Kevin Anderson, Tyndall Centre, 2012

1. Real Clothes for the Emperor:
facing the challenges of climate change
Kevin Anderson
Tyndall Centre
University of Manchester
2012

2. Context
The international energy agency‟s (IEA) view on climate change
 “When I look at this [CO2] data, the trend is perfectly in line with a temperature increase
of 6 degrees Celsius, which would have devastating consequences for the planet.”
 “we have 5 years to change the energy system – or have it changed”
Fatih Birol - IEA chief economist
Similar concerns are forthcoming from government chief scientists and the recent PwC report

3. Climate change commitments
 International ‘To hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius
and take action .. consistent with science and on the basis of equity‟
 EU „must ensure global average temperature increases do not exceed
preindustrial levels by more than 2°C‟
 UK “average global temperatures must rise no more than 2°C”

4. How consistent are 2°C & 4°C futures with
emission trends and climate science?

5. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

6. Billion tonnes CO2
70.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
80.0
90.0
1980
IPCC established
First report
1990
RIO Earth Summit
Second report
RCEP report (60% by 2050)
2000
Third report
most dangerous threat
Fourth report
Copenhagen
2010
Rio + 20
Year
2020
2030
2040
Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
2050

7. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

8. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
Global economic downturn
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
… yet emissions have continued to rise
(~6% in 2010, ~3% 2011 & 12)
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

9. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
… so what of future emissions?
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

10. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
Energy system design lives (lock-in)
70.0  Supply technologies 25-50 year
 Large scale infrastructures
60.0 30-100 years
Billion tonnes CO2
 Built environment
50.0
 Aircraft and ships ~30 years
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

11. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Emission assumptions
Rio + 20
80.0
 OECD emissions reduce from 2012
70.0
 India/Africa join globilisation 2020/25
60.0
 China/India peaks emissions by 2030/45
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0  Africa emissions rise to peak in 2060
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

12. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
~3000GtCO2 for 2000-2050
40.0 ~5000GtCO2 for 2000-2100
30.0
… i.e. a 4°C – 6°C rise between 2050 & 2100
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

13. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
A1FI
70.0
RCP8.5
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
40.0
30.0
… i.e. a 4°C – 6°C rise between 2050 & 2100
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

14. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0
40.0
… outside chance
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

15. Global emission of fossil fuel CO2 (inc. cement)
90.0
Rio + 20
80.0
70.0
60.0
Billion tonnes CO2
50.0  demand technologies: 1-10 years
 demand behaviours: now-10 years
40.0
D
30.0
Too eearly
for supply
m
20.0
a
10.0 n Supply
d &
demand
0.0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Year

16. The Emperor's undergarments
an „orthodox‟ view on 2°C

17. “To keep … global average temperature rise close to 2°C … the UK [must] cut
emissions by at least 80% ... the good news is that reductions of that size are
possible without sacrificing the benefits of economic growth and rising prosperity.”
CCC 2009/11

18. Still looks naked to me
2°C – a alternative take …

19. “… it is difficult to envisage anything other than a planned economic recession
being compatible with stabilisation at or below 650ppmv CO2e”
Anderson & Bows 2008/11

20. Do climate ‘scientists’ take any
responsibility for the streaking
Emperor?

21. EU
Inconsistencies in 2°C targets
 Copenhagen Accord: “hold … below 2 degrees Celsius”
 EU: “do not exceed 2°C”
 UK Low Carbon Transition Plan: “must rise no more than 2°C”
IPCC language: a “very unlikely” to “exceptionally unlikely” chance of exceeding 2°C
i.e. less than a 10% chance of exceeding 2°C
Despite this:
 UK Government has adopted a pathway with a 63% of exceeding 2°C

22. … even then it assumes the UK should have a very
inequitable share of the 63% chance of exceeding 2°C
… a position far removed from the Copenhagen Accord
and Cancun Agreement‟s “… on the basis of equity”.

23. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)
(Royal Society‟s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011
~50:50 chance of exceeding 2°C

24. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)
(Royal Society‟s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011
~50:50 chance of exceeding 2°C
Peak 2025
Growth 3.5% p.a
Reduction 7% p.a.
(2x Stern!)

25. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)
(Royal Society‟s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011
~50:50 chance of exceeding 2°C

26. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)
(Royal Society‟s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011
~50:50 chance of exceeding 2°C
Peak ~2010
Reduction ∞% p.a.

27. … for a still lower chance of 2°C,
Annex 1 nations need at least a…
… 10% reduction in emissions year on year
 40% reduction by 2015
 70% 2020
 90+% 2030
Impossible?
… is living with a 4°C – 6°C global rise by 2050-2100 less impossible?

28. How do two such fundamentally different
interpretations of the challenge arise
from the same science?

29. … for many analysis/scenarios:
 Recent historical emissions sometimes ‘mistaken’ or ‘massaged’
 Short-term emission growth seriously down played
 Peak year choice ‘Machiavellian’ & dangerously misleading
 Reduction rate universally dictated by economists
 Geoengineering widespread in low carbon scenarios
 Assumptions about ‘Big’ technology naively optimistic
Collectively – they have a magician‟s view of time & a linear view of problems ?

30. 2°C – a political & scientific creed?

31. Senior political scientist (2010)
“Too much is invested in 2°C for us to say its not possible – it
would undermine all that‟s been achieved
It‟ll give a sense of hopelessness – we may as well just give in
Are you suggesting we have to lie about our research findings?
Well, perhaps just not be so honest – more dishonest …”

32. Senior Government Advisor
(2010)
“We can‟t tell them (ministers & politicians) it‟s impossible
We can say it‟s a stretch and ambitious – but that, with
political will, 2°C is still a feasible target”

33. DECC SoS (2010)
- day before attending Copenhagen
“Our position is challenging enough, I can‟t go with the message
that 2°C is impossible – it‟s what we‟ve all worked towards”

34. … the IEA, PwC et al reports demonstrate how
scientists are slowly beginning to acknowledge that
we‟re heading towards 4°C; but still very few are
yet prepared to be candid about what 2°C or 3°C
demands in terms of mitigation

35. … in the meantime were planning for:
 up to 30GW of new gas fired powerstations
 tax breaks for shale gas
 the rejection of a 2030 decarbonisation standard for electricity
 the collapse of a large-scale CCS demonstration plant
 new airport capacity
 aviation dropped from EUETS
 weakened EU standards for cars
 shipping planning for a four-fold increase in emissions by 2050

36. and for Wales …
Plan for:
 regional impacts of global ~4°C by ~2050 & ~6°C by ~2100 (Vicky)
 global repercussions, including
- disruption to food imports
- potential mass migration
- military tension
There are no precedents for a 9 billion population with such rapidly rising temperatures

37. But
“… this is not a message of futility, but a wake-up call of
where our rose-tinted spectacles have brought us. Real
hope, if it is to arise at all, will do so from a bare
assessment of the scale of the challenge we now face.”
Anderson & Bows.
Beyond „dangerous climate change
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
Jan 2011

38. … a final message of hope ..
“at every level the greatest obstacle to
transforming the world is that we lack the
clarity and imagination to conceive that it
could be different.”
Roberto Unger