Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Policy and Action Standard, Mitigation Goal Standard
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
4 gefällt mir•3,123 views
World Resources Institute hosted a launch event on 21 November 2014 for two new Greenhouse Gas Protocol Standards to inform government climate change strategies. Building on previous GHG Protocol standards, the Policy and Action Standard helps evaluate the effectiveness of specific policies or measures in achieving greenhouse gas emissions reductions, empowering policymakers and analysts to better assess and communicate their progress. The Mitigation Goal Standard takes a bigger picture view, enabling governments to determine their emissions trajectory and whether their policy portfolio aligns with reaching their climate goals. Both standards are applicable for all levels of government. Find out more at http://www.wri.org/events/2014/11/launch-and-training-workshop-greenhouse-gas-protocol
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (14)
Ähnlich wie Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Policy and Action Standard, Mitigation Goal Standard
Ähnlich wie Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Policy and Action Standard, Mitigation Goal Standard (20)
Mehr von World Resources Institute (WRI)
Mehr von World Resources Institute (WRI) (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Policy and Action Standard, Mitigation Goal Standard
- 1. LAUNCH OF GHG PROTOCOL POLICY AND ACTION STANDARD & MITIGATION GOAL STANDARD 21 NOVEMBER 2014
- 2. Manish Bapna Executive Vice President and Managing Director, World Resources Institute
- 3. Pankaj Bhatia Director, Greenhouse Gas Protocol, World Resources Institute
- 4. Key questions • Are countries on track to meet their climate commitments? • How effective are local or national policies to drive emissions reductions? • Will countries’ actions add up to limit warming to under 2 degrees Celsius? Source for carbon budget: IPCC AR5 Synthesis Report
- 5. Need for new standards • New diversity of national GHG reduction goals • Increased need to estimate GHG effects of policies and actions • Lack of consistency and transparency in current approaches • Lack of capacity • No international guidelines until now
- 6. Overview of standards How to estimate the greenhouse gas effects of policies and actions How to assess progress toward national or subnational GHG emissions reduction goals
- 7. Policy and Action Standard
- 8. Before implementation: What effect is a given policy or action likely to have on emissions in the future? During implementation: Is a given policy or action on track and delivering expected results? After implementation: What effect has a given policy or action had on emissions? Purpose of the standard
- 9. Objectives of assessing policy/action impact Governments (local, subnational, national), donor agencies and financial institutions, businesses, NGOs, and research institutes can use the standard to: • Inform policy selection and design by comparing policy options based on their expected GHG effects • Evaluate policy effectiveness (and cost-effectiveness) in delivering intended results • Report on GHG effects of policies and actions • Attract and facilitate financial support for mitigation actions by estimating GHG reductions • Can also assess non-GHG effects (co-benefits) and costs
- 10. Regulations and standards Taxes Subsidies Emissions trading programs Voluntary agreements Information instruments Infrastructure programs Implementation of new technologies, processes, or practices Financing and investment Types of policies and actions
- 11. Define policy or action Identify effects Estimate baseline scenario emissions Estimate policy scenario emissions Subtract to estimate the GHG effect Overview of steps
- 12. Pilot example: German renewable energy law
- 13. Pilot example: Beijing ETS 7000 6750 6500 6250 6000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 CO2 emissions (10k tons) policy scenario baseline scenario policy scenario (only consider electricity related emission reduction)
- 15. Before the goal period: What factors to consider when designing a goal and how to calculate allowable emissions in the target year During the goal period: How to assess and report progress After the goal period: How to assess and report goal achievement Purpose of the standard
- 16. Types of goals Goal Type Examples Reductions in what? Reductions relative to what? Base year emissions goal Australia: 80% reduction below 2000 levels by 2050 New York City: 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 Emissions Historical base year Fixed level goal Costa Rica: ‘long-term economy-wide transformational effort to enable carbon-neutrality’ Emissions No reference level Base year intensity goal China: 40-45% reduction in CO2 emissions per unit of GDP by 2020 compared with the 2005 level Emissions intensity Historical base year Baseline scenario goal Brazil: Between 36.1% and 38.9% below projected emissions in 2020 South Africa: 34% deviation below BAU by 2020 Emissions Projected baseline scenario
- 17. Pilot example: South Africa Mining Sector – tracking progress
- 18. Pilot example: United Kingdom – Multi-Year Goals
- 19. Process for developing the standards
- 20. Greenhouse Gas Protocol standards Corporate Standard Project Protocol Product Standard Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard Mitigation Goal Standard Policy and Action Standard
- 21. Standard development process • 270 participants in 40 countries Secretariat (WRI) Advisory Committee (30) Technical Working Groups (80) Review Group (130) Pilot Testers (30)
- 22. Pilot testing: 32 policies/goals in 20 countries/cities US Mexico Costa Rica Colombia UK Belgium Chile South Africa Japan South Korea Indonesia China India Bangladesh Tunisia Germany Israel
- 23. Thank You. Kelly Levin David Rich Pankaj Bhatia www.ghgprotocol.org/mitigation-accounting
- 24. Michael Lazarus Senior Scientist, Stockholm Environment Institute – US Center
- 25. Piloting the Standards Michael Lazarus, SEI-US, Seattle office GHG Protocol Standards Launch WRI, Washington, DC November 21, 2014
- 26. Piloting the Goals Standard for Seattle • Goals: Emissions 7% below from 1990 levels by 2012 (Kyoto) and 80% by 2050 (helped launch a national effort of 1,000 U.S. Mayors) • Finding: 2012 core emissions only 4% below 1990, short of 7% goal, while population grew by 23% • Application: Together with ex ante analysis of how to meet 2050 goal, used by City to inform climate action plan
- 27. Common process and accounting can help guide how (and why) goals are set (and met) 1.12 0.23 0.05 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.08 0.05 0.38 0.09 0.05 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 6.13 6.04 1990 Population and economic growth Phase-in of ODS substitutes Lower passenger travel More efficient cars and trucks More efficient air travel Building efficiency & fuel switch Efficiency & changes in output Less disposal, more recycling / composting Lower-carbon electricity Seattle City Light offsets Other 2012 GHG Emissions (Million t CO2e) TRANSPORT BUILDINGS INDUSTRY & WASTE EXOGENOUS FACTORS POWER SUPPLY OTHER
- 28. Piloting Policies & Actions Standard for Keystone XL • Demonstrated utility of the Standard for infrastructure activities and policies that might increase emissions • Highlighted importance of capturing baseline uncertainty • Showed value of thinking through causal chains
- 29. Guidance, tools, and consistency can support robust, policy-relevant analysis
- 30. Sophie Siemens Project Coordinator, Ministry of Environment, Chile
- 31. Pilot Testing Experience from Chile of WRI Mitigation Goals and Policy & Action Standards MRV of Policies and Low-Emission Development Strategies Friday, 21st November 2014, by M. Sophie Siemens LECB Project Coordinator at Climate Change Office Ministry of Environment of Chile
- 32. Mitigation Goal Assessment “Chile will take NAMAs to achieve a 20% deviation below the ‘business as usual’ emissions growth trajectory by 2020, as projected from year 2007. Geographic boundary National. Sector and sources Scope GHGs considered Mitigation goal type Goal period Single or multi year goal Gobierno de Chile | Ministerio del Medio Ambiente 32 Goal level All IPCC 2006 sectors and relevant sources by sector. Single goal across scope with direct emissions. All KP gases. Reduction in emissions relative to a static baseline scenario. From 2007 until 2020. Single year. Target year: 2020. 20% deviation below the ‘business as usual’ emissions growth trajectory by 2020, as projected from year 2007. Chile is developing NAMAs to meet its voluntary goal.
- 33. Minimum Efficiency Performance Standards for residential lighting (MEPS) N° Sector Name of Action Implementor Type 1 Transport CO2 goals for new cars MoE Ex ante 2 Industry and 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Net GHG Emissions (tCO2e) Gobierno de Chile | Ministerio del Medio Ambiente Accumulate d effects: -1.729.732 tCO2e Mining Cogeneration MoE Ex ante 3 CPR Thermal reconditioning MoE Ex ante & Expost 4 Appliances Minimum Efficiency Performance Standards for residential lighting (MEPS) Ministry of Energy Ex-ante 2014- 2020 5 All sectors EE awareness campaign MoE tbd
- 34. Thank you! M. Sophie Siemens msiemens@mma.gob.cl
- 35. Questions and Answers For more information on the Mitigation Goal and Policy and Action standards, please visit ghgprotocol.org
- 36. Katia Simeonova Manager, Mitigation, Data and Analysis Programme, United Nations Climate Change Secretariat
- 37. Panel Discussion Jennifer Morgan, Director, Climate Program, World Resources Institute Alexa Kleysteuber, Mitigation Advisor, The Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean Maurice LeFranc, Senior Advisor for International Climate Change, United States Environmental Protection Agency Kelly Levin, Senior Associate, World Resources Institute David Rich, Senior Associate, World Resources Institute
- 38. Questions and Answers For more information on the Mitigation Goal and Policy and Action standards, please visit ghgprotocol.org
Hinweis der Redaktion
- # I would like to start with these two graphics: # 790 is the total carbon budget we have considering all GHGs and consistent with the long-term goal to stay below 2 C # We have already used 65% of it and are just left with 275 to spend more if we want to stay below 2C As we focus on national and international agreements to stay within the budget, we have some very important questions to consider: # How will we know we aren’t overshooting the budget? # How will we know countries are on track to meet their climate commitments and contribute to this overall goal? # How will we know what new measures or commitments we need from countries and internationally We are today releasing these new standards designed to help answer these questions effectively.
- # First two are the major drivers or needs why we these standards are critical # Recent US-China > we see different types of goals # Also some countries may undertake policies and measures in addition to or instead of economy-wide targets> this is the 2nd driver Furthermore, it’s not just a technical need, there are some political and institutional aspects also such as: # Ensuring methodologies are internationally accepted methods so different countries aren’t measuring in different ways > there’s presently no international guideline to ensure consistency and transparency # Many countries lack capacity on how to undertake these evaluations
- Non-GHG effects or co-benefits may include air quality improvement, poverty reduction, public health benefits, job creation, etc. The basic procedures and steps in the standard can be used to estimate non-GHG effects, but additional quantification methods and data sources will be necessary (e.g., economic models/data)
- The standard can be used for all types of policies and actions, though some may be more difficult to assess than others.
- These are the five basic steps to using the standard. Define the policy or action to be assessed Map the causal chain of the policy or action to identify all potential the GHG effects, including intended and unintended effects, and define the GHG assessment boundary around significant effects Define the baseline scenario—the events or conditions most likely to occur in the absence of the policy or action being assessed—and estimate baseline emissions for all affected source/sink categories in the assessment boundary Define the policy scenario— the events or conditions most likely to occur in the presence of the policy or action being assessed—and estimate policy scenario emissions for the same set of source/sink categories Subtract baseline emissions from policy scenario emissions to estimate the net GHG effect of the policy or action
- # The German Renewable Energy Act of 2000 gives renewable energy preferential access to the power grid over fossil fuels and nuclear energy. # Öko-Institut used the standard to estimate the policy’s future impact and found it will likely avoid 100 million tonnes (Mt) of CO2 annually in 2020, 120 Mt annually in 2030, and 150 Mt annually in 2040. # These findings help illuminate the expected reductions and whether the policy needs to be refined or additional policies may need to be considered
- One of the 7 ETS pilots Piloting period: 2013-2015 Covers about 50% of Beijing’s CO2 emissions Sectors covered: heat supply, thermal power generation, cement, petrochemical, other manufacturing industries, services (e.g. universities, hospitals, banks, public services, shopping mall etc.) 490 key emission institutions Emissions sources covered: fossil fuel combustion, consumption of purchased electricity*, production process and waste treatment Offset limit: up to 5% of the total allowances; 50% of the offset credits from Beijing projects The policy line with electricity reductions isn’t a scenario…. It shows how much of the reduction comes from the electricity sector. This is important because Beijing ETS (and other ETS Pilot in China) is different from other ETS in that it includes electricity consumption (scope 2) emission in their trading boundary.
- # Promethium Carbon used the Mitigation Goal Standard to assess South Africa’s progress in reaching its goal of reducing mining sector emissions 15% below 2006 levels by 2015. # They found that in 2013, emissions had dropped by 2.7% and still needed to decrease by an additional 1.31 Mt CO2e to reach the goal on time.
- # The UK Climate Change Committee used the Mitigation Goal Standard to report on the design of their goals under the Climate Change Act of 2008. The government has adopted a series of fixed level, cumulative multi-year goals in an effort to meet a long-term goal of reducing emission by at least 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. # The assessment showed the benefits of coupled short-term and long-term goals, which can help ensure that a long-term emission reduction pathway is realized, as well as multi-year goals, which are designed to limit cumulative emissions over several years and can allow some year-to-year flexibility.
- -To accomplish this objective Chile will need a relevant level of international support.” -Static v/s dinamic (recálculo).
- -Level of reduced emission at year 2020: 707.315 tCO2e – 326.362 tCO2e = 380.954 tCO2e