If the world continues its emitting ways unchanged, we could face upward of 1,000 parts per million of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) concentration in the atmosphere, or a warming of 6 degrees Celsius (10.8 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to pre-industrial periods. This is a business-as-usual case that in all likelihood would result in a very uncomfortable future for the planet and its inhabitants.
Alternatively, the world could step up and address this challenge head-on in Copenhagen. In a newly released excerpt for policymakers from the World Energy Outlook 2009, the International Energy Agency (IEA) reminds us that the energy sector is pivotal in reducing emissions and can smooth the road toward a Copenhagen agreement.
G8 countries have agreed on a maximum allowable warming of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels (the world’s temperature has already increased by 0.6 degrees Celsius since the 1850s). To make this happen, science demands limiting carbon dioxide to a maximum of 450 ppm CO2e, or 350 ppm of CO2 alone. It is this alternative path that the IEA models in comparison to the business-as-usual case outlined above.
Efficiency is the heavyweight in this analysis, contributing 57 percent of the world’s total energy-related emissions abatements by 2030. The vast majority of these emissions abatements from efficiency would take the form of improvements at the consumer end, such as more efficient appliances in homes and vehicles on the street. Of course, there is still enormous room for efficiency progress at power plants as well.
Transitioning the global energy mix from today’s heavily coal-dependent trajectory to a low-carbon pathway is a necessity. Renewable energies thus follow efficiency in second place with a reduction potential of 20 percent of total world abatements. In contrast, nuclear and carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) together amount to about the same emissions reduction potential as renewables.
The IEA report provides for some promising news: already, emissions under a business-as-usual approach are expected to be 5 percent lower by 2020, compared to last year’s projections. However, only 25 percent of that is a result of new policies aimed at reducing emissions. The remaining 75 percent is due to the current economic crisis.
In the IEA 450 ppm stabilization scenario, total greenhouse gas emissions would peak at 510 ppm of CO2e in 2030 and plateau at this level for 10 years, followed by a quick decline to 450 ppm. The subcategory of energy-related emissions would peak earlier, at 2020, and from then on decrease slowly.
Whom does the IEA envision doing what? And when? Industrialized countries would take the lead with national commitments to reduce their emissions, employing cap-and-trade systems for their power and industrial sectors. Emerging economies and developing countries would commit to nationally appropriate mitigation actions (the so-called NAMAs of the Bali Roadmap), actions that include unilateral measures with financial and technical help from developed countries.
Across the board in all countries, we would have emissions-intensity targets for energy-intensive sectors: cement, iron and steel, passenger vehicles, aviation, and shipping. Starting in 2021 at the latest, emerging economies like China, Russia, and Brazil would join in on the cap-and-trade system.
Where does all this land us? Developed countries emitted an aggregated 13.1 gigatons (Gt) of emissions in 2007. In the IEA scenario, emissions would decrease steadily from this base to 10.9 Gt in 2020 and 7.1 Gt in 2030. Emerging economies, which generated 9.7 Gt in 2007, would continue to increase emissions to 12.6 Gt in 2020, and then more vigorously embark on a low-carbon pathway, resulting in a decrease to 11.1 Gt by 2030. The large number of developing countries would continue to increase their emissions slowly from 5 Gt in 2007 to 6.1 Gt in 2020 and 6.4 Gt in 2030.
How will the IEA’s 450 ppm CO2e scenario become a reality? To achieve these trajectories, we will need massive financial and technological investments. According to the IEA, we have to direct $10.5 trillion toward energy-related investments between 2010 and 2030. The good news: much of these investments would be recovered in energy savings. The main recipients of these mostly new and additional funds include the transport sector (45%); buildings, appliances, and electronics (24%); the power sector (16%); industry (10.5%); and biofuel facilities (4%).
A final interesting outcome: the U.S. and China are not only the two biggest greenhouse gas emitters. According to the IEA study, they also have the most to gain in energy savings from the necessary investments.
The full report will be available in early November on the IEA website.
Loading ...
