Long term modeling and transition towards a Low Carbon Society

1. Long term modeling and transition towards a Low Carbon Society Semaine Athens module Changement climatique Christophe CASSEN Centre International de Recherche sur l’Environnement et le Développement (CIRED) cassen@centre-cired.fr

2. Presentation schedule • Some insights on climate negotiations • The transition toward a LCS: lessons from the past and perspectives • Long term modeling: current development and interactions with the international negociations

3. Overview of the Climate issue • Agenda settingand early international responses (1985-1990) • Constitutional phase: entry into force of the Convention on Climate Change (1990-1992) • Regulatory Phase: elaboration of the Kyoto Protocol (1997-2005) • The second constitutional phase: negotiation of the Future ClimateRegime (2005-….)

4. Agenda setting and early international responses: 1985-1990 • 1979 : First World ClimateConference (WMO) • 1985 : UNEP/WMO Conference • 1988 : G7 conference (Montreal) • Establishment of the IPCC • 1989: La Hague summit • 1990: Second World ClimateConference Dominated by Non governmental actor Intergovernmental issue

5. Constitutional phase: negotiation and entry into force of the Convention on Climate change • Rio (1992): FCC (Framework on ClimateChange) • Article 2: “The ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. “ • Article 3: common but differentiatedresponsibilitiesbetweenannex 1 and non annex 1 countries • Equityconcerns

6. Global emissions of carbon dioxide and methane (1850-2000) Sources: Marland et al. (2007): Houghton (2008), Stern and Kaufmann (1998) CO2 emission per capita per year per country http://greening.tafesa.edu.au/

7. Regulatory Phase: Elaboration of the Kyoto Protocol • The Kyoto Protocol (1997) • Bindingreductiontargets for Annex I countries 2008-2012 (EU 15 -8%/1990, USA -6%, Canada -7%, Allemagne -21%, Espagne +15%) ) EU vision • Flexible mechanisms: emissiontrading, JI US vision • Marrakech accords (2001) : adoption of the detailedrules of Kyoto Protocol • CDM : clean developmentmechanism • The US exits from the process (2001) • Byrd-Hagelamendment(1997): US involvmentdepends on developing countries’ ones • The Kyoto Protocol entersinto force (2004)

8. The second constitutional phase: negotiation the Future Climate Regime • 2007: Bali Roadmap, relaunch of the negotiations • Mitigation/Adaptation/Technologicaltransfer/ Financing • 2009: Copenhagen, a failure? • Rising influence of the BASICS / Europe marginalized • A non official text: includes the 2K objective • Copenhagenpledges • 2010: Cancun, a call for a « paradigm shift » • 2011: the DurbanPlatform, toward a global agreement by 2020?

9. Three dynamics unchanged since 1988… • Divisions: • Within the industrialize country group: supporters/opponents of binding, quantitative limits on GHG: US vs EU • Industrialized/developing countries over their respective responsibilities for adressing CC • Amonsgt developing countries those concerned more about climate change/development and poverty eradication: BASICS vs AOSIS

10. Conclusions • A long time process, climateregimestill in evolution • Limits of the FCC to fostersense of community: more achievementoutside (G8…) • A processquestioned for itscomplexity • Toward a decentralizedbottom up processratherthan a global international negotiation?

11. Presentation schedule • Some insights on climatenegotiations • The transition toward a LCS: lessonsfrom the past and perspectives • Long termmodeling: currentdevelopment and interactions with the international negociations

12. A transition toward a LCS? « The switch from an economic system dependent on one or a series of energy sources and technologies to another » …a basic definition

13. A context favourable to a transition toward a LCS? • The urgency of climate change: the 2K objective, European energy-climate objectives, French F4, Energiewende • What energy mix for the transition after Fukushima ? • Debate around the peak oil • Global Economic uncertainties: a window of opportunity for a green economy ?

14. Lessons from past transitions : the British industrial revolution (19th century) • From biomass to coal • Combination of many factors: • new technologies (steam engine, coal grates) • favourable labor market: aboundant labor forces • agricultural progress • relatively cheaper energy resources (coal) • adequate financing system • intellectual and social values • The transition was not smooth : • unplanified process • empoverishment of the working class • delayed diffusion in other countries (France)

15. The nature of the transitions • A long time process • An increase in global energyconsumption • Winners and losers • A combination of technological, institutional and social features : a widereconomic and social transformation Global energy consumption and transition, 1800-2010 Source : Fouquet (2009) Source: Grübler, 2012

16. Open questions • Differences between past and future transitions? • How representing future changes? What tools and expertise can be mobilized?

17. Presentation schedule • Some insights on climatenegotiations • The transition toward a LCS: lessonsfrom the past and perspectives • Long termmodeling: currentdevelopment and interactions with the international negociations

18. Energy/Development debate in the 70’s • A turmoil context: • Increasing awareness of environmental issues (Silent Spring…) • Energy tensions (first and second oil chock) • Economic uncertainties (beginnning of structural unemployment) • The opposition between developed countries and the third world around the development issues: the Stockolm conference (1972)

19. Energy/Development debate in th 70’s • Limits to Growth (Meadows/Club de Rome) : a reference report • The current trend of economicgrowthconducts to a deadlock by 2100 • A model based on dynamicsystems (Forrester) • Highlycontroversial: • Underestimatetechnologicalprogress • Poor representation of economicmechanisms • Underestimates the Heterogeneity of the world • Severalmodelingexercisesanswer to the report : Bariloche, Pesterovic… Source: Meadows, 1972

20. Twopioneers, twovisions of long termpathways Amory Lovins (1976): Soft EnergyPathways • Energyefficiency, renewables, decentralizedenergy • Energy is but a means to social ends, and is not an end in itself William Nordhaus (1974): growthis the anwer • Only a matter of bad technologies • The DICE model: framing for future exercises • Economicassessment of a climate objective • The followers: Integrativeassessmentmodels: MERGE (Manne and Richels)… The computer revolution and the booming of modeling scenarios in the 90’s

21. A permanence of « modeling tribes »

22. Some key forum of expertise • International institutes: IIASA, OECD, World Bank, IEA (WEO) • International scientific programs: IPCC, Energy modeling forum • Frame the scientific (and political?) agenda

23. A key framing structure: the IPCC • 1979 : First World Climate Conference (WMO) • 1985 : UNEP/WMO Conference ‘Assessment of the Role of Carbon Dioxide and of Other Greenhouse Gases in Climate Variations and Associated Impacts’ • 1988 : G7 recommendation and the setting up of the IPCC at the 40th session WMO, with UNEP support

24. Initial objectives • Identify: • uncertainties and scientific researches relating to climate needs • informations necessary to assess climate policies • Review policies implemented • Assess all implications of CC • Collaborate with other UN agencies and governments

25. Structure • IPCC Bureau • Three Working Groups : • WGI : Scientific Assessment of CC • WGII : Impact assessment of CC • WGIII : Mitigation strategies to CC • SBSTA – Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), • Interface between IPCC and UNFCCC : • Disseminate the conclusions of IPCC • Reframe the specifications of IPCC

26. Writing process of the report • Each group divided in chapters with coordinating, lead and contributing authors • Strict appointment of experts • Long process of writing: a volunteer job! • Three reports: complete report, technical summary, and the summary for policy makers (SPM)

27. The IPCC and Climate Negotiations

28. Overview of the climate issue • 1979 1st world conference on CC • 1988: G7: launching of the « climate case » • 1992: Rio de Janeiro: Climate Convention • 1995: The Berlin warrant • 1997: The Kyoto Protocol • 2000: Half-failure of COP6 at La Haye • 2001: Marrakech agreement (COP7) exit of USA • 2004: Kyoto protocol ratified and applied • 2005: G8 Gleneagle : the 2K objective • 2009: Copenhagen: too much expectations • 2010: Cancun: a call for a paradigm shift • 2011: Durban: toward a global agreement by 2020

29. First challenge: assessing the cost of climate policies (early 90’s) • Optimism of “engineers” vs pessimism of “economists” • Technical cost vs macro-economic costs • What about the instruments? The debate around a carbon tax: the EU vs the USA

30. First challenge: assessing the cost of climate policies (early 90’s) • 1990: The first IPCC report:set key frameworkselements (mitigation/adaptation, short term/long-term, sectorialpotentials,emissions scenarios ) • Rio 1992: the climate convention «  stabiliser les concentrations de gaz à effet de serre dans l’atmosphère à un niveau qui empêche toute perturbation anthropique dangereuse du système climatique […]dans un délai convenable pour que les écosystèmes puissent s’adapter naturellement […] et que le développement économique puisse se poursuivre de manière durable », (art.2, CNUCC). «  les politiques et mesures prises pour faire face au changement climatique devraient être coût efficace de manière à assurer des bénéfices globaux au plus bas coût possible. », (art.3, CNUCC).

31. Second challenge: timing of action IPCC Second Assessment Report (1995) • WGI • Greenhouse effect due to anthropic emissions • Forecast +0.3°C/decade [0.2,0.5] • Forecast sea level rise +6cm/decade [3,10] • Several uncertainties identified (well, oceans, clouds) • WGII : adaptation and mitigation • Majority of systems are sensitive to climate change • Several options available, depending on the future climate, institutions, and investments available • WGIII : socio-économic assessment of policies • Range of actions • Sequential policy making : uncertainty justifies the action • The Kyoto protocol adopted in 1997 – COP 3

32. The Kyoto Protocol • The mandate of Berlin: quotas of emissions instead of an international carbon tax • Kyoto: commitments and flexibility mechanisms (CDM, JI) • Application to the modeling agenda: The When, Where and What flexibility strategies

33. When flexibility? • Action timing : early vs delayed action • The alarmists vs the partisans for a « a wait and see » policy • What’s next after Kyoto?

34. The cost of a delayed action Source: Recipe 2009

35. Where flexibility? • Different reduction potentials in sectors and countries • The problem of transfers between developed and developing countries • Toward an international carbon market or a fragmented regime?

36. Transfers may appear prohibitive Source: Crassous 2009

37. A third challenge: what type of transition? Special Report on Emission Scenarios - 2000 • Completereview of the litterature of scenarios • IPCC data set • Definition of 4 main ‘storylines’ • 6 modeling teams mobilized • Harmonization and review of 40 scénarios • One representative scenario for each storyline defined

38. Globalisation Globalised, extensive ‘Sustainable development’ Globalised, intensive ‘Market-Forces’ Emphasis on sustainability and equity Regional, extensive ‘Mixed green bag’ Regional, intensive ‘Clash of civilisations’ Regionalisation /fragmentation Special Report on Emission Scenarios - 2000 • Definition of 4 main ‘storylines’ Source : SRES, H. Kieken

39. Special Report on Emission Scenarios - 2000 Source : IPCC, 2000.

40. Special Report on Emission Scenarios - 2000 • Data set of existing scenarios • Complete assessment of the literature

41. The issues raised by the 2K objective

42. The emergence of the 2K objective • From an objective in concentration to an objective in temperature (450ppm to the 2°C) • A political background: G8, EU…

43. Fourth Report on Emission Scenarios - 2007 « Une stabilisation entre 710 et 445 ppm équiv.-CO2 en 2050 impliquerait, à l'échelle de la planète, des coûts macroéconomiques moyens se situant entre une hausse de 1 % et une baisse de 5,5 % du PIB mondial. Cela équivaut à un ralentissement de la progression moyenne du PIB mondial de moins de 0,12 point de pourcentage par an. » (AR4 WGIII SPM Box 3)

44. Moderate stabilization costs

45. Optimism in reduction emission potentials • Current technologies are sufficient to stabilize concentrations Economic mitigation potential Potentiel in different sectors for different carbon prices in 2030, for all reference trajectories

46. Source: McKinsey 2009

47. Cheap 2K? Yes … in a ‘first best’world « The most ambitious pathways [350-450 ppm CO2] are possible » with a macroeconomic impact comprised between +0.5 and -3% of the GDP in 2030 with technologies currently known and a uniform carbon price between 5 and 80 $/tCO2 in 2030 … with a serious and ‘never read’ caveat : ‘Most models use a global least cost approachto mitigation portfolios and with universal emissions trading, assuming transparent markets, no transaction cost, and thus perfect implementationof mitigation measures throughout the 21st century.’ (AR4 WGIII SPM Box 3)

48. Technologies are not the only way to reduce emissions • Behavioral obstacles • Bottlenecks, lock in • Technical progress is not a manna from heaven!

49. Information gap in the residential sector 90% 65% Source: Giraudet 2010 49

50. Technologies are not the only way to reduce emissions • Behavioral obstacles • Bottlenecks, lock in • Technical progress is not a manna from heaven!