Day 10: Report from Reed Smith Delegates in Copenhagen at the United Nations Climate Change Conference
This post was written by Larry Demase.
In addition to the official proceedings, much of the activity at and around the COP centers on what is not said or said unofficially or (hearsay notwithstanding) just heard from other delegates. For example:
- At a side event this morning hosted by the International Energy Agency, the Swedish Deputy Prime Minister, who was the keynote speaker, did not discuss the resignation of Connie Hedegaard, the Danish chairwoman in charge of COP-15. Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the Danish Prime Minister took over for her purportedly because he was not happy with pace of negotiations. That is in contrast with the official statement that the takeover was planned. Regardless, there is buzz among delegates that the Danish Prime Minister is trying to politically hijack the conference.
- A Japanese negotiator lamented that he stayed up all night to negotiate and was depressed over prospects – although he said he thought there was still a chance for a political agreement.
- The European Union wants a reduction based on 1.5 degree (C) in temperature but there has been significant discussion among delegates that this level of reduction is unworkable.
Scuttlebutt, protests and general chaos aside, where does that leave us? For the next two days, the COP is left to focus on the deadlock in the negotiations over payment to the developing countries and the level of emission target reductions.
Beyond the COP, others have focused on how to reduce carbon dioxide emissions throughout the globe. The International Energy Agency (IEA) is one of the groups focused on this issue. The IEA is an intergovernmental organization that acts as an energy policy advisor to countries in their effort to ensure reliable, affordable and clean energy for citizens. After attending the IEA side event, it is obvious that much of what is going on at COP-15 is based on the work of the IEA. They have an incredible amount of real information in their data base and have prepared several roadmaps to advance innovative energy technology. The technology roadmaps identify gaps in financing, research and development, and the needed “revolution” in technology to reduce GHG emissions.
Underlying the IEA’s technology roadmaps is a model with two scenarios that predicts the necessary changes in world energy use to achieve GHG emissions reduction goals. One scenario is based on limiting GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at 450 ppm of CO2 equivalent (the current atmospheric concentration is about 385 ppm). This is called their 450 scenario and is equivalent to a 2 degree temperature increase. They also have a 550 scenario. When asked why they did not create a 350 ppm scenario, the IEA responded that they could not find one that would work.
Here are some key conclusions from their 450 scenario:
- a fifty dollar per ton carbon price is needed to “decarbonize” the energy sector in order to meet 2020 goals;
- a fifty percent cut in world-wide CO2 emissions is needed by 2050;
- current COP-15 pledges will not be enough to meet the 450 goal;
- major tools for achieving the 450 goal include (a) implementation of IEA energy efficiency recommendations, (b) decommissioning most of the world’s coal fired power plants, and (c) limiting use of gasoline to fifty percent of world’s transportation fleet; and
- natural gas will remain a large part of the energy sector with growth of gas production from shale (interesting news for my home state of Pennsylvania).
According to the IEA’s Richard Baron, it is also exploring the proposition that the carbon market should be brought to developing countries because the Clean Development Mechanism has not brought the type of emission reductions needed in those countries. The proposal is that new carbon mechanisms could cost-effectively support larger scale projects in developing countries. The objective is to move away from small projects to ones which can affect the developing countries’ own baseline.
The IEA underscored that an energy technology revolution will involve a portfolio of solutions: greater energy efficiency, increased renewable energies and nuclear energy, and the near-decarbonization of fossil fuel-based power generation. It has identified carbon capture and storage (CCS) as the only technology available to mitigate GHG emissions from large-scale fossil fuel usage in fuel transformation, industry and power generation.
Tom Kerr, who is with the IEA’s Energy Technology Policy Division, reported there were currently only five CCS projects in existence in the world and none of them involved power plants. The IEA estimates that one hundred CCS projects will be needed by 2020 and three thousand by 2050 in order to meet the 450 scenario. The IEA believes CCS is required not just for new coal-fired power plants but natural gas and oil fired plants as well as for various manufacturing sectors of the world economy. The IEA is projecting more than enough capacity exists for CO2 storage under its 450 scenario.
By the way, in support of the IEA’s carbon capture and storage efforts, Dave Wagner of Reed Smith is part of an IEA working group that will draft a model legal framework for carbon capture and storage that would be used to assist governments in the development of national legal and regulatory frameworks around the world.
