”Understanding and influencing global politics towards Copenhagen and beyond” Comments by Anders...
-
Upload
miles-nash -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of ”Understanding and influencing global politics towards Copenhagen and beyond” Comments by Anders...
”Understanding and influencing global politics towards Copenhagen
and beyond”
Comments by Anders Wijkman at Ny-Ålesund Symposium 2009.
1. Financial crisis2. Climate crisis3. Ecosystem/Natural resources crisis4. Peak oil
• All these crises have the same roots, unsustainable use of resources – in the economic system and in Nature.
• 2/3 of major ecosystems used beyond capacity• Climate change and resource constraints will affect our
economies negatively, will aggravate poverty in many developing countries and may lead to serious conflicts
Several parallel crises:
•Just as a few lonely economists warned us we were living beyond our financial means and overdrawing our financial assets, scientists are warning us that we’re living beyond our ecological means and overdrawing our natural assets,” argues Glenn Prickett, senior vice president at Conservation International. But, he cautioned, as environmentalists have pointed out: “Mother Nature doesn’t do bailouts.” Thomas Friedman in New York Times, march 2009.
•We created a way of raising standards of living that we can’t possibly pass on to our children,” said Joe Romm, a physicist and climate expert who writes the indispensable blog climateprogress.org <http://climateprogress.org/> . We have been getting rich by depleting all our natural stocks — water, hydrocarbons, forests, rivers, fish and arable land — and not by generating renewable flows Thomas Friedman in New York Times, march 2009
Human growth20/80 dilemma
Ecosystems60 % loss dilemma
Climate550/450/350 dilemma
Surprise99/1 dilemma
”The Quadruple Squeeze”
The Planetary Response to global change drivers (Steffen et al., 2004)
From: Steffen et al. 2004
The Planetary Response
1900 1950 2000
CO2, N2O, CH4 concentrations
Overfishing
Land degradation
Loss of Biodiversity
Water Depletion
Unsustainable consumption
…..
Climate Change325 ppm CO2 < 1W m2
(300 – 350 ppm CO2 ; 1-1.5 W m2))
Ocean acidification
Aragonite saturation ratio < 20 % below pre-industrial levels
Ozone depletion< 5 % of Pre-Industrial 290 DU
(0 - 10%)
Global Freshwater Use<4000 km3/yr
(4000 – 6000 km3/yr)
Biodiversity Loss
< 10 E/MSY
Biogeochemical loading:
Global N & P Cycles
Limit industrial fixation of N2 to
35 Tg N yr-1
P < 20 % inflow to Oceans
Atmospheric Aerosol Loading
To be determined
Land System Change≤15 % of
land under crops
Chemical Pollution Plastics, Endocrine
Desruptors, Nuclear Waste Emitted globally
To be determined
Planetary Boundaries
Rethink economic policy framework
• Financial Crisis and Environmental Crisis have same roots - unsustainable use of resources
• Externalities overwhelm us; there are boundary conditions for human development we have to respect
• Beyond GDP – Stiglitz Commission an opportunity, but research needed
• Take Nature into account – loss of tropical forests = 2-5 trillion US p a
• Implement PPP• Discountingof future values critical issue• In the EU: Merge Lisbon and SDS strategies• Reform business models
Global 2ºC pathways and their risks
Challenges for Copenhagen:• Mitigation – minimum 40-50 % GHG reductions for Annex 1
countries to 2020; significantly lower GHG pathways than BAU for non-Annex 1
• Emissions reduction target for 2050 – 70-80% reduction needed to meet 2° target
• Special problem: how to promote forest protection?• Adaptation – 20-50 billion US p a from 2013; kick-start by
funding NAPA:s now• Technology cooperation – in addition to CDM, JI etc• Include ecosystems protection• Funding? – most natural would be PPP, e g auctioning
revenues, tax on bunker fuels, aviation etc
EU energy/climate package• 20% GHG reduction to 2020 – unilateral• 20% Renewables, binding• 20% Energy Efficiency improvement• Reformed ETS• Stricter CO2 standards for vehicles (120 g/km)• CCS – 12 demo-plants• Buildings directive• Eco-design directive• Global Climate Change Alliance, but limited funding• Readiness to move to 30% reduction in the event of
international deal in Copenhagen
Negotiations not encouraging so far
• Proposals on the table far away from what is needed – will result in 3-4° warming
• Perception seems to be that incremental change will do
• North/South distrust• Financial issues so far no progress• Negotiators don´t discuss what stabilisation requires –
rather what is politically possible • EU has provided leadership so far – but that is put into
question now?
Put a price on Carbon• ”Cap and Trade” or CO2 tax• In theory, ”Cap and Trade” the most effective• In reality, CO2 tax easier to implement• Many good experiences w CO2 tax, such as
Sweden, where CO2 tax in 1991 lead to phasing out of fossil fuels in heating of buildings
• A lot of prestige invested in ”Cap and Trade”• Is a CO2 tax at all possible in the US?• One problematic issue is how to incentivise
investments over the long-term?
Experience w ETS• Lots of problems during starting phase - overallocation - permits allocated for free; windfall profits - what to include? – transport missing• Reform issues: - cap must be signif lowered - permits to be auctioned – but EU decision december 2008 disapp! - flanking measures to give technology push - Environment Performance Standards as parallel measure - Should forest credits be included? - How link to other ”cap and trade” regimes? - The degree of flexibility? – how much CDM?
Non-ETS activities – regulation a must!
• Energy efficiency, • Renewables• Land-use• R&D• Strengthen ecosystems in general
Efficiency:
• Buildings• White certificates• Cars• Tyres, eco-driving etc• Electric equipment/Eco-design• Manufacturing• Resource efficiency• Global standards
Future global power generation capacity
GW
Source:IEA; McKinsey analysis
Power supply yet to be built
**** **
2030 capacity yet to be built7%
Existing capacity
23%
Renewables:
• EU objective: 20% of energy mix in 2020 (8,5% today) – binding target
• Trade between MS• Green certificates or feed-in tariffs
Land-use
• Agriculture, incl meat production, low tillage etc
• Forests – avoided deforestation, reforestation • Bio-fuels – Obs sustainability criteria• Bio-char
Energy R&D• Long neglected• Share of public funding for Energy R&D has gone down
significantly since 1980 – must be multiplied• Many promising areas, like solar cells and solar
thermal, off-shore wind, wave, sea currents, fuel cells, electric cars, 2nd generation biofuels, biogas, low-energy housing etc
• CCS special issue – needed but too much used as alibi to continue BAU
• How to guarantee investments? – floor price on oil• Who is investing in alternatives?
Private-sector R&D is increasingly focused on projects with short-term payoffs.Private-sector R&D is increasingly focused on projects with short-term payoffs.Source: IEA Databases, Source: IEA Databases, Doornbosch, et al.,Doornbosch, et al., 2008 2008
Public Energy R&D in IEA Countries
History of US Federal Government R&DHistory of US Federal Government R&D
JFK ApolloProgram
Carter EnergyProgram
Reagan “Star Wars” Program
Homeland Security
Optimism the only possible attitude
• Distrust must be addressed – requires commitments both on mitigation and adaptation; start adaptation NOW
• 2/3 of power generation and buildings in 2030 still to be built• Mitigation saves money• Already huge opportunities to use energy more efficiently• Financial Crisis an opportunity; Rethink economic growth• Contraction and convergence OK as principle but China already
beyond per capita GHG target for 2050• Most important is to put a price on Carbon• Land use issues critical• Develop mechanisms for technology cooperation• Long term: Science – Policy Gap must be bridged