Climate Policy Imperatives

1. Climate Policy Imperatives Dr John Broderick EPSRC Knowledge Transfer Fellow Tyndall Manchester john.broderick@manchester.ac.uk

2. Overview • About the Tyndall Centre • Taking responsibility as a region • Allocation methodologies • Novel approach for the regional scale • Cumulative emissions accounting • Credible climate framework • Current climate policy and uncomfortable conclusions • Aviation and tourism within this framing • Acknowledgements • Work by Ruth Wood, Alex Joyce, Alice Bows, Kevin Anderson • Funded by Tyndall Centre, EPSRC and Joule Centre grants

3. Tyndall Manchester • Interdisciplinary research centre started in 2000, with 7 partners • Social, economic and engineering climate change research • Tyndall Manchester focussed on energy, emissions and stakeholders • Agenda setting research on emissions budgets, aviation and shipping • High policy relevance and profile, for instance Hansard citations 2008 • UoM: 43 • Tyndall Manchester: 100 • EPSRC Knowledge Transfer role allows for further outreach and policy work

4. Taking Responsibility • View aviation as a complex system, where responsibility may be allocated amongst actors in a variety of ways. No objectively “right” answer. • Status quo: no allocation, • Aviation excluded from national and international emissions control regimes, but soon to enter EU ETS • To producers, bottom-up on the basis of fuel sold • E.g. Nation states • To producers on the basis of emissions calculated • E.g. Airlines • To consumers (end-users) of the service • Passengers, as individuals • Aggregating or disagregating across spatial or administrative scale: State – Region – Local Authority • To other influential actors or beneficiaries within aviation system • Airports • (Regional) Planning authorities • Air traffic control • Issues • Purpose of accounting – reflective of interventions? • Availability of data • Consistent with existing UNFCCC inventories

5. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? International Accounting UNFCCC: Bunker Fuels National Accounting No Standard

6. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? • Joule Centre research, part funded by NWDA • Stakeholder workshops, including future scenarios • Develop regional apportionment methodology • Reflects local influences: • Over LTO • Of residents flying practices & tourists attracted • Reflects local economic benefits: • From hosting an airport (direct benefit) • From services to residents, businesses and tourism (indirect)

7. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? Cruise emissions: apportioned according to the region from which the passengers start their journey Diagram from Corinair/EMEP EEA 2009 LTO : Apportioned to the airport’s region

8. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? Emissions calculated under hybrid apportionment • Reproduced from Wood et al (2010)

9. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? Current Method New Method

10. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? • Reproduced from Wood et al (2010)

11. What contribution does aviation in the North West make to the region’s total CO2 emissions? Reproduced from Joyce (2011) • Sub-regional apportionment based on passenger survey data and 20 major emitter flights from Manchester and Liverpool airports • Highly uneven spatial distribution

12. Conclusions from apportionment work • Reasonable and possible to apportion aviation emissions sub nationally. Methodology applicable elsewhere. • Continued growth of aviation impacts other sectors of the economy under constrained emissions budgets • CCC estimates of 0.8% to 1.5% p.a. seat-km efficiency improvements, ACARE target at upper end. • Substantial unevenness, spatially and considering destinations, raises questions of governance and appropriate policy interventions

13. Cumulative Emissions Accounting

14. Illustrative pathway for a carbon budget Annual CO2e emissions Emissions already released 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

15. Illustrative pathway for a carbon budget A Trajectory becomes steeper Annual CO2e emissions Emissions already released 2050 target shifts A=B for same climate impact B 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

16. Anderson-Bows: 2°C budget, CO2 only http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full.pdf+html?sid=423cdf2d-23a1-4170-b4b6-74e87f173156 Peak 2025 Growth 3.5% p.a Reduction 7% p.a. (2x Stern!) Budget premised on 37% chance of exceeding 2°C GMT rise

17. Anderson-Bows: 2°C budget, CO2 only http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full.pdf+html?sid=423cdf2d-23a1-4170-b4b6-74e87f173156 Budget premised on 37% chance of exceeding 2°C GMT rise

18. Anderson-Bows: 2°C budget, CO2 only http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full.pdf+html?sid=423cdf2d-23a1-4170-b4b6-74e87f173156 Peak ~2010 Reduction ∞% p.a. Budget premised on 37% chance of exceeding 2°C GMT rise

19. Current climate policy • Broadening the analysis beyond the previous slides • If... IPCC’s link between cumulative emissions & temperature rise is broadly correct • Non-Annex 1 nations peak emissions by 2025 • There are rapid reductions in deforestation emissions • Food emissions per capita halve from today’s values by 2050 • No discontinuities (“tipping points”) occur • And... Stern, CCC, IEA’s maximum “feasible” reductions of 3-4% in Annex 1 p.a. is achieved • Then... 2°C stabilisation is virtually impossible • UK’s budgets premised on 63% chance of exceeding 2°C • and 4°C by 2070 looks likely (on the way to 6°C …?)

20. Greater impacts at lower temperatures From Smith et al (2009) Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the IPCC)‘‘reasons for concern’’

21. Summary • Final (2050) targets are unrelated to avoiding dangerous climate change. • It is cumulative emissions that matter. • Fundamentally rewrites the chronology of climate change. Every delay makes the problem worse. • Stop thinking of long term gradual reductions and consider urgent and radical reductions.

22. Conclusions Challenge to Air Tourism • Timeframe of climate change problem is extremely challenging for all but especially for the aviation industry. • Technological & infrastructure lock-in suggest aviation’s emissions will grow considerably as a proportion of tolerable EU and UK emissions budgets (Bows 2010). • Emissions trading will not be viable in the medium-term if 2ºC remains the target. • Accelerating R&D, plus demand management and destination shifts will be essential.