The Challenge of The Challenge of StabilizationStabilization

Saving the World Without Losing Saving the World Without Losing Our Mocha-Choco-Loco Espresso Our Mocha-Choco-Loco Espresso

LattesLattes

Tony Robalik (2007)

Dramatic ForeshadowingDramatic Foreshadowing

• Only the B1 SRES scenario “come[s] anywhere near to stabilization of concentration by 2100” (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.177)

• B1 world is:– More integrated– More eco-friendly– Rapid economic growth, but towards service and info economy– Population peak of 9bn in 2050, then drops to 7bn by 2100– Reduction in material intensity– Introduction of clean and efficient tech– Emphasis on global solutions to economic, social, and enviro

sustainability– NO POLICY INTERVENTIONS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRES

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1

•Our goal: to emit at a level consistent with natural CO2 sinks, i.e., no more than 5GtCO2e/yr (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.193)

Global Warming Potential (GWP)Global Warming Potential (GWP)

Stern, 2006, p.198

Note: CO2-equivalent emissions are defined differently than CO2-equivalent concentrations. Concentrations of CO2e consider the instantaneous effect of any particular gas in the atmosphere. For example, while non-CO2 gases account for only 23% of GWP, they account for 30% of total radiative forcing today. Stern prefers CO2e concentrations.

~1850-2006~1850-2006

• 1850: atmospheric GHG concentrations were 280ppm CO2e

• 2006: 430ppm CO2e

• North America & Europe responsible for 70% of CO2 from energy production

• Developing countries: less than 25%• Our national hypocrisy:

– We’re the biggest culprits– We’ve exported all our manufacturing overseas

Stern (2006)

Notice the slowdown in growth 1971-2002 associated with a real increase in prices

Stern, 2006, p.175

Emissions per CapitaEmissions per Capita

Houghton (2004), pp.255-7Knickerbocker, 2007, citing Univ. of Chicago research

2000 by 2050 by 2100

World Average 1tC / yr

0.6tC / yr (450ppm)

1.1tC / yr (550ppm)

0.3tC / yr (450ppm)

0.7tC / yr (550ppm)

Developed & Transitional Economies

2.8tC / yr

--USA 5.5tC / yr

--American Non-Vegetarians compared to Vegetarians

+1.5tC / yr

(+27%)

Developing Countries 0.5tC / yr

A transition economy is an economy which is changing from a planned economy to a free market (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_economy)

•Assumed A1 or B1 scenario, in which world pop peaks at 9bn in 2050 and drops to 7bn by 2100

•Does not consider feedback effects

•Not clear if Houghton is referring to CO2 or CO2e

Feedback EffectsFeedback Effects

• Two important feedbacks– Increased soil respiration as temp rises– Forest die-back as climate changes

• Many stabilization scenarios do not consider these effects

• If included:– 450ppm CO2 550ppm– 550ppm CO2 750ppm

• Not clear if Houghton is referring to CO2 or CO2e• Currently, natural systems absorb ~1/2 anthropogenic

CO2, but CC might change global carbon cycle, reducing this amount (Jones, 2006)

(Houghton, 2006, p.255)

Emissions by SourceEmissions by Source•Greenhouse gas emissions by source, 2000

Stern (2006), p.171

Emissions FlowchartEmissions Flowchart

WRI: http://cait.wri.org/figures.php?page=World-FlowChart&view=100

Selected Sectors: Land-UseSelected Sectors: Land-Use

• Deforestation single largest source

– Indonesia: 30%

– Brazil: 20%

Stern (2006), p.171, Annex 7f

Land UseLand Use

• Peak in 1990 from forest fires in Indonesia• “Countries will halt deforestation when only 15%

of their 2000 forest area remains” (Stern, Annex 7f, citing Houghton)

– Houghton’s “arbitrary assumption” (id.)

Stern (2006), p.171, Annex 7f

Land UseLand Use

Stern, 2006, Annex 7f

Selected Sectors: Ag & the Selected Sectors: Ag & the “Hidden” Sector“Hidden” Sector

Stern, 2006, Annex 7g

•Developing countries: 75% of all ag emissions

•Where do you think all your mangos and avacados come from?

The “Hidden” SectorThe “Hidden” Sector

• When you include the entire supply chain, livestock account for 18% of all GHG emissions– 9% of all CO2

– 37% of all CH4 (methane)– 65% of all N2O (nitrous oxide)

• Includes, e.g.,– Deforestation for pasture & feed (70% of deforestation

in Amazon grazing)– Fertilizers– Energy to run slaughterhouses & processing plants– Etc.

• 30% of the Earth’s land surface is devoted to livestock

• Changes in dietary habits can have immediate effects, as turnover rate for farm animals is very short

18% of total CO2e

cf. transport sector, which produces only 14% of total

http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html, 2007

The Psychology of WorryThe Psychology of Worry• “The affective system […] is the

wellspring of action” (p.104)– Visceral reactions, like fear and

anxiety• Personal experience is very

important• It functions automatically & without

training, unlike the analytic system

• Recent events given more weight• Evidence generated in favor of an

action interferes with generation of evidence arguing against that action

• “[W]omen have been shown to worry more than men about a host of risks” (p.105)

• Worry is a finite resource• One-action bias: worry goes

away when just one action is taken

• Three policy recommendations (p.116):

– High Drama: concretize future events and move them closer in time and space to raise visceral concern

– Improve process: need for “guided protocols by which decision makers consider arguments for conservation and climate change mitigation before they are allowed to consider arguments against such actions”

– Education & Eco-Literacy: “better (environmental) science and statistics education can create the familiarity with the scientific presentation of information and mental habits that will create citizens who give greater weight to the output of their analytic processing system”

• The problem is, of course, “ultimately self-corrective” (p.116)

Weber, 2006

Paths to StabilizationPaths to Stabilization

Clearly shows the benefits of peaking early

Stern, 2006, p.199

Paths to StabilizationPaths to Stabilization

•Stabilization at 450ppm CO2e would be very difficult – but so lovely!

•Stabilization at 550ppm CO2e (roughly double pre-ind) seems more “reasonable”

Stern, 2006, p.200

COCO22 and Temperature and Temperature

Stern, 2006, p.195

Warren, 2006

“Maximum” and “minimum” are based on probabilities from “all eleven recent studies”

•Note the significant probability of exceeding +3-4°C for 550ppm CO2e

•450ppm CO2e would be much safer, putting us in +2-3°C range

•+2-3°C range is when Amazon goes bye-bye

Drivers of Emissions GrowthDrivers of Emissions Growth

• Income• Population growth• Fuel choice

– Affected by natural resource endowments

– “Historic investment in generation capacity”

• Sprawl, inefficient use of land• Availability of alternatives (e.g.,

in transportation)• Social choices (such as

willingness to bike or walk)• Dietary choices• Carbon intensity• Technical developments

affecting fuel efficiency

• Economic growth --> rapid urbanization & infrastructure development

• Conversion of land from forest to agriculture– Subsistence ag in Africa– Beef & Soya in S. Am.– Coffee & timber in S. Asia

• Increased ag productivity (more fertilizers and more N2O from the soil)

Stern, 2006, Annexes 7b-g

Stern’s Prospects for SavingsStern’s Prospects for Savings

• STRONG POLICY• Carbon capture and storage

(CCS)• Increased use of renewables• Nuclear power

– If costs come down, and– If “public acceptance issues

are resolved”• Switching to less carbon-

intense FFs• Reduced demand from end-

users• Improvements in fuel efficiency

(could account for ¾ of carbon savings in transportation)

• Behavioral change

• Efficiency: Among IEA-11 group of countries, 10% reduction in energy demand accompanied 88% increase in manufacturing output (‘73-’00)

• Energy efficiency increases in buildings could come at low or negative costs– Innovative design– Good site design– Better lighting, heaing, and

cooling systems• Save the forests! (and plant

new ones)• Dissemination of best

practices in agriculture and forestry

Stern, 2006, Annexes 7b-g

http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/30YearsSUM.pdfIEA-11: Australia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States

““Wedges”Wedges”

Stern, 2006, p.207This stabilizes emissions but not concentrations

B1 ScenarioB1 Scenario

• The only SRES scenario that “come[s] anywhere near to stabilization of concentration by 2100” (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.177)

• How can we make it better?

• What climate-specific policies should we implement?

• What actions can planners & others take?

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1

B1 ScenarioB1 Scenario• B1 world is:

– More integrated– More eco-friendly– Rapid economic growth, but towards service and info

economy– Population peak of 9bn in 2050, then drops to 7bn by

2100– Reduction in material intensity– Introduction of clean and efficient tech– Emphasis on global solutions to economic, social, and

enviro sustainability– WHAT POLICY INTERVENTIONS?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRES

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1

•Our goal: to emit at a level consistent with natural CO2 sinks, i.e., no more than 5GtCO2e/yr (Houghton, p.254; Stern, p.193)

ReferencesReferencesFAO. Livestock a major threat to environment: Remedies urgently needed. Retrieved 26

February 2007, from http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.htmlKnickerbocker, B. (20 February 2007). Humans’ beef with livestock: A warmer planet.

Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0220/p03s01-ussc.html

Houghton, J. (2004). Global warming: The complete briefing, 3rd Edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp.253-264.

IEA. “Executive Summary”. Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/30YearsSUM.pdf

Jones, C., Cox, P., & Huntingford, C. (2006). Impact of climate-carbon cycle feedbacks on emissions scenarios to achieve stabilization. In Schellnhuber (ed.), 324-331.

“Special Report on Emissions Scenarios.” Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRES

“SRES: B1 storyline and scenario family.” Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/094.htm#1

Stern, N. (2006). Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change: Report to HM Treasury. Retrieved 24 February 2007, from http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/sternreview_index.cfm

Warren, R. (2006). “Impacts of Global Climate Change at Different Annual Mean Global Temperature Increases.” In Schellnhuber (ed.), 93-131.

Weber, E. (2006). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change 77: 103–120.

WRI. World greenhouse gas emissions flow chart. Retrieved on 26 February 2007, from http://cait.wri.org/figures.php?page=World-FlowChart&view=100