2?C and the UK

1
2?C and the UKs real carbon budget

• Alice Bows
• Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
• The University of Manchester

2
Outline

• UK EUs position on climate change
• Cumulative emissions
• UK emission trajectory
• How can we remain within the trajectory?
• Policy conclusions

3
Whats the UK EU position?
We should prevent the most dangerous effects
of climate change

• The UK Government and the EU define this as 2?C
• Historically, correlated with 550ppmv CO2(or
  eq?)
• Led to UK Governments 60 reduction target by
  2050

4
In 2006 Energy Review Climate Change
Programme
Acknowledge 450ppmv CO2 is much more likely to
meet 2C threshold than 550ppmv
Note 450ppmv offers typically 70 of exceeding
2C 50 of exceeding 3C
5
When it comes to targets
the final reduction in carbon has little
relevance to the 2?C or 550/450ppmv concentrations
What is important are the cumulative emissions
of carbon i.e. CO2 remains in the atmosphere for
over 100 years, consequently each years
emissions add to those emitted in previous years
6
For a 450ppmv CO2 future,
the UK can emit 4.8 billion tonnes of carbon
between 2000-2050
Note this is based on how the UK Government
apportioned global emissions to the UK in order
to calculate the 60 by 2050 target
7
From this two questions arise

1. What were the emissions between 2000 2006?
2. What emissions are we locked into in the
   immediate future?

8
Answer 1
Emissions 2000-2006 1.2 billion tonnes
carbon For a 450 future, this leaves 3.6
billion tonnes for 2007-2050 i.e. weve used
¼ of our permitted emissions for 50 years in just
6½ years!
9
Answer 2
10
Looking at 450ppmv target graphically
11
(No Transcript)
12
Plot data from 2000 to 2006
13
Dip due to September 11th
Plot data from 2000 to 2006
14
What about the next 6 years lets assume we
stabilise annual emissions from all sectors,
except aviation and shipping, where growth is
held at 2 below current levels
15
This gives a notable rise in emissions between
now 2012
16
We know that for 450ppmv the area under the curve
cannot be greater than
This gives a notable rise in emissions between
now 2012
4.8 billion tonnes carbon
17
locking the UK into a trajectory with
unprecedented annual carbon reductions for around
2 decades, beginning in 2012-14
We know that for 450ppmv the area under the curve
cannot be greater than
4.8 billion tonnes carbon
18
locking the UK into a trajectory with
unprecedented annual carbon reductions for around
2 decades, beginning in 2012-14
Absolute carbon reduction 9 p.a. Carbon
intensity reduction 11 p.a.
19
even a 550ppmv trajectory has an emission
reduction of 6 p.a from 2015 for 2 decades
20
How can we remain within the trajectory ?
21
Carbon emissions rise to 167MtC by 2012
By 2010 it is essential to put the brakes on
energy consumption
22
2010

• Putting the brakes on energy consumption..

• Improve building fabric
• Promote shift to public transport
• Curb growth in aviation emissions
• Implement policies to reduce energy consumption
  and drive innovation

23
450ppmv
Carbon emissions rising to 2012, before
decreasing at 9 p.a. to 50 MtC
24
2030 A decoupling of energy consumption and
carbon emissions
25
2030 A decoupling of energy consumption and
carbon emissions

• Reducing energy demand from buildings
• The measures to be taken are known, the
  challenge is implementation
• Reducing energy demand from transport
• New technology low carbon fuel
• Modal shift
• Behavioural change, reduced mobility
• Aviation?
• Low carbon supply
• Large-scale low carbon electricity supply

26
450ppmv
Emissions continue to fall to 19 MtC
27
2050
By 2050, low carbon is standard.
28
So where does this leave us?
29
most emissions are released in next 15 yrs
2006
30
demand
2006
supply demand
31
what does this trajectory say for emission
policies?
Meeting the Governments 2oC target is far more
demanding than generally recognised Short-term
policies must focus on reducing energy demand Low
carbon supply essential for larger cuts to be met
in the longer term OR, do we need to revisit the
2oC threshold adapt for very significant
potentially catastrophic impacts?