UN climate panel says emissions quotas insufficient—focus should lie on industry
- Lagos: Climate Conference 08 has 'perfect timing'
- Norway to make money from EU Emissions Trading System
- A wise decision: UN Climate Panel and Al Gore share Nobel Peace Prize
- EU adapts to climate change
- Urgent action required to clean up ship dismantling industry
- EU: Russia veering far off track in fighting climate change
- Dutch government uniltaterally pursuing progressive environmental policy
- Rebecca Harms: European Parliament Climate Change Committee lacks uniform commitment
- G-8 leaders agree to ‘call’ for greenhouse gas reductions
- Barroso puts CCS on the G-8 agenda
- Summit preview: Nuclear issues could overshadow talks on climate change at G-8
- Bush’s warm to climate change heats European debate before G-8 summit
- UK Energy White Paper urges CCS launch but stirs controversy for endorsement of nuke power
- European Parliament forms committee on climate change, throwing its political weight into the ring
- British Petroleum to launch industrial-scale CCS project in Australia
- EEB gives a cautious nod to carbon capture and storage
- UN commissioned climate report with concrete recommendations presented in US
- Climate change and the Arctic
- The Arctic and environmental change threats
- Carbon Capture and Storage sceptics in the European Parliament revise their stance
- London Protocol approves CO2 storage
- UK reports that climate change will be as economically devastating as World War II
- Norway implements tax incentives for hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles
- Bellona holds Hydrogen workshop at the European parliament
Related articles
Such a scheme to develop and market these new technologies, the report asserted, should be accomplished by a series of government subsides, legislation, duties and taxes, and binding agreements.
Emission trading schemes, such as those available under the Kyoto Protocol, the Climate Panel report argues, are insufficient to stem the growth of greenhouse gases.
The Bellona Foundation is entirely in agreement with the conclusions drawn by the UN Climate Change panel in its latest report, and has long been lobbying for many of the tasks the Climate Report puts before governments in the interest of reaching an emissions free energy economy and society.
Trading schemes are typically designed to set national or business caps on greenhouse gas emissions. Businesses or nations that produce more than their allocated amount of emissions are able to purchase so called “carbon credits” from businesses or nations that are producing green house gasses below their set emissions cap.
The Climate Panel’s reports
The Climate Panel’s third report entitled “Mitigation of Climate Change” was made public on May 4th, and is one part of the panel’s four-part series on climate change issue. This most recent report discusses each emissions reduction effort currently underway in each energy sector and analyses their short term, medium term and long term Impact on the climate and society.
It also highlights each remedy that has the best record so far and thoroughly backs carbon capture and storage as an applicable technique to limit emissions.
Previous installments of the report have included the assertion, in its first volume, that climate changes are man-made. This release was the most jarring and detailed analysis of its kind to date, and followed quickly on the heels of the thunderous reaction to the British Stern Report, which had reached the same conclusion that global climate change was man-made.
The Climate Panel report’s second installment, released in April, pointed out the catastrophic consequences that climate change would have for nature and society. This, too, confirmed the findings of the Stern report, which concluded that climate change would have as devastating an impact on the global economy and society as the two World Wars.
This most recent installment from the UN Climate Panel focuses on what can be done to reduce global climate change. Its central thesis is that it is necessary to induce industry to reduce emissions—but warns that this must be done quickly.
UN warmly endorses carbon capture in third release
 |
| Bellona President Frederic Hauge |
| (Photo: Nils Bøhmer/Bellona) |
The first (UN Climate Panel) report was monstrously frightening,” said Bellona President Frederic Hauge. “This last one shows that we can actually do something—without having to stop eating meat or go visit our grandmothers. We are especially pleased with (the report’s) wide acceptance of carbon capture and storage, which will bring us a long way down the road.”
Carbon capture and storage- long a controversial question in environmental circles—is an initiative that has long been encouraged by Bellona, as its technology is something that can be applied as an upgrade to emissions releasing plants that already exist.
Specific areas targeted
The UN Climate Panel shows there is enormous potential to reduce emissions and greenhouse gases especially within the energy, construction, industry and agricultural sectors.
The UN Climate Panel called for an increase in energy efficiency within energy production, an emphasis on renewable energy and emphasised the importance of carbon capture and storage at factories, the report said.
There are number of efforts that can be undertaken within the transport sector, starting with bio-fuels and expended public transportation, the report indicated. Despite the myriad obstacles in this sector, there are also wide and critical possibilities toward reducing emissions. Yet market influences alone, including higher fuel prices, will not yield significant emissions reductions, says the report.
As concerns construction, the report asserted, an increase in energy efficiency could critically reduce the price of emissions. Construction, said the report, could forgo more than 30 percent its emissions by applying a few efforts that would pay for themselves.
Industry, the report said, holds the most potential by upgrading ineffective industries in both poor and rich nations. Energy reclamation and carbon capture and storage in the cement, fertilizer and metal industries would be a good measure, says the report.
Subsidies demnaded for new technology
In order to enact these changes, the report conceded, expensive government subsidies must be applied, Yet the report emphasised that subsidies are critically needed to overcome barriers to implementing new technologies.
 |
| Bellona's Marius Holm |
| Photo: Nils Bøhmer/Bellona |
“This is in step with Bellona’s assessment—environmentally friendly fuel for cars, carbon dioxide cleansing, and solar energy are examples of solutions with big potential, but as always will not come into play without help from the authorities,” said Bellona co-chairman Marius Holm.
“These are solutions that will be expensive at first glance, but which must prevail over technical and economic barriers. Even if a method may seem expensive today, using the Kyoto Protocol as a yardstick, methods that promote totally clean energy will be cost effective in the long run.”
Carbon prices lay the foundation
The Climate Panel recommends the introduction of a “price on carbon.” This means in practice the introduction of a world-wide carbon dioxide market.
Where the Kyoto Protocol aims for reducing world wide emissions to the levels recorded in 1990 by 2012, the carbon dioxide market goes further by fixing a price tag to emissions, and pushing for a constantly lowering ceiling for emissions.
“Bellona supports the notion of a global quota system where the overall emissions ceiling gradually comes down. When all carbon dioxide emissions receive a cost, the market will trigger a large spectrum of simple and cheap efforts that will constitute large emissions reductions,” said Holm.
Holm added that Bellona was “relieved” that the Climate Panel had reached the same conclusions as the organisation, especially concerning carbon pricing and that it is not sufficient by itself to yield the desired emissions cuts.
“It is simple math: If emissions reduce by 60 to 80 percent over 50 years, clean energy sources must replace today’s polluted energy sources,” said Holm.
To achieve that goal, said Holm, there must be a “massive concentration” on carbon capture and storage, large scale implementation of new renewable energy sources and an introduction of environmentally friendly automobile fuel.
“This won’t happen by itself and it won’t happen even if quota prices are high because these (new energy) solutions must gather a large momentum before they become competitive,” said Holm.
Large spectrum of methods evaluated
The third installment of the Climate Report examines an exhaustive amount of alternative energy methods for each specific energy sector.
Experience from many countries attests to the fact that all methods have their advantages and disadvantages, the report points out, and determines, among other things that direct regulations and standards could be preferable, given that sparate barriers hinder producers and consumers from reacting to price signals.
“The development of economic wealth puts the world population in a position to drive polluting automobiles, even though there is a tax levy on petrol in most countries,” said Holm.
“Even though cars will be more effective, the premium is eaten up as the number of cars grows. Therefore we are not getting around clean energy carriers for the transport sector such as bio-fuel, electricity of hydrogen.”
Commercial hydrogen before 2030
But shifting to a hydrogen fuel economy poses imposing barriers, said Holm, as both automobiles themselves and the entire infrastructure supporting them must be revamped.
Bellona is pleased that the UN’s Climate Panel has in mind that commercialization of hydrogen is possible before 2030, and that bio-fuel and electric cars are advised in the latest report, Holm added.
Norwegian example of quota vs. technolgy must improve
 |
| Climate researcher Knut Alfsen |
| (Photo: Petter Haugneland/Cicero) |
Norwegian researcher Knut Alfsen of the UN Climate Panel had clear advice for Norwegian authorities when the third volume of the climate report came out – concentrate on technological development, not emissions quotas.
Alfsen was one of the lead writers behind the last climate report, and is the research director at the Central Statistics Bureau, as well as a senior advisor with the CICERO Centre for Climate Change.
“Norway’s concentration on technological development is laughably small. It must in all cases double, Alfsen told Bellona Web. I am thinking first and foremost of carbon capture and storage, but we see for example that concentration on energy effectiveness is totally minimal.”
Bellona’s Hauge agreed.
“These declarations from Alfsen are in line with what Bellona has said long argued. This is something we have said ourselves,” said Hauge. “This last part of the report puts an even larger responsibility on wealthy nations. Norway is responsible for 2 to 3 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the world because of our gas and oil exports, so (Norwegian) Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg has a similarly large moral responsibility.”
Norwegian environmental minister Helen Bjørnøy agreed that Norway carries a large burden of emissions and therefore a large burden to reduce them.
“It is entirely necessary to do something dramatic. Domestically we have such a large share of the emissions that it is entirely necessary to get emissions reductions in our own country,” Bjørnøy said.
She added that a sector by sector report on Norway’s industry would be published in coming days, though did not speculate about precisely how the government will deal with the issues raised.
The failings of a ‘quota only’ system
Alfsen proposed that Norway, via the international plan, must seek to supplement the Kyoto Protocol with technology-based agreements, saying that a quota-based system alone would not contribute significantly enough for emissions cuts to be beneficial
The reason that various quota solutions—the very solutions that are economists’ favourites – don’t reach their intended targets is because they are voluntary, said Alfsen. Another reason is that the quota system gives investors little incentive to invest in large environmentally friendly projects for environmentally friendly technology, he said.
Anne Karin Saether and Charles Digges reported from Oslo. Marius Holm contributed to this report.
