OECD Warns of Dire Consequences of Climate Inaction

Summary.  The OECD reports that the sustainability of the Earth’s natural environment and human population is threatened over the next forty years.  In its “OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050” it summarizes threats to the planet’s climate, its biodiversity, the water resources that supply human needs and economic activities, and human health.  Growth of the world’s population and concomitant significant expansion of its economic output will put strains on these systems. 

Importantly, under its Baseline scenario, which assumes no new policies to combat emissions of greenhouse gases, OECD projects that the world will need 80% more energy in 2050 than now, 85% of which will still be supplied by fossil fuels.  The resulting increase in greenhouse gas emissions will threaten many aspects of human life, because Baseline policies are insufficient to keep the rise in global average temperature below the internationally formulated goal of 2ºC. 

OECD proposes that aggressive action should be begun right away to limit greenhouse gas emissions in order to keep within the international goal.  Barring such initiatives now, it will require more urgent, immediate and costly measures by about 2020 to recover lost ground and remain on the path toward achieving the international goal.  The Organization projects that expenditure of only 5.5% of worldwide economic product would be needed to reduce emissions by about 70% by 2050, which is deemed sufficient to meet the goal.  OECD believes this is achievable and highly worthy of the required effort. 

Environmental Outlook.   

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued its “OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction” (Outlook) on March 15, 2012.  The report covers four major aspects related to the climate and sustainability efforts worldwide, namely, global warming, biodiversity, water resources and the effects of increasing pollution on human health.  This post will focus primarily on climate change.

Population Growth and Profound Economic Expansion. 

The Outlook points out that the population of the world is expected to grow from 7 billion souls at present to more than 9 billion by 2050, an increase of 29%.  Over the same period, the economic activity in the world is expected to grow to about four times its present level.  The growing population in the world, and the continuing movement of much of the world’s people from poverty into the economic middle class, means that demand for energy and for natural resources will likewise expand greatly.  Higher living standards suggest that the people of the world will expect to consume more goods and services.  All these factors indicate that there will be significant stresses on the world’s societies.  It is expected that 70% of the population will become urban dwellers by 2050, exacerbating problems such as air pollution, congestion and waste management.

The Outlook expects that in support of this expansion, barring significant policy changes, the world’s energy demand will be 80% higher in 2050 than at present, and that fossil fuels will remain as the principal energy source, providing about 85% of that energy.  These conclusions are based on a “Baseline” scenario, which assumes no new policies directed toward mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, and incorporates extrapolated socioeconomic trends continuing from the present time.

Increased Emissions of Damaging Greenhouse Gases.


The expanded use of fossil fuels will lead to a corresponding growth in the annual rate of emitting the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the atmosphere.  Since the physical processes governing the fate of atmospheric CO₂ leave most of it in the atmosphere, its concentration will continue to increase as the emissions rate increases.  Much of this growth will come from developing countries of the world, which the Outlook exemplifies as BRIICS (Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, China and South Africa).  Beyond the increase in fossil fuels, use of land and water resources for agriculture to provide food for the expanding population and its changing dietary habits will impose increased stress on the planet.

The Outlook states in bold emphasis “Continued degradation and erosion of natural environmental capital is expected to 2050, with the risk of irreversible changes that could endanger two centuries of rising living standards.”

A summary of some of the dangers envisioned in the Outlook is given below.

Climate change

o       Greenhouse gas emissions and concomitant atmospheric concentrations continue to grow, especially from energy-derived CO₂.

o       There is increasing evidence for climate change and its effects.

• Pledges by the nations of the world were given at the Copenhagen (2009) and Cancun (2010) conferences to limit greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently to keep the atmospheric concentration below 450 parts per million (ppm) of CO₂-equivalents, the level thought to be the upper bound for keeping the long-term average increase in global temperature below 2ºC (3.6ºF) above the temperature that prevailed prior to the industrial revolution.  It appears these are incapable of being fulfilled.

Biodiversity continues to shrink in response to climate change and ncreased land use
pressures.

Water resources

o       More people will live in areas of growing water shortages and increased groundwater pollution.

o       More people, both urban and rural, will not have access to sanitary water sources.

Health and Environment

o       Increasing levels of SO₂ and NO_X air pollution in the urban areas of developing countries adversely impact the health and mortality of affected populations.

The Outlook also lists certain areas where efforts have led to a slowing of detrimental processes, and even to certain improvements.  No such improvements were identified for climate change, however.  Trends that reduce the emissions rate were identified based on increased efficiencies in developed countries, and a reduction in deforestation in OECD and BRIICS countries.

Consequences of Inaction in Climate Policy

Global Warming.  The Outlook expresses concern that in the absence of more ambitious policies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, climate change bringing more disruptive effects will be locked in.  It envisions greenhouse gas emissions growing, by region, under the Baseline scenario, as shown below.

OECD Baseline scenario projection of annual greenhouse gas emissions over 40 years from 2010 to 2050.  Emissions are in Gigatonnes of CO₂-equivalent and run from 0 to 90.  “AI” means Annex I of the Kyoto Protocol covering developed countries at the time the Protocol was negotiated.  “Rest of BRIICS” does not include Russia.  ROW indicates rest of the world.

Source: OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction. Highlights.  http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/6/1/49846090.pdf

The projection expects overall emissions to increase 50% between 2010 and 2050, arising largely from the BRIICS group and due mainly to growth by 70% in CO₂ emissions from energy production.  According to the Baseline, these emissions could result in atmospheric CO₂ concentrations of as much as 685 ppm by 2050, far in excess of the upper bound of 450 ppm recognized as the goal required to keep long-term global average temperatures from increasing more than 2ºC; this predicted high level could bring the temperature increase to the range of 3ºC to 6ºC (5.4ºF to 10.8ºF) above pre-industrial levels by 2050.

The Outlook deems that pledges by the countries of the world undertaken at the  Cancun Conference are inadequate to constrain global temperature rise to 2ºC.  As a result, it predicts that global precipitation patterns would change, glaciers and permafrost at high latitudes would melt increasingly more rapidly, severe sea level rise would result, and extreme weather events would increase in frequency and intensity. In order to restore the world’s climate trajectory to a path that would likely avoid consequences such as these, the Outlook foresees the need for more rapid and more expensive reductions in emissions to be effective by 2020, compared to the more long-term, reasoned approach that the world’s nations might have embarked on earlier.

Biodiversity, as measured by mean species diversity, is predicted to decrease by 10% by 2050, largely as a result of the effects of climate change, commercial forestry, and the expanded use of land for cultivating bioenergy crops.  Freshwater diversity will also likely suffer losses beyond the one-third already lost.  It is estimated that loss of biodiversity has a value between US$2 and 5 trillion per year.

Water resources will be further strained, in view of the increase in the global population and demands placed on water for consumption, industrial and manufacturing use, and cooling of thermal electric generation facilities.

Human health will suffer under the Baseline scenario, due primarily to higher mortality arising from airborne particulate matter and ground level ozone.

Policy Changes to Minimize Further Climate Change

The Outlook points out that the Baseline scenario emphasizes the high priority of changing the world’s policies in order to minimize the problems identified above.  It is very concerned that natural systems have “tipping points” of change, beyond which positive feedback mechanisms make further detrimental changes all the easier, becoming “irreversible”.  It recognizes that the factors contributing to climate and environmental tipping points remain poorly understood.

“Acting now makes environmental and economic sense”, according to the Outlook.  There remains a possibility of restraining greenhouse gas emissions so that the maximum annual rate could occur by 2020, and then decrease year by year after that.  Reducing the annual emissions rate in this way could succeed in keeping the world’s long-term global temperature rise within the 2ºC limit. This ambition implicitly refers to a metaphor in an earlier post according to which the atmosphere is a CO₂ bathtub whose faucet keeps adding more CO₂ but whose drain is mostly closed so that very little CO₂ is removed.  The result is that the level of CO₂ in the bathtub keeps rising.  In fact, CO₂ remains in the atmosphere for 100 years or more.  This metaphor emphasizes that even if the annual rate of global CO₂ emissions falls, each year’s new contribution still raises the level of the CO₂ atmosphere in the bathtub.  It is the cumulative, final level of CO₂ that determines what the long-term global average temperature rise will be, not the annual emissions rate.

The Outlook alludes to estimates that costs of harms and damages due to climate change by 2050 could be as high as 14% of global average per capita consumption.  Compared to this, the report suggests, for example, that pricing fossil fuel use, or greenhouse gas emissions, sufficient to achieve the 2ºC limit (the 450 Core scenario) would impact global gross domestic product by only 5.5% by 2050, while succeeding to reduce annual emissions by about 70% by then (see the graphic below).

Relative changes in GDP (dark blue) and greenhouse gas emissions (light blue), giving the effect of implementing the 450 ppm Core scenario (- - -) compared to the Baseline scenario ( ^______ ).

Source: OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction. Highlights.  http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/6/1/49846090.pdf

The Outlook proposes broad policy initiatives that can help achieve the benefits shown in the above graphic, and its sustainability objectives more generally.  These include

• Pricing pollution and harmful greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently higher than environmentally sound alternatives that the market will reward the latter.  Mechanisms to accomplish this policy include environmental taxes and emissions trading (cap-and-trade) schemes.  Cap and trade is already in place in the European Union, California , and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) operating in the northeastern states of the U. S., as well as in certain other countries of the world.

• Removing subsidies that promote use of fossil fuels and increase emission of greenhouse gases.  The Outlook cites fossil fuel subsidies of US$45-75 billion per year in OECD countries, and over US$400 billion in 2010 in developing and emerging countries.  The most recent post here points out that in the U. S., subsidies for fossil fuels have historically been as much as 5 times greater than for renewable energy sources.

  Analysis

The report “OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction” (as summarized here from its Highlights) covers four interrelated areas of the issue of the sustainability of human and other life forms on the planet.  The difficult problem of greenhouse gas-induced warming of long-term global average temperatures forms an important portion of the report.

The Outlook joins the most recent versions of the annual products on energy and the environment generated by the U. S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Agency and the OECD’s International Energy Agency .  The latter agencies provide data and analytical information, but do not offer policy recommendations.

  

The recent annual meetings of the Congress of the (193) Parties under the U. N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), at Copenhagen (2009) and Cancun  (2010) had as an important objective negotiating a follow-on agreement to take effect upon the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol at the end of 2012.  These conferences failed to reach agreement on this central aspect of their agendas (but each did agree to other provisions; see the linked posts).  Most recently at the Durban conference in 2011 the attending nations conceded that the objective of the Copenhagen and Cancun conferences with respect to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol was unattainable.  Rather, they agreed to the Durban Platform, embodying the new, extended objective of negotiating a legally binding world-wide treaty to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 2015, and to implement it by 2020.  Unfortunately, as noted, these dates are greatly delayed from the earlier timeline tied to the Kyoto Protocol.  In the interim no worldwide accord is in place that governs or constrains greenhouse gas emissions, although regional emissions limitations in the European Union, California, RGGI, and certain other countries are in place.

  

Yet the OECD Outlook stresses that major environmental harms, and damage to planetary sustainability, will ensue under the Baseline scenario that envisions no new environmental policies until 2050.  Of relevance under the present schedule of the UNFCCC, absent imminent action more urgent, drastic and costly measures are envisioned as necessary by 2020 in order to achieve the 450 ppm/2ºC objective. 

Once CO₂ and other greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere, the dynamics of their movements disperse the gases across the face of the entire planet.  The gases carry no tag identifying their source country.  Their effects on the climate likewise are felt all around the world.  Long-term warming of the global average temperature leads to harmful effects such as rising sea levels, extremes of weather, floods and droughts.  For these reasons it is incumbent on all nations of the world to come together as soon as possible to implement policies that mitigate emissions of greenhouse gases so as to seek to minimize the harms that they bring about.

© 2012 Henry Auer

Increasing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Developing Countries

Summary.  The developing world generally has higher rates of population growth and economic development than do developed countries.  Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of China and India, the most important examples of developing countries, have grown 4- to 6-fold from 1980 to 2009.  They are projected to continue growing rapidly in coming decades.

To the extent that such development continues without constraint on emissions of greenhouse gases, the world risks exceeding the limit of an increase in worldwide average temperature of 2ºC agreed to by the nations of the world.  Warming worldwide temperatures bring with them increased occurrence of extreme weather events that cause high levels of physical and economic harms.  Instead of expanding use of fossil fuels, the nations of the world should agree on new measures to “decarbonize” energy production and limit greenhouse gas emissions, thereby constraining planetary temperature rise within the agreed limit.

Introduction.  The use of energy, primarily provided by fossil fuels, across the globe has been expanding inexorably over past decades, and is forecast to continue growing by large amounts in coming decades.  Correspondingly the rate of emission of resulting greenhouse gases is also rising dramatically.  Most of this growth originates in the developing countries of the world, which generally are expanding both in their populations and in their economic activity.  Both factors contribute to expanding demand for energy.  This post examines these issues.

Many points are summarized in the main body of this post, with expanded information and data provided in the Details section at the end.

                       

Historical trends for energy use and CO₂ emissions for China and India.  China and India are the largest countries among the non-OECD nations (OECD, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, considered to be developed countries; see Note 1; non-OECD countries considered to be developing countries).  They have been growing rapidly in economic productivity, energy use and greenhouse gas emissions over the last two decades.  This post exemplifies the expansion of the energy economies of developing countries by focusing on these two countries. 

In 2009 China was the largest, and India was the fourth largest, consumer of energy in the world (U. S. Energy Information Agency (USEIA) India analysis, Nov. 21, 2011).  As India’s population expands and the national economies of both countries grow (see population and GDP tables below in the section Projected future trends), energy demand is expected to rise significantly.

Past growth in use of fossil fuels by China and India is summarized here.  For more details and graphics please see the Details section below. 

Generally, use of fossil fuels, and especially of coal and oil, has grown 4- to 6-fold, or even more, from 1980 to 2009.  Emissions of CO₂, the greenhouse gas that is the product of burning fossil fuels, likewise grew at comparable rates.

Energy use and emissions for the period from 1997, the year the Kyoto Protocol was agreed on, and the last year in the graphs below, 2009, are evaluated.  The date of the Kyoto Protocol is used here, because, as developing countries, China and India were excluded from coverage by its terms while many developed countries would be bound by it.  For this period:

• coal use by China grew by 241%, and use by India grew by 195%;
• China’s use of oil grew 213% from 1997 to 2009, and India’s grew by 176%; and
• CO₂ emissions from China grew by 250% between 1997 and 2009, and from India by 184%.

Coal is the predominant source of energy in China by far.  Among renewable sources, hydroelectric power constituted 6% of energy consumption.

Coal is a large source of energy for India as well as for China.  It is also significant that 24% of energy in India comes from combustible biomass, much of which originates from animal waste.

Neither country had large energy sources from renewable sources such as wind and solar power as of 2008-2009.

Projected future trends

World population growth.  The USEIA issued its International Energy Outlook 2011 (IEO) in September 2011.  The IEO projects population increases among countries of the world in its International Energy Outlook 2011.  Data extracted from this report for the U. S., OECD, China and India include the following:

                   Population growth

Region/country	2008 Actual	2035 Projection	Av. annual % chg.
U.S.	305	390	0.9
OECD	1,209	1,358	0.5
China	1,328	1,450	0.3
India	1,181	1,528	1.0
World	6,731	8,453	0.9

Source: USEIA, International Energy Outlook 2011  http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2011).pdf

World per capita gross domestic product (GDP).  The USEIA projects the growth in economic activity among countries and regions of the world in its IEO.  Data for per capita GDP include the following:

Per capita GDP expressed in purchasing power parity, using 2005 USD

Region/country	2008 Actual	2035 Projection	Av. annual % chg.
U.S.	43,349	65,862	1.5
OECD	30,601	47,887	1.7
China	5,777	23,694	5.7
India	2,692	8,792	4.6
World	9,773	19,123	2.6

Source: USEIA, International Energy Outlook 2011  http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2011).pdf  

Projected future growth in energy use.  (See Details for further information.)

Projections of future energy use drawn from the IEO relate to the USEIA’s Reference case, in which it is assumed that economic growth continues as at present, and that no policy changes are made in the future that are not currently operative.  This is frequently referred to as “business-as-usual”.

In its press release, USEIA states that, largely because of strong economic growth in developing countries (non-OECD countries) including the two leaders, China and India, the world’s energy use is expected to increase 53% between 2008 and 2035.  Energy use is closely tied to the growth in economic activity; the table above shows that per capita GDP is projected to grow by 5.7%/yr in China, and by 4.6%/yr in India, much more rapidly than in developed countries. These two countries alone will be responsible for half of the world’s increase in energy use.

An extract of data presented in the IEO is tabulated in the Details section at the end of this post, following the Discussion.  A graphical presentation of projected energy use is shown here.

Source: USEIA, International Energy Outlook 2011  http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2011).pdf

China and India consumed 21% of the world’s energy in 2008.  Their energy use is expected to more than double over the period shown, constituting 31% of the world’s energy use in 2035.  The annualized rate of increase across all non-OECD countries is 2.3%, whereas for the developed countries (OECD), the annualized rate of increase is only 0.6% (see the graphic above).

Projected growth in CO₂ emissions.  The IEO includes predictions for growth in CO₂ emissions originating from fossil fuels.  Data from the table in the Details section are shown in the chart below.

Source: USEIA, International Energy Outlook 2011  http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2011).pdf

Emissions from India grow by 208% from 2008 to 2035, and those from China grow by 198%.  It is seen that emission growth from the U. S. and from the OECD as a whole are much more modest.  The nations of the European Union, included in the OECD, have embarked on an ambitious program (linked here and here) to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050.  Clearly this falls outside the assumptions of the USEIA Reference case, and is not reflected in the data for the OECD.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) published its World Energy Outlook 2011 (WEO 2011) on Nov. 9, 2011.  It includes projections based on three scenarios.  The Current Policy Scenario (CPS) assumes no additional emissions policies implemented beyond those already in place in 2011.  This inaction is projected to lead to an increase in long-term global average temperature of 6ºC (10.8ºF) by 2035.  The intermediate New Policies Scenario includes policies intended to reduce emissions, but not by enough to stabilize atmospheric CO₂ levels. It is projected to lead to an increase in long-term global average temperature of 3.5ºC (6.3ºF).  The 450 Policy Scenario (450 PS) implements strict controls on new emissions that are intended to stabilize the atmospheric CO₂ concentration at 450 parts per million; this is the level deemed adequate to keep the increase in long-term global average temperature within 2ºC (3.6ºF) above the pre-industrial level.  This upper limit is based on the Fourth Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was issued in 2007.

The IEA graphic below compares projections of Total Primary Energy Supply by global regions for two scenarios, CPS and 450 PS.

Comparison of total world energy supply under the CPS and the 450 PS. Historical data for 1990 and 2008, and projected results under the two policies for 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2035.  Blue: OECD+ (developed countries); Green: OME, other major economies (developing countries); Purple: OC, other countries (developing countries); (see Note 2); Orange: Intl. bunkers, international air and marine transportation.

Source: IEA, 2011 Key World Energy Statistics; http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2011/key_world_energy_stats.pdf

The chart above illustrates annual rates of use of energy, indicating that each year large amounts of the greenhouse gas CO₂ are emitted.  Under CPS, the annual rate keeps increasing, adding to atmospheric concentrations of CO₂ at an ever-increasing rate.  Under 450 the annual rate appears to level off, but each year additional CO₂ still is emitted. 

Nevertheless, it is seen that by 2035, adopting the stringent 450 Policy Scenario results in an overall projected decrease of 22% in total energy needed compared to CPS.  The largest reduction in energy use is from the large economies of the developing world (OME), about 23%; followed by reductions in energy use by other developing countries (OC), about 17%, and reductions by OECD+ (developed countries) of about 13%.

Discussion

The Cancun Agreements were the final product (text and press release) of the 2010 conference, held under the auspices of the United Nations, and were approved by all 193 nations except one. 

Among the commitments made in Cancun, developing countries, on a voluntary basis, submitted “nationally appropriate mitigation actions” planned for coming years to the United Nations supervisory body.  Whereas many countries with smaller economies enumerated detailed goals and steps, countries such as China and India that are major emitters of greenhouse gases provided only brief, more generic, statements of goals (see the table below):

Country	Year for goal	Statement of goal
China	2020	Voluntary measures to reduce CO2 emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP; emissions intensity) by 40–45% compared to 2005, increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 15%, and to increase forest coverage by 40 million hectares (99 million acres).
India	2020	Voluntary efforts to reduce emissions intensity of its GDP by 20–25% compared with the 2005 level, excluding emissions from agriculture.

Developing countries such as China have long stressed their improvement of energy intensity, a measure of increasing the efficiency of their use of energy.  Yet, as seen in this post, their absolute amounts of energy used and greenhouse gas emitted continue growing at significant rates, responding to the prodigious rate of expansion of their economies, improvement in energy intensity notwithstanding.

The IEA warned in WEO 2011, according to its press release, that the world will enter “an insecure, inefficient and high-carbon energy system” unless it implements strong new policies to lower future emissions of CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.  Recent developments that signal  this urgency include the Fukushima nuclear accident which has deflated enthusiasm for nuclear energy, turmoil in the Middle East which creates instability in oil supplies and costs, and a strong increase in energy demand in 2010 which led to record high emissions of CO₂.

Fatih Birol, IEA’s Chief Economist, points out that as time passes without significant action to mitigate emissions, the world is becoming “locked in” to a high-carbon energy infrastructure.  Up to the point of changing policy, all preexisting energy-producing and –consuming infrastructure commits the world to continuing its carbon-inefficient energy economy.  They continue to emit CO₂ annually during their service lifetimes according to their originally designed (less efficient) operating specifications.  This is illustrated in the following graphic, which considers that 2010 is the year of commitment.

Lock-in of annual rates of CO₂ emissions from energy-producing and energy-consuming physical installations as of 2010, shown in the various SOLID colors.  Projected additional annual rates of emissions from facilities newly installed after 2010, allowable under the 450 Policy Scenario, are shown in the HATCHED GREEN area at the top of the diagram. 450 envisions that the annual rate of emissions reaches a maximum by 2017 and then begins declining.

© OECD/IEA 2011.  Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2011; http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2011/key_graphs.pdf

In the graphic above emissions from committed infrastructure (solid colors) are projected to decrease year by year as the various facilities age and are removed from service.  The graphic illustrates the maneuvering leeway (green shading) in annual CO₂ emissions that are consistent with the 450 Policy Scenario, which is intended to ensure that the long-term average increase in global temperature is constrained to 2ºC (3.6ºF).  The IEA press release states

“Four-fifths of the total energy-related CO2 emissions permitted to 2035 in the 450 Scenario are already locked-in by existing capital stock…. Without further action by 2017, the energy-related infrastructure then in place would generate all the CO2 emissions allowed in the 450 Scenario up to 2035. Delaying action is a false economy: for every $1 of investment in cleaner technology that is avoided in the power sector before 2020, an additional $4.30 would need to be spent after 2020 to compensate for the increased emissions.”

The leeway emissions are the only portions of the world’s energy economy available for manipulation to reduce overall CO₂ emissions.

The Kyoto Protocol, covering many developed nations but not the U. S., expires in 2012.  It had been the goal of the U. N. conferences in Copenhagen (2009) and Cancun (2010) to negotiate a new treaty to follow Kyoto as it expired.  But the nations of the world could not agree on terms.  In 2011, at the Durban conference conference, this discord was so fundamental that now the goal has been pushed back to reach an agreement by 2015, with the objective of having it come into force by 2020.  Unfortunately, these dates are greatly extended from earlier timelines.  They permit greenhouse gases to be emitted unconstrained and to continue accumulating in the earth’s atmosphere without sanctions in the interim.  Because of the delay, climate scientists are concerned that the global average temperature will increase considerably more than previously hoped.  This would mean severe changes in climate and weather, leading to increased numbers and severity of extreme weather events. 

Greenhouse gas emissions are a global problem, demanding a global solution.  Once emitted into the atmosphere, CO₂ and other greenhouse gases do not carry a label indicating where on the globe they originated from.  Emissions from any country become the greenhouse effect problem of every country.  The increase in the long-term global average temperature, and its attendant extremes of weather events, damages caused and expenses incurred, affect all the nations of the world. 

Rather than continuing the unabated expansion of the use of fossil fuels, and incurring unforeseen expenses caused by extreme weather events, the nations of the world should be decarbonizing their energy.  Comparable amounts of capital could be invested and comparable numbers of new jobs could be created that would be directed to developing renewable sources of energy or to implementing “zero-emissions” use of fossil fuels (exemplified by the experimental technology of carbon capture and storage).  It behooves all nations to embark on greenhouse gas mitigation measures as soon as possible, and not to continue “business-as-usual”.

                      ===========================================

Details.

Historical trends for energy use and CO₂ emissions for China and India.

Trends for coal and oil use in China and India are shown below, as these are the principal fossil fuels used in each country for electricity generation and transportation, respectively.  Values for 1997, the year the Kyoto Protocol was agreed on, and the last year in the graph, 2009, are shown.  The date of the Kyoto Protocol is used here, because, as developing countries, China and India were excluded from coverage by its terms.

Use of coal is shown below.

Use of coal 1980-2009, million short tons/year, for China and India.  The scale for China runs from 0 to 3500, and that for India runs from 0 to 700.

Source: USEIA http://www.eia.gov/countries/img/charts_png/CH_coacon_img.png

http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=IN#coal

From 1997 to 2009, coal use by China grew by 241%, and use by India grew by 195%.  For a portion of this period, it is believed that China was commissioning new coal-fired electricity plants at the rate of about two per week.

Total use of oil in thousands of barrels/day between 1980 and 2009 for China and India.  The scale for China runs from 0 to 9000, and that for India runs from 0 to 3500.

Source: USEIA http://www.eia.gov/countries/img/charts_png/CH_petcon_img.png

http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=IN#pet

China’s use of oil grew 213% from 1997 to 2009, and India’s grew by 176%.

China’s use of petroleum increased a further 10% from 2009 to 2010, and is expected to grow at that rate in the next few years  (USEIA China Analysis 2011).  It produces considerable oil domestically, but also imports large amounts, currently about the same as is produced domestically. 

The distribution of the sources of energy for China and India is shown in the chart below, for 2008 or 2009.

Source: USEIA. http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=CH;

http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=IN.

Coal is the predominant source of energy in China by far.  Among renewable sources, hydroelectric power constituted 6% of energy consumption; China is assertively developing this source.  The total amount of hydroelectric power will expand considerably in 2012 as all the turbines at the Three Gorges Dam begin operating.

The graphic shows that coal is a large source of energy for India as well as in China.  It is also significant that 24% of energy in India comes from combustible biomass, much of which originates from animal waste.

Other than hydroelectric power, neither country had large energy sources from renewable sources such as wind and solar power as of 2008-2009.

Carbon dioxide emissions attributed to the burning of fossil fuels for the two countries are shown below.

Total carbon dioxide emissions from use of fossil fuels 1980-2009 for China and India, million metric tons/year.  The scale for China runs from 0 to 8000, and that for India runs from 0 to 1800.

Source : USEIA http://www.eia.gov/countries/img/charts_png/CH_co2con_img.png

http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=IN#cde

CO₂ emissions from China grew by 250% between 1997 and 2009, and from India by 184%.  It is noteworthy that, as expected, the trajectory of emissions from China closely resembles the pattern of its coal use (see earlier graphic, above).

Projected future growth in energy use.

Consumption of all fossil fuels is projected to grow dramatically during this period.  Use of coal is projected to increase from 139 quadrillion Btu in 2008 to 209 quadrillion Btu in 2035, a change of 50%.  China alone is responsible for 76% of the increase in use of coal.  India and other Asian countries also contribute significantly (19%) to this increase, at least in part because coal is cheaper to use than other sources of energy. 

Use of energy in transportation of people and goods is projected to grow through 2035 in the Reference case, almost entirely from non-OECD countries.  As non-OECD countries grow economically, the demand for transportation services grows significantly, especially the demand for personal cars.  Energy consumption in transportation almost doubles, growing at a rate of 2.6%/yr in the non-OECD countries, but only at 0.3%/yr in OECD countries.

Renewable energy across the globe is provided largely by hydroelectric generation and wind; solar generation currently plays a much smaller role.  In OECD countries, the major growth in renewables through 2035 is expected to come from wind and solar power, as potential hydroelectric sites are already fully developed.  In non-OECD countries, however, hydroelectric generation is still growing at a fast pace as dam sites continue to be exploited.

Electricity generation in China is expanding very rapidly, and is expected to continue to do so (USEIA China Analysis 2011).   In 2008 the generating capacity was 797 GW of which almost 80% was generated from coal.  It is expected that by 2020 the capacity will double to 1,600 GW, and to generate 3 times as much electricity by 2035 as was produced in 2009.  To accommodate this increased capacity, the Chinese are also aggressively expanding their transmission grid.  Since most of the generating capacity comes from conventional thermal sources supplied largely by burning coal and natural gas, it is to be expected that emissions of CO₂ will increase correspondingly.  The government of China expects that thermal generation capacity will increase from 652 GW in 2009 to 1,000 GW in 2020.  Coal will remain the principal fuel because of its domestic abundance, although older plants will be decommissioned in favor of larger, more efficient generators.  Natural gas will play a small but increasing role in the future.

Among renewable sources, hydroelectric power plays a larger role in China than in any other country, and will continue to grow.  For instance the massive Three Gorges Dam will become fully operational in 2012.  Wind power is expanding at a rapid rate, but even so remains a miniscule fraction of China’s electric generating portfolio.

Electricity generation in India.  India had about 177 GW of generating capacity in place in 2008 (USEIA India analysis).  Conventional thermal generation (mostly coal) provided 80% of that, with hydroelectric generation providing most of the remainder.  Nuclear and renewable power provided only a few percent of India’s electricity.  About 35% of the population lacks access to electricity, mostly in rural areas, representing over 400 million people.  Even in the main cities there are frequent blackouts.

Projections of future energy use under the USEIA’s Reference case are drawn from IEO and tabulated here.

Source: USEIA, International Energy Outlook 2011  http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2011).pdf

                   ===============================================

Notes:

1. Current OECD member countries included in this IEO are the United States, Canada, Mexico, Austria, Belgium, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark,

Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand.

2. OECD+: OECD as in Note 1 plus Bulgaria, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta and Romania;

OME (other major economies), Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russian Federation and Middle East;

OC (other countries), the world other than OECD+ and OME.

© 2011 Henry Auer