitigate leaves 2°C

rous climate change?

e this as 2°Ce this as 2 C

d of the ranged of the range

ing even at 400-450ppmv CO2g pp 2

C stabilisation highly unlikely

Emission-red

UK EU & Global longUK, EU & Global - longUK’s 80% rEU 60% 80%EU 60%-80%Bali 50%

CO2 stays in atmosphe

Long-term targets areg g

duction targets

g term reduction targetsg term reduction targetsreduction in CO2e by 2050

“ 2050“ 2050“ 2050

ere for 100+ years,

dangerously misleadingg y g

2050 reduction unrelated to avoidin

l ti i i th t ttcumulative emissions that matter

this fundamentally rewrites the time

from long te- from long te

- to urgent &

ng dangerous climate change (2°C)g g g ( )

(i b b d t)(i.e. carbon budget)

eline of climate change

erm gradual reductionserm gradual reductions

radical reductions

How do global telink to

l b l d tiglobal and natio& from there to& from there to

emission-reduct

emperatures

l b b d tnal carbon budgets

ion pathways?

TemperatureTemperature threshold

science/modelling

GHG concentration

science/modelling

Global cumulativeemission budgetemission budget

Apportionment regime

National cumulative

pp g

emission budget

Global emission pathwaypathway

2000-2008emissions

+

National emissionh

+short-termprojections

pathway

… looking at it graphically

pathway forsi

ons

emis

sC

O2e

e

available carbobudgetnu

al C

budget

Ann

2000 2020 2040

r a CO2e budget

on

2060 2080 2100

pathway forsi

ons

emis

s

Plot recent

CO

2e e Plot recent


al C

budget

Ann

2000 2020 2040

r a CO2e budget

t emissionst emissions

on

2060 2080 2100

pathway forsi

ons

emis

s

leas

ed

CO

2e e

ady

rel


al C

ns a

lre

budget

Ann

Emis

sio

E

2000 2020 2040

r a CO2e budget

on

2060 2080 2100

pathway forsi

ons

emis

s

leas

ed

We can proje

CO

2e e

ady

rel We can proje- Short-te

We know:


al C

ns a

lre

We know:- Cumula

budget

Ann

Emis

sio

E

2000 2020 2040

r a CO2e budget

ect:ect:term emissions to peak year/s

on ative emissions for 2°C

2060 2080 2100

pathway forsi

ons

emis

s

leas

ed

Hence can

CO

2e e

ady

rel Hence can


al C

ns a

lre

budget

Ann

Emis

sio

E

2000 2020 2040

r a CO2e budget

n draw emission pathwaysn draw emission pathways

on

2060 2080 2100

pathway forsi

ons

emis

s

leas

ed

CO

2e e

ady

rel

nual

C

ns a

lre

carbon budget raAnn

Emis

sio

E

2000 2020 2040

r a CO2e budget

ange

2060 2080 2100

TyTyemissio

(2000

To consider:

1. CO2 emissions fro2 Non CO GHGs (p2. Non-CO2 GHGs (p

What emission space remain3. CO2 emissions fro

yndall’syndall son scenarios 0-2100 CO2e)

om landuse (deforestion)(principally agriculture)(principally agriculture)

ns for:om energy?

TyTyemissio

(2000

Included very optimistic:y- CO2 from land-use &


forestry emission scenarios

TyTyemissio

(2000

Included very optimistic:- CO2 from land-use &



- CO2 from land-use & 7

CO

2)

5

6

Characterised by high

O2 (

MtC

4

5uncertainty (principally driven by deforestation; 12-25% of

s of

CO

3

4global CO2e)

Two Tyndall scenarios withis

sion

s

2

Two Tyndall scenarios with

different carbon-stock levels

i i 70% & 80%

Em

1

remaining: 70% & 80%

200002000


0 2020 2040 2060 2080 21

Year

0 2020 2040 2060 2080 21

TyTyemissio

(2000

Included very optimistic:- land-use & forestry em

CO h- non-CO2 greenhouse


mission scenariosi igas emissions

- non-CO2 greenho

e)

142 g

GtC

O2

12

2 ghg

(G 10Marked tail from food

related emissions

on-C

O2

6

8related emissions

s of

no

4

6Food emissions/capita

assumed to halve by 2050

mis

sion

s

2

4

Em

02000

ouse gas emissionsg

Early actionMid actionLate actionLate action

Year

0 2020 2040 2060 2080 21

TyTyemissio

(2000

Included very optimistic:- land-use & forestry em

CO h- non-CO2 greenhouse

Global CO e emissions peakGlobal CO2e emissions peak


mission scenariosi i ?gas emissions?

ks of 2015/20/25?ks of 2015/20/25?

facto

the latest em

what is the sca‘problem’ w

oring in…

missions data

ale of the global gwe now face?

It’s gettin

Global CO2 em

~ 2.7% p.a. last 100yrs

~ 3.3% p.a. 2000-2006

ng worse!

mission trends?

latest global CO2eg 2

~ 2.4% p.a. since 2000

~ Stern assumed 0.95% p

(global peak by 2

e emission trends?

p.a.

2015)

Wh

this failure to reduce&&

the latest science on

Say aboutSay about

at does:

e emissions

n cumulative emissions

a 2°C future?a 2 C future?

What greenhou

pathway

se gas emission

ys for 2°C

Assumpt

2015/20/25 global peak in em

Highly optimistic deforestatio

2°C global carbon budget2°C global carbon budget 1400 to 2200 G

~10% to 60% chance of exc

tions

missions

on & food emission reduction

GtCO2e for 2000-2100eeding 2°C

Total greenhouse gTotal greenhouse g

2015 peak 2020

ses

(GtC

O2e

)

60

80

es (G

tCO

2e)

60

80

eenh

ouse

gas

40en

hous

e ga

se40

mis

sion

s of

gre

20

issi

ons

of g

ree

20

Year

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

Em 0

2000 2020 20

Em

i

0

(Anderson & Bows. 2008 Philosophical Transac

gas emission pathwaysgas emission pathways

0 peak 2025 peak

es (G

tCO

2e)

60

80

Low DL

Low DH

Medium D

enho

use

gase

40

Medium DL

Medium DH

High DL

High DH

issi

ons

of g

re

20

Year

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2

Em

i

0

Year

40 2060 2080 2100

ctions A of the Royal Society. 366. pp.3863-3882)

10% - 60% chanc4 5 0 p p m v c u m u la t iv e e m

)

& with a 2G

tCO

2e) 8 0ga

ses

(G

6 0

nhou

se

4 0

of g

reen

2 0

mis

sion

s

2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 4

Em 0

(Anderson & Bows. 2008 Philosophical

ce of exceeding 2°Cis s io n s c e n a r io s p e a k in g in 2 0 2 0

g2020 peak

L o w AL o w B

Unprecedentedd tiL o w B

M e d iu m AM e d iu m BH ig h A

reductions(~10% pa

from 2020)H ig h B

from 2020)

Y e a r

4 0 2 0 6 0 2 0 8 0 2 1 0 0

Y e a rTransactions A of the Royal Society. 366. pp.3863-3882)

… and for ene

60

(with 20

2) 50

e (G

tCO

40O

2 alo

ne

30Even then total

ons

of C

20

decarbonisation by

~2035-45 necessary

Em

issi

o

10

2035 45 necessary

02000

rgy emissions?

2015 peak M edium DL

020 peak)p L

2015 peak H igh DL2015 peak H igh DH2020 peak H igh DL2020 peak H igh DH

Year

2020 2040 2060 2080 21

What annual global

from energy ffrom energy f

Assume 2020 global peak in emissioHighly optimistic deforestatiHighly optimistic deforestati~ 50% (?) chance of excee

emission reductions

for 3°C and 4°Cfor 3 C and 4 C

onstion & food emission reductionstion & food emission reductionseding 3°C & 4°C

For 3°C & emissionsFor 3 C & emissions

… 9% annual red

For 4°C & emissions

… 3.5% annual re

peaking by 2020:peaking by 2020:

ductions in CO2 from energy2 gy

peaking by 2020:p g y

eductions in CO2 from energy

What are theWhat are the such re

Annual reductions of gre

“been associated with econo

UK gas & French 40x nuclearUK gas & French 40x nuclear

Collapse Soviet Union economCollapse Soviet Union econom

precedents forprecedents for ductions?

ater than 1% p.a. have only

omic recession or upheaval”Stern 2006

r ~1% p a reductionsr ~1% p.a. reductions(ex. aviation & shipping)

my ~5% p a reductionsmy 5% p.a. reductions

450p

greenhouse gas e

(50% chance of

ppmv

emission pathways

f exceeding 2°C)

For a 450ppmvpp

the UK can emit ~ 4… the UK can emit ~ 4

2050

Note: this is based on how the Uemissions to the UK in order to ca

v CO2 future,2 ,

4 8 billion tonnes of carbon4.8 billion tonnes of carbonbetween 2000-

UK Government apportioned globalalculate the ‘60% by 2050’ target

From this two qFrom this two qquestions arise...questions arise...

Question 1…

…….what were U

2000 & 2006?2000 & 2006?

Emissions: 2000-200F 450 f tFor a 450 future,

this leaves 3this leaves 3

… i.e. we’ve used ¼50 i j t 6½50 years in just 6½ y

UK emissions between

06 = ~1.2 billion tonnes carbo

3 6 billion tonnes for 2007-2053.6 billion tonnes for 2007 205

of our permitted emissions fo!years!

Question 2…Question 2…

….. what emissio

in the immediate

ons are we locked into

e future?

Looking at 450ppmmv target graphically …

Carbon

200

160

180

s (M

tC)

120

140

mis

sion

s

100

120

arbo

n e

60

80

Ca

40

0

20

2000 2010 2020

trajectories

s curve from 2012s curve from 2012

Year

2030 2040 2050

Carbon

200

160

180

s (M

tC)

120

140Plot data f

mis

sion

s

100

120

arbo

n e

60

80

Ca

40

0

20

2000 2010 2020

trajectories


from 2000 to 2006

Year

2030 2040 2050

Carbon

200

160

180

s (M

tC)

120

140Plot data fDip due to

mis

sion

s

100

120

arbo

n e

60

80

Ca

40

0

20

2000 2010 2020

trajectories


from 2000 to 2006o September 11th

Year

2030 2040 2050

Carbon

200

160

180

s (M

tC)

120

140What about the nex

mis

sion

s

100

120 lets assume we sall sectors, excep

arbo

n e

60

80 growth is held at ~

Ca

40

0

20

2000 2010 2020

trajectories


xt 6 years …stabilise annual emissions frompt aviation and shipping, where~ 2% below current levels

Year

2030 2040 2050

Carbon

200

160

180

s (M

tC)

120

140This givesbetween n

mis

sion

s

100

120 between n

arbo

n e

60

80

Ca

40

0

20

2000 2010 2020

trajectories


s a notable rise in emissions now & 2012now & 2012

Year

2030 2040 2050

) 600

700locan

(MtC

O2)

500

600

But UK ~2

mis

sion

s

400can emit

only

ioxi

de e

m

300 17 to 23 GtCO2

6% p.a.

Car

bon

di

2002

C

0

100

2000 2010 20200

Carbon pathwayp y

cking nation into unprecedentednnual CO2 reductions for22 decades, beginning 2012-14

9% p.a.p

Year

2030 2040 2050

What does the

about UK emission

pathway approach say

n policies ?

) 600

700

(MtC

O2)

500

600

mis

sion

s

400

ioxi

de e

m

300

Car

bon

di

200

C

0

100

2000 2010 20200

Policy implicationsy p

Year

2030 2040 2050

) 600

700

(MtC

O2)

500

600

demand

mis

sion

s

400

ioxi

de e

m

300

Car

bon

di

200 su

deC

0

100 de

2000 2010 20200

Policy implicationsy p

upply&

mandmand

Year

2030 2040 2050

MitigShort-term:Short-term:

Rapid reduction in emissions thvolun

Low emission diets

Afforestation – combined timbe

Moratoriums on:sale of inefficient appliances (pp (sale of any cars under 60mpgairport, sea port and road expairport, sea port and road expany new fossil-fuel powerstat

gation2010-20152010-2015

hrough behaviour changetary & enforced (via regulation)

er new-build

(all A++ from 2010)( )gpansionpansionion (without CCS & CHP)

MitigShort-MediumShort-Medium

Rapid deployment of low-carborapid renewables (Severnmassive biomass programp gwidespread micro-grids coal with CCS & CHP nuccoal with CCS & CHP nucnuclear with CHP

Massive shift to electricity for tr

H d i f t t (?)Hydrogen infrastructure (?)

gationterm: 2015-2025term: 2015-2025

on energy supply barrage?)

mme

clearclear

ransport & heat

Reducing car(mitig(mitig

T id d liTo avoid dangerous climreduction in carbon em

90%90%

Remember – almost alfrom energy & 80% offrom energy & 80% of20% of the global popu

bon emissions gation)gation)

t h dmate change we need a missions in the region of:

% !!% !!

ll carbon emissions aref all emissions come fromf all emissions come fromulation !

ThThankank you

re-framing theframing the climate change debate...climat the tyndall cen cli t hclimate change a...

Documents