Date post: | 02-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | thalassa-venetia |
View: | 25 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Climate Policy Imperatives
Dr John BroderickEPSRC Knowledge Transfer FellowTyndall Manchester
Overview
About the Tyndall Centre Taking responsibility as a region
» Allocation methodologies » Novel approach for the regional scale
Cumulative emissions accounting» Credible climate framework» Current climate policy and uncomfortable conclusions» Aviation and tourism within this framing
Acknowledgements» Work by Ruth Wood, Alex Joyce, Alice Bows, Kevin Anderson» Funded by Tyndall Centre, EPSRC and Joule Centre grants
Tyndall Manchester
• Interdisciplinary research centre started in 2000, with 7 partners
• Social, economic and engineering climate change research
• Tyndall Manchester focussed on energy, emissions and stakeholders
• Agenda setting research on emissions budgets, aviation and shipping
• High policy relevance and profile, for instance Hansard citations 2008– UoM: 43– Tyndall Manchester: 100
• EPSRC Knowledge Transfer role allows for further outreach and policy work
Taking Responsibility
View aviation as a complex system, where responsibility may be allocated amongst actors in a variety of ways. No objectively “right” answer.
Status quo: no allocation, » Aviation excluded from national and international emissions control regimes, but soon to enter EU ETS
To producers, bottom-up on the basis of fuel sold» E.g. Nation states
To producers on the basis of emissions calculated» E.g. Airlines
To consumers (end-users) of the service» Passengers, as individuals » Aggregating or disagregating across spatial or administrative scale: State – Region – Local Authority
To other influential actors or beneficiaries within aviation system» Airports » (Regional) Planning authorities» Air traffic control
Issues» Purpose of accounting – reflective of interventions?» Availability of data» Consistent with existing UNFCCC inventories
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
International Accounting
UNFCCC: Bunker Fuels
National AccountingNo Standard
Joule Centre research, part funded by NWDA Stakeholder workshops, including future scenarios Develop regional apportionment methodology Reflects local influences:
» Over LTO» Of residents flying practices & tourists attracted
Reflects local economic benefits:» From hosting an airport (direct benefit)» From services to residents, businesses and tourism (indirect)
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
LTO : Apportioned to the airport’s region
Cruise emissions: apportioned according to the region from which the passengers start their journey
Diagram from Corinair/EMEP EEA 2009
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
Emissions calculated under hybrid apportionment
Reproduced from Wood et al (2010)
Current Method New Method
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
Reproduced from Wood et al (2010)
Sub-regional apportionment based on passenger survey data and 20 major emitter flights from Manchester and Liverpool airports
Highly uneven spatial distribution
What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions?
Reproduced from Joyce (2011)
Conclusions from apportionment work
Reasonable and possible to apportion aviation emissions sub nationally. Methodology applicable elsewhere.
Continued growth of aviation impacts other sectors of the economy under constrained emissions budgets» CCC estimates of 0.8% to 1.5% p.a. seat-km efficiency improvements,
ACARE target at upper end.
Substantial unevenness, spatially and considering destinations, raises questions of governance and appropriate policy interventions
Cumulative Emissions Accounting
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Ann
ual C
O2e
em
issi
ons
Illustrative pathway for a carbon budget
Em
issi
on
s alr
ead
y r
ele
ase
d
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Ann
ual C
O2e
em
issi
ons
Illustrative pathway for a carbon budget
Em
issi
on
s alr
ead
y r
ele
ase
dA
BA=B for same climate impact
2050 target shifts
Trajectory becomes steeper
Growth 3.5% p.a
Peak 2025
Reduction 7% p.a. (2x Stern!)
Anderson-Bows: 2°C budget, CO2 onlyhttp://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full.pdf+html?sid=423cdf2d-23a1-4170-b4b6-74e87f173156
Budget premised on 37% chance of exceeding 2°C GMT rise
Anderson-Bows: 2°C budget, CO2 onlyhttp://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full.pdf+html?sid=423cdf2d-23a1-4170-b4b6-74e87f173156
Budget premised on 37% chance of exceeding 2°C GMT rise
Peak ~2010
Reduction ∞% p.a.
Anderson-Bows: 2°C budget, CO2 onlyhttp://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full.pdf+html?sid=423cdf2d-23a1-4170-b4b6-74e87f173156
Budget premised on 37% chance of exceeding 2°C GMT rise
Current climate policy
• Broadening the analysis beyond the previous slides• If... IPCC’s link between cumulative emissions &
temperature rise is broadly correct» Non-Annex 1 nations peak emissions by 2025» There are rapid reductions in deforestation emissions» Food emissions per capita halve from today’s values by 2050» No discontinuities (“tipping points”) occur• And... Stern, CCC, IEA’s maximum “feasible” reductions
of 3-4% in Annex 1 p.a. is achieved• Then... 2°C stabilisation is virtually impossible
» UK’s budgets premised on 63% chance of exceeding 2°C • and 4°C by 2070 looks likely (on the way to 6°C …?)
Greater impacts at lower temperatures
From Smith et al (2009) Assessing dangerous climate change through anupdate of the IPCC)‘‘reasons for concern’’
Summary
Final (2050) targets are unrelated to avoiding dangerous climate change.
It is cumulative emissions that matter. Fundamentally rewrites the chronology of
climate change. Every delay makes the problem worse. Stop thinking of long term gradual reductions and consider
urgent and radical reductions.
Conclusions
Timeframe of climate change problem is extremely challenging for all but especially for the aviation industry.
Technological & infrastructure lock-in suggest aviation’s emissions will grow considerably as a proportion of tolerable EU and UK emissions budgets (Bows 2010).
Emissions trading will not be viable in the medium-term if 2ºC remains the target.
Accelerating R&D, plus demand management and destination shifts will be essential.
Challenge to Air Tourism