0. The process and the people 1. Emission of GHG 1970 -2004 AD 2. Future Emissions and how to reduce them What is the potential for reducing emissions? How to reduce emissions? Changes in Lifestyle 3. What are the costs What are the costs in 2030? There are also co-benefits of mitigation 4. Long-term mitigation and Stabilization levels Long-term mitigation (after 2030) Stabilization and global mean temperatures 5. Policies to realize mitigation of climate change 6. Sustainable development & climate change mitigation
Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch/WG3_press_presentation.pdf 0. Danke ! from
Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch/ AR4wg3 SPM Fig.1http://www.ipcc.ch/ Fig.SPM 1 CO2 is the largest contributor
Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch AR4-wg3 _SPM p.6, Notes to Fig. SPM1http://www.ipcc.ch Notes to Fig.SPM 1 Notes: 1. Other N2O includes industrial processes, deforestation/savannah burning, waste water and waste incineration. 2. Other is CH4 from industrial processes and savannah burning. 3. CO2 emissions from decay (decomposition) of above ground biomass that remains after logging and deforestation and CO2 from peat fires and decay of drained peat soils. 4. As well as traditional biomass use at 10% of total, assuming 90% is from sustainable biomass production. Corrected for 10% carbon of biomass that is assumed to remain as charcoal after combustion. 5. For large-scale forest and scrubland biomass burning averaged data for 1997-2002 based on Global Fire Emissions Data base satellite data. 6. Cement production and natural gas flaring. 7. Fossil fuel use includes emissions from feedstocks.
Mitigation in the short and medium term (until 2030)
0. The concept of “ mitigation potential” has been developed to assess the scale of GHG reductions that could be made, relative to emission baselines, for a given level of carbon price (expressed in cost per unit of CO2 equ emissions avoided or reduced). Mitigation potential is further differentiated in terms of “market potential” and “economic potential”. 1. Market potential is the mitigation potential based on private costs and private discount rates, which might be expected to occur under forecast market conditions, including policies and measures currently in place, noting that barriers limit actual uptake. 2. Economic potential is the mitigation potential, which takes into account social costs and benefits and social discount rates assuming that market efficiency is improved by policies and measures and barriers are removed. Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch AR4-wg3 _SPM p.9, Box SPM2,http://www.ipcc.ch Concept of Mitigation Potential
Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch/WG3_press_presentation.pdf and SPM Statement 5, p.10http://www.ipcc.ch/WG3_press_presentation.pdfTable SPM 1 Bottom up Studies Both bottom-up and top-down Studies indicate that there is substantial economic potential for the mitigation of global GHG emissions over the coming decades, that could offset the projected growth of global emissions or reduce emissions below current levels
Definitionen aus Box SPM 2 Bottom-up studies are based on assessment of mitigation options, emphasizing specific technologies and regulations. They are typically sectoral studies taking the macro-economy as unchanged. Sector estimates have been aggregated, as in the TAR, to provide an estimate of global mitigation potential for this assessment. Top-down studies assess the economy-wide potential of mitigation options. They use globally consistent frameworks and aggregated information about mitigation options and capture macro- economic and market feedbacks. Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch AR4-wg3 _SPM p.9, Box SPM2,http://www.ipcc.ch
only: World Fig. SPM 6 ; from bottom up stufies Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch/WG3_press_presentation.pdf Based on end-use allocation
Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch/WG3_press_presentation.pdf in insulation and appliances.
Renewable energy generally has a positive effect on energy security, employment and on air quality. Given costs relative to other supply options, renewable electricity, which accounted for 18% of the electricity supply in 2005, can have a 30-35% share of the total electricity supply supply in 2030 at carbon prices up to 50 US$/t CO2-eq Wörtlich zitiert: Nuclear power Given costs relative to other supply options, nuclear powe r, which accounted for 16% of the electricity supply in 2005, can have an 18% share of the total electricity supply in 2030 at carbon prices up to 50 US$/tCO2-eq, but safety, weapons proliferation and waste remain as constraints. AR4wg3 _ SPM p.17+18
Definitionen (p.17 of SPM) 24 Spill over effects of mitigation in a cross-sectoral perspective are the effects of mitigation policies and measures in one country or group of countries on sectors in other countries. 25 Carbon leakage is defined as the increase in CO2 emissions outside the countries taking domestic mitigation action divided by the reduction in the emissions of these countries.
Quelle: http://www.ipcc.ch/WG3_press_presentation.pdf 2050 -2000 AD AR4wg3 _ SPM, Table SPM5 selection; p.22 „ at equilibrium“
Pink shaded areas give the CO2 emissions for the post-TAR emissions scenarios. Green shaded areas depict the range of more than 80 TAR stabilization scenarios. AR4wg3 _ SPM, Fig SPM7 selection; p.23 Emission pathways of mitigation scenario: Example category B Pathway is for CO2 emissions only.
Figure SPM 7: Emissions pathways of mitigation scenarios for alternative categories of 5 stabilization levels (Category I to VI as defined in the box in each panel). The pathways are for CO2 emissions only. Pink shaded (dark) areas give the CO2 emissions for the post-TAR emissions scenarios. Green shaded (light) areas depict the range of more than 80 TAR stabilization scenarios. Base year emissions may differ between models due to differences in sector and industry coverage. To reach the lower stabilization levels some scenarios deploy removal of CO2 from the atmosphere (negative emissions) using technologies such as biomass energy production utilizing carbon capture and storage. [Figure 3.17] AR4wg3 _ SPM, Fig SPM7 Bildunterschrift; p.23
Statement 19 Statement 19: The range of stabilization levels assessed can be achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that are currently available and those that are expected to be commercialised in coming decades. This assumes that appropriate and effective incentives are in place for development, acquisition, deployment and diffusion of technologies and for addressing related barriers (high agreement, much evidence). Technologie steht bereit, allerdings fehlen Anreize :
In 2050 global average macro-economic costs for multi-gas mitigation towards stabilization between 710 and 445 ppm CO2-eq, are in the range between a 1% gain to a 5.5% decrease of global GDP (see Table SPM.6). For specific countries and sectors, costs vary considerably from the global average. Macro-economic Costs in 2050 AR4wg3 _ SPM, Statement 20 ; p.26 Statement 20
„ 21. Decision-making about the appropriate level of global mitigation over time involves an iterative risk management process that includes mitigation and adaptation, taking into account actual and avoided CC damages, cobenefits, sustainability, equity, and attitudes to risk. Choices about the scale and timing of GHG mitigation involve balancing the economic costs of more rapid emission reductions now against the corresponding medium-term and long-term climate risks of delay [high agreement, much evidence]. “ AR4wg3 _ SPM, Statement 21 ; p.26 In dieser Abstraktheit überall vollste Zustimmung. (eigentlich sogar ziemlich trivial) Das wussten schon die alten Römer: Quidquid agis, prudenter agas et respice finem. Statement 21