POSSIBLE MEASURES TO REDUCE HUMAN GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS

The Changing ArcticGlobal Climate Change – Thee Need for Action,

The Ny-Ålesund Symposium 2007,Ny-Ålesund

August 20 - 22, 2007

Jorgen RandersNorwegian School of Management BI

CO2 EMISSIONS FROM HUMAN ACTIVITY

GtCO2 per year

From fossil fuels

From land use change

SUSTAINABLE

Stern: Necessary reduction to achieve 450-550 ppm CO2e

Stabilising below 450ppm CO2e would require emissions to peak by 2010 with 6-10% p.a. decline thereafter.

If emissions peak in 2020, we can stabilise below 550ppm CO2e if we achieve annual declines of 1 – 2.5% afterwards. A 10 year delay almost doubles the annual rate of decline required.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Glo

bal E

mis

sion

s (G

tCO

2e)

450ppm CO2e

500ppm CO2e (falling to450ppm CO2e in 2150)

550ppm CO2e

Business as Usual

50GtCO2e

70GtCO2e

65GtCO2e

Source: Taylor, on Stern Review 2006

THE NEED: 50 % CUT IN CO2 BY 2050

GtCO2 per year

From fossil fuels

From land use change

2050

KYOTO

2100

SUSTAINABLE

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Source: Taylor, on Stern Review 2006

Sum: 35%

Sum: 65%

Increase energy efficiency

Efficient cars, buildings, industrial plant

Efficient transport pattern (public transport, coordinated cargo, less truck and air)

Replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources

More wind, solar, biomass

More bio-fuels

More heat-pumps

More nuclear?

Make remaining fossil use “CO2-free”

Carbon capture and storage in power plants

CCS in other big point sources

Reduce non-energy emissions

Reduced emissions from forestry

Methane capture in waste disposal

and agriculture

A GLOBAL SOLUTION –WHAT?

-200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Fin

al E

ne

rgy

Re

qu

ire

me

nt

(EJ

)

avoided energy use

renewables

conventional fossil fuel use

CCS

nuclear gas

renewable H2

WWF: COVERING GLOBAL ENERGY NEED

Increased energy efficiency

New renewable energy supply

Carbon capture and storage

Source: WWF, Climate Solutions, 2007

IEAE: CO2 Reduction by Sector

End-use efficiency offers the largest potential (45%)

Power Gen. 34%, CO2 Capture & Storage (CCS) 20%

Other renew. 6%

Biomass 2%

Fossil fuel gen. eff 1%

Nuclear 6%

Coal to gas 5%

Hydro 2%

CCS 12%

Fuel mix in building 5% and industry 2%

Power Gen34%

End-use efficiency

45%

Biofuels in transport 6%

CCS in fuel transformation 3%

CCS in industry 5%

MAP Scenario 205032 Gt CO2 Reduction

Materials & products effic. 1% Energy & feedstock effic. 6%

Cogen. & steam 2% Process innovation 1%

Industry 10%

Appliances 7.5%

Water heat., cooking 1%

Space heating 3%

Lighting, misc. 3.5%Air conditioning 3%

Buildings 18%

Fuel economy in transport 17%

Transport 17%

Source: Unander, on IEA Energy Technology Perspectives 2006

Increase energy efficiency

Efficient cars, buildings, industrial plant

Efficient transport pattern (public transport, coordinated cargo, less truck and air)

Replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources

More wind, solar, biomass

More bio-fuels

More heat-pumps

More nuclear?

Make remaining fossil use “CO2-free”

Carbon capture and storage in power plants

CCS in other big point sources

Reduce non-energy emissions

Reduced emissions from forestry

Methane capture in waste disposal

and agriculture

A GLOBAL SOLUTION –WHAT?

30 %

30 %

20 %

20 %

– relative weight

GHG ABATEMENT COST CURVE

Source: McKinsey Quarterly, No1 2007

Increase energy efficiency

Higher cost for energy

More R&D

Replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources

Higher cost for GHG emissions

Remove subsidies for fossils

More subsidies for renewables

More R&D

Make remaining fossil use “CO2-free”

Initial subsidy for CCS

Higher cost for GHG emissions

More R&D

Reduce non-energy emissions

Reduced land clearingMore reforestationHigher cost for GHG emissions

A GLOBAL SOLUTION – HOW?

• The result if Norway continues business as usual

• Emissions increase by about 40 per cent to 2050

THE “REFERENCE PATH” TO 2050

TOTAL NORWAY GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS MtCO2 e/year 2005 2020 2035 2050 TOTAL REFERENCE PATH 54 59 62 69 TRANSPORTATION 16 3 Low- and zero-emission vehicles 0 -1 -6 -8 4 CO2 neutral fuels 0 -3 -3 -3 5 Transportation reduction 0 0 -1 -1 6 Low-emission ships 0 -1 -1 -2 4 HEATING 5 7 Energy-efficient construction 0 -1 -2 -3 8 CO2 neutral heating 0 -2 -2 -3 1 AGRICULTURE AND WASTE 6 9 Methane capture 0 0 -2 -2 2 PROCESS INDUSTRY 13 10 CCS from industry 0 -1 -2 -3 11 Process improvements 0 -1 -2 -2 9 PETROLEUM SECTOR 14 12 Electrification of offshore activities 0 -3 -3 -3 2 ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION 0 13 New renewables 0 0 0 0 14 Carbon capture and storage 0 -4 -10 -19 1 TOTAL LOW EMISSIONS PATH 54 42 28 19

MEASURES IN LOW EMISSIONS PATH

• The result if Norway imple-ments the Commission’s total solution

• Emissions fall to one third of Norway’s Kyoto obligation by 2050

THE “LOW EMISSIONS PATH” TO 2050

1 200

1 700

2 200

2 700

3 200

1995 2010 2025 2040 2055

Mrd

. 199

9-kr

.

ReferansebanenLavutslippsbanen

SMALL EFFECT ON NORWAY’S GDP

Reference path

Low emissions path

STRONG CLIMATE ACTION MAY BE DELAYEDBECAUSE OF:

1. The perceived high cost of action2. Long time from cost to benefit

3. Immediate effects on distribution: loss of jobs4. The tragedy of the climate commons

5. Initial damage strikes those who can’t afford to act6. Legitimate unwillingness among the poor to commit

7. The tyranny of the cost-effective solution

THREATH 1: GLOBAL DECISION DELAYS

Global warming may become self-sustaining and unstoppable because of:

• Increased absorption of solar heat in an increasingly ice-free Arctic ocean,

• Increased emissions of methane gas from melting tundra,

• Reduced absorption of CO2 in acidic ocean water,

and other self-reinforcing mechanisms.

THREATH 2: SELF-REINFORCING FEEDBACK IN THE CLIMATE SYSTEM

Here!

MELTING TUNDRA - 2

MELTING TUNDRA - 3

THANK YOU!