Poster: Going beyond integrated assessment: big emitting nations and the 2°C target
1
Poster Template from www.manchester.ac.uk/photographics Faculty of Engineering & Physical Sciences www.tyndall.ac.uk As greenhouse gases increase, nations debate targets aiming to avoid 2°C. Two important parameters dictating the extent of warming are cumulative emissions & climate sensitivity. Both are useful for communicating the climate change challenge to policymakers and simplifying outputs of complex coupled global climate models. ‘Climate sensitivity’: temperature change associated with a doubling CO 2 concentration in the atmosphere. The likely range for equilibrium climate sensitivity is 1.5°C - 4.5°C. ‘Cumulative emissions’: limit to long- lived greenhouse gases released for a set climate outcome. 33% chance of >2°C requires emissions to remain below 3670GtCO 2. 50% chance, the budget rises to 4440GtCO 2 (IPCC, 2013). Using these constraints, and building on Anderson & Bows (2011), implications for the world biggest emitters are explored. Introduction Methods Grouping big emitter nations Analysis Analysis Conclusions References IPCC, 2013. Summary for policymakers: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In Intergovernmental panel on climate change (Ed.), Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (2013). Anderson, K., & Bows, A., 2011, Beyond dangerous climate change: emission pathways for a new world, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 369, 20-44, DOI:10.1098/rsta. 2010.0290. To derive the ‘top emitters’ territorial and consumption-based CO 2 inventories were scrutinised to rank nations. To help group nations, they were then re- ranked on the basis of Kaya Identity indicators, as well as CO 2 growth rates. Table 1 illustrates the end rankings for 2010 and 2012. Going beyond integrated assessment: big emitting nations and the 2°C target Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester Alice Bows-Larkin, Maria Sharmina, Jaise Kuriakose & Kevin Anderson Table 2: Country groups for the top emitters covering 85% of the CO 2 from fossil fuel and industry . Figure 1: CO 2 by country groups including the ‘Rest of the World (RoW)’ in 2013. Figure 2: 1990 to 2013 trend in CO 2 emissions from the 10 high emitting country groups plus bunkers, normalised to 1990=1. Figure 3: 1990 to 2013 trend in CO 2 from ten high emitting country groups & bunkers. Figure 4: Scenario for a 33% chance of exceeding 2°C, with a one year post-economic downturn continued towards a peak (if emissions increasing). Table 1: Nations ranked by territorial-based Kaya factors for 2012 and 2010 using data from the World Bank and Global Carbon Project. A low number represents ‘good’ performance in terms of low CO 2 per GDP, high GDP per person, low CO 2 per primary energy consumed, or low primary energy per GDP. Countries were then grouped according to similarity based on their energy systems (Table 2). Any nation with >5% share of the total amount of CO 2 was placed in a separate group (Figure 1). Recent trends are considered and scenarios developed to explore what 2°C means for big emitters and the rest of the world (Figure 2). The approach does not involve an integrated assessment model to derive country pathways using an optimisation algorithm, rather the context of each scenario is carefully considered. . Recent CO 2 trend data (Figure 3) highlights the importance of China and the USA in particular. China’s CO 2 emissions are growing strongly as fossil fuel consumption rises driven by affluence and manufacturing for overseas. This rise is despite heavy investment in renewables. Consideration of contextual factors, such as the shift towards more fossil fuels in Japan following the Fukushima disaster, economic instability in Russia or recent decarbonisation policies in Europe all constrain short-term emission trends. Preliminary findings identify high sensitivity to the very restricted 2°C cumulative budgets, and importance of clear communicatio n of carbon budgets for policymakers. Figure 5: Scenario for a 33% chance of exceeding 2°C, with a four year post-economic downturn continued towards a peak (if emissions are increasing). Table 3: Comparison between two scenarios (Scn1 & Scn4) peak dates, absolute CO 2 at the peak, per capita emissions at the peak date and the proportion of energy and industry CO 2 taken up by each group (figures hold for both the 33% and 50% budgets). Emission trends in the short-term must receive greater levels of scrutiny, particularly in nations or groups of nations, with rapidly growing emissions and a large share of global emissions, as this dictates future climate outcomes. Bunker emissions should not be overlooked. They are of a similar proportion to other big emitter groups. China and USA are key – given the current political framing around territorial emissions, their large share of emissions, and the direction of travel. Equity dimensions are hugely important – focusing too much on the big emitters risks overlooking how high emissions may rise as developing economies improve standards of well-being. 13.9% 3.2% 4.0% 5.4% 1.4% 29.2% 6.1% 6.8% 6.4% 3.5% 5.2% 14.9% RoW Bunkers G1: APSAU G2: BraMeSKT G3: Canada G4: China G5: FGISUK G6: India G7: IIKSAT G8: Japan G9: Russia G10: USA 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Carbon dioxide emissions per year (MtCO 2 yr 1 ) Year G1: APSAU G2: BraMeSKT G3: Canada G4: China G5: FGISUK G6: India G7: IIKSAT G8: Japan G9: Russia G10: USA Rest of the World InternaMonal Bunkers 0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500 4.000 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Carbon dioxide emissions per year (MtCO 2 yr 1 ) Year G1: APSAU G2: BraMeSKT G3: Canada G4: China G5: FGISUK G6: India G7: IIKSAT G8: Japan G9: Russia G10: USA Rest of the World 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 Carbon dioxide emissions per year (MtCO 2 yr 1 ) Year InternaMonal bunkers G1: APSAU G2: BraMeSKT G3: Canada G4: China G5: FGISUK G6: India G7: IIKSAT G8: Japan G9: Russia G10: USA Rest of the world 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 Carbon dioxide from energy & industry (MtCO 2 yr 1 ) Year InternaMonal bunkers G1: APSAU G2: BraMeSKT G3: Canada G4: China G5: FGISUK G6: India G7: IIKSAT G8: Japan G9: Russia G10: USA Rest of the world Rates of change consistent with 2°C strongly dictated by short-term change (1-5 years), esp.in big emitter nations (Figs. 4/5).
-
Upload
cfcc15 -
Category
Environment
-
view
28 -
download
0
Transcript of Poster: Going beyond integrated assessment: big emitting nations and the 2°C target
University of Manchester
Faculty of Life Sciences
PhotoGraphics Unit
The blue instruction columns are for your help designing and will not
print out on your poster
This PowerPoint 2007 and 2010 poster template produces a landscape style poster. This view is as a four column poster (although this can be altered – see Modifying instructions below) and includes the University Logo, Faculty Name and Faculty web address. This template can be printed to any of the International Standard Paper sizes (A0,A1,…etc) The template should help design a well laid out scientific poster and will hopefully save you time by not having to start from scratch. The template has all the elements you need to create your poster, and by simply dragging and dropping the individual poster elements you can quickly and simply get a well laid out poster. If you have any questions regarding the templates, or if you want to get your poster printed by us please contact : PhotoGraphics Unit on Tel: 0161 275 5258 or Email: [email protected] Modifying the Poster Layout This PowerPoint 2007-10 template has three different column layouts. To change to one of the different layouts, Right-click your mouse on the background (not on the columns or title bar) and click on “Layout” to see the different layout options. The columns in the provided layouts are fixed and cannot be moved but advanced users can modify any layout by going to VIEW and then SLIDE MASTER.
Using the placeholders To add text to this template click inside a placeholder and type in or paste your text. To move a placeholder, click on it once (to select it), place your cursor on its frame and your cursor will change to the symbol of your ‘mouse pointer on a cross’. You can then, click once and drag it to its new location where you can resize it as needed. Additional placeholders for Titles, Text and Images can be found on the right hand instruction column of this template. Viewing your poster To get an idea as to how you poster will look, you can view the template at the size it will look like when printed. To see what you poster will look like at A0 view the template at 100%. To view your poster at A1 view the template at 70% (to zoom in and out go to the VIEW menu and click on ZOOM to set your preferred magnification). Removing Template Elements To remove any of the Sub-Title Bars and text boxes that are already on the template and that you don’t need, just select them with the mouse and press the delete key.
Poster Template from
ww
w.m
anchester.ac.uk/photographics
Importing Text and Graphics from External Sources Text: Paste or type your text into a pre-existing placeholder or drag in a new placeholder from the left side of the template. Move it anywhere as needed. Photos/Images: Drag in a picture placeholder, size it first, click in it and insert a photo from the menu. Tables: You can copy and paste a table from an external document onto this poster template. To adjust the way the text fits within the cells of a table that has been pasted, right-click on the table, click FORMAT SHAPE then click on TEXT BOX and change the INTERNAL MARGIN values to 0.25 Graphs: You should save graphs as image files such as jpeg, in the programme that you created them in e.g. excel, and then insert them into the poster using the Photo/Images instruction above. (Don’t copy and paste you graph from the programme e.g. Excel directly into the template as the graph may not print properly)
Poster Elements
Use the sections provided below to add new elements to your poster: Drag a placeholder onto the poster area, size it, and click in it to edit. Sub-Heading placeholder Move this sub-heading placeholder onto the poster to add another sub-heading. Use section headers to separate the sections and topics on your poster. Text placeholder Move this preformatted text placeholder to the poster to add a new body of text. Picture placeholder Move this graphic placeholder onto your poster, size it first, and then click it to add a picture to the poster. PhotoGraphics Unit – University of Manchester 1.828 Stopford Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PT Tel: 0161 275 5258 Email: [email protected]
Faculty of Engineering & Physical Sciences www.tyndall.ac.uk
As greenhouse gases increase, nations debate targets aiming to avoid 2°C. Two important parameters dictating the extent of warming are cumulative emissions & climate sensitivity. Both are useful for communicating the climate change challenge to policymakers and simplifying outputs of complex coupled global climate models. ‘Climate sensitivity’: temperature change associated with a doubling CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. The likely range for equilibrium climate sensitivity is 1.5°C - 4.5°C. ‘Cumulative emissions’: limit to long-lived greenhouse gases released for a set climate outcome. 33% chance of >2°C requires emissions to remain below 3670GtCO2. 50% chance, the budget rises to 4440GtCO2 (IPCC, 2013). Using these constraints, and building on Anderson & Bows (2011), implications for the world biggest emitters are explored.
Introduction
Methods
Grouping big emitter nations Analysis Analysis
Conclusions
References IPCC, 2013. Summary for policymakers: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In Intergovernmental panel on climate change (Ed.), Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (2013). Anderson, K., & Bows, A., 2011, Beyond dangerous climate change: emission pathways for a new world, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 369, 20-44, DOI:10.1098/rsta.2010.0290.
To derive the ‘top emitters’ territorial and consumption-based CO2 inventories were scrutinised to rank nations. To help group nations, they were then re-ranked on the basis of Kaya Identity indicators, as well as CO2 growth rates. Table 1 illustrates the end rankings for 2010 and 2012.
Going beyond integrated assessment: big emitting nations and the 2°C target
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester
Alice Bows-Larkin, Maria Sharmina, Jaise Kuriakose & Kevin Anderson
Table 2: Country groups for the top emitters covering 85% of the CO2 from fossil fuel and industry.
Figure 1: CO2 by country groups including the ‘Rest of the World (RoW)’ in 2013.
Figure 2: 1990 to 2013 trend in CO2 emissions from the 10 high emitting country groups plus bunkers, normalised to 1990=1.
Figure 3: 1990 to 2013 trend in CO2 from ten high emitting country groups & bunkers.
Figure 4: Scenario for a 33% chance of exceeding 2°C, with a one year post-economic downturn continued towards a peak (if emissions increasing).
Table 1: Nations ranked by territorial-based Kaya factors for 2012 and 2010 using data from the World Bank and Global Carbon Project. A low number represents ‘good’ performance in terms of low CO2 per GDP, high GDP per person, low CO2 per primary energy consumed, or low primary energy per GDP.
Countries were then grouped according to similarity based on their energy systems (Table 2). Any nation with >5% share of the total amount of CO2 was placed in a separate group (Figure 1).
Recent trends are considered and scenarios developed to explore what 2°C means for big emitters and the rest of the world (Figure 2). The approach does not involve an integrated assessment model to derive country pathways using an optimisation algorithm, rather the context of each scenario is carefully considered. .
Recent CO2 trend data (Figure 3) highlights the importance of China and the USA in particular. China’s CO2 emissions are growing strongly as fossil fuel consumption rises driven by affluence and manufacturing for overseas. This rise is despite heavy investment in renewables.
Consideration of contextual factors, such as the shift towards more fossil fuels in Japan following the Fukushima disaster, economic instability in Russia or recent decarbonisation policies in Europe all constrain short-term emission trends.
Preliminary findings identify high sensitivity to the very restricted 2°C cumulative budgets, and importance of clear communication of carbon budgets for policymakers.
Figure 5: Scenario for a 33% chance of exceeding 2°C, with a four year post-economic downturn continued towards a peak (if emissions are increasing).
Table 3: Comparison between two scenarios (Scn1 & Scn4) peak dates, absolute CO2 at the peak, per capita emissions at the peak date and the proportion of energy and industry CO2 taken up by each group (figures hold for both the 33% and 50% budgets).
Emission trends in the short-term must receive greater levels of scrutiny, particularly in nations or groups of nations, with rapidly growing emissions and a large share of global emissions, as this dictates future climate outcomes. Bunker emissions should not be overlooked. They are of a similar proportion to other big emitter groups.
China and USA are key – given the current political framing around territorial emissions, their large share of emissions, and the direction of travel.
Equity dimensions are hugely important – focusing too much on the big emitters risks overlooking how high emissions may rise as developing economies improve standards of well-being.
13.9%
3.2%
4.0%
5.4%
1.4%
29.2% 6.1%
6.8%
6.4%
3.5%
5.2%
14.9%
RoW
Bunkers
G1: APSAU
G2: BraMeSKT
G3: Canada
G4: China
G5: FGISUK
G6: India
G7: IIKSAT
G8: Japan
G9: Russia
G10: USA
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Carbon
dioxide
emission
s per year (MtCO
2yr-‐1)
Year
G1: APSAU
G2: BraMeSKT
G3: Canada
G4: China
G5: FGISUK
G6: India
G7: IIKSAT
G8: Japan
G9: Russia
G10: USA
Rest of the World
InternaMonal Bunkers
0.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
3.500
4.000
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Carbon
dioxide
emission
s per year (MtCO
2yr-‐1)
Year
G1: APSAU
G2: BraMeSKT
G3: Canada
G4: China
G5: FGISUK
G6: India
G7: IIKSAT
G8: Japan
G9: Russia
G10: USA
Rest of the World 0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 Carbon
dioxide
emission
s per year (MtCO
2 yr-‐1)
Year
InternaMonal bunkers
G1: APSAU
G2: BraMeSKT
G3: Canada
G4: China
G5: FGISUK
G6: India
G7: IIKSAT
G8: Japan
G9: Russia
G10: USA
Rest of the world
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090
Carbon
dioxide
from
ene
rgy & indu
stry (M
tCO
2yr-‐1)
Year
InternaMonal bunkers
G1: APSAU
G2: BraMeSKT
G3: Canada
G4: China
G5: FGISUK
G6: India
G7: IIKSAT
G8: Japan
G9: Russia
G10: USA
Rest of the world
Rates of change consistent with 2°C strongly dictated by short-term change (1-5 years), esp.in big emitter nations (Figs. 4/5).
