Colloquium 20 January, 2010

Decoupling

Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker Co-Chair

• Why decoupling and which decoupling? • The International Panel for Sustainable Resource Management • Why a factor of five? • Efficiency gains at the core • Making it happen • Vision of a green economy

Decoupling has been the overarching idea of all environmental policy since its earliest days. It means decoupling environmental damages from economic wellbeing.

The term 'decoupling' refers to breaking the link between “environmental bads”and “economic goods.”

OECD Environmental Strategy for the First Decade of the 21st Century (Paris, 2001).   

Many decoupling reports do already exist. This one is from 2006.

Another decoupling report, this one with a strong “South” perspective

What kind of decoupling is needed? And what is feasible?

1. 7b people want decent life styles; 2. Today‘s lifestyles are resource

intensive and unsustainable; 3. Hence we need to decouple decent

living from resource intensity; 4. Exactly that is technically feasible.

The EU‘s concept of decoupling wealth from impacts

time

GDP

Environmental Pressure

Relative Decoupling

Absolute Decoupling

Environmental Pressure

Size (Indexed)

100

Figure 2.2

Developing countries insist on the distinction between relative and absolute decoupling

Protecting the ozone layer; A success story of decoupling! Source GEO 4 UNEP 2005

California decoupled energy consumption from wealth

In public utility regulation, decoupling refers to the disassociation of a utility's profits from its sales of the energy commodity. This was Art Rosenfeld’s ingenious strategy.

A Dutch case study of decoupling

Source: Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (2004)

Netherlands: absolute decoupling even GDP from CO2!

UNEP, the UN Environment Programme created the

Its core mission is to find pathways to decoupling in various areas

The Resource Panel created five Working Groups, on • Decoupling • Biofuels • Metals • Water • Impacts Assessment

The Panel‘s Biofuels group published ist first report in October, 2009. It found that many biofuels make things worse. (But some help decoupling).

Biofuels remain marginal on the world scale, but their negative impacts are very high

The next report will be on metals. This Group is chaired by Professor Thomas Graedel from Yale.

One early Result: End of life recycling rate (global) for 62 metals. Most metals enjoy less than 1% recycling!!!

>50% >25-50% >10-25% 1-10% <1% ???

The fourth group, on water, will concentrate on water efficiency (because 95% of the existing literature is on increasing water supplies). Efficiency also means decoupling.

The fifth group looks at the important impacts on the environment. It addresses the biggest sectors in terms of impact: Construction, transport and food. It will seek decoupling there.

The decoupling group‘s first report will present the concepts and major facts as well as four case studies: China, Japan, Germany, South Africa.

The decoupling group‘s second report will address opportunities and policies of decoupling.

Why a factor of five? • ecological footprints • a Danish „IPAT“ calculator • Yamamoto from Japan • climate stabilization needs

Source: Redefining Progress: Ecological Footprint of Nations 2004

Ecological Footprints per capita vary widely

Sustainable societies have reasonably small ecological footprints and a high Human Development Index (HDI)

0 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 HDI

Footprints (hectares)

2

4

6

8

10

The sustainable development

quadrant

High HDI

Small footprints

Empirically, only one country is „sustainable“

Cuba

A five-fold decoupling of wealth

from used areas could move poor countries to high HDI and rich

countries to small footprints into the „sustainability rectangle“.

I = Impact on the environment resulting from consumption P = Population number A = consumption per capita (Affluence) T = Technology factor (introduced in 1971 by Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren, who now serves as chief Science Advisor to President Obama).

Everybody in this room surely remembers I = P * A * T

T is the “decoupling factor”

Now google the „Global consumption growth calculator“ and find Harald Agerley‘s instructions for calculating the „T“ in IPAT needed to avoid major environmental deterioration. Under all plausible assumptions you arrive at T = 1/4 (very optimistic) to T = 1/5 (optimistic) or T = 1/10 (rather pessimistic)

When Professor Yamamoto was

here in Nov, 2006, he said a factor of five was necessary to avoid resource

disasters.

Source:  Netherlands Envir. Assessment Agency. 2009. Growing Within Limits.  Report to the GA of the Club of Rome,. 

If we want climate stabilization, we need decoupling from CO2

Very similar: IPCC, or the Stern Review:

BAU (blue) vs. stabilising at 450 ppm CO2 (red)

The longer we wait, the more radical changes are needed

Source: Investing in Cimate Change 2009 (Deutsche Bank, October 2008)

All reasonable scenarios of climate stabilization

seems to lead to decoupling needs in the vicinity of a factor of five.

And that within 40 years or so

Empirically, wealth goes with carbon intensity

Escaping from this correlation means we need a „Kuznets Curve“ of decarbonization!

„rich and carbon free“

And then make China, India etc. „tunnel through that curve!“

„rich and carbon free“

Three options exist:

•Reduce carbon intensity of energy

•Reduce energy intensity of wealth

•Reduce wealth

Options to respond to the challenge.

Conventional views on decarbonization: 80% less carbon per unit of energy 10% less energy per GDP 10% less wealth.

My own suggestion instead: 30% less carbon per unit of energy 65% less energy per GDP Perhaps 5% less GDP

That‘s essentially the philosophy of „Factor Five“, published December, 09. Updated German and Chinese editions in 2010, more translations in the pipeline.

“Passive houses”: a factor of ten more heat efficient

Refurbishing existing buildings

Upper row: Photographs Lower: Thermograms

LED replacing incandescent bulbs: a factor of 10

Philips 7W  Master  LED 

Energy efficiency

Carbon efficiency

From Portland cement to geopolymer cement

Amory Lovins’ “Revolution” SUV 1,5 l/100km

Today’s SUV’s 12 l/100km

From rotten trains (and ten lane highways) to high speed trains (and max. 4 lane highways)

A tenfold increase of metal recycling

>50% >25-50% >10-25% 1-10% <1% ???

Policy options to make it happen.

First: the mindset. We need a new paradigm

Old paradigm:

Increasing labour productivity

New paradigm:

Increasing resource productivity

Labour productivity has increased twentyfold since 1850. It is not utopian to think of resource productivity increasing

tenfold in 100 years and fivefold in 50 years!

Labour poductivity rose in parallel with labour costs

This suggests a strategy of actively elevating energy prices in parallel with energy productivity increases

High price elasticity for electricity – comparing countries

Source: Jean-Philippe Barde, 2008

High price elasticity for petrol

per capita and year fuel comsumption in kg

Source: J.Jesinghaus, 1992 

Prices of industrial commodities & energy, in constant dollars

However, for 200 years resource prices were falling. Recent price hikes just brought us back into the lower confidence interval!

2000-2004

EU Emission Trading System of CO2: price fluctuations

Emissions recede as prices go up (surprise, surprise!)

Source: DIW 2005

Fuel Duty Escalator 1993-1999

German Ecotax 1999-2003

Change in per capita

CO2-emissions (tons,

Base year 1993)

During the 5 years of increased energy taxes, the overall tax burden in Germany decreased

A corridor of increasing energy prices may be agreed, within which some fluctuation may occur

High energy prices need not hurt the economy. Japan blossomed during the 15 years of highest energy prices.

Achim Steiner, UNEP‘s Executive Director has initiated a

Green Economy Initiative and at a session of the Resource Panel last November said that decoupling was at the core of its mandate.

Thank you,

dear friends at the Bren School!