Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 Achieving the 2ºC target in the Copenhagen Accord: an assessment using a global model E3MG Terry Barker Presentation to the Institute for Sustainable.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1 Achieving the 2ºC target in the Copenhagen Accord: an assessment using a global model E3MG Terry Barker Presentation to the Institute for Sustainable."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Achieving the 2ºC target in the Copenhagen Accord: an assessment using a global model E3MG Terry Barker Presentation to the Institute for Sustainable Energy and the Environment (I-SEE) at the University of Bath, 9 March 2010 ADaptation And Mitigation (ADAM) strategies for climate change was funded by the EU under FP6

2 2 2 Outline The Copenhagen Accord Implications for GHG reductions and carbon prices from IPCC AR4 Global policy implications Use of E3MG to assess feasibility and costs of rapid decarbonisation

3 3 3 Key Features of the Copenhagen Accord, December 2009 Maintains the twin-track progress under the UNFCCC: –long-term cooperative action –further commitments of Annex I parties under the Kyoto Protocol Agreed by the largest countries contributing to GHG emissions: US, China, Political, non-legally-binding statement Recognizes the scientific view that the increase in global temperatures should be below 2 degrees Celsius

4 4 4 Policy outcomes of the Copenhagen Accord, December 2009 Annex I (developed countries) –quantified GHG emission reduction targets for 2020 to be reported by 31/1/2010 –US$30bn and $100bn by 2020 to support adaptation and mitigation in non-Annex I countries –accounting of targets and finance to be rigorous, robust and transparent Non-Annex I (developing countries) –nationally appropriate mitigation actions to be reported by 31/1/2010 –supported actions to be subject to international measurement, reporting and verification

5 5 5 Implications for GHG reductions and carbon prices from IPCC AR4 IPCC AR4 assessed climate modelling literature and synthesised the results Ultimate target is to avoid dangerous climate change, but this can be converted to –global temperature rise –GHG concentrations by 2100 –GHG emission reductions below 1990 or 2005 levels

6 6 6 Figure 2: Average global temperatures, GHG concentrations and emissions Multigas and CO 2 only studies combined Source: IPCC WG3 SPM 2007 Range comes from alternative estimates of climate sensitivity Range comes from diferent models Note lack of studies below 450ppmv-CO 2 -eq

7 7 7 Copenhagen temperature target, Stern s concentration range and safe and feasible concentration targets Copenhagen Accord interpretation: global mean temperature increase at less than 2ºC above pre-industrial level Source: IPCC WG3 SPM 2007 feasible Stern safe where we are now!

8 8 8 Targets to avoid dangerous climate change dangerous is an ethical and political issue Target of 2ºC above pre-industrial is very stringent and requires stabilisation below 450ppm CO 2 eq to have a 50% probability of being met –stabilisation below 400ppm CO 2 e is more likely to achieve less than 2 ˚ C Stern, p. 284: The current evidence suggests aiming for stabilisation somewhere within the range ppm CO 2 e. Anything higher would substantially increase risks of very harmful impacts.. –but costs of <450 are unreliable and may be small Most modelling scenarios have been for targets c 650ppm CO 2 eq (EMF19, EMF21). Innovation Modelling Comparison Project (IMCP) had one scenario around 550 CO 2 eq (450 CO 2 only) –ADAM project assessed the 400ppm CO 2 e target (4 models)

9 9 9 Implications for avoiding dangerous climate change To have a good probability of achieving <2ºC rise –CO 2 -eq concentrations have to be <450ppm CO 2 eq (c/f c430 now) –global GHG emissions have to fall by >70% below baseline by 2050 –technologies have to be developed to capture CO 2 Fossil-fuel GHG stocks cause damages and industrialized countries are responsible for most of current stocks –hence reduction in OECD of c90% below BAU/1990 by 2050 Risks are asymmetric –so precaution suggests a zero-carbon economy as soon as possible (without excessive costs) Eventually all countries & sectors have to decarbonize –not How much? but When? for each business and government –with a policy portfolio that is effective, efficient, equitable and flexible

10 10 Policies for global decarbonisation Policy portfolios (market-based, regulation, voluntary) suited to national conditions could be effective, efficient, equitable and flexible Market economies respond to price signals, hence the need for a global carbon price that will achieve net zero GHG emissions by an agreed date (2050?) Market and political forces will encourage wider cap- and-trade Technological standards and agreements support low-cost deployment of low-GHG processes and products Gains from co-ordination –+sum game and room for negotiation –climate change threatens long-term growth, so funding of mitigation benefits all as well as being equitable –substantial demand-side low-GHG investment can utilise resources otherwise wasted (construction downturn)

11 11 What are the macro-economic costs by 2030 for different stabilization levels? Stabilization levels (ppm CO 2 -eq) Median GDP reduction[1][1] (%) Range of GDP reduction [2][2] (%) Reduction of average annual GDP growth rates [3] [3] (percentage points) – 1.2< – 2.5< [4][4]Not available< 3< 0.12 [1][1] This is global GDP based market exchange rates. [2][2] The median and the 10 th and 90 th percentile range of the analyzed data are given. [3][3] The calculation of the reduction of the annual growth rate is based on the average reduction during the period till 2030 that would result in the indicated GDP decrease in [4][4] The number of studies that report GDP results is relatively small and they generally use low baselines.

12 12 3% maximum global cost by 2030 Most studies for stringent stabilization (categories A1 and A2) show costs less than 3% Source: IPCC AR4, WG III Report 2007, Chapter 3, Figure 3.25 (a) 3% cost

13 13 Illustration of the maximum 3% cost number GDP without mitigation GDP with stringent mitigation e.g. 2ºC target GDP Time 80% current 77% ~1 year

14 14 Summary: the costs of achieving the 2 º C target Key conclusion from IPCC AR4: not enough studies on stringent mitigation have been done! Extrapolating from current studies: The macro-economic costs of the 2 º C target appear to be negligible (even beneficial) for global GDP and welfare, provided policies are well-designed Equilibrium models (providing nearly all the cost estimates) assume that mitigation will be costly, despite evidence from econometric models and business Low-cost, low-GHG technologies are likely to be developed both directly and through rising carbon prices But this requires international co-operation on allocation of burdens and benefits

15 15 Conclusions for policy 450ppmv CO2-eq is not stringent enough to avoid dangerous climate change A rising real carbon price is required of about $100/tCO 2 by 2020 (rising thereafter) to be on the safe side, e.g. by a trading scheme –the price should be guaranteed by government so as to reduce the risks of investing in low-GHG technologies –a portfolio of supporting policies (regulation, ecotax reform, information) reduces costs and accelerate change A zero-carbon economy appears feasible at negligible (but uncertain) macroeconomic costs, with high carbon prices and strong regulation –costs critically depend on international co-ordination

16 16 Summary of IPCC AR4 on stringent climate change mitigation Latest CBA studies suggest that damages at the current stock of GHGs are unbounded (ethical discount rates and unlimited escalating damages and risks) AR4: there is not enough evidence from modelling studies for reliable costs of targets more stringent than ppmv CO2-eq AR4 Literature suggests that global GHG reduction targets are required of at least 30% by 2020 and at least 80% by 2050 for ppmv CO2-eq by 2100

17 17 Lack of studies of stringent mitigation (below 450ppmv CO2 eq by 2100) GDP cost by 2030 Results of studies for ppmv CO2eq stabilization (categories A1 and A2) Source: IPCC AR4, WG III Report 2007, Chapter 3, Figure 3.25 (a)

18 18 The E3MG approach and the treatment of costs and benefits of mitigation Detailed, annual, dynamic, non-linear econometric simulation model with database , projecting to 2100 Improved forecasting performance in the short to medium run Aggregation over countries –our approach: 20 world regions, local market valuations Aggregation over time –not done, i.e. no discounting except for simulating business decisions Environmental benefits (e.g. less air pollution) –set aside as conventionally done in the literature Recycling of carbon tax and other government revenues –explicitly treated as lowering indirect taxes, not lump-sum Costs measure: %GDP, not price of permit or consumers expenditure Technology benefits (hybrid top-down bottom-up approach) –accelerated technological change with higher economic growth

19 19 Design of measures implemented in E3MG Contribution to ADAM FP6 project (ADaptation And Mitigation strategies for climate change) Combines mitigation and technology policies for both carbon pricing and regulation Designed to give rise to economies of scale & economies of specialisation in the deployment of low C technologies Implemented in a cumulative manner (each component includes additional measures to the previous one)

20 20 Measures implemented in E3MG for achieving 400ppm CO 2 e (1) 1)Carbon prices auctioning for the energy sector & carbon taxes for non-energy sectors revenue recycling through reduction in indirect taxes, and investment incentives for low-GHG measures in all main sectors 2)Subsidising low-C electricity technologies ($/kWh) using part of the revenue from 100% auctioning evenly spread across renewables and CCS 40% from 2011 to 2030, dropping to 20% by 2040 and to 0% by )Accelerated diffusion of CCS and electric plug-in vehicles through technological agreements and regulations all new coal-based power plants after 2020 to be fitted with CCS 30% of vehicle fleets to be electric by 2020

21 21 Measures implemented in E3MG for achieving 400ppm CO 2 e (2) 4)Incentives for conversion to low-GHG production methods in energy-intensive sectors 5)Incentives for energy-efficiency investments in households 15% of the revenue recycled from the carbon tax improving efficiencies of existing domestic dwellings & appliances introducing new low-C dwellings & appliances 6)Accelerated increase in carbon prices

22 22 E3MG: E3 Links ECONOMY as in national accounts TECHNOLOGY specifications & costs ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSIONS as in environmental statistics ENERGY as in energy statistics damage to health and buildings e.g. industrial emissions of SF6 funding R&D prices and activity investment fuel use fuel prices and costs fuel use pollution- abatement equipment fuel use

23 23 Emission reductions pathways: baseline, 550ppm and 400ppm to 2100 Source: Terry Barker and Şerban Scrieciu (2010) Modelling Low Climate Stabilisation with E3MG: Towards a New Economics Approach to Simulating Energy-Environment- Economy System Dynamics Energy Journal, 31(1).

24 24 Global GDP and investment : Baseline, 550ppm and 400ppm Source: Terry Barker and Şerban Scrieciu (2010) Modelling Low Climate Stabilisation with E3MG: Towards a New Economics Approach to Simulating Energy-Environment-Economy System Dynamics Energy Journal, 31(1).

25 25 Annual changes in global GDP and investment cycles, : 550ppm and 400ppm stabilisation scenarios Source: Terry Barker and Şerban Scrieciu (2010) Modelling Low Climate Stabilisation with E3MG: Towards a New Economics Approach to Simulating Energy-Environment-Economy System Dynamics Energy Journal, 31(1).

26 26 The importance of regulation and recycling in achieving the 400ppm CO 2 -e target ( by excluding electric cars or extra incentives for low-carbon technology deployment) 400 noecars: no regulation for electric vehicles 400 norev: no recycling of revenues for low- carbon power

27 27 Electricity investment in context: global investment, 2000 $bn

28 28 Examples of accelerated decarbonisation France s move to nuclear power in the 1980s Copenhagen s 25% reduction in CO 2 emissions below 1990 levels Studies of 30% reduction in US CO 2 emissions required for Kyoto ratification

29 29 France: decarbonising electricity production from 50% thermal in 1980 to 10%in 1987 Source:

30 30 Copenhagen s 25% cut in per capita CO 2 emissions by 2005 below 1990 levels Every citizen has reduced his input to global warming from 7 tons to 4.9 tons, by 2.1 tons in fact compared to the 1990 figures. … despite remarkable growth in the city … due to connecting the district heating system and generating stations to cleaner fuels, especially … natural gas. So, we dare to set an ambitious new goal of reducing CO 2 emissions by a further 20% by 2015 compared to today (2005 figures). This means that by 2015 we will have reduced emissions by 40% compared to 1990.

31 31 US study of accelerated reductions in CO 2 emissions number of years to adjust: 3 to 4 13 trade in emission permits:noneAnnex Inone Annex I CO 2 change (%) GDP cost (incl co-benefits) (%) US Administration EIA study (1998) for Congress on effects of ratifying the Kyoto Protocol on the US economy, assuming action from 2006 Note: GDP cost allows for co-benefits not included in original study. Sources: US Energy Information Administration (EIA) (1998). Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on U.S. Energy Markets and Economic Activity. Washington DC. Barker, T., Ekins, P. (2004) The costs of Kyoto for the US economy, The Energy Journal, Vol. 25 No. 3, 2004, pp

32 32 Conclusion (1): A portfolio of policies is needed for low-cost mitigation Both carbon prices and regulation is required for 400ppmv CO2e by 2100 to be feasible at low cost Carbon pricing via emission trading and carbon taxes leads markets to choose low- cost options Regulation via carbon-efficiency standards for vehicles and power stations leads to increased investment in low-carbon technologies and reductions in costs

33 33 Conclusion (2): Climate policy if well- designed leads to GDP gains Climate policies can lead to higher, more efficient and more productive investment –low-carbon technologies are more capital intensive than fossil fuel technologies –potential for learning by doing is greater –market failures, as in no regrets options for energy-saving in buildings, can be addressed Higher investment leads to multiplier effects, especially in times of recession, higher output and lower unemployment

34 34 Conclusion (3): More stringent policies accelerate change and reduce costs further Decarbonisation of the global economy is required over the next years to make the achievement of the 2°C target likely All sectors will eventually have to become based on clean electricity or solar power The new technologies can develop with substantial economies of specialization and scale across the global economy with international cooperation of R&D and standards

35 35 Thank you

36 36 Memo: Relationship between $50/tCO 2 and US fuel prices 2005 base Added cost of $50/tCO 2 $$% Crude Oil($/bbl) % Regular Gasoline($/gal) % Heating Oil($/gal) % Wellhead Natural gas($/tcf) % Residential Natural gas($/tcf) % Utility Coal($/short ton) % Electricity(c/kWh) % Source: Derived from Table ES.5, US CCSP, 2006, sourced in turn from Bradley et al. 1991, updated with U.S. average prices for the 4th quarter of 2005 as reported in DOE, Note: This table does not include any adjustments in producer prices due to changes in energy demands under stabilization.

Download ppt "1 Achieving the 2ºC target in the Copenhagen Accord: an assessment using a global model E3MG Terry Barker Presentation to the Institute for Sustainable."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google