Alice Bows

Beyond 'dangerous' climate change: Emission scenarios for a new world

The Copenhagen Accord reiterates the international community’s commitment to ‘hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius’. Yet its preferred focus on global emission peak dates and longer-term reduction targets, without recourse to cumulative emission budgets, belies seriously the scale and scope of mitigation necessary to meet such a commitment. Moreover, the pivotal importance of emissions from non-Annex 1 nations in shaping available space for Annex 1 emission pathways received, and continues to receive, little attention. Building on previous studies, this paper uses a cumulative emissions framing, broken down to Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 nations, to understand the implications of rapid emission growth in nations such as China and India, for mitigation rates elsewhere. The analysis suggests that despite high-level statements to the contrary, there is now little to no chance of maintaining the global mean surface temperature at or below 2°C. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2°C have been revised upwards, sufficiently so that 2°C now more appropriately represents the threshold between ‘dangerous’ and ‘extremely dangerous’ climate change. Ultimately, the science of climate change allied with the emission scenarios for Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 nations suggests a radically different framing of the mitigation and adaptation challenge from that accompanying many other analyses, particularly those directly informing policy.

Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post-2000 emission trends

The 2007 Bali conference heard repeated calls for reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions of 50 per cent by 2050 to avoid exceeding the 2°C threshold. While such endpoint targets dominate the policy agenda, they do not, in isolation, have a scientific basis and are likely to lead to dangerously misguided policies. To be scientifically credible, policy must be informed by an understanding of cumulative emissions and associated emission pathways. This analysis considers the implications of the 2°C threshold and a range of post-peak emission reduction rates for global emission pathways and cumulative emission budgets. The paper examines whether empirical estimates of greenhouse gas emissions between 2000 and 2008, a period typically modelled within scenario studies, combined with short-term extrapolations of current emissions trends, significantly constrains the 2000–2100 emission pathways. The paper concludes that it is increasingly unlikely any global agreement will deliver the radical reversal in emission trends required for stabilization at 450 ppmv carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). Similarly, the current framing of climate change cannot be reconciled with the rates of mitigation necessary to stabilize at 550 ppmv CO2e and even an optimistic interpretation suggests stabilization much below 650 ppmv CO2e is improbable.

Going beyond two degrees? The risks and opportunities of alternative options

Since the mid-1990s, the aim of keeping climate change within 2 °C has become firmly entrenched in policy discourses. In the past few years, the likelihood of achieving it has been increasingly called into question. The debate around what to do with a target that seems less and less achievable is, however, only just beginning. As the UN commences a two-year review of the 2 °C target, this article moves beyond the somewhat binary debates about whether or not it should or will be met, in order to analyse more fully some of the alternative options that have been identified but not fully explored in the existing literature. For the first time, uncertainties, risks, and opportunities associated with four such options are identified and synthesized from the literature. The analysis finds that the significant risks and uncertainties associated with some options may encourage decision makers to recommit to the 2 °C target as the least unattractive course of action.

Executing a Scharnow turn: reconciling shipping emissions with international commitments on climate change

The Copenhagen Accord (and Cancun Agreement) commits the international community to “hold the increase in global temperature below 2°C, and take action to meet this objective consistent with science and on the basis of equity.” This article explores the implications of these commitments for the shipping sector. It outlines how the science of climate change places stringent constraints on the sector’s emissions at the global level while the equity dimension tightens still further the industry’s emissions space for the Annex 1 nations. The mitigation potential of proposed global-scale measures are detailed and the apportionment of emissions between non-Annex 1 and Annex 1 discussed. Building on the scientific framing of cumulative emissions, the article concludes that nothing short of an immediate ‘Scharnow turn’ is necessary if the industry is not to capsize wider efforts to “hold the increase in global temperature below 2°C”.

Air Transport, Climate Change and Tourism

Air transport plays an ever more important role in tourism. However, air transport already has a 40% share of all tourism CO2 emissions and 54–75% of radiative forcing (UNWTO, UNEP, WMO, 2008, figures for 2005). Furthermore, the EU Commission wishes to play its part in ensuring global temperatures do not rise by more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels by reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 60–80% by 2050 from 1990 levels. Although the EU accepts that emissions from the aviation industry are important, it remains ambiguous as to whether or not its emission-reduction target includes this ever-growing sector. Furthermore, by using percentage reduction targets, the EU neglects the crucial importance of both cumulative emissions and carbon-cycle feedbacks. This paper aims to address both the targets deficiencies and the likely contribution that technology can make to improving aviation fuel efficiency by quantifying the contribution of the aviation industry to future EU climate change targets in relation to CO2 alone. This paper demonstrates that, despite a variety of technological options available to improve fuel efficiency within the aviation industry, current high rates of growth are locking aviation into becoming a very significant contributor to the EUs climate change emissions within the next few decades. Furthermore, the consequences of these findings for the future of tourism are discussed.

Aviation in turbulent times

The aviation sector is in turbulent times. On top of increased security concerns, oil price rises and health scares, it now finds itself at the centre of the climate change debate. Previously highly resilient to short-term ‘shocks’, it remains unclear as to how the aviation sector will respond to persistent and significant pressure to mitigate its global carbon emissions. From a technological point of view, mitigation is not straightforward, with few, if any, low-carbon technologies available in the short-term and significant time-lags in achieving the necessary penetration of the global fleet. Moreover, many drivers within the sector are aligned towards growth and despite political recognition of the increasing importance of aviations CO2 emissions, policies encouraging growth of the industry continue to conflict with the climate change agenda. Given the complexity of the aviation system within a dynamic commercial environment, scenarios, rather than economic forecasts, are used here to explore opportunities for the aviation industry to develop within the constraints of the EUs own climate change targets. The scenarios illustrate a variety of feasible aviation futures, but all require other sectors to make emission reductions well in excess of those levels currently envisaged, due to the expansion of the EUs aviation industry within a constrained carbon cap.

Cumulative emission scenarios using a consumption-based approach: a glimmer of hope?

Every year, new research illustrates how the pace of global emission growth gradually reduces the chance of avoiding ‘dangerous’ climate change. Previous analyses that have taken a territorial emissions framing approach demonstrate how little space there is available for Annex 1 nations’ emissions to continue at current levels because of the pace of growth in industrializing economies. This paper uses a cumulative emissions approach to explore whether a consumption-based framing offers new opportunities and avenues for tackling climate change. Results reveal that there is still scope for emissions to remain within a budget associated with a high probability of remaining below the 2°C temperature rise above pre-industrial levels associated with ‘dangerous’ climate change. However, both territorial and consumption-based approaches require a rethinking of the political orthodoxy for the highest probabilities of not exceeding 2°C. Using the consumption-based framework, mitigation policy in Annex 1 nations can address consumer-related emissions sending mitigation signals along supply chains and across national boundaries, thereby increasing their influence over global CO2. Ultimately, allying the cumulative framing of climate change with the consumption-based approach offers additional potential for achieving a global low-carbon transition compared with policies framed solely using the conventional territorial approach. Nevertheless, cumulative budgets associated with a high probability of not exceeding the 2°C threshold between ‘dangerous’ and ‘acceptable’ climate change demand immediate and urgent emission reductions, irrespective of the accounting approach employed.

Decarbonizing the UK energy system and the implications for UK shipping

Background: The current UK energy system relies heavily on shipped imports of fossil fuels. As climate change policies drive energy system decarbonization, fuel imports are likely to change. Results: Based upon future energy scenarios devised by the UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change and a set of contrasting trading assumptions, this article explores the impact of energy system decarbonization upon freight work and CO2 emissions arising from fuel shipping. While oil and oil products are currently the most important contributors to both freight work and shipping CO2 emissions, by 2050 biofuels and biomass will become dominant energy commodities. Conclusion: The distance over which fuel travels is important and the greatest reductions in absolute CO2 emissions are achieved when fuel is sourced close to the UK.

Aviation and Climate Change: lessons for European Policy

List of Figures. List of Tables. Acknowledgments. 1. Flying into Heavy Weather 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Aviations Past, Present and Future 1.3 Climate Change and Cumulative Emissions 1.4 Opportunities for Aviation 1.5 Climate and Aviation Policy 1.6 Comparative Assessment 1.7 Aviation in the Wider Energy Context 2. Aviation: Past, Present and Future 2.1 Introduction 2.2 The Past 2.3 The Future 2.4 The Wider Context 2.5 Summary 3. Climate Change & Cumulative Emissions 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Global Climate Change 3.3 Climate Targets in the EU 3.4 Summary 4. Opportunities for Aviation 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Shifting Environmental Focus 4.3 Aircraft Engine Technology 4.4 Airframe Design 4.5 Low-Carbon Fuels 4.6 Operations 4.7 Contrails and Cirrus Clouds 4.8 Summary 5. Climate and Aviation Policy 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Global Policies and Drivers 5.3 EU Policies and Drivers 5.4 UK Policies and Drivers 5.5 Summary 6. Comparative Assessment 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Aviation Emission Scenarios for the EU 6.3 Aviation Emission Scenarios for the UK 6.4 Summary 7. Aviation in the Wider Energy Context 7.1 Introduction 7.2 The Tyndall Scenario Method 7.3 The Energy Policy Context 7.4 Scenario Method 7.5 Tyndalls 60% Energy Scenarios 7.6 Tyndalls Cumulative Carbon Scenarios 8. Conclusion. Notes. Bibliography. Index.

Aviation, emissions and the climate change debate

These are turbulent times for the aviation industry. Previously proudly bearing the mantle of nation-state icon by, and within, countries across the world (though arguably exemplified and exaggerated in Britain), we see everywhere the legacy of something which is symbolic, but also very real, tangible and present still: national pride. Perhaps reaching its zenith in the 1960s, we can see its traces throughout the industry and in the history books (Hudson 1972). We find it also across all the different ‘classes of agent’ which comprise the aviation sector – aircraft and components manufacturers, airline and airport operators, and air traffic controllers – such that it significantly contributes to a collective aviation psyche. For manufacturers, we see it in state-of-the-art aerospace engineering. For airlines: in the plane-tail livery of ‘national flagships’; for airports: in airy chandelier bedecked terminals; for pilots and crew: in passengers moving aside as smartly uniformed teams hurry by: hats and stripes, high heeled shoes, identical overnight trolleys: peacocks of national brands. What we might call the ‘clip-clop factor’. In sum it is captured in a word: status. Such symbols are important for underpinning a sense of collective self-identity and professional self-worth (Abbott 1988), yet gradually at first, and in recent years at an alarming, even accelerated rate, the basis of these iconic symbols have been undermined and challenged. The aftermath of the 9/11 attacks brought heightened security at airports and with it understandably longer, more rigorous, and unfortunately de-personalising security procedures and a newly anxious flying public. The ‘low cost’ or as we prefer ‘high volume’ business model changes the flying experience – more people equates to more crowded terminals, longer check-in queues and quicker flight turnarounds – into a discernibly different ‘service’ with corresponding shifts in service levels throughout the sector. This includes drastic changes to the working terms and conditions of aircrews. Into this mix we add the two latest and arguably most striking factors in terms of their structural significance for the sector as a whole: