Global warming in an unequal world: A global deal for effective action

CSE, New Delhi

The crisis: the science of climate change

1. Climate change is real; it is already dangerous; heading towards catastrophe.

2. Climate change is urgent; it needs us to act quickly and drastically;

3. But how? Climate change is linked to economic growth. Can we re-invent growth?

Hockey stick:

CO2+

Temperature

increase

CO2 emissions linked to energy and linked to economic growth

The challenge: what is the least risky target?

1. If annual emissions remain at today’s level, greenhouse gas levels would be close to 550 ppm by 2050

2. This would mean temperature increase of 3-5°C

3. The difference in temperature between the last ice age (3 million years ago) and now is 5°C

4. The 2°C target is feasible; but still dangerous

Business as usual is 5°C; even if we stabilise at current levels; increase is dangerous

Impacts: devastation or can we cope?

1. Snow cover will contract. Indian glaciers are beginning to melt fast

2. Hot extremes, heat waves, and heavy precipitation events will increase.. (floods and droughts)

3. Tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense

4. Sea levels are expected to increase – intense debate on how high will this be; and by when. But can we wait????

3-truths: Climate change political and economic challenge

1. Is related to economic growth. No one has built a low carbon economy (as yet)

2. Is about sharing growth between nations and between people. The rich must reduce so that the poor can grow. Create ecological space.

3. Is about cooperation. If the rich emitted yesterday, the emerging rich world will do today. Cooperation demands equity and fairness. It is a pre-requisite for an effective climate agreement.

Drastic reduction needed: For 450 ppm (2°C) reduce 85% by 2050

Historical emissions: A tonne of CO2 emitted in 1850 same value as tonne of CO2 emitted in 2005

P er capi ta bur den (1902-2004)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

United States Uni ted K ingdom China India Austr al ia Mozambique

P er capi ta bur den (1902-2004)

2 tonnes is what the world can sustain…

1 US citizen =

107 Bangladeshis

134 Bhutanese

19 Indians

269 Nepalese

Unacceptable. Need to secure ecological space for growth

2007: High on rhetoric. Low on action

1. Need urgent action. We are running out of time. Need deep cuts: 50-80% over 1990 levels by 2050

2. Kyoto agreed to small change – 5% cuts3. Even that failed. US and Australia

walked out. EU emissions increased last year

4. Pressure on China and India..

Is India the new villain?

Between 1990-2004: Total emissions increase US: 1.2 billion tonnes India: 0.7 billion tonnesPer capita increase US: 1.3 tonnes/per person/year/increase= 20.6

tonnes India: 0.4 tonnes/per person/year/increase=1.2

tonnes

Decreased 3% only because of decrease of economies under transition. Rich have increased

Only UK and Germany have cut.

But beginning to increase again.

Gas and reunification impact fading…

Big words and small change

No energy transition made Little to reduce energy emissions

No more kindergarten approach

Framework for cooperation: 1. Industrialised countries to take deep cuts (30%

by 2020) minimum. US and Australia must join

2. Emerging rich and rest to participate, not by taking legally binding cuts but through a strategy to ‘avoid’ future emissions.

What is the framework for low-carbon growth strategy?

B. The economics and options for India and the world

India: Inventory: 1994

Options exist: re-invent growth. Avoid pollution

1. We can build “clean” coal power stations 2. Can build distributed power grid, based on

renewable…3. Can re-invent mobility to move to public

transport..4. 18% emissions from land use changes. Can

protect forests; Can plant new forests.. 5. Large numbers of people already renewable –

because of poverty. How can we leapfrog from being poor to rich without taking fossil route?

Clean, new and buried coal

‘Clean’ Coal Technologies: Increase efficiency Supercritical – high steam pressure and

temperature – 40% efficiency – low with Indian coal

FBC/PFBC – Suitable for Indian coal – smaller size – similar efficiency gains as supercritical

IGCC – Convert coal to gas – 50% efficiency and more - expensive

Clean, new and buried coal

Most new large plants on supercritical – cost effective – R&M of old and new plants should be based on this technology

FBC suitable for distributed generation IGCC – only high-end technology from

climate perspective - needs technology transfer and financial assistance

Other ‘coal’ options? Are they clean or viable?

1. Carbon-capture and storage – burn coal, separate CO2, compress it and bury it underground -- hope that it will not come out.

Uncertain, site-specific and expensive – mitigation cost up to $ 50/ tonne CO2

Dump and forget syndrome – constant leakage monitoring. Chances of accidental releases

Can’t afford bad ideas. Can’t waste time

Nuclear

Cost, safety, proliferation and waste Expensive – both capital as well as generation

– even without including waste disposal costs

New renewables: still small part of world primary energy supply: less than 0.5%

39% of India’s primary energy comes from renewables – because of chulhas of poor

How will the world re-invent its energy system?

Renewables: Cost – the biggest barrier

Wind energy: make it blow in right direction

India: 7500 mw of wind installed. 70% of new renewable in country.

Now feed-in preferential tariffs provided by different state regulators

But needs more support – higher tariffs + grid connectivity

Needs monitoring to ensure we know how much is used; not just how much is installed

Solar concentrating power

India built one of first plants. Not utilised. Not developed.

Now world is discovering the potential of ‘raw’ sun

Spain, Algeria, Australia, Israel, Morocco…building plants to harvest sun

In India, Mathania plan failed (given up)

Potential: one block of one district Barmer can generate enough power for the country

Re-invent mobility: can India succeed where the world has failed?

Efficiency is not the answer; sufficiency.. Can we restrain cars?

In UK, cars became more efficient; emissions increased as people bought more; drove more

Survival vs luxury emissions

Biofuels: for vehicles of rich or chulhas of poor? All corn in US converted to ethanol will substitute 12 per cent of gasoline use. Best option?Or use to leapfrog poor from old renewable to new renewable

Forests: to plant and to avoid cutting

Land use changes are 18% of current emissions.

2 challenges:a. To plant new forests to add to sinksb. To ‘avoid’ deforestation by payment of

forests as forestsCurrent “offsets” not working – cannot use

forests as garbage dumps

C. The framework for action. But..

The South will do what North has done

Will first get rich; add to pollution; then invest in cleaning it up

A low-carbon growth strategy will cost money. The South will need to invest in efficiency, pollution control and protecting forests as forests before it gets rich

This needs change in global framework

CDM instrument to make this transition. But designed to fail

1. Aim to get cheap emission reduction has lead to projects which do little. Low hanging fruits. Cannot pay for real change.

2. Designed for ineffective action – additional to policy – leads to nothing

3. Designed for mutual self-interest between private sector; not public interest;

Has become the ‘Cheap’ ‘Convoluted’ ‘Corrupt’ Development Mechanism

CDM: Convoluted and small

By November 2007: total global CDM portfolio: 2.29 billion tonnes worth of CO2 equivalent to be credited over 10 years.

Will offset much less than 1 per cent of total emissions over next 10 years

Small, ineffective

CDM: cheap and corrupt

CDM is a market mechanism, not climate action. Cheap options used; no high end transfer of technology. No investment in clean coal.. No investment for poor

Industry hype?

FICCI report: December 2007Total CERs expected till 2012: 429 million Total CERs issued till Nov 2007: 29 million (7 per

cent of what they expect?)Already invested: Rs 1,19,000 crore (US$ 30

billion) in CDM projectsWhat have we got in return???? Price unknown

(will have to get US$ 70/cer to recover their investment?)

Agenda for Bali and after: Reform CDM

1. Provide a floor price for CDM projects to push for high end technologies and climate-effective projects;

2. Make CDM addition to government policy. Currently, additionality means that project only support if additional to business as usual.

Ridiculous. Designed for industry. Indian and foreign. Not designed for big change.

Extraordinary crisis, needs big response..

1. Need to cut emissions by 80% by 2050;2. Need to peak emissions by 2015 and then cut3. New (zero-fossil) technologies are not competitive or

limited4. Will not work without changes in consumption. Have to

reduce and have to change the way we do business Business as usual will not work. No soft answers will

workNot a green ‘party’ but a green ‘revolution’ neededWill cost. Otherwise we will all pay

Freezing inequity not acceptable

If we accept 80% cut for rich; 20% cut for emerging rich and poor over 1990 levels by 2050 then:

US reduces from 19.3 tonnes/capita to 4 tonnes per capita

India reduces from 0.8 tonnes/capita to 0.6 tonnes/capita

China reduces from 2.1 tonnes/capita to 1.7 tonnes/capita

Global justice????

Not acceptable

Per capita entitlements

1. Need framework for cooperation

2. Need framework that can push for energy transformation

Best option is to create per capita emission rights;

Use the rights to create global carbon market;

Use the market (with rules for public good) to make the transition into low carbon economies

Contract and converge

D. Issues in Bali: a ‘watchlist’

1. The post-Kyoto framework: what will it be? Comprehensive global agreement (including India and China) or long-term aspirational goals (no commitments) or hard targets for the rich countries

2. Adaptation fund (SBI/2007/15): % of CDM proceeds. Currently, not operationalised.

3. Technology transfer: contact group setup4. Reducing emissions from deforestation from developing

countries (SBSTA/2007/MISC.14 Adds.1-3): EU wants deforestation to be part of post 2012 framework

D. Issues in Bali: a ‘watchlist’

5. CDM issues

a. Should destruction of HFC-23 included in CDM

b. Should the limit for small scale afforestation and deforestation projects be increased

c. Should CCS be included under CDM

Our position for Bali++++

1. Agree on legally binding emission targets for rich Annex-1 countries: 30% by 2020

2. If ‘rich’ countries opt out; cut penalties; stop trade; do not allow them to participate in technology agreements. This round belongs to the industrialised countries.

3. The engagement of the South will be through a financial framework to avoid emissions

Design for effective action

4. Reform CDM so that it is effective – countries do sector-wise plans; look at costs and then invest through CDM

5. Put a floor of US$50 for tonne of carbon so that it allows for high end technology transfer

6. Sign technology transfer agreements – let rich countries buy private technologies and make them available in key sectors

Politics for future

Cannot freeze global inequity;Cannot survive climate change – rich or

poor;Climate is not about the failure of the

market;It is about our failure to make the markets

work for public and common good…It is about politics..

Otherwise road to ‘common’ hell