Greenhouse gas emissions and constraints to mitigation in the … · 2014-05-12 · Greenhouse gas emissions and constraints to mitigation in the small island states of the Caribbean

Greenhouse gas emissions and constraints tomitigation in the small island states of theCaribbean

B, SinghDkpartement de gkographie, Universit4 de A40ntrdal, Montrkal, Canada

Abstract

Based on analyses done in the preparation of their National Communications,GHG inventories for several Caribbean countries including, Antigua andBarbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica, St Kitts andNevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines and Trinidad and Tobago arepresented. Except for Trinidad and Tobago that is fairly industrialized, GHGemissions derive mainly from the Energy sector, with the energy industries andtransportation sub-sectors being the most important, In the case of Haiti, massivedeforestation has led to important C02 emissions,Not accounting for natural sinks, most Caribbean countries still turn out to be netremovers of C02. Emissions of non-C02 gases, except for Trinidad and Tobagoare minimal.The relatively low levels of GHG emissions, the under developed economies andthe lack of in-house environmentally sound clean technologies therefore make itvery difficult for the Small Island States of the Caribbean to seriously considerGHG mitigation measures, especially in view of the prohibitive costs of suchabatement measures.

1 Introduction

On account of anthropogenic activities worldwide relating mainly toindustrialization and land use, and driven by population growth andconsumerism the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases (GHG’s) hasbeen increasing at an alarming rate, so much so as to enhance the greenhouseeffect of the planet and to cause regional climate and climate-related globalchanges, The IPCC (Intergovemrnental Panel on Climate Change) ThirdAssessment Report (TAR: IPCC, 2001) claims that there is new and strongerevidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributableto human activities, Furthermore, Small Island States like those of the Caribbeanare highly vulnerable to climate change because of their small size (and lowelevation in many cases), relative isolation, high population growth rates andrelatively high incidence of poverty, which increase their sensitivity to climatechange and limit their adaptive capacity.

© 2002 WIT Press, Ashurst Lodge, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. All rights reserved.Web: www.witpress.com Email [email protected] from: Air Pollution X , CA Brebbia & JF Martin-Duque (Editors).ISBN 1-85312-916-X

314 Air Pollution X

Mitigation involves the development of programs related to sustainabledevelopment in the context of climate change and to the development ofmethodologies for assessing mitigation measures and of policy options forimplementing adaptation / mitigation alternatives that shall allow the smallisland sates of the Caribbean to abate the increase in GHG emissions and toenhance their removal by sinks.Although the small island states of the Caribbean may not be significantcontributors to global GHG emissions, they could however play a small role inthe stabilization of GHG’s in the atmosphere. GHG abatement strategies wouldinclude the transfer and implementation of environmentally sound technologies(EST’s), supported by effective Government policies, aimed at reducing the netemissions of GHG’s to the atmosphere so as to minimize their influence onclimate globally.Hence, various efficiency improvements and technological efforts have beendirected towards identifying suitable greenhouse gas mitigation (GHGM) optionsaimed at reducing GHG emissions, notably carbon dioxide (C02) ( Metz etal,2000; Ramnathan, 1999).The major economic sectors that contribute to GHG and other gases emissions inthe small island states of the Caribbean are the energy sector, mainly throughemissions from the energy industries, the transportation and the residential sub-sectors.

Because of recent massive deforestations, the Land Use Change and Forestry(LULUCF) sector of Haiti is a major contributor to net COZ emissions,

Non-C02 gases that derive from road transport and energy industries areimmeasurably small, given the low population of the Caribbean countries,

2 Methods

The data used in this paper are gleaned from the completed First NationalCommunications of the individual Caribbean countries. Also, the author throughhis involvement as a Consultant to a number of the Caribbean counties tofacilitate the preparation of their First National Communications, was privy to anumber and variety of internal country reports and statistics.

As for the case study on St, Kitts and Nevis relating the costs of abatementmeasures, data was derived from the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange most recent report on mitigation measures (Metz et al., 2001 ).

Data for Trinidad and Tobago on COZ and non-COz emissions are not availableand are not included in this paper.

3 Results

As presented in Table 1, most Caribbean countries are very small in size, rangingfrom 269 km2 (St, Kitts/Nevis) to 10,991 km2 (Jamaica), with the exception ofHaiti (27,750 km2) and Guyana on mainland South America (214,969 km’).Except for Guyana, total populations are relatively high, However, becausepopulations are concentrated in coastal lowlands, population densities arerelatively high, even in Guyana where the population is concentrated in a narrowzone along the Atlantic coast (Table 1).


Air Pollution X 315

The economies of the Caribbean countries can be classified as under-developedor developing and the level of poverty is relatively high in most instances,especially Haiti. Tourism is the mainstay of the economies of most countries,namely Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevisand St. Lucia. Trinidad and Tobago, however, because of its rich and diverseindustrial base related to its vast petroleum and natural gas resources can bedescribed as a developing nation,

3.1 C02 Emissions

Based on the Greenhouse Gas Inventones of each Caribbean country, the majoreconomic sector that contributes to GHG and other gas emissions (1994) is theenergy sector. In 1994, chosen as the reference year for the GHG inventory ofmost of the Caribbean countries, COZ emissions range from 77 Gg (Dominicaand St Kitts and Nevis) to 8,182 Gg (Jamaica), although this figure would bemuch higher for Trinidad and Tobago (Table 2),

By far, the greatest amount of COZ emissions for the Caribbean countries areattributable to the energy sector (Bahamas: 1, 894 Gg; Barbados : 1,875 Gg;Guyana :1,446 Gg: Jamaica 8,182 Gg). The bulk of these COZ emissions, derivefrom thermal power plants fed by diesel or heavy fuel oil. The transportationsector, where gasoline is the main fuel used is another major contributor to C02emissions. Also, the residential sector, where LPG gas is widely used forcooking, also contributes significantly to C02 emissions (Table 2),

The industrial sector that is under-developed in most Caribbean countries, exceptfor Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica and Barbados, is not a major contributor ofC02 emissions. Even as such the C02 emissions are relatively small (Barbados :38 Gg; Jamaica:379 Gg) (Table 2).

For all of the Caribbean countries examined, COZ emissions were insignificantlysmall in the agriculture sector in 1994. Emissions, if any would be attributable tothe burning of agricultural residues such as sugarcane. In Guyana, where thisactivity is prevalent, the C02 emissions are accounted for in the energy sector(Table 2).

The other sector that significantly contributes to C02 emissions, mainly throughdeforestation activities related to urbanization and fuel wood use, is the land usechange and forestry sector. This is especially true in the case of Haiti where C02emissions totaled 954 Gg in 1994. St. Lucia (164 Gg), St. Vincent and theGrenadines (89 Gg), Jamaica (88 Gg) and St Kitts and Nevis (68 Gg) are alsomajor contributors in this respect(Table 2).

C02 emissions from the waste sector were insignificantly small for all Caribbeancountries considered, in 1994 ( Table 2). This is because incineration of garbageis restricted to rural unmanaged sites.

Also, memo items of Caribbean countries, namely international bunkers, relatedto the tourism industry, and burning of biomass, also contribute to COZemissions. In 1994, major contributions of C02 emissions from internationalbunkers came from Jamaica (353, 983 Gg), the Bahamas (645 Gg) and Barbados


316 Air Pollution X

(620 Gg). Emissions of CO, from the burning of biomass came mainly fromHaiti (3,48 1 Gg) (Table 2).

However, in Guyana, significant quantities of biomass consisting of sugarcanebagasse (1,132,838 tonnes) and rice husk (40,000 tonnes) were combusted forenergy production in 1994. Also, firewood (82,436 tonnes) and charcoal (1,691tonnes), for cooking purposes, also contributed to C02 and non-C02 emissionsin 1994.

3.2. Non-COz emissions

On the whole, given the size of their populations and their economies, non-COzemissions from Caribbean countries are very small. In most cases, especially forthe smaller islands, the emissions are minutely small (< 1 Gg) ( Table 3).

In the energy sector, the main non-COz emissions are CO (Guyana :180 Gg;Haiti :349 Gg; Jamaica : 173 Gg) deriving mainly from the transportation andresidential sub-sectors and NMVOC (Bahamas : 4 Gg; Haiti : 48 Gg; Jamaica :29 Gg), also attributable mainly to the transport and residential sub-sectors (Table 3).

S02 emissions, that lead to negative radiative forcing, and that derive mainlyfrom the energy industries and transport sub-sectors, are also relatively important(Jamaica :99 Gg),

As for the industrial sector, non-COz emissions are mainly attributable toNMVOC emissions from the food and beverage industries and from road pavingwith asphalt (Guyana :23 Gg; Haiti :13 Gg; Jamaica :6 Gg; Grenada :52 Gg) (Table 3),

In the agriculture sector, non-COz emissions are mainly due to CHA(Guyana :44Gg; Haiti : 92 Gg; Jamaica : 43 Gg) from enteric fermentation and manuremanagement of animals and rice cultivation; to N20 emissions (Jamaica : 343Gg; Haiti : 7 Gg) from animal waste management systems and fertilizerapplications to agricultural soils (Table 3),

Non-C02 emissions in the land use and forestry sector are very small and aremainly attributable to CO emissions (Bahamas :4 Gg; St Lucia : 3 Gg) derivingfrom the burning of forest biomass (Table 3). However, savannah burning inGuyana caused the release of 8 Gg of CH, in 1994 (Table 3).

In the waste sector, non-C02 emissions are mainly attributable to CH~ emissionsfrom waste disposal sites and, in certain instances (St. Lucia, Jamaica, Barbados)from domestic and industrial wastewater treatment (Barbados: 84 Gg; Grenada :70 Gg; Jamaica :15 Gg; St. Lucia 28 Gg) ( Table 3), For all Caribbean countries,very small amounts of N20 emissions also derive from human sewage,


Air Pollution X 317

3.3. Mitigation Options and Barriers

Although the Small Island States of the Caribbean contribute relatively smallamounts of C02 and non-C02 emissions to the global totals, being signatories tothe United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) theyare obliged to identify and undertake measures to abate GHG and related gasesemissions.

3.3.1. Energy Sector

In the current context, the energy supply sector is the main vehicle of economicdevelopment and international competitiveness for the small island sates of theCaribbean. Also, this sector is by far the most important insofar as C02emissions in the Caribbean are concerned. For purposes of brevity andimportance, only the energy industries, transportation and residential/commercialsub-sectors are considered,

Mitigation Options-Energy Industries

Several GHGM (Greenhouse Gas Mitigation) technolog.hned options have areavailable for reducing GHG emissions in the energy sector. For instance, someof the short term options for mitigating C02, in the energy sector of the selectedCaribbean countries include: the retro-jitting of existing plants with modernefficient technologies such as decarbonization of flue gases and fuel, the use ofless carbon -intensive fuels, such as switching from liquid fossil fuels to naturalgas or simply the use of cleaner liquid fuels where costs can be justified.Alternatively, if affordable and feasible the replacement and or modernization ofthe existing power plants that use energy efjcient technologies can be a viablealternative, However, if the power plant is near the end of its life cycle, it maybemore economical to build a new energy-efficient plant than to retrofit it.Also, in the short term, the existing power plants can certainly be optimized formore efficient fuel use, and consequently lower emissions, by simplyimplementing a regime of preventative maintenance, Furthermore, the benefitsof these two strategies would be realized in reduced fuel costs, reducedequipment repair costs and a stabilization of electricity costs to the consumer.In the medium term, the greater use of renewable energy technologies for powergeneration such as solar and wind energy and the development of micro-scalehydro power plants, which may not be cost-effective in the short term because ofthe technology limitations, are viable GHG abatement options for Caribbeancountries.On the other hand, in the long term, mitigation options may include C02 storageand sequestration and even the eventual use of nuclear power. However, the factthat the Caribbean is a nuclear waste products – free zone and that the scale ofnuclear plants, the smallest being about 40 MW which is more than 10 times themaximum demand for most Caribbean countries, would preclude nuclear poweras a viable option.Further long-term mitigation options for the small island states of the Caribbeanmay include a shift to other forms of energy, costs and other factors permitting,


318 Air Pollution X

such as exploration of the potential use and exploitation of geothermal energyand oceanic wave and tide energy.Barriers to Mitigation/Energy IndustriesThere are several barriers that have to be overcome to permit the transfer andadoption of environmentally sound technologies (EST ‘s) in the Caribbean. Themajor barriers to effective technology transfer, currently, in the energy sector areeconomic, relating to the high initial costs of capital-intensive projects andinstitutional, relating to political will and human resources (Metz et al., 2000).In most Caribbean countries, electricity is provided by a largely state-ownedcompanyL in a monopolistic situation, that sell electricity through a regulatoryreview process that allows the utility to recover all operating expenses and areturn on investments, regardless of the quality of the service,One of the major barriers to adoption of modernized technology in the short tomedium term then, is a lack of competitive and cost-effective incentives,Another major barrier to technology transfer in the energy sector for Caribbeancountries, in the current context, is the lack of the appropriate human resources.To address this shortcoming would require substantial investments in capacitybuilding and information gathering on new technologies that maybe less costlyand more environmentally friendly. Although most Caribbean governments arerevising their trade policies in order to liberalize markets, substantial tarl~fbarriers for imports of foreign energy supply technologies, except for duty-freeconcessions on renewable energy technologies (RET) equipment in somecountries (St. Lucia), remain. This limits exposure to energy efficiencyimprovement pressures from foreign competition on domestic suppliers andprevents early introduction of sustainable energy innovations from abroad.

In some cases political interference, in response to pressures from differentinterest groups, may also work against the elimination of conventional energytechnologies.

Another major barrier to the transfer of cost-effective and environmentallyfriendly energy technologies in the Caribbean is the poor access to information.Caribbean countries may therefore need to strengthen its linkages with the rest ofthe world, both in the near and long term, by investing in the infrastructureneeded to receive and transfer information relating to energy technologies.

A major requirement for successful agreement in technology transfer is theguarantee of intellectual property rights (IPR). In the long term then, CaribbeanGovernments may therefore consider the production-sharing IPR model,whereby the private foreign firms contract with the local state-owned electricityutility to share technology with them in return for a share of the productsproduced.

Mitigation Options-TransportationTransport-related GHG emissions are the second-fastest growing sectoremissions worldwide (Metz et al,, 2000). Also, the transport sector is the leastjlexible to changes because of its almost dependence on petroleum-based fuels,current entrenched travel L$estyles, and lack of political will. Furthermore,


Air Pollution X 319

transportation is growing by about 3 to 4 ‘%. annually worldwide (Metz et al.,2000). This rate of growth may well be higher for some Caribbean countriessuch as Trinidad and Tobago and a good part of vehicles entering the countriesare used and most likely less efficient. Also, the new vehicles entering thecountry are not required to meet stict emission standards, these standards beingnon-existent in most Caribbean countries,

In the short term, mitigation technology options may include low cost actionssuch as proper maintenance and overall servicing of vehicles will very likelylead to both reductions in fuel use and carbon emissions

Other short-term options may include the mandatory installation of pollutionremoval devices such as catalytic converters in vehicular exhaust emissionsystems and the implementation of tougher legislation relating to exhaustemissions.

In the medium term, the use of cleaner fuels such as methanol and ethanol,improved gasoline, and alternative transport fuels such as compressed naturalgas (CNG), liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), improvements in tire performanceand lubricants and other accessories such as transmission improvements and theuse of lighter vehicles, especially for urban use, can lead to reductions in GHGemissions,

In the medium-to-long term, infrastructure and system changes, includinggreater use of and reliance on traffic andjleet management systems and modalshits from road to monorail transportation systems, if feasible, may also beinstituted as a long-term GHG mitigation option,

Barriers to Mitigation/Transportation

Currently, there are significant technological, economic and institutional barriersthat can prevent the transfer and adoption of EST’s in the transportation sector ofCaribbean countries. For instance, lack of suitable local jirms to supplycomponents and services required by large foreign firms may be a limitingfactor. In addition, social norms sometimes also discourage the use of GHG-mitigating technologies. For example, there may be a bias against the use ofbicycles as a ‘serious’ mode of transport because ownership of cars is perceivedby many as a sign of social standing. However, the lack of required infrastmctureand safety concerns may play a major role in discouraging the use of bicycles.

CommerciaVlnstitutional and Residential Buildings

In the commercial, institutional and residential building sector of Caribbeancountries, GHG emissions are essentially restricted to energy used to coolbuildings, provide lighting, and services ranging from cooking to the use ofhome appliances including television sets and computers.

Mitigation Options-Residential, Commercial, Institutional Buildings

Nonetheless, in the short to medium term, there are several easily attainabletechnological options for reducing GHG emissions from buildings,


320 Air Pollution X

In the short to medium term, mitigation options in the buildings sector mayinclude the regulatoy enforcement of energy conservation labels on equipmentand appliances. Improvements in buildings thermal integri~ aimed at reducingcooling energy losses, greater use of more efjcient lighting systems and cookingappliances aimed at reducing energy consumption such as compact andelectronic fluorescent lamps and lighting control systems, may be other viableGHG abatement options.

Barriers to Mitigation/ Residential, Commercial and InstitutionalBuildings

Currently, there are several barriers to the successful transfer of modernand efficient and environmentally fi-iendly technologies, most of themeconomic and institutional.

Buildings are usually long lasting and community development patterns haveeven longer time spans, The incremental costs of the best technologies arerelatively small at the time of construction compared with the cost of replacingenergy-wasteful and polluting equipment.Furthermore, in the case of commercial and institutional buildings where theusers do not directly bear the cost of energy, and where energy planning andmanagement are not factored into the operations of individual departments thereis usually little or no incentive to conserve and use energy wisely. Policies aimedat education to address lack of sensitivity to energy conservation issues maytherefore be beneficial.3.3.2. Industrial Sector

The industrial sector of Caribbean countries is relatively underdeveloped andinvolves a limited range of activities. Aggregate energy use and emissions, whichdepend on the structure of the industrial sector, and the energy and carbonintensi~ of the activities, are relatively low, most Caribbean counties beingsmall island developing states whose economies are largely tied to tourism,services and agriculture.

Because of these insignificant levels of emissions of C02 and non-C02 gases, inthe current context, there is little need or justification to address mitigationoptions in this sector, at least in the short to medium term, Nonetheless, in themedium to long term, and depending upon the national development plan ofCaribbean counties, new and emerging industies may be encouraged to adoptEST’s so as to mitigate GHG and other gas emissions.

3.3.3. Agriculture Sector

GHG emissions from agriculture in the Caribbean are relatively insignificant,with emissions being limited to CH4, mainly from entenc fermentation andmanure management from animal stocks and to N20 from atmosphericdeposition, leaching of agricultural soils, cultivation of histosols, mainly andgrazing animals, minimally.

Several technological alternatives are available to the Caribbean Governmentsfor mitigating the important GHG’s in agriculture, namely COZ, CH4 and N20. Inthe short to medium term, these would involve, amongst others, new genetic


Air pollution x 321

stocks, improved irrigation efjciency, improved water and nutrient use efficiencyand improved risk management and production management techniques.

In the medium to long term on the other hand, the focus of Government policymay shift towards agricultural reform and modernization, focusing on theintroduction of more drought-resistant crop varieties that would also require lesswater and energy,

3.3,4, Land Use and Forestry Sector

In 1994, the land use and land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector of mostCaribbean countries acted as a net sink for COZ causing removals of C02 throughchanges in forest and other woody biomass stocks through carbon uptake fromthe abandonment of managed lands. On the other hand, forest and grasslandconversions and carbon release from agriculturally-impacted soils (minimal)caused C02 emissions.

Non-COz emissions from the land use and forestry sector are very minimalbecause of very limited forest and grassland conversion activities.

Mitigation of net GHG emissions from forests and forest soils in Caribbeancountries should therefore be focused on methods aimed at reducing emissionson the one hand and enhancing carbon uptake, on the other,

In the short and medium term, technologies that maybe adopted for reducing netGHG emissions in the land use change and forestry sector of Caribbean countriesmay include management for carbon conservation aimed at controllingdeforestation and harvesting regimes through systematic monitoring, protectingforest reserves by controlling fires and pest outbreaks, Policy should also obligeconcessionaires to provide a forest management plan, to obtain a lumber permitand should include mitigation of climate change as a major component

In the medium to long policy measures for reducing net GHG emissions in theland use and forestry sector of the Caribbean may be directed at are regulatormeasures aimed at slowing deforestation, promoting forest regeneration andincreasing the amount of carbon stored in forests by actively promotingreforestation and afforestation programs,

3.3.5, Waste Sector

The main GHG emissions deriving from the waste sector of most Caribbeancountries stem from CH4 emissions from solid waste disposal and from N20emissions from human sewage,

Among the technical options that Caribbean countries may choose to mitigateCH4 emissions from solid waste disposal sites (SWDS) in the short to mediumterm are firstly source reduction efforts whereby reduction in waste generation,and conservation and home-based garbage separation may be used to decreasethe amount and types of garbage that turn up at SWDS. Furthermore, this maybeachieved by diverting wastes away from SWDS through recycling of productssuch as paper, bottles and metal cans, home-based comporting, ensuring thatwaste does not decompose in an anaerobic environment and incineration.


322 Air Pollution X

In the long term, an attractive technological option to mitigate CHi fromSWDS’S, know-how and resources permitting, would be the recovery of CH4generated fi-om waste through a centralized system of ducts directed at somecentral collection point, where CH4 can be collected for other downstream usesor simply used to generate electricity as is done elsewhere, although costconsiderations with respect to the amount of CH4 abatement, may be animpediment,

3.4 Case Study : Costing Abatement Measures-St, Kitts and Nevis

In this section, an attempt is made to derive the costs for mitigation measures fora typical small island sate of the Caribbean. Based on data availability, St, Kittsand Nevis are chosen for this analysis. For brevity and importance, only theenergy sector is considered.

Data or estimates for the analysis on abatement strategies and costs are derivedfrom the literature (Metz et al., 2001) (Table 5).

For the St. Kitts and Nevis case study, a baseline scenario projections ofpopulation and GDP are presented for 5 years following the reference year,1994, 10 to 15 years and 30 tO 40 years preceding.

Population projections are based on estimates of population growth done by theSt. Kitts/Nevis department of Statistics.

GDP projections are based on a 5 ‘?(oper year growth rate, a policy objective ofthe St. Kitts and Nevis government,

These estimates of population and GDP growth are used to gauge the futureGHG emissions, namely 10 to 15 years and 30 to 40 years into the future. Withthese statistics, the average increase in GHG emissions in the future are taken as0.5 Y. per year, about half the global rate,

GHG increases and avoidable emissions and costs in the future are only done forthe residential/commercial, transport and energy supply sectors, the mostimportant sectors that contribute to C02 emissions in St, Kitts and Nevis, Non-C02 emissions, on account of the very low values in St, Kitts and Nevis, are notconsidered,

The avoidable emissions that range from 20 to 50 ?(o of baseline values werederived from the IPCC, 2001 report (Metz et al., 2001) and expert judgement(Electricity Department: St Kitts and Nevis)

The costs of avoidable emissions in the future, namely 10 to 15 years and 30 to40 years from the reference year, are extracted from various estimates fordeveloping countries provided in the IPCC, 2001 Report, that include some levelof discounting ( Metz et al,, 2001).

From Table 5, projected C02 reductions costs will vary ilom $ US -3,750,000 to$ US 1,250,000 for the residential commercial sector, $ US -625,000 to $ US2,500,000 for the transport sector and $ US 100,000 to $ US 200,000 for theenergy supply sector under the current (<5 years ) situation.


Air Pollution X 323

Negative costs would imply that accrued benefits, including employment andenvironmental quality, are larger than the real costs,

Furthermore, these abatement costs vary from -2,0 % (residential/commercial)to 0.6% (transport) of GDP.

On the other hand, projected COJ reductions costs will vary from -$ US -3,900,000 to $ US 650,000 for the residential commercial sector, $ US – 500,000to $ US 2,000,000 for the transport sector and $ US 100,000 to $ US 200,000 forthe energy supply sector for the period 10 to 15 years from the reference year,1994 (Table 5).

Again, negative costs would imply that accrued benefits, including employmentand environmental quality, are larger than the real costs.

Furthermore, these abatement costs vary from -1.4 % (residential/commercial)to 0,6 % (transport) of GDP.

Finally, for the period 30 to 40 years into the fiture, projected COZ reductionscosts will vary from -$ US -4,800,000 to $ US 800,000 for the residentialcommercial sector, $ US – 575,000 to $ US 2,300,000 for the transport sectorand $ US 150,000 to $ US 300,000 for the energy supply sector for the period 10to 15 years from the reference year, 1994 (Table 5),

Again, negative costs would imply that accrued benefits, including employmentand environmental quality, are larger than the real costs.

Furthermore, these abatement costs vary from -0,7 % (residential/commercial)0.2 % ( transport) of GDP,

4 Summary and Conclusions

It transpires from the above then, that Caribbean nations contribute relativelyinsignificant amounts of GHG emissions to the global total, However, Caribbeancountries, in compliance with the UNFCCC, should focus their GHG mitigationefforts on: C02 emissions from the energy sector, especially the manufacturingindustries and construction, energy industries, and transportation sub-sectors,CHd emissions from the waste and agriculture sector, NMVOC emissions in theindustrial sector and the preservation and strengthening of the C02 sink in theland use and forestry sector, However, these mitigation efforts would call forresources, both technical and financial, Caribbean countries may not have.

In addition to achieving GHG abatement in these sectors, other accrued benefitswould include greater fuel efficiency and reduced costs and a cleanerenvironment leading to aesthetic and health benefits.The impacts of mitigation measures must also be seen against the backdrop ofchange, and generally including growth, in GDP otherwise. For the Caribbean,it is important to note that there is currently a low level of industrialisation. Anynew industrialisation would likely involve new, modern technology, whichalready incorporates measures to reduce GHG emissions and this in turn wouldmake the new capacity more competitive internationally.Short to medium term impacts of GHG abatement measures involve significantinvestment. But, investment in such mitigation measures in the short term will


324 Air Pollution X

generally generate positive impacts on employment (direct and throughmultiplier effects), income, taxes and consumption.

Insofar as the medium to long term of GHG abatement measures are concerned,their impacts may dampen economic growth slightly, but as the St. Kitts andNevis case study shows, there is little negative impact overall. However, similarstudies have to be done for other sectors and small island developing economiesof the Caribbean.It therefore appears essential to view the chosen GHG abatement strategies as amulti-purpose investment in the future of the Caribbean’s economy and society,These strategies would therefore become even more compelling and such aperspective would facilitate the leveraging of the necessary investment funds toundertake the GHG mitigation projects.

5 References

1. Caribbean Renewable Energy Development Project (CREDP), 2000,12’h Caribbean Energy Information System Network Meeting. St. Kittsand Nevis, November 4, 2000; 13 p.

2. Government of St. Kitts and Nevis, 2000. St. Kitts and NevisSustainable Energy Plan. Working Draft. September 11, 2000; 14p.

3. Metz, B., O.R. Davidson, J-W Martens, S.NM. van Rooijen andL.V.W. McGrory, 2000. Methodological and Technical Issues inTechnology Transfer. A Special Report of IPCC Working Group 111,Cambridge University Press, New York, N.Y,, USA, 466p,

4, Metz, B., O.R. Davidson, R, Swart and J. Pan, 200 1,Climate Change2001 : Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group 111 to the ThirdAssessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press, NewYork, N, Y., USA, 752p,

5. Millich, 1,, 1999. The role of methane in global warming: where mightmitigation strategies be focused?. Global Environmental Change, Vol. 9No.3: 179-201.

6, Ranmathan, R., 1999, Selection of appropriate greenhouse gasmitigation options. Global Environmental Change. Vol. 9 N0,3: 203-210.

7. Watson, R., M.C. Zinyowera, R,H. Moss and D,J, Dokken,1996.CLIMATE CHANGE 1995, Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of

Climate Change: Scient@Technical Analyses, IPCC Secondassessment Report. Cambridge University Press., London, 878p,


Air Pollution X 325


326 Air PO1lUIion X


Air pollution X 327


328 Air pollution X


Documents

Greenhouse gas emissions and constraints to mitigation in the … · 2014-05-12 · Greenhouse gas emissions and constraints to mitigation in the small island states of the Caribbean