www.pointcarbon.comOctober 2009

36 CHEMICALS

The firststeps

The shores of the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen are getting closer and closer, yet it is still not certain that December’s meeting will deliver an acceptable replacement for the

Kyoto protocol. To help decision-makers try to reach an effective and efficient agreement on future reductions of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), the International Council

of Chemical Associations (ICCA) recently commissioned a report on carbon abatement solutions enabled by the chemicals industry.

‘Decarbonised’ has become a very fashionable word in the climate change negotiations without always defining what it really implies. A simplistic view would put carbon as the new villain, but it can actually be a benefactor under specific conditions.

With this in mind, the report – produced for the ICCA with the help of McKinsey & Co and the Oeko Institute – included a carbon life-cycle analysis of 102 chemicals products with data coming from Europe, Japan and the US. The life-cycle analysis did not cover every chemicals product or emission in the industry, but it did cover areas where GHG emissions are considered sensitive, such as in insulation, mobility, agriculture, lighting,

packaging and clothing.It provides tools to analyse where the

major emitters are and what solutions we should apply there. In addition to the

technical comprehension of the carbon balance of the products, it also sets out political recommendations for the Copenhagen negotiations. In doing so, it

builds a bridge between sound data on the emissions coming from the global chemicals

InnovatIon In the chemIcals Industry can help the transItIon to a

low-carbon economy, says PHILIPPE dE CASAbIAnCA

P36-37 Chemicals.indd 36 21/09/2009 12:16

CHEMICALS

October 2009

37

house is already a reality in Europe and most modern insulation foams are no longer restricted to use in new

buildings. At a time of increasing fossil fuel costs, such figures do matter. Agrochemicals are the

second largest contributors to emissions savings. The main driver of the CO2 savings enabled by agrochemicals is

avoided land-use change due to increases in crop yield. If fertilisers and crop protection were not

available, the yield from agriculture would drop by between 30 and 85 per cent depending on the crop type, soil, technology and climate zone.

To produce the same amount of crops with this lower yield would require double the amount of land.

In the cases highlighted, as with the other products, consumers’ preferences must also play a part and take account of

both the climate change mitigation effects and everyday budgetary constraints. Decision-makers can provide or ease frameworks to facilitate the dissemination of efficient technologies and the maturation of new innovative

technologies. In the case of insulation or implementing a renewable energy device at home, consumers may feel hesitant because of the slow return on investments. Better

conditions are necessary for industry to continue innovating and for consumers to further limit their GHG emissions beyond a BAU scenario.

To continue innovating, this industry must have a level playing field and avoid carbon leakage – the relocation of industries to regions deprived of binding CO2 regulations,

such as the EU emissions trading scheme. Then

industry; consumers’ behaviour; and the political decisions related to climate change issues and its consequences.

The report’s key finding is that for every tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) emitted by the chemicals industry, a saving is enabled of up to three tonnes of CO2e via the products and technologies provided to other industries and consumers. In other words, chemicals industry products create GHG savings around three times greater than their emissions.

This analysis looked at the products from the cradle to the grave: from the extraction of feedstocks and fuels, to production (direct and indirect energy emissions, process emissions) and to the final disposal (incineration, heat recovery, recycling, landfill etc). The emissions savings have been calculated by comparing their usage with non-chemical alternatives, such as synthetic versus natural textiles.

For example, in 2005, in a theoretical world deprived of chemicals, GHG emissions would have been 11 per cent or 5.2 giga tonnes (Gt) of CO2e higher. The analysis shows how strong the enabling power of the chemicals industry is, as without its products, many other items could not exist.

Currently, the chemicals products that drive the greatest GHG savings are building insulation, fertilisers and crop protection, lighting, plastic packaging, marine anti-fouling coatings, synthetic textiles, automotive plastics, low-temperature detergents, and plastics used in piping. Some popular low-carbon applications deliver GHG savings,

but they are still limited compared with the listed chemicals products. For example, in 2005, solar power saved 40 million tonnes (Mt) of CO2e, wind power accounted for 60 Mt, whereas insulation saved 2.4 Gt, fertilizer and crop protection 1.6 Gt, lighting

700 Mt, and packaging 220 Mt.In 2030, under a business-as-usual (BAU)

scenario, insulation, fertiliser and crop protection, and lighting would still lead the

GHG savings list, despite some other technologies, which have become more mature, making a larger contribution than in 2005. Therefore, under the 2030 BAU scenario, GHG abatement

as a result of using chemicals industry products would rise to 13.8 Gt and the ratio of emissions saved

rises to one to four.These figures are encouraging, but they do not match all

the reductions needed to curb the general growth of GHG emissions. If we rely on existing techniques and existing trends for the dissemination of these products, then we shall achieve reductions, but not sufficient to what is actually required to combat climate change. Therefore, we need more aggressive policies to improve product dissemination, such as fiscal incentives.

In the case of insulation for buildings, for example, a lot of improvements are still technically possible with proven technologies. The zero-cost heating

Chemicals industry products enable GHG savings around three times greater than their emissionsdecision-makers should focus on the lowest cost abatement opportunities, push for energy efficiency, support research and development efforts, promote the sustainable use of energy and feedstocks, provide incentives for faster action by rewarding early movers that proactively reduce their carbon footprint, and push for the most efficient and sustainable disposal, recovery and recycling options.

The ICCA report is only the beginning of the journey. It is the first time an industry has embarked on such a global study. More steps will follow and the shores of Copenhagen are among them. l

Philippe de Casabianca is the senior counsellor communication at Cefic, the European member of ICCAEmail: PCA@cefic.be

P36-37 Chemicals.indd 37 21/09/2009 12:16