Evaluating climate change mitigation

1
Evaluating climate change mitigation
development benefits in the traditional energy
sector
International Workshop on Evaluating Climate
Change and Development May 10-13, 2008
Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Alexandria, Egypt

• Rob Bailis
• Asst Professor
• Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies

Evans Kituyi Coordinator - Energy Environment
Programme University of Nairobi
2
Overview

• The traditional energy sector (TES)
• Contributions to global change
• Co-benefits of mitigation
• Examples from the field

3
Some initial thoughts

• Why look at the TES?
• Not a solution to the climate crisis
• But a potential contribution
• with profound social implications
• Call from COP/MOP in Nov 06 (COP12)
• 2 CDM meths approved in Jan 08
• One Gold Standard Voluntary meth approved in Apr
  08
• Methodologies still problematic looking for
  input

4
The TES and global change

• 2-3 billion ppl use biomass as a source of energy
• 2 sources of GHG emissions

LUC associated with unsustainable harvest of wood
Combustion ? non-CO2 GHGs
5
The TES and global change

• Slippery Carbon
• 70-99 of emissions are from CO2
• Mitigation impact depends on future tree growth
• which depends on
• Environment
• Society

200
GHGs
gC (CO2-e using 100 yr GWP) per MJ delivered
100
0
Traditional woodstove
Improved woodstove
6
The TES and global change

• IPCC Fourth Assessment
• 10 global woodfuel harvest non-renewable
• If true, the TES
• causes 20 global emissions from deforestation
• emits 1.5-2 of global GHGs (0.2-0.3 GtC)
• GHG emissions from transportation in the whole
  EU

7
Co-benefits of mitigation in the TES

• Household energy - the largest potential
  development dividends (IISD)
• Health
• Socioeconomic benefits
• Local environmental benefits
• WHO estimates
• Causes 3 of global illness death
• Investment in TES has very positive returns
• Health benefits 51
• Environmental benefits 81
• Time (labor) and/or cash savings ??

8
Examples from the field

• Little attention from carbon offset activities
• GEF - 4 medium or large-scale projects
• CDM - 1 project
• Voluntary markets - ??
• Many projects assume rather than assess
  co-benefits

9
Examples from the field

• Market transformation of institutional woodstoves
  in Kenya
• High quality stoves
• Woodlots
• Between Mar 07 and Mar 08
• 500 stoves in 200 schools
• Fuel use reduced 56 (2-6 ktC/yr)
• 200,000 tree seedlings
• 30 tC/ha-yr or 1.2 ktC/yr

10
Examples from the field

• Unmeasured SD impacts?
• Air quality and health outcomes
• Fate of the woodlots
• Environmental impacts of woodlots
• Use of savings

11
Closing thoughts

• If we care about co-benefits, we need to evaluate
  them
• Rigorous ME of mitigation activities
• Especially in A/R projects
• Multi-criteria assessment of SD impacts
• Methodologically consistent
• Contextual and participatory
• Thank you!

12

• Extra slides

13
Cost-effectiveness of technical interventions

• WHO (2006)
• 1 invested in improved stoves yields a 60
  societal return

Direct health
Avoided
care savings
morbidity and
0.2
mortality
9
Avoided
environmental
Time saved in
damage
fuel collection
14
and cooking
54
Direct fuel
savings
23
14
Life-cycle woodfuel GHG flows
Atmospheric Carbon
Emissions from wood decomposition or burning
(CO2, CH4, NOx, VOCs, CO, PM)
Photosynthesis
Woody biomass
Solid waste (slash)
Harvest
Loss of soil-C as a result of change in land
cover (CO2, CH4)
Woodfuel
Emissions from pyrolysis (CO2, CH4, NOx, VOCs,
CO, PM)
Carbonization
Charcoal
Emissions from combustion (CO2, CH4, NOx, VOCs,
CO, PM)
End-use
Process
Waste output
Key
Stock of carbon
Flow of carbon in biomass materials
Flow of carbon as GHG