Mitigation of climate change impacts
Climate
change mitigation are actions to limit the magnitude
and/or rate of long-term climate change. Climate change mitigation generally
involves reductions in human (anthropogenic) emissions of greenhouse gases
(GHGs). Mitigation may also be achieved by increasing the capacity of carbon
sinks, e.g., through reforestation. By contrast, adaptation to global warming
are actions taken to manage the eventual (or unavoidable) impacts of global
warming, e.g., by building dikes in response to sea level rise.
Examples of mitigation include switching to
low-carbon energy sources, such as renewable and nuclear energy, and expanding
forests and other "sinks" to remove greater amounts of carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere. Energy efficiency can also play a major role, for example,
through improving the insulation of buildings. Another approach to climate
change mitigation is geoengineering.
The main international treaty on climate
change is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
In 2010, Parties to the UNFCCC agreed that future global warming should be
limited to below 2.0 °C (3.6 °F) relative to the pre-industrial
level. Analysis suggests that meeting the 2 °C target would require annual
global emissions of greenhouse gases to peak before the year 2020, and decline
significantly thereafter, with emissions in 2050 reduced by 30-50% compared to
1990 levels. Analyses by the United Nations Environment Programme and
International Energy Agency suggest that current policies (as of 2013) are too
weak to achieve the 2 °C target.
Methods and means
The projected contribution of various energy
sources to world primary electricity consumption (PEC) is based on a climate
change mitigation scenario, in which GHG emissions are substantially reduced
over the 21st century. In the scenario, emission reductions are achieved using
a portfolio of energy sources, as well as reductions in energy demand.
Assessments often suggest that GHG emissions
can be reduced using a portfolio of low-carbon technologies. At the core of
most proposals is the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through
reducing energy waste and switching to low-carbon power sources of energy. As
the cost of reducing GHG emissions in the electricity sector appears to be
lower than in other sectors, such as in the transportation sector, the
electricity sector may deliver the largest proportional carbon reductions under
an economically efficient climate policy.
Other frequently discussed means include
energy conservation, increasing fuel economy in automobiles (which includes the
use of electric hybrids), charging plug-in hybrids and electric cars by
low-carbon electricity, making individual-lifestyle changes (e.g., cycling
instead of driving), and changing business practices.
A range of energy technologies may contribute
to climate change mitigation. These include renewable energy sources such as
solar power, tidal, ocean energy, geothermal power, and wind power; nuclear
power, the use of carbon sinks, and carbon capture and storage. For example,
Pacala and Socolow of Princeton have
proposed a 15 part program to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 billion
metric tons per year − or 25 billion tons over the 50-year period using today's
technologies as a type of Global warming game.
Another consideration is how future socio-economic
development proceeds. Development choices (or "pathways") can lead
differences in GHG emissions. Political and social attitudes may affect how
easy or difficult it is to implement effective policies to reduce emissions.
Alternative energy sources
Renewable energy
The 150 MW Andasol
solar power station is a commercial parabolic trough solar thermal power plant,
located in Spain. The Andasol plant uses tanks of molten salt to store solar
energy so that it can continue generating electricity even when the sun isn't
shining.
Renewable energy flows involve natural
phenomena such as sunlight, wind, tides, plant growth, and geothermal heat, as
the International Energy Agency explains:
Renewable energy is derived from natural
processes that are replenished constantly. In its various forms, it derives
directly from the sun, or from heat generated deep within the earth. Included
in the definition is electricity and heat generated from solar, wind, ocean,
hydropower, biomass, geothermal resources, and biofuels and hydrogen derived
from renewable resources.
Climate change concerns and the need to
reduce carbon emissions are driving increasing growth in the renewable energy
industries. Low-carbon renewable energy replaces conventional fossil fuels in
three main areas: power generation, hot water/ space heating, and transport
fuels. In 2011, the share of renewables in electricity generation worldwide
grew for the fourth year in a row to 20.2%, with the global share of
electricity from hydro power staying roughly constant at 16.3%.
Renewable energy use has grown much faster
than anyone anticipated. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said
that there are few fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio
of renewable energy technologies to meet most of total global energy demand. At
the national level, at least 30 nations around the world already have renewable
energy contributing more than 20% of energy supply.
As of 2012, renewable energy accounts for
almost half of new electricity capacity installed and costs are continuing to
fall. Public policy and political leadership helps to "level the playing
field" and drive the wider acceptance of renewable energy technologies. As
of 2011, 118 countries have targets for their own renewable energy futures, and
have enacted wide-ranging public policies to promote renewables. Leading
renewable energy companies include BrightSource Energy, First Solar, Gamesa, GE
Energy, Goldwind, Sinovel, Suntech, Trina Solar, Vestas and Yingli.
The incentive to use 100% renewable energy
has been created by global warming and other ecological as well as economic
concerns. Producing all new energy with wind power, solar power, and hydropower
by 2030 is feasible and existing energy supply arrangements could be replaced
by 2050. The energy costs with a wind, solar, water system should be similar to
today's energy costs. According to International Energy Agency (IEA), solar
power generators may produce most of the world's electricity within 50 years,
dramatically reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions.
Economic analysts expect market gains for
renewable energy (and efficient energy use) following the 2011 Japanese nuclear
accidents. Globally, there are an estimated 3 million direct jobs in renewable
energy industries, with about half of them in the biofuels industry.
Some countries, with favorable geography,
geology and weather well suited to an economical exploitation of renewable
energy sources, already get most of their electricity from renewables, including
from geothermal energy in Iceland (100 percent), and Hydroelectric power in
Brazil (85 percent), Austria (62 percent), New Zealand (65 percent), and Sweden
(54 percent). Renewable power generators are spread across many countries, with
wind power providing a significant share of electricity in some regional areas:
for example, 14 percent in the U.S. state of Iowa, 40 percent in the northern
German state of Schleswig-Holstein, and 20 percent in Denmark. Solar water
heating makes an important and growing contribution in many countries, most
notably in China, which now has 70 percent of the global total (180 GWth).
Worldwide, total installed solar water heating systems meet a portion of the
water heating needs of over 70 million households. The use of biomass for
heating continues to grow as well. In Sweden, national use of biomass energy
has surpassed that of oil. Direct geothermal heating is also growing rapidly.
Renewable biofuels for transportation, such as ethanol fuel and biodiesel, have
contributed to a significant decline in oil consumption in the United States
since 2006. The 93 billion liters of biofuels produced worldwide in 2009
displaced the equivalent of an estimated 68 billion liters of gasoline,
equal to about 5 percent of world gasoline production.
Nuclear power
Since about 2001 the term "nuclear
renaissance" has been used to refer to a possible nuclear power industry
revival, driven by rising fossil fuel prices and new concerns about meeting
greenhouse gas emission limits. However, in March 2011 the Fukushima nuclear
disaster in Japan and associated shutdowns at other nuclear facilities raised
questions among some commentators over the future of nuclear power. Platts has
reported that "the crisis at Japan's Fukushima nuclear plants has prompted
leading energy-consuming countries to review the safety of their existing
reactors and cast doubt on the speed and scale of planned expansions around the
world".
The World Nuclear Association has reported
that nuclear electricity generation in 2012 was at its lowest level since 1999.
Several previous international studies and assessments, suggested that as part
of the portfolio of other low-carbon energy technologies, nuclear power will
continue to play a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Historically,
nuclear power usage is estimated to have prevented the atmospheric emission of
64 giga tonnes of CO2-equivalent as of 2013. Public concerns about nuclear
power include the fate of spent nuclear fuel, nuclear safety, and security
risks which are considered unique among low-carbon energy sources, however many
Hydroelectric power stations also have safety and security concerns, with one
such safeguard being in the form of the Hoover Dam Police.
A Yale University review published in the
Journal of Industrial Ecology analyzing CO2 life cycle assessment emissions
from nuclear power determined that: "The collective LCA literature
indicates that life cycle GHG emissions from nuclear power are only a fraction
of traditional fossil sources and comparable to renewable technologies."
Uncertainty surrounding the future GHG emissions of nuclear power have to do
with the potential for a declining uranium ore grade without a corresponding
increase in the efficiency of enrichment methods. In a scenario analysis of future
global nuclear development, as it could be effected by a decreasing global
uranium market of average ore grade, the analysis determined that depending on
conditions, median life cycle nuclear power GHG emissions could be between 9 to
110 g CO2-eq/kWh by 2050.
During his
presidential campaign, Barack Obama stated, "Nuclear power represents more
than 70% of our noncarbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can
meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power as an
option."
This graph
illustrates nuclear power is the USA's largest contributor of
non-greenhouse-gas-emitting electric power generation, comprising nearly
three-quarters of the non-emitting sources.
Nuclear power may be uncompetitive compared
with fossil fuel energy sources in countries without a carbon tax program, and
in comparison to a fossil fuel plant of the same power output, nuclear power
plants take a longer amount of time to construct.
Global public
support for energy sources, based on a survey by Ipsos (2011).
Two new, first of their kind, EPR reactors
under construction in Finland and France have been delayed and are running
over-budget. However learning from experience, two further EPR reactors under
construction in China are on, and ahead, of schedule respectively. As of 2013,
according to the IAEA and the European Nuclear Society, worldwide there were 68
civil nuclear power reactors under construction in 15 countries. China has 29
of these nuclear power reactors under construction, as of 2013, with plans to
build many more, while in the US the licenses of almost half its reactors have
been extended to 60 years, and plans to build another dozen are under
serious consideration. There are also a considerable number of new reactors
being built in South Korea, India, and Russia. At least 100 older and smaller
reactors will "most probably be closed over the next 10-15 years".
This is probable only if one does not factor in the ongoing Light Water Reactor
Sustainability Program, created to permit the extension of the life span of the
USA's 104 nuclear reactors to 60 years. The licenses of almost half of the
USA's reactors have been extended to 60 years as of 2008. Two new AP1000
reactors are, as of 2013, being constructed at Vogtle Electric Generating Plant.
Currently, the most popular source of
nuclear power is uranium-235. However, thorium in a molten salt reactor has
been touted as a more practical alternative to uranium. This is in part because
its naturally occurring isotope, thorium-232, is fertile, while uranium needs
to be enriched before it can be used in nuclear power applications. One major
obstacle to the use of thorium power is that it requires a significant
investment in new research and development.
Public opinion about nuclear power varies
widely between countries. A poll by Gallup International (2011) assessed public
opinion in 47 countries. The poll was conducted following a tsumani and
earthquake which caused an accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in
Japan. 49% stated that they held favourable views about nuclear energy, while
43% held an unfavourable view. Another global survey by Ipsos (2011) assessed
public opinion in 24 countries. Respondents to this survey showed a clear
preference for renewable energy sources over coal and nuclear energy (refer to
graph opposite). Ipsos (2012) found that solar and wind were viewed by the
public as being more environmentally friendly and more viable long-term energy
sources relative to nuclear power and natural gas. However, solar and wind were
viewed as being less reliable relative to nuclear power and natural gas. In
2012 a poll done in the UK found that 63% of those surveyed support nuclear
power, and with opposition to nuclear power at 11%. In Germany, strong
anti-nuclear sentiment led to eight of the seventeen operating reactors being
permanently shut down following the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.
Nuclear fusion research, in the form of the
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor is underway. Fusion powered
electricity generation was initially believed to be readily achievable, as
fission power had been. However, the extreme requirements for continuous
reactions and plasma containment led to projections being extended by several
decades. In 2010, more than 60 years after the first attempts, commercial power
production was still believed to be unlikely before 2050.
Carbon intensity
of fossil fuels
Most mitigation proposals imply —
rather than directly state — an eventual reduction in global fossil fuel
production. Also proposed are direct quotas on global fossil fuel production.
Fuel switching
Natural gas emits far fewer greenhouse gases
(i.e. CO2 and Methane - CH4) than coal when burned at
power plants, but evidence has been emerging that this benefit could be
completely negated by methane leakage at gas drilling fields and other earlier
points in the production lifecycle.
A study performed by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the Gas Research Institute (GRI) in 1997 sought to
discover whether the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from increased
natural gas (predominantly methane) use would be offset by a possible increased
level of methane emissions from sources such as leaks and emissions. The study
concluded that the reduction in emissions from increased natural gas use
outweighs the detrimental effects of increased methane emissions. More recent
peer-reviewed studies have challenged the findings of this study, with
researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
reconfirming findings of high rates of methane (CH4) leakage from natural gas
fields.
While carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from
fossil fuel combustion may be reduced by using natural gas rather than coal to
produce energy, it also found that additional methane (CH4) from leakage adds
to the radiative forcing of the climate system, offsetting the reduction in CO2
forcing that accompanies the transition from coal to gas. The study looked at
methane leakage from coal mining; changes in radiative forcing due to changes
in the emissions of sulfur dioxide and carbonaceous aerosols; and differences
in the efficiency of electricity production between coal- and gas-fired power
generation. On balance, these factors more than offset the reduction in warming
due to reduced CO2 emissions. When gas replaces coal there is additional
warming out to 2,050 with an assumed leakage rate of 0%, and out to 2,140 if
the leakage rate is as high as 10%. The overall effects on global-mean
temperature over the 21st century, however, are small. Petron et al. (2013) and
Alvarez et al. (2012) note that estimated that leakage from gas infrastructure
is likely to be underestimated. These studies indicate that the exploitation of
natural gas as a "cleaner" fuel is questionable.
Carbon capture and storage
Schematic
showing both terrestrial and geological sequestration of carbon dioxide
emissions from a coal-fired plant.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a method
to mitigate climate change by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from
large point sources such as power plants and subsequently storing it away
safely instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. The Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change says CCS could contribute between 10% and 55% of the
cumulative worldwide carbon-mitigation effort over the next 90 years. The
International Energy Agency says CCS is "the most important single new
technology for CO2 savings" in power generation and industry.
Though it requires up to 40% more energy to run a CCS coal power plant than a
regular coal plant, CCS could potentially capture about 90% of all the carbon
emitted by the plant. Norway, which first began storing CO2, has cut
its emissions by almost a million tons a year, or about 3% of the country's
1990 levels. As of late 2011, the total CO2 storage capacity of all 14 projects
in operation or under construction is over 33 million tonnes a year. This is
broadly equivalent to preventing the emissions from more than six million cars
from entering the atmosphere each year.
Energy efficiency and conservation
A spiral-type
integrated compact fluorescent lamp, use has grown among North American
consumers since its introduction in the mid-1990s.
Efficient energy use, sometimes simply
called "energy efficiency", is the goal of efforts to reduce the
amount of energy required to provide products and services. For example,
insulating a home allows a building to use less heating and cooling energy to
achieve and maintain a comfortable temperature. Installing fluorescent lights
or natural skylights reduces the amount of energy required to attain the same
level of illumination compared to using traditional incandescent light bulbs.
Compact fluorescent lights use two-thirds less energy and may last 6 to 10
times longer than incandescent lights.
Energy efficiency has proved to be a cost-effective strategy for
building economies without necessarily growing energy consumption. For example,
the state of California began implementing energy-efficiency measures in the
mid-1970s, including building code and appliance standards with strict
efficiency requirements. During the following years, California's energy
consumption has remained approximately flat on a per capita basis while
national U.S. consumption doubled. As part of its strategy, California
implemented a "loading order" for new energy resources that puts
energy efficiency first, renewable electricity supplies second, and new
fossil-fired power plants last.
Energy conservation is broader than energy
efficiency in that it encompasses using less energy to achieve a lesser energy
service, for example through behavioural change, as well as encompassing energy
efficiency. Examples of conservation without efficiency improvements would be
heating a room less in winter, driving less, or working in a less brightly lit
room. As with other definitions, the boundary between efficient energy use and
energy conservation can be fuzzy, but both are important in environmental and
economic terms. This is especially the case when actions are directed at the
saving of fossil fuels.
Reducing energy use is seen as a key
solution to the problem of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. According to the
International Energy Agency, improved energy efficiency in buildings,
industrial processes and transportation could reduce the world's energy needs
in 2050 by one third, and help control global emissions of greenhouse gases.
Transport
Bicycles have almost no
carbon footprint compared to cars, and canal transport may represent a positive
option for certain types of freight in the 21st century
Modern energy-efficient technologies, such
as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and development of new technologies, such
as hydrogen cars, may reduce the consumption of petroleum and emissions of
carbon dioxide. A shift from air transport and truck transport to electric rail
transport would reduce emissions significantly.
Increased use of biofuels (such as ethanol
fuel and biodiesel that can be used in today's diesel and gasoline engines)
could also reduce emissions if produced environmentally efficiently, especially
in conjunction with regular hybrids and plug-in hybrids. For electric vehicles,
the reduction of carbon emissions will improve further if the way the required
electricity is generated is low-carbon power in origin.
Effective urban
planning to reduce sprawl would decrease Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT),
lowering emissions from transportation. Increased use of public transport can
also reduce greenhouse gas emissions per passenger kilometer.
Urban planning
Urban planning also has an effect on energy
use. Between 1982 and 1997, the amount of land consumed for urban development
in the United States increased by 47 percent while the nation's population grew
by only 17 percent. Inefficient land use development practices have increased
infrastructure costs as well as the amount of energy needed for transportation,
community services, and buildings.
At the same time, a growing number of
citizens and government officials have begun advocating a smarter approach to
land use planning. These smart growth practices include compact community
development, multiple transportation choices, mixed land uses, and practices to
conserve green space. These programs offer environmental, economic, and
quality-of-life benefits; and they also serve to reduce energy usage and
greenhouse gas emissions.
Approaches such as New Urbanism and
Transit-oriented development seek to reduce distances travelled, especially by
private vehicles, encourage public transit and make walking and cycling more
attractive options. This is achieved through "medium-density",
mixed-use planning and the concentration of housing within walking distance of
town centers and transport nodes.
Smarter growth land use policies have both a
direct and indirect effect on energy consuming behavior. For example,
transportation energy usage, the number one user of petroleum fuels, could be
significantly reduced through more compact and mixed use land development
patterns, which in turn could be served by a greater variety of non-automotive
based transportation choices.
Building design
Emissions from
housing are substantial, and government-supported energy efficiency programmes
can make a difference.
For institutions of higher learning in the
United States, greenhouse gas emissions depend primarily on total area of
buildings and secondarily on climate. If climate is not taken into account,
annual greenhouse gas emissions due to energy consumed on campuses plus
purchased electricity can be estimated with the formula, E=aSb, where a =0.001621 metric tonnes of CO2
equivalent/square foot or 0.0241 metric tonnes of CO2
equivalent/square meter and b =
1.1354.
New buildings can be constructed using
passive solar building design, low-energy building, or zero-energy building
techniques, using renewable heat sources. Existing buildings can be made more
efficient through the use of insulation, high-efficiency appliances
(particularly hot water heaters and furnaces), double- or triple-glazed
gas-filled windows, external window shades, and building orientation and
siting. Renewable heat sources such as shallow geothermal and passive solar
energy reduce the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted. In addition to designing
buildings which are more energy-efficient to heat, it is possible to design
buildings that are more energy-efficient to cool by using lighter-coloured,
more reflective materials in the development of urban areas (e.g. by painting
roofs white) and planting trees. This saves energy because it cools buildings
and reduces the urban heat island effect thus reducing the use of air
conditioning.
Sinks and negative emissions
A carbon sink is a natural or artificial reservoir
that accumulates and stores some carbon-containing chemical compound for an
indefinite period, such as a growing forest. A negative carbon dioxide emission
on the other hand is a permanent removal of carbon dioxide out of the
atmosphere, such as directly capturing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and
storing it in geologic formations underground.
The Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems
Cooperative Research Centre (ACE-CRC) notes that currently one third of
humankind’s current present annual emissions of CO2 are absorbed by the oceans.
The oceans act as a carbon sink, that is, a reservoir that accumulates and
stores carbon via its physicochemical and biological processes. Unfortunately,
this "vital service comes with the cost of ocean acidification". The
ecological effects of ocean acidification are still largely unknown. Research
so far has focussed on how acidification lowers pH and the level of carbonate
ions available for calcifying organisms to form their shells. These organisms
include plankton species that contribute to the foundation of the Southern
Ocean food web. However acidification may impact on a broad range of other
physiological and ecological processes, such as fish respiration, larval
development and changes in the solubility of both nutrients and toxins.
According to the CSIRO the Southern
Ocean is absorbing increasing amounts of carbon dioxide, with potentially
significant impacts on marine life.
Reforestation
and avoided deforestation
Almost 20% (8 GtCO2/year) of
total greenhouse-gas emissions were from deforestation in 2007. The Stern
Review found that, based on the opportunity costs of the landuse that would no
longer be available for agriculture if deforestation were avoided, emission
savings from avoided deforestation could potentially reduce CO2
emissions for under $5/tCO2, possiblly as little as $1/tCO2.
Afforestation and reforestation could save at least another 1GtCO2/year,
at an estimated cost of $5/tCO2 to $15/tCO2. The Review
determined these figures by assessing 8 countries responsible for 70% of global
deforestation emissions. Pristine temperate forest has been shown to store
three times more carbon than IPCC estimates took into account, and 60% more
carbon than plantation forest. Preventing these forests from being logged would
have significant effects. Further significant savings from other
non-energy-related-emissions could be gained through cuts to agricultural
emissions, fugitive emissions, waste emissions, and emissions from various
industrial processes. Using evidence from Mozambique, a typical low income
country where agriculture is the dominant provider of income for most citizens,
researchers from the Overseas Development Institute found a positive
correlation between increased production intensification and reduced land
conversion, and crop returns, economic growth and food security.
Restoring grasslands store CO2
from the air into plant material. Grazing livestock, usually not left to
wander, would eat the grass and would minimize any grass growth while grass
left alone would eventually grow to cover its own growing buds, preventing them
from photosynthesizing and killing the plant. A method proposed to restore
grasslands uses fences with many small paddocks and moving herds from one
paddock to another after a day a two in order to mimick natural grazers and
allowing the grass to grow optimally. It is estimated that increasing the
carbon content of the soils in the world’s 3.5 billion hectares of agricultural
grassland by 1% would offset nearly 12 years of CO2 emissions. Allan
Savory, as part of holistic management, claims that while large herds are often
blamed for desertification, prehistoric lands used to support large or larger
herds and areas where herds were removed in the United States are still
desertifying.
Negative carbon
dioxide emissions
Creating negative carbon dioxide emissions
literally removes carbon from the atmosphere. Examples are direct air capture,
biochar, bio-energy with carbon capture and storage and enhanced weathering
technologies. These processes are sometimes considered as variations of sinks
or mitigation, and sometimes as geoengineering.
In combination with other mitigation
measures, sinks in combination with negative carbon emissions are considered
crucial for meeting the 350 ppm target, and even the less conservative 450 ppm
target.
Geoengineering
Geoengineering is an alternative to mitigation and adaptation,
but as an entirely separate response to climate change. Geoengineering options,
such as ocean fertilization to remove CO2 from the atmosphere,
remained largely unproven. It was judged that reliable cost estimates for
geoengineering had not yet been published.
The National Academy of Sciences report Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming:
Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base defined geoengineering as "options that
would involve large-scale engineering of our environment in order to combat or
counteract the effects of changes in atmospheric chemistry." They
evaluated a range of options to try to give preliminary answers to two
questions: can these options work and could they be carried out with a
reasonable cost. They also sought to encourage discussion of a third
question — what adverse side effects might there be. The following types
of option were examined: reforestation, increasing ocean absorption of carbon
dioxide (carbon sequestration) and screening out some sunlight. NAS also argued
"Engineered countermeasures need to be evaluated but should not be
implemented without broad understanding of the direct effects and the potential
side effects, the ethical issues, and the risks.". In July 2011 a report
by the United States Government Accountability Office on geoengineering found
that "[c]limate engineering technologies do not now offer a viable
response to global climate change."
Carbon dioxide
removal
Carbon dioxide removal has been proposed as
a method of reducing the amount of radiative forcing. A variety of means of
artificially capturing and storing carbon, as well as of enhancing natural
sequestration processes, are being explored. The main natural process is
photosynthesis by plants and single-celled organisms. Artificial processes
vary, and concerns have been expressed about the long-term effects of some of
these processes.
It is notable that the availability of cheap
energy and appropriate sites for geological storage of carbon may make carbon
dioxide air capture viable commercially. It is, however, generally expected
that carbon dioxide air capture may be uneconomic when compared to carbon
capture and storage from major sources — in particular, fossil fuel
powered power stations, refineries, etc. In such cases, costs of energy produced
will grow significantly. However, captured CO2 can be used to force
more crude oil out of oil fields, as Statoil and Shell have made plans to do.
CO2 can also be used in commercial greenhouses, giving an
opportunity to kick-start the technology. Some attempts have been made to use
algae to capture smokestack emissions, notably the GreenFuel Technologies
Corporation, who have now shut down operations.
Solar radiation
management
The main purpose of solar radiation
management seek to reflect sunlight and thus reduce global warming. The ability
of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to create a global dimming effect has made
them a possible candidate for use in geoengineering projects.
Societal controls
Another method being examined is to make
carbon a new currency by introducing tradeable "Personal Carbon
Credits". The idea being it will encourage and motivate individuals to
reduce their 'carbon footprint' by the way they live. Each citizen will receive
a free annual quota of carbon that they can use to travel, buy food, and go
about their business. It has been suggested that by using this concept it could
actually solve two problems; pollution and poverty, old age pensioners will
actually be better off because they fly less often, so they can cash in their
quota at the end of the year to pay heating bills, etc.
Population
Various organizations promote population
control as a means for mitigating global warming. Proposed measures include
improving access to family planning and reproductive health care and
information, reducing natalistic politics, public education about the
consequences of continued population growth, and improving access of women to
education and economic opportunities.
Population control efforts are impeded by
there being somewhat of a taboo in some countries against considering any such
efforts. Also, various religions discourage or prohibit some or all forms of
birth control. Population size has a different per capita effect on global warming
in different countries, since the per capita production of anthropogenic
greenhouse gases varies greatly by country.
Non-CO2 greenhouse gases
CO2 is not the only GHG relevant
to mitigation, and governments have acted to regulate the emissions of other
GHGs emitted by human activities (anthropogenic GHGs). The emissions caps
agreed to by most developed countries under the Kyoto Protocol regulate the
emissions of almost all the anthropogenic GHGs. These gases are CO2,
methane (chemical formula: CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), the
hydrofluorocarbons (abbreviated HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6).
Stabilizing the atmospheric concentrations
of the different anthropogenic GHGs requires an understanding of their
different physical properties. Stabilization depends both on how quickly GHGs
are added to the atmosphere and how fast they are removed. The rate of removal
is measured by the atmospheric lifetime of the GHG in question. Here, the
lifetime is defined as the time required for a given perturbation of the GHG in
the atmosphere to be reduced to 37% of its initial amount. Methane has a
relatively short atmospheric lifetime of about 12 years, while N2O's
lifetime is about 110 years. For methane, a reduction of about 30% below
current emission levels would lead to stabilization in its atmospheric
concentration, while for N2O, an emissions reduction of more than
50% would be required.
Methane is a significantly more powerful
greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Burning one molecule of methane generates
one molecule of carbon dioxide, indicating there may be no net benefit in using
gas as a fuel source. Reducing the amount of waste methane produced in the
first place and moving away from use of gas as a fuel source will have a
greater beneficial impact, as might other approaches to productive use of
otherwise-wasted methane. In terms of prevention, vaccines are in the works in
Australia to reduce significant global warming contributions from methane
released by livestock via flatulence and eructation.
Another physical property of the
anthropogenic GHGs relevant to mitigation is the different abilities of the
gases to trap heat (in the form of infrared radiation). Some gases are more
effective at trapping heat than others, e.g., SF6 is 22,200 times
more effective a GHG than CO2 on a per-kilogram basis. A measure for
this physical property is the global warming potential (GWP), and is used in
the Kyoto Protocol.
Although not designed for this purpose, the
Montreal Protocol has probably benefitted climate change mitigation efforts.
The Montreal Protocol is an international treaty that has successfully reduced
emissions of ozone-depleting substances (e.g., CFCs), which are also greenhouse
gases.
Costs and benefits
Costs
The Stern Review proposes stabilising the
concentration of greenhouse-gas emissions in the atmosphere at a maximum of
550ppm CO2e by 2050. The Review estimates that this would mean
cutting total greenhouse-gas emissions to three quarters of 2007 levels. The
Review further estimates that the cost of these cuts would be in the range −1.0
to +3.5% of World GDP, (i.e. GWP), with an average estimate of approximately
1%. Stern has since revised his estimate to 2% of GWP. For comparison, the
Gross World Product (GWP) at PPP was estimated at $74.5 trillion in 2010, thus
2% is approximately $1.5 trillion. The Review emphasises that these costs are
contingent on steady reductions in the cost of low-carbon technologies.
Mitigation costs will also vary according to how and when emissions are cut: early,
well-planned action will minimise the costs.
One way of estimating the cost of reducing
emissions is by considering the likely costs of potential technological and
output changes. Policy makers can compare the marginal abatement costs of
different methods to assess the cost and amount of possible abatement over
time. The marginal abatement costs of the various measures will differ by
country, by sector, and over time.
Benefits
Sustainability and climate change suggested
that up to the year 2050, an effort to cap greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at
550 ppm would benefit developing countries significantly. This was judged
to be especially the case when combined with enhanced adaptation. By 2100,
however, it was still judged likely that there would be significant effects of
global warming. This was judged to be the case even with aggressive mitigation
and significantly enhanced adaptive capacity.
Sharing
One of the aspects of mitigation is how to
share the costs and benefits of mitigation policies. There is no scientific
consensus over how to share these costs and benefits. In terms of the politics
of mitigation, the UNFCCC's ultimate objective is to stabilize concentrations
of GHG in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent "dangerous"
climate change. There is, however, no widespread agreement on how to define
"dangerous" climate change.
GHG emissions are an important correlate of
wealth, at least at present. Wealth, as measured by per capita income (i.e.,
income per head of population), varies widely between different countries.
Activities of the poor that involve emissions of GHGs are often associated with
basic needs, such as heating to stay tolerably warm. In richer countries,
emissions tend to be associated with things like cars, central heating, etc.
The impacts of cutting emissions could therefore have different impacts on
human welfare according wealth.
Distributing
emissions abatement costs
There have been different
proposals on how to allocate responsibility for cutting emissions:
- Egalitarianism:
this system interprets the problem as one where each person has equal
rights to a global resource, i.e., polluting the atmosphere.
- Basic
needs and Rawlsian criteria: this
system would have emissions allocated according to basic needs, as defined
according to a minimum level of consumption. Consumption above basic needs
would require countries to buy more emission rights. This can be related
to Rawlsian philosophy. From this viewpoint, developing countries would
need to be at least as well off under an emissions control regime as they
would be outside the regime.
- Proportionality
and polluter-pays principle:
Proportionality reflects the ancient Aristotelian principle that people
should receive in proportion to what they put in, and pay in proportion to
the damages they cause. This has a potential relationship with the
"polluter-pays principle", which can be interpreted in a number
of ways:
- Historical responsibilities:
this asserts that allocation of emission rights should be based on
patterns of past emissions. Two-thirds of the stock of GHGs in the
atmosphere at present is due to the past actions of developed countries
(Goldemberg et al., 1996,
p. 29).
- Comparable burdens and ability to pay:
with this approach, countries would reduce emissions based on comparable
burdens and their ability to take on the costs of reduction. Ways to
assess burdens include monetary costs per head of population, as well as
other, more complex measures, like the UNDP's Human Development Index.
- Willingness to pay:
with this approach, countries take on emission reductions based on their
ability to pay along with how much they benefit from reducing their
emissions.
Specific
proposals
- Ad
hoc:
allocations based partly on GNP could be a way of sharing the
burdens of emission reductions. This is because GNP and economic activity
are partially tied to carbon emissions.
- Equal
per capita entitlements: this is the most
widely cited method of distributing abatement costs, and is derived from
egalitarianism. This approach can be divided into two categories. In the
first category, emissions are allocated according to national population.
In the second category, emissions are allocated in a way that attempts to
account for historical (cumulative) emissions.
- Status
quo: with this approach, historical
emissions are ignored, and current emission levels are taken as a status
quo right to emit. An analogy for this approach can be made with
fisheries, which is a common, limited resource. The analogy would be with
the atmosphere, which can be viewed as an exhaustible natural resource. In
international law, one state recognized the long-established use of
another state's use of the fisheries resource. It was also recognized by
the state that part of the other state's economy was dependent on that
resource.
Governmental and intergovernmental action
Many countries, both developing and
developed, are aiming to use cleaner technologies. Use of these technologies
aids mitigation and could result in substantial reductions in CO2
emissions. Policies include targets for emissions reductions, increased use of
renewable energy, and increased energy efficiency. It is often argued that the
results of climate change are more damaging in poor nations, where
infrastructures are weak and few social services exist. The Commitment to
Development Index is one attempt to analyze rich country policies taken to
reduce their disproportionate use of the global commons. Countries do well if
their greenhouse gas emissions are falling, if their gas taxes are high, if
they do not subsidize the fishing industry, if they have a low fossil fuel rate
per capita, and if they control imports of illegally cut tropical timber.
Kyoto Protocol
The main current international agreement on
combating climate change is the Kyoto Protocol, which came into force on 16
February 2005. The Kyoto Protocol is an amendment to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Countries that have ratified
this protocol have committed to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and
five other greenhouse gases, or engage in emissions trading if they maintain or
increase emissions of these gases.
Temperature targets
Actions to mitigate climate change are
sometimes based on the goal of achieving a particular temperature target. One
of the targets that has been suggested is to limit the future increase in
global mean temperature (global warming) to below 2 dc, relative to the
pre-industrial level. The 2 dc target was adopted in 2010 by Parties to the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Most countries of the
world are Parties to the UNFCCC. The target had been adopted in 1996 by the
European Union Council.
Temperature targets
The graph on the right
shows three "pathways" to meet the UNFCCC's 2 °C target,
labelled "global technology", "decentralised solutions",
and "consumption change". Each pathway shows how various measures
(e.g., improved energy efficiency, increased use of renewable energy) could
contribute to emissions reductions. Image credit: PBL Netherlands Environmental
Assessment Agency.
Actions to mitigate climate change are
sometimes based on the goal of achieving a particular temperature target. One
of the targets that has been suggested is to limit the future increase in
global mean temperature (global warming) to below 2 °C, relative to the
pre-industrial level. The 2 °C target was adopted in 2010 by Parties to
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Most countries of
the world are Parties to the UNFCCC. The target had been adopted in 1996 by the
European Union Council.
Temperatures have increased by 0.8 °C
compared to the pre-industrial level, and another 0.5–0.7 °C is already
committed. The 2 °C rise is typically associated in climate models with a
carbon dioxide equivalent concentration of 400–500 ppm by volume; the current
(April 2011) level of carbon dioxide alone is 393 ppm by volume, and rising at
1-3 ppm annually. Hence, to avoid a very likely breach of the 2 °C target, CO2
levels would have to be stabilised very soon; this is generally regarded as unlikely,
based on current programs in place to date. The importance of change is
illustrated by the fact that world economic energy efficiency is presently
improving at only half the rate of world economic growth.
Encouraging use changes
Emissions tax
An emissions tax on greenhouse gas emissions
requires individual emitters to pay a fee, charge or tax for every tonne of
greenhouse gas released into the atmosphere. Most environmentally related taxes
with implications for greenhouse gas emissions in OECD countries are levied on
energy products and motor vehicles, rather than on CO2 emissions
directly.
Emission taxes can be both cost-effective
and environmentally effective. Difficulties with emission taxes include their
potential unpopularity, and the fact that they cannot guarantee a particular
level of emissions reduction. Emissions or energy taxes also often fall
disproportionately on lower income classes. In developing countries,
institutions may be insufficiently developed for the collection of emissions
fees from a wide variety of sources.
Making the
emitting of CO2 illegal
Another option is to replace the emission
reduction-positive approach proposed with the Kyoto protocol and its successor
with an emitted GHG-negative approach.
Scientist Ken Caldeira has
proposed making greenhouse gas-emitting devices illegal.
Subsidies
According to Mark Z. Jacobson, a program of
subsidization balanced against expected flood costs could pay for conversion to
100% renewable power by 2030. Jacobson, and his colleague Mark Delucchi,
suggest that the cost to generate and transmit power in 2020 will be less than
4 cents per kilowatt hour (in 2007 dollars) for wind, about 4 cents for wave
and hydroelectric, from 4 to 7 cents for geothermal, and 8 cents per kwh for
solar, fossil, and nuclear power.
Carbon emissions
trading
With the creation of a market for trading
carbon dioxide emissions within the Kyoto Protocol, it is likely that London
financial markets will be the centre for this potentially highly lucrative
business; the New York and Chicago stock markets may have a lower trade volume
than expected as long as the US maintains its rejection of the Kyoto. However,
emissions trading may delay the phase-out of fossil fuels.
The European Union Emission Trading Scheme
(EU ETS) is the largest multi-national, greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme
in the world. It commenced operation on 1 January 2005, and all 25 member
states of the European Union participate in the scheme which has created a new
market in carbon dioxide allowances estimated at 35 billion Euros
(US$43 billion) per year. The Chicago Climate Exchange was the first
(voluntary) emissions market, and is soon to be followed by Asia's first market
(Asia Carbon Exchange). A total of 107 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide
equivalent have been exchanged through projects in 2004, a 38% increase
relative to 2003 (78 Mt CO2e).
Twenty three multinational corporations have
come together in the G8 Climate Change Roundtable, a business group formed at
the January 2005 World Economic Forum. The group includes Ford, Toyota, British
Airways and BP. On 9 June 2005 the Group published a statement stating that
there was a need to act on climate change and claiming that market-based
solutions can help. It called on governments to establish "clear,
transparent, and consistent price signals" through "creation of a
long-term policy framework" that would include all major producers of
greenhouse gases.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is a
proposed carbon trading scheme being created by nine North-eastern and
Mid-Atlantic American states; Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. The scheme was due
to be developed by April 2005 but has not yet been completed.
Implementation
Implementation puts into effect climate
change mitigation strategies and targets. These can be targets set by
international bodies or voluntary action by individuals or institutions. This
is the most important, expensive and least appealing aspect of environmental
governance.
Funding
Implementation requires funding sources but
is often beset by disputes over who should provide funds and under what
conditions. A lack of funding can be a barrier to successful strategies as
there are no formal arrangements to finance climate change development and
implementation. Funding is often provided by nations, groups of nations and
increasingly NGO and private sources. These funds are often channelled through
the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). This is an environmental funding
mechanism in the World Bank which is designed to deal with global environmental
issues. The GEF was originally designed to tackle four main areas: biological
diversity, climate change, international waters and ozone layer depletion, to which
land degradation and persistent organic pollutant were added. The GEF funds
projects that are agreed to achieve global environmental benefits that are
endorsed by governments and screened by one of the GEF’s implementing agencies.
Problems
There are numerous issues which result in a
current perceived lack of implementation. It has been suggested that the main
barriers to implementation are, Uncertainty, Fragmentation, Institutional void,
Short time horizon of policies and politicians and Missing motives and
willingness to start adapting. The relationships between many climatic
processes can cause large levels of uncertainty as they are not fully
understood and can be a barrier to implementation. When information on climate
change is held between the large numbers of actors involved it can be highly
dispersed, context specific or difficult to access causing fragmentation to be
a barrier. Institutional void is the lack of commonly accepted rules and norms
for policy processes to take place, calling into question the legitimacy and
efficacy of policy processes. The Short time horizon of policies and
politicians often means that climate change policies are not implemented in
favour of socially favoured societal issues. Statements are often posed to keep
the illusion of political action to prevent or postpone decisions being made.
Missing motives and willingness to start adapting is a large barrier as it
prevents any implementation.
Martin Wolfe argued in the Financial Times
in 2013 that, in order for effective climate change mitigation to take place,
substantial resources needed to be invested in technologies that would deliver
a prosperous low-carbon economy. Neither the technology nor the institutions
required to deliver it existed in 2013, and hence there was no political will
to make effective action.
Occurrence
Despite a perceived lack of occurrence,
evidence of implementation is emerging internationally. Some examples of this
are the initiation of NAPA’s and of joint implementation. Many developing nations
have made National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs) which are frameworks
to prioritize adaption needs. The implementation of many of these is supported
by GEF agencies. Many developed countries are implementing ‘first generation’
institutional adaption plans particularly at the state and local government
scale. There has also been a push towards joint implementation between
countries by the UNFCC as this has been suggested as a cost-effective way for
objectives to be achieved.
Territorial policies
United States
Efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
by the United States include energy policies which encourage efficiency through
programs like Energy Star, Commercial Building Integration, and the Industrial
Technologies Program. On 12 November 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically
signed the Kyoto Protocol, but he indicated participation by the developing
nations was necessary prior its being submitted for ratification by the United
States Senate.
In 2007, Transportation Secretary Mary
Peters, with White House approval, urged governors and dozens of members of the
House of Representatives to block California’s first-in-the-nation limits on
greenhouse gases from cars and trucks, according to e-mails obtained by
Congress. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program is a group of about twenty
federal agencies and US Cabinet Departments, all working together to address
global warming.
The Bush administration pressured American
scientists to suppress discussion of global warming, according to the testimony
of the Union of Concerned Scientists to the Oversight and Government Reform
Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives. "High-quality
science" was "struggling to get out," as the Bush administration
pressured scientists to tailor their writings on global warming to fit the Bush
administration's skepticism, in some cases at the behest of an ex-oil industry
lobbyist. "Nearly half of all respondents perceived or personally
experienced pressure to eliminate the words 'climate change,' 'global warming'
or other similar terms from a variety of communications." Similarly,
according to the testimony of senior officers of the Government Accountability
Project, the White House attempted to bury the report "National Assessment
of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change," produced
by U.S. scientists pursuant to U.S. law. Some U.S. scientists resigned their
jobs rather than give in to White House pressure to underreport global warming.
In the absence of substantial federal
action, state governments have adopted emissions-control laws such as the
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in the Northeast and the Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006 in California.
Developing
countries
In order to reconcile economic development
with mitigating carbon emissions, developing countries need particular support,
both financial and technical. One of the means of achieving this is the Kyoto
Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The World Bank's Prototype Carbon
Fund is a public private partnership that operates within the CDM.
An important point of contention, however,
is how overseas development assistance not directly related to climate change
mitigation is affected by funds provided to climate change mitigation. One of
the outcomes of the UNFCC Copenhagen Climate Conference was the Copenhagen
Accord, in which developed countries promised to provide US $30 million
between 2010 and 2012 of new and additional resources. Yet it remains unclear
what exactly the definition of additional is and the European Commission has
requested its member states to define what they understand to be additional,
and researchers at the Overseas Development Institute have found 4 main
understandings:
- Climate
finance classified as aid, but additional to (over and above) the ‘0.7%’
ODA target;
- Increase
on previous year's Official Development Assistance (ODA) spent on climate
change mitigation;
- Rising
ODA levels that include climate change finance but where it is limited to
a specified percentage; and
- Increase
in climate finance not connected to ODA.
The main point being that there is a
conflict between the OECD states budget deficit cuts, the need to help
developing countries adapt to develop sustainably and the need to ensure that
funding does not come from cutting aid to other important Millennium
Development Goals.
However, none of these initiatives suggest a
quantitative cap on the emissions from developing countries. This is considered
as a particularly difficult policy proposal as the economic growth of
developing countries are proportionally reflected in the growth of greenhouse
emissions. Critics of mitigation often argue that, the developing countries'
drive to attain a comparable living standard to the developed countries would
doom the attempt at mitigation of global warming. Critic also argue that
holding down emissions would shift the human cost of global warming from a
general one to one that was borne most heavily by the poorest populations on
the planet.
In an attempt to provide more opportunities
for developing countries to adapt clean technologies, UNEP and WTO urged the
international community to reduce trade barriers and to conclude the Doha trade
round "which includes opening trade in environmental goods and
services".
Non-governmental approaches
While many of the proposed methods of
mitigating global warming require governmental funding, legislation and
regulatory action, individuals and businesses can also play a part in the
mitigation effort.
Choices in personal actions and business operations
Environmental groups encourage individual
action against global warming, often aimed at the consumer. Common
recommendations include lowering home heating and cooling usage, burning less
gasoline, supporting renewable energy sources, buying local products to reduce
transportation, turning off unused devices, and various others.
A geophysicist at Utrecht University has urged similar institutions
to hold the vanguard in voluntary mitigation, suggesting the use of
communications technologies such as videoconferencing to reduce their
dependence on long-haul flights.
Air travel and
shipment
In 2008, climate scientist Kevin Anderson
raised concern about the growing effect of rapidly increasing global air
transport on the climate in a paper, and a presentation, suggesting that reversing
this trend is necessary to reduce emissions.
Part of the difficulty is that when aviation emissions are made at
high altitude, the climate impacts are much greater than otherwise. Others have
been raising the related concerns of the increasing hypermobility of
individuals, whether traveling for business or pleasure, involving frequent and
often long distance air travel, as well as air shipment of goods.
Business opportunities and risks
On 9 May 2005 Jeff Immelt, the chief
executive of General Electric (GE), announced plans to reduce GE's global
warming related emissions by one percent by 2012. "GE said that given its
projected growth, those emissions would have risen by 40 percent without such
action."
On 21 June 2005 a group of leading airlines,
airports and aerospace manufacturers pledged to work together to reduce the
negative environmental impact of aviation, including limiting the impact of air
travel on climate change by improving fuel efficiency and reducing carbon
dioxide emissions of new aircraft by fifty percent per seat kilometre by 2020
from 2000 levels. The group aims to develop a common reporting system for
carbon dioxide emissions per aircraft by the end of 2005, and pressed for the
early inclusion of aviation in the European Union's carbon emission trading
scheme
Legal action
In some countries, those affected by climate
change may be able to sue major producers. Attempts at litigation have been
initiated by entire peoples such as Palau and the Inuit, as well as
non-governmental organizations such as the Sierra Club. Although proving that
particular weather events are due specifically to global warming may never be
possible, methodologies have been developed to show the increased risk of such
events caused by global warming.
For a legal action for negligence (or
similar) to succeed, "Plaintiffs ... must show that, more probably than
not, their individual injuries were caused by the risk factor in question, as
opposed to any other cause. This has sometimes been translated to a requirement
of a relative risk of at least two." Another route (though with little
legal bite) is the World Heritage Convention, if it can be shown that climate
change is affecting World Heritage Sites like Mount Everest.
Legal action has also been taken to try to
force the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gas
emissions under the Clean Air Act, and against the Export-Import Bank and OPIC
for failing to assess environmental impacts (including global warming impacts)
under NEPA.
According to a 2004 study commissioned by
Friends of the Earth, ExxonMobil and its predecessors caused 4.7 to 5.3 percent
of the world's man-made carbon dioxide emissions between 1882 and 2002. The
group suggested that such studies could form the basis for eventual legal
action.






0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home