RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 1
Emission implications of long-term climate targets - a work-in-progress report -
Michel den Elzen (RIVM, the Netherlands)
Malte Meinshausen (ETH Zurich, Switzerland)
Side Event COP-10
13th December 2004
Buenos Aires
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 2
Introduction
Part 1: Why 2°C ? What CO2 level corresponds with a 2°C target?
Part 2: The method to derive emission pathways with cost-effective multi-gas mixes of reductions.
Part 3:What are the (regional) emission reduction targets?
Part 4: What is the impact of further delay?
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 3
Part 1:Why 2°C?
What equilibrium CO2-equivalent level corresponds with 2oC?
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 4
EU’s 2°C target
“[...] the Council believes that global average temperatures should not exceed 2 degrees above pre-industrial level and that therefore concentration levels lower than 550 ppm CO2 should guide global limitation and reduction efforts. [...]”(1939th Council meeting, Luxembourg, 25 June 1996)
“REAFFIRMS that, with a view to meeting the ultimate objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [...] to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, overall global annual mean surface temperature increase should not exceed 2°C above pre-industrial levels in order to limit high risks, including irreversible impacts of climate change; RECOGNISES that 2°C would already imply significant impacts on ecosystems and water resources [...]” (2610th Council
Meeting, Luxembourg, 14 October 2004 Council 2004, 25-26 March 2004)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 5
Temperature increase higher over land
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 6
Reasons for Concern (IPCC TAR WGII)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 7
Millions at Risk (Parry et al., 2001)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 8
Expected warming for ~550ppm CO2eq
Climate Sensitivity ...
... summarizes key uncertainties in climate science
... is the expected average warming of the earth’s surface for a doubling of CO2 concentrations (about 550 ppm CO2)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 9
Background: Difference between CO2 and CO2equivalence
Conversion Table for > 2100
CO2 (ppmv)
+ other GHG + aerosols
CO2eq(ppmv)
350 + other ≈ 400
390 + other ≈ 450
470 + other ≈ 550
550 + other ≈ 650
“CO2equivalence” summarizes the climate effect (‘radiative forcing’) of all human-induced greenhouse-gases and aerosols, as if we only changed the atmospheric concentrations of CO2.
Like “bread exchange” units for food or “tonnes oil equivalent (toe)” for energy sources.
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 10
Expected warming for ~550ppm CO2eq New research cannot exclude very high warming levels (e.g. >
4.5°C) for stabilization of greenhouse gases at 550ppm CO2–eq. “The fact that we are uncertain may actually be a reason to act
sooner rather than later” (Eileen Claussen)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 11
The risk to overshoot 2°C
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 12
The Risk to overshoot 2°C
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 13
Conclusions Part 1
550 ppm CO2 equivalence is “unlikely” to meet the 2°C target
The risk to overshoot 2°C can be substantially reduced for lower stabilization levels.
There is about a fifty:fifty chance to meet 2°C by stabilizing at 450ppm
There is a “likely” achievement of the 2°C target for stabilization at 400ppm CO2eq (risk to overshoot 2°C is about 25%).
Dependent on climate sensitivity PDF
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 14
Part 2: The method to calculate emission
pathways
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 15
Method: FAIR-SiMCaP FAIR (RIVM)
Calculates the emission allowances and abatement costs of post-2012 regimes
Here we use the cost-model: cost-optimal mixes of greenhouse gas for total reductions (6
GHGs) every 5 year periodsleast costs approach using on MAC curves Not over time
SiMCaP (ETH Zurich)calculates parameterised emission pathways to achieve predefined
climate targets, like 400ppm CO2eqClimate calculations by simple climate model
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 16
Method: FAIR-SiMCaP
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 17
Basic assumptions
Three baseline scenarios: IMAGE-B1 (IPCC B1, MACs B1 & LUCF: B1) CPI (middle IPCC, MACs CPI & LUCF: CPI) CPI+tech (MACs additional technological
improvements) & LUCF: B1)
Rationale behind CPI+tech:1. Current studies show more abatements are possible
2. More optimistic, simple assumptions for the MACs (e.g. energy CO2 MACs now additional improvement of
0.2%/year)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 18
Basic assumptions (continued) In order to avoid global emission reduction rates exceeding
3%/year, the default scenarios assume early reductions. Peak of global emissions in 2015-2020
Early peaking is technically feasible, costs not too high, but … political willingness?
Focus on CO2-equivalent concentration stabilisation levels of 400, 450, 500 and 550 ppm
The lower concentration levels include overshooting: Stabilisation at 400 ppm: Peaking at 480 ppm; Stabilisation at 450 ppm: Peaking at 500 ppm; Stabilisation at 500 ppm: Peaking at 525 ppm;
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 19
CO2-eq. emissions in GtC-eq
0
5
10
15
20
25
1995 2020 2045 2070 2095
CO2-eq. emissions in GtC-eq
0
5
10
15
20
25
1995 2020 2045 2070 2095
baseline CPI
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1995 2020 2045 2070 2095
Sinks
F-gasses
N2O
CH4
CO2
profile
Cost-optimal reduction over GHGs
0
5
10
15
20
25
1995 2020 2045 2070 2095
IM A-B1
450
baseline B1
CO2-eq. emissions in GtC-eq
0
5
10
15
20
25
1995 2020 2045 2070 2095
450
CP I-tech
baseline CPI Main focus on
energy-related CO2 reductions
In short terms, potentially large incentives for sinks and non-CO2 GHGs (cheap options)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1995 2020 2045 2070 2095
Sinks
F-gasses
N2O
CH4
CO2
profile
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 20
Fossil CO2 emissions
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 21
Other Greenhouse gas Emissions
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 22
Greenhouse gas Concentrations
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 23
Contribution GHGs to net radiative forcing
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 24
Presented multi-gas scenarios are roughly within the range of existing mitigation scenarios.
The applied method reflects the existing policy-framework and assumes cost-minimizing achievements of targets in each 5 year period: This results in near-term incentives for non-CO2 reductions and
for sinks But in the long-term the focus has to be on reductions in CO2
emissions
Conclusions Part 2
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 25
Part 3:What are the (regional) emission
reduction implications?
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 26
Emission pathways with different baselines
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 27
The default emission pathways
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 28
In 2020, global emissions may increase from 10-25% above 1990 levels (400-450ppm).
In 2050, the emissions have to be reduced by 30-60%
Change of global GHG emissions (incl. LUCF CO2 emissions) compared to 1990 level (in %)
-60-50-40-30-20-10
010203040
2050
-60-50-40-30-20-10
010203040
2020
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
OECD90
400ppm
450ppm
500ppm
550ppm
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 29
Change of global GHG emissions (excl. LUCF CO2 emissions) compared to 1990 level (in %)
If landuse CO2 emissions decrease, then reduction needs for the Kyoto gas emissions only (without landuse CO2) are relaxed by about 10%-15%.
By 2050, 20-45% below 1990 levels (400-450ppm).
-60-50-40-30-20-10
010203040
2050
-60-50-40-30-20-10
010203040
2020
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
OECD90
400ppm
450ppm
500ppm
550ppm
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 30
Change emissions compared to 1990 level in 2020 excl. LUCF CO2 for Multi-Stage regime (%)
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Annex I
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
FSU & E. Eur
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
OECD90
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Non-Annex I
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Africa & Lat. Am
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Asia
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
OECD90
400ppm
450ppm
500ppm
550ppm
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
global
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 31
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
Annex I
Change emissions compared to 1990 level in 2050 excl. LUCF CO2 for Multi-Stage regime (%)
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
FSU & E.Eur
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
OECD90
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Non-Annex I
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Africa & Lat. Am
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Asia
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
Global
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
OECD90
400ppm
450ppm
500ppm
550ppm
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 32
Overall global emissions (Kyoto gas emissions + landuse CO2):
400ppm CO2eq: 50% to 60% below 1990 by 2050
450ppm CO2eq: 30% to 40% below 1990 by 2050
Assuming landuse CO2 emission decrease as specified, needed global Kyoto gas emissions reductions are less: 400ppm CO2eq: 35% to 45% below 1990 by 2050
450ppm CO2eq: 15% to 25% below 1990 by 2050
Conclusions Part 3 (Global)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 33
Focusing on Kyoto gas emissions excluding landuse emissions: In 2020, Annex I emissions need to be reduced ~
30% below 1990 levels for 400ppm, and ~15% 450ppm.
The reductions are differentiated amongst the Parties, Annex I takes the lead, followed by the more advance developing countries, and then the low-income countries.
For meeting the lower concentration levels major developing countries have to participate in the reductions between 2015 and 2025
Conclusions Part 3 (Regional)
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 34
Part 4:What is the impact of further delay
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 35
The effect of delay: 450ppm
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 36
The effect of delay: 400ppm
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 37
The effect of delay: 400ppm
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 38
A delay of global action of just five years matters.
Global emissions will have to peak in 10 to 15 years to limit the risk of overshooting 2°C to reasonable levels.
The consequence of delay are: Lower absolute emissions after around 2040 Steeper maximal reduction rates already from 2020 /
2025
“Delaying action for a decade, or even just years, is not a serious option” (Sir David King, Sience,9 January 2004)
Conclusions Part 4
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 39
Overall conclusions
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 40
Overall conclusions Multi-gas mitigation pathways
550 ppm CO2 eq. is “unlikely” to meet the 2°C target
Limiting the risk to overshoot 2°C to less then 33% requires stabilization at approximately 400ppm.
It seems necessary, that global emissions peak before 2020 to achieve 400 or 450ppm stabilization levels. Cost of delay potentially very high.
This is followed by reductions in the order of 30% to 60% (incl. land use CO2 emissions) in 2050 compared to 1990 levels (450/400ppm CO2eq).
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 41
Overall conclusions (continued)
Regional emission reductions depend on: emissions growth in the baseline allocation scheme for differentiated commitments abatement potential and reduction costs
In 2020, Annex I emission need to be approximately 30% below 1990 levels for 400ppm, and approximately 20% lower for 450ppm stabilization.
For meeting the lower concentration levels, major developing countries have to participate in the reductions between 2015 and 2025
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 42
Reminder - Disclaimer
The presented work is part of a longer term project. Cost estimates, in particular non-fossil CO2, will be
explored in more detail (implementation barriers). Cost of delayed pathways will be explored with dynamic
energy model TIMER (inertia, technological improvements, forgone learning effects)
Work in progress
RIVM (the Netherlands) and ETH (Switzerland) 43
Thank you!
Contact: [email protected]@ethz.ch
Presentation will be made available from www.rivm.nl/ieweb/www.simcap.org
Top Related