5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 34

5-6 March 2009, Szentendre, REC PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 84 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Sharing the burden: the multistage approach “ Support of Shaping the Post Kyoto Climate Regime ” REC Workshop Developed by Ecofys presented by Zsolt Lengyel, SenterNovem. 5-6 March 2009, Szentendre, REC. Content. The background snapshot : climate stabilsation goals

Download Presentation

5-6 March 2009, Szentendre, REC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

Sharing the burden: the multistage approach“Support of Shaping the Post Kyoto Climate Regime” REC WorkshopDeveloped by Ecofys presented by Zsolt Lengyel, SenterNovem

5-6 March 2009, Szentendre, REC


Content

Content

  • The background snapshot : climate stabilsation goals

  • The various post-Kyoto effort sharing approaches

  • The multistage approach

  • Stabilisation scenarios

  • Conclusions

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

1.a. Climate stabilisation

Source: IPCC Synthesis Report, 2001

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

1.b. Risk of overshooting 2°C

Source: IPCC AR4, Synthesis Report

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

1.c. Emission reduction efforts

Source: IPCC AR4, Workong Group III, Chapter 13, Box 13.7

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2. Approaches

Contraction and Convergence

Based on one/two principles

Brazilian Proposal on hist. resp.

Common but diff. convergence

Intensity targets

Sectoral approaches

Triptych

Sophisticated approaches

Multistage

South North dialogue

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.a. Contraction and Convergence

  • Contraction: Agreement on a global emission pathway (e.g. towards 450ppmv)

  • Convergence: Per capita emission converge until, e.g., 2050

For 450 ppmv CO2:

  • Convergence level 2-3 tCO2eq. (Global average today ~6)

Origin of the approach: Global CommonsInstitute www.gci.org.uk/briefings/ICE.pdf

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.b. Common but differentiated convergence (CDC)

  • Three stages

    • No commitments

    • “No-Lose” targets

    • Convergence of per capita emission level to the same level in e.g. 40 years

  • Participation threshold:

    • (time dependent) globalaverage per capita emissions

For 450 ppmv CO2:

  • Convergence level ~2 tCO2eq.

  • Participation at world average

Höhne, den Elzen, Weiss: “Common but differentiated convergence” accepted at Climate Policy 2005

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.c. Brazilian Proposal on historical responsibility

  • Design

  • Share reduction proportional to historical responsibility

  • To allow growth targets: reductions below a reference scenario

  • Critical issues

  • Calculation of historical responsibility

  • For growth targets reference scenario needed

  • Decisions on who participates needed

  • For 450 ppmv CO2:

  • Fast participation of countries additional to Annex I, e.g. at Annex I average per capita emissions or GDP

  • Ambitious reductions for reducing countries

See www.match-info.net for calculations of contributions to temperature increase

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.d. Intensity targets

  • Improvement of Emissions/GDP

  • Decision on participation needed

  • For 450 ppmv CO2:

  • Annex I assumed to reduce 20% below 1990 in 2020

  • Intensity targets for Non-Annex I countries, if their per-capita emissions above 3 to 5 tCO2eq./cap in 2020

  • Emissions/GDP improvement 1 to 2 percentage points per year better than under reference scenario

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.e. Sectoral approaches

  • Emission targets are defined for all individual sectors as function of their respective output (e.g. t of steel, kWh produced, etc.). Emission trading possible

  • For 450 ppmv CO2:

  • Annex I assumed to reduce 20% below 1990 in 2020

  • Major Non-Annex I countries

    • Electricity: reduction in CO2/kWh by 3% per year; energy efficiency improvements reduce growth in production by 0.5% per year

    • Iron & steel: convergence in tCO2/t steel by 2025 to 0.80 (year 2000 average = 1.53)

    • Cement: convergence in tCO2/t cement by 2020 to 0.60 (year 2000 average = 0.77)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.f. Triptych

For 450 ppmv CO2:

  • Convergence to efficiency 50% better than BAT in industry in 2050

  • 60% emission free electricity in 2050.

  • Domestic: convergence to 0.7tCO2eq/cap

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

2.g. South North Dialogue

  • Thresholds: CO2/GDP, GHG/cap, emission growth, cumulative emissions, GDP/cap, HDI; show members of the groups

  • Adaptation commitment http://www.wupperinst.org/Sites/Projects/rg2/1085.html

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


2 h multistage

Absolute reductions (current Annex I)

2.h. Multistage

e.g. slowing of emission growth

e.g. sustainable development policies and measures

No reduction commitments

(current non-Annex I)

  • Countries “graduate” into the next steps (based on thresholds emissions/cap, GDP/cap, human development index)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

3. Multistage: A staged future system

Towards 450 ppmv CO2 (550 ppmv CO2eq.) in 2020

Very few

Absolute reductions

1.5-4 % p.a.

Above world average

e.g. slowing of emission growth

20 to 25% below BAU

Above Non-Annex I average

e.g. sustainable development policies and measures

10% below BAU

No commitments

Source: Höhne, Phylipsen, Ullrich, Blok, 2005: “Options for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol“ http://www.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/2847.pdf

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


3 a stages of the multistage system 1 2

Stage 1 – No commitments: Countries with a low level of development do nothave climate commitments. At least all least developed countries (LDCs) wouldbe in this stage.

Stage 2 – Enhanced sustainable development: At the next stage, countries commit in a clear way to sustainable development. The environmental objectives are built into the development policies. Such a first ‘soft’ stage would make it easier for new countries to join the regime. Requirements for such a sustainable pathway could be defined, e.g. inefficient equipment is phased out and requirements and certain standards are met for any new equipment or a clear deviation from the current policies depending on the countries.

3.a. Stages of the multistage system (1-2)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


3 b stages of the multistage system 3

Stage 3 – Moderate absolute target: In this stage, countries commit to a moderate target on absolute emissions. The emission level may be higher than the starting year, but it should be below a reference scenario. The target could also be positively binding, meaning that allowances can be sold, if the target is exceeded. No allowances have to be bought, if the target is not achieved. An incentive to accept such a target would be the possibility to participate in emissions trading.

3.b. Stages of the multistage system (3)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


3 c stages of the multistage system 4

Stage 4 – Absolute reduction target: Countries in stage 4 receive absolute emission reduction targets (like industrialised countries now in the Kyoto Protocol) and have to reduce their absolute emissions substantially until they reach a low per capita level (essentially a fifth stage). How much each individual country has to reduce its emissions can be defined in different ways, e.g. Comparison of International Climate Policy Approaches for Post 2012 converging per capita emissions, based on the Triptych approach or based purely on negotiations. As time progresses, more and more countries enter stage 4.

3.c. Stages of the multistage system (4)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

3.d. Multistage approach: Strength and weaknesses

Strenghts:

Gradual phase in of countries, in line with UNFCCCspirit, taking into account national circumstances

General framework that can accommodate manyideas and satisfy many demands

Allows for gradual decision making

Trust-building as industrialised countries take thelead

Compatible with Kyoto Protocol (reporting andmechanisms)

Weaknesses:

Can lead to a complex system, requires many decisions and allows for exceptions

• Risk that countries enter too late so that some long term stabilisation options are lost

• Incentives needed for countries to participate in a certain stage

Source: Comparison of International Climate PolicyApproaches for Post 2012, Niklas Höhne, Ecofys, “KyotoPlus – Papers, “, 2006 Berlin

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

3.e. Multistage for 450 ppmv CO2

~5 tCO2eq/cap

Absolute reductions

2-5 % per year

~4 tCO2eq/cap

e.g. slowing of emission growth

20 to 35% below BAU

~3tCO2eq/cap

e.g. sustainable development policies and measures

10 to 15% below BAU

No commitments

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

3.f. Possible multi-stage agreement

Source: K. Blok, N. Höhne, A. Torvanger, R. Janzic, 2005: “Towards a Post-2012 Climate Change Regime”, http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/pdf/id_bps098.PDF

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


3 g paramaters from the 550 to 400 ppmv case 1

550 ppmv case: The parameters in this case could have a realistic chance of beingacceptable to many countries: Participation in stage 4 (substantial reductions)would be at the current average of industrialised countries, developing countriesparticipate, when they reach the development (emission levels) of industrialised(Annex I) countries.

The second stage (pledge for sustainable development)would require 5% reduction below the reference scenario, the third stage(moderate reductions) would require emission to be 10% to 15% below reference.

The final stage would still be ambitious with 1.5% to 4% reduction per year.

3.g. Paramaters: from the 550 to 400 ppmv case (1)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


3 h paramaters from the 550 to 400 ppmv case 2

450 ppmv case: The parameters for this case are already much more stringent and likely to be less agreeable: Participation in stage 4 (substantial reductions) would be at current world average.

The second stage (pledge for sustainable development) would already require emissions to be reduced by 10% to 15% below reference, the third stage (moderate reductions) would require reductions of 30% to 35% below reference.

The final stage would be ambitious with a 4.5% to 5.2% reduction per year.

3.h. Paramaters: from the 550 to 400 ppmv case (2)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


3 i paramaters from the 550 to 400 ppmv case 3

450 ppmv case: The parameters needed for this case stretch the Multistage approach to its limits: Participation in stages 2 and 3 has to occur almost immediately for most developing countries. Already in stages 2 and 3 reductions of 20% and 30% to 35%, respectively, have to occur and countries at stage 4 have to reduce emissions drastically with 7.5% to 9% per year.

3.i. Paramaters: from the 550 to 400 ppmv case (3)

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

3.j. Options in a multistage setting

  • Annex I: Alternatives to absolute emission reduction targets

    • Dynamic targets and “price caps”

    • Sectoral targets / sectoral emission standards

    • Agreements on technology development

    • Most of the alternatives are unlikely to be sufficient to reach the 2°C limit

    • Non-Annex I: incentives for participation

    • Sectoral targets

    • “No lose” targets

    • “Sector crediting mechanisms”

    • Extended CDM

    • “Sustainable development policies and measures”

See also: Höhne and Lahme 2005: “Types of future commitments under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol post 2012”, Briefing paper for WWF

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

4.a. Delay of emission reductions

Reference: Based on SRES A1B scenario

Delayed 2020: Kyoto countries extend their targets to 2020, no action by others

Delayed 2015: Kyoto countries extend their targets to 2015, no action by others

Multistage: All countries reach Kyoto until 2010, followed by ambitious agreement for 2020 for all countries

Delay of 5 to 10 years after 2010 has significant implications on subsequently necessary emission reductions to meet the same goal

Source: K. Blok, N. Höhne, A. Torvanger, R. Janzic, 2005: “Towards a Post-2012 Climate Change Regime”, http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/pdf/id_bps098.PDF

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

4.b. Different stabilization levels

2020

  • The choice of the stabilization level is important

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

4.c. Different stabilization levels

2050

  • The choice of the stabilization level is important

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

4.d. Change 1990 to 2020 towards 450 ppm CO2

- Kyoto target

  • Annex I: -10% to –30% below 1990

  • No participation but also no “hot air”: South Asia and Africa

  • Deviate from their reference: Latin America, Middle East, East Asia and Centrally planned Asia

Source: Höhne, Phylipsen, Ullrich, Blok, 2005: “Options for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol“ http://www.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/2847.pdf

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

4.e. Change 1990 to 2050 towards 450 ppm CO2

  • All approaches require drastic reductions

  • Annex I: -70% to -90% below 1990

  • Substantial deviation from reference in all Non-Annex I regions

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

5.a. Conclusions (1)

  • The parameters stretched to their limits for the low stabilization levels: 550 ppmv CO2:

    • participation of Non-Annex I countries at Annex I average per capita emissions

    • 45% renewables and emission-free fossil fuels in the electricity sector by 2050

  • 400 ppmv CO2:

    • almost immediate participation of many Non-Annex I countries

    • emission reductions of more than 5% per year in the last stage

    • 85% renewables and emission-free fossil fuels in the electricity sector by 2050

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

5.b. Conclusions (2)

  • Annex I: the difference in reductions between stabilization targets (400, 450 and 550 ppmv) is larger than the difference between the various approaches aiming at the same stabilization target.

  • Only for developing countries that participate under some and do not participate under other approaches, the differences between approaches are large. For those countries the criteria for participation are an important determinant.

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

5.c. Conclusions (3)

  • It seems likely that any future regime will be staged in some form.

  • Countries are very diverse. Hence, several types of targets are likely to exist inparallel.

  • A staged or parallel setting is the most likely outcome of the sequentialdecision-making that is currently applied.

  • The critical element of the approach isthat additional countries participate early enough so that stringent environmentalgoals can be reached.

  • Incentives for such participation (not just thresholds) have to be included into the system.

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


5 6 march 2009 szentendre rec

Relevant contact details for Ecofys & SenterNovem

Dr. Niklas HöhneZsolt Lengyel

Manager Programme Advisor

Energy and Climate Strategy Energy & Climate Global Cooperation

Ecofys Germany GmbHSenterNovem

Tel: +49 221 270 70 101Tel: +31 30 214 7829

[email protected]@senternovem.nl

Alyssa Gilbert

International Sector Manager: Governments

Ecofys UK Ltd

T: +44 7867 524 730

E: [email protected]

5 March 2009, Szentendre, The Regional Environmental Center


  • Login