Showing posts with label policies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label policies. Show all posts

Saturday, October 26, 2024

Models downplay wrath of what they sow

Models that analyze what is driving up the temperature all too often omit specific sources, or when included, models all too often downplay their contribution. Accordingly, policies that are promoted based on such models are all too often ineffective or even counter-productive. 

Methane is all too often referred to as 'natural gas' originating from wetlands, swamps, cows and pigs, as if calling methane 'natural' implied that human activities were not responsible for such emissions. Moreover, people with vested interests all too often suggest that such 'natural emissions' should be captured and used for heating, cooking or industrial purposes, to offset 'human emissions'. Similarly, forest fires are all too often referred to as 'wildfires', as if human activities were not responsible for them. 

The compilation of images below shows forest fires as the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions on October 26, 2024. An image of carbon monoxide is also added (bottom right), as carbon monoxide is an indicator of forest fires. Carbon monoxide is also important since it is a precursor of tropospheric ozone and carbon monoxide depletes tropospheric hydroxyl radicals, thus extending methane's lifetime. 


The methane image (top right) shows a high presence of methane in northern Europe. The cause for this is the high temperatures anomaly in northern Europe on October 26, 2024, resulting in strong decomposition of vegetation, which comes with high emissions of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and methane. 


The high temperatures anomaly in northern Europe is illustrated by the above image. The image also illustrates polar amplification of the temperature rise, one of the mechanisms that drives up the temperature rise. Numerous mechanisms driving up the temperature rise are discussed in an earlier post that warns about a Double Blue Ocean Event. Thawing permafrost can cause huge emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane and nitrous oxide. 

[ from earlier post ]
Rising emissions could originate from many sources, the more so as more sinks turn into sources.
[ from earlier post ]
Many models go back only to 1750, many even use an earlier base, as if concentrations of greenhouse gases only started to rise then. 

The image on the right shows IPCC and WMO values for the rise of methane (CH₄), carbon dioxide (CO₂) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) from 1750. The image shows that: 
- Methane rose to 265% its 1750 value. - Carbon dioxide rose to 151% its 1750 value.
- Nitrous oxide rose to 125% its 1750 value.

Note that values for methane as low as 550 ppb and carbon dioxide as low as 260 ppm have been found in ice cores corresponding with periods thousands of years ago, as illustrated by the image below, from the pre-industrial page, based on Ruddiman et al. (2015)


According to the Met Office, climate sensitivity is typically defined as the global temperature rise following a doubling of CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere compared to pre-industrial levels. Pre-industrial CO₂ was about 260 parts per million (ppm), so a doubling would be at roughly 520 ppm.

recent study found that doubling the atmospheric CO₂ levels could cause an increase in Earth’s average temperature of 7 to 14°C (13 to 25.2°F). In the video below, Guy McPherson discusses the study.


How fast could a rise to 520 ppm CO₂ unfold? Models typically put 520 ppm CO₂ far away in the future. The image below shows an analysis based on August 2009 through July 2024 data that has a trend added pointing at 520 ppm CO₂ getting crossed in 2029 and 1200 ppm CO₂ getting crossed in early 2035. In other words, the clouds tipping point could get crossed in early 2035 due to rising CO₂ alone, and because this tipping point is measured in CO₂e, this could occur well before 2035 when including the impact of feedbacks and further mechanisms.

[ from earlier post ]

Another way the danger of rising temperatures is all too often downplayed is to suggest that many feedbacks work only over very long timescales. This narrative may be convenient for politicians who rarely bother about what happens beyond the next election. However, as discussed in a recent post, there are many mechanisms that can push up the temperature rapidly, adding up to a potential rise of more than 18°C within years.

Climate Emergency Declaration

Instead of omitting them, all mechanisms driving up the temperature should be fully included in an action plan that seeks to improve the situation. Multiple policy instruments and combinations of policy instruments should be considered for implementation, preferably through local feebates

The situation is dire and the precautionary principle calls for rapid, comprehensive and effective action to reduce the damage and to improve the situation, as described in this 2022 post, where needed in combination with a Climate Emergency Declaration, as discussed at this group.



Links

• Copernicus - Climate Pulse
https://atmosphere.climate.copernicus.eu

• Climate Reanalyzer 
https://climatereanalyzer.org

• World Meteorological Organization (WMO) - Greenhouse Gas Bulletin - No. 20 – 28 October 2024

• Double Blue Ocean Event 2025? 
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2024/10/double-blue-ocean-event-2025.html

• Continuous sterane and phytane δ13C record reveals a substantial pCO2 decline since the mid-Miocene - by Caitlyn R. Witkowski et al. (2024) 



Monday, October 21, 2019

Which policy can help EVs most?

In many countries, it has been proven hard to implement policies that help electric vehicle (EVs). In France, fuel taxes have triggered huge protests. In Ecuador, huge protests followed a steep rise in fuel prices, as a result of a decision to end gasoline and diesel subsidies.

An analysis conducted by Arctic-news compares eight policies on two criteria, i.e. how effective they are from a policy perspective and how popular the policies will likely be. As the image below shows, many policies are little or no better at helping EVs than continuing with business as usual (BAU).


“Tightening fuel economy standards may aim to reduce fuel use,” says Sam Carana, editor of Arctic-news, “but the Jevons paradox shows that this may lead to people buying more powerful cars, drive longer distances, etc. Moreover, it does little to help EVs, in fact, it may make it cheaper for people to keep driving fossil fuel-powered cars.

Sam Carana adds: “Subsidies for EVs aren't popular with pedestrians and cyclists, or with people who use public transport to go to work. These are often the poorest people and they feel that money that is spent on subsidies for EVs comes at the expense of social services for the poor. Subsidies are unlikely to gain popular support. Similarly, when subsidies for EVs take the form of tax deductions given to EV buyers, this mainly benefits those who can afford to buy EVs. Additionally, this reduces overall tax revenue, leaving less money for social services.”

“Taxes aren't much better, they may make driving a polluting car more expensive, but as long as people keep driving polluting cars, it won't help EVs and it won't help much with the climate crisis either. Higher taxes on fuel and cars haven't made EVs much more common in Europe than they are in the U.S., where such taxes are lower. The worst form of tax is 'Cap & Trade', as it enables people to keep driving polluting cars by paying for emission cuts elsewhere. Even if those cuts are indeed made elsewhere, they aren't made locally. Tax and Dividend seeks to get popular support by promising people part of the revenue, but this means the money isn't used to fight pollution and it may even be counterproductive, by helping people to keep driving fossil fuel-powered cars. Simple carbon taxes therefore seem more effective, while they may also be more popular with the poor, since more of the revenues can be spent on social services.”

Sam Carana: “Local feebates are the best way to go. It makes sense to add fees to the price of fuel, and - in order to most effectively facilitate the necessary transition to EVs - the revenues are best used to support EVs locally, which also helps such polices gain popular support locally.”

The analysis also looks at a wider set of local feebates, such as fees on sales of fossil fuel-powered cars, with the revenues used to fund rebates on local sales of EVs. Fees on facilities that sell or process fuel could also raise revenues that could be used to fund rebates on, say, EV chargers.  Furthermore, differentiation in fees on car registration, on car parking and on toll roads could all help make EVs more attractive.


In conclusion, a wide set of local feebates can most effectively facilitate the necessary changes and can best gain local support. The climate crisis urgently needs comprehensive and effective action, as described in the Climate Plan, which recommends implementation of local feebates to facilitate the necessary changes.

An associated issue is the Urban Heat Island effect, as illustrated by the image on the right. Buildings, roads and cars can significantly increase temperatures and pollution including ozone at surface level.

One way to reduce temperatures, pollution and road congestion is by using electric vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) air taxis.

Lilium plans to start offering air taxi services from 2025. While using about the same amount of electricity as an EV traveling over roads, the Lilium Jet travels as fast as 300 km/h and has a radius of 300 km.”

Sam Carana adds: “In practice, most trips are less than 10 km. A fleet of 10,000 Lilium Jets could cater for all trips otherwise made by cars in an area where one million people live.”

In theory, this could remove virtually all cars from a city, resulting in less need for roads, bridges, tunnels, parking spaces, garages, driveways, airports, etc. These air taxis can use the roofs of large buildings for landing and take off, or dedicated areas in parks or custom-built places along the shore (see image below).


This also means there will be less need for resources, infrastructure and space to manufacture, sell and service vehicles. As a result, urban centers could use the spaces gained for more trees, parks, footpaths and bike-ways, while becoming more compact, enabling people to live closer together and closer to workplaces, shops, restaurants, educational and medical facilities, etc. As cities become more compact, the average trip within a city will become shorter in distance and take up less time.



Local councils should be keen to help make this happen, for a number of reasons. A fleet of air taxis can help combat road congestion, global heating, including the Urban Heat Island effect, and pollution by cars. At first glance, creating places for 10,000 air taxis to land and take off may look like a big job, but many businesses will be keen to accommodate air taxis. Moreover, it is very attractive when considering that 10,000 air taxis can replace the need for up to a million vehicles, as well as the need to build and maintain the associated roads, bridges, tunnels, parking spaces, garages, etc. It can also double the amount of land available for parks, houses and other buildings. Lilium plans to start offering commercial services from 2025, so it's time to start planning now and create places for air taxis to land and take off where they will be needed.

The video below, 'The Urban Green', was posted by WWF International on March 17, 2016.




Links

• Climate Plan (page)
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/climateplan.html

• Climate Plan (post)
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2019/06/climate-plan.html

• Climate Plan (group)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/climateplan

• Feebates
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/feebates.html

• Who are the gilets jaunes and what do they want?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/03/who-are-the-gilets-jaunes-and-what-do-they-want

• Ecuador's Morena scraps fuel subsidy cuts in big win for indigenous groups
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-protests/ecuadors-moreno-scraps-fuel-subsidy-cuts-in-big-win-for-indigenous-groups-idUSKBN1WT265

• Ecuador’s Government Crisis, Explained
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/ecuadors-government-crisis-explained/2019/10/08/d54f19f2-ea17-11e9-a329-7378fbfa1b63_story.html

• Ecuador: Society's Reaction to IMF Austerity Package 


Saturday, December 1, 2012

Aviation Policies

The European Union's policy on Aviation Emissions

From the start of 2012, the European Union (EU) required its members to include emissions from flights arriving at and departing from their airports in the EU scheme of emissions allowances and trading, while encouraging other nations to take equivalent measures. The EU exempts biofuel and claims to take a 'comprehensive approach' to reducing environmental impacts of aviation. To create space for political negotiations to get an international agreement regulating emissions from aviation, the EU has meanwhile postponed implementation of its directive by one year.

What kind of international agreement could be reached on aviation emissions? What policies work best? How do aviation policies fit into a comprehensive approach?

A Comprehensive Plan of Action on Climate Change

A comprehensive plan is best endorsed globally, e.g. through an international agreement building on the Kyoto Protocol and the Montreal Accord. At the same time, the specific policies are best decided and implemented locally, e.g. by insisting that each nation reduces specific emissions by a set annual percentage, and additionally removes a set annual amount of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and the oceans, followed by sequestration, proportionally to its current emissions.

Policy goals are most effectively achieved when policies are implemented locally and independently, with separate policies each addressing the specific shifts that are each needed to reach agreed targets. Each nation can work out what policies best fit their circumstances, as long as they each independently achieve agreed targets. Counting emissions where they occur will encourage nations to adopt effective policies, such as imposing fees on the sales of products in proportion to the emissions they cause, and adopting product standards that ban products that would otherwise cause unacceptably high emissions while clean alternatives are readily available.


Clean Energy Policies

Policies aiming to achieve a shift to clean energy will apply to many sectors such as transportation (including aviation), power plants, and industry and buildings which are also large consumers of fossil fuel. The above image also shows policies specifically targeting aviation, in addition to clean energy policies that apply across sectors.

The image below proposes feebates as the most effective way to accomplish the necessary shift to clean energy. In such feebates, fees are imposed on polluting energy and associated facilities, with revenues used - preferably locally - to fund rebates on clean energy and associated facilities.


In line with such feebates, each nation could impose fees on jetfuel, while using the revenues for a variety of purposes, preferably local clean energy programs. Where an airplane lands arriving from a nation that has failed to add sufficient fees, the nation where the airplane lands could impose supplementary fees. Such supplementary fees should be allowed under international trade rules, specifically if revenues are used to fund direct air capture of carbon dioxide.

Aviation Policies

As said, apart from clean energy policies, it makes sense to additionally implement policies specifically targeting aviation. Airplanes not only cause carbon dioxide emissions, but also cause other emissions such as black carbon and NOx, contrails and cirrus cloud effects. The EU emissions scheme only targets a limited set of emissions, while also looking at their global warming potential, rather than the potential of emissions to cause warming locally, specifically in the Arctic. A joint 2011 UNEP/WMO report mentioned many measures to reduce black carbon and tropospheric ozone, adding that their implementation could reduce warming in the Arctic in the next 30 years by about two-thirds.

A 2012 study by Jacobson et al. concludes that cross-polar flights by international aviation is the most abundant direct source of black carbon and other climate-relevant pollutants over the Arctic. Rerouting cross-polar flights to instead circumnavigate the Arctic Circle therefore makes sense. While such rerouting consumes more fuel, it could reduce fuel use and emissions within the Arctic Circle by 83% and delay pollutant transport to the Arctic.

Given the need to act on warming in the Arctic, it makes sense to ban cross-polar flights. To further reduce the flow of pollutants to the Arctic caused by aviation, it makes sense to add fees on all jet flights. Such fees on jet flights would be additional to the above fees on fuel. This could further facilitate a shift from aviation toward cleaner forms of transportation, such as high speed rail. Where the revenues of such fees are used to fund direct air capture, they could also help kickstart an industry that could produce synthetic jetfuel and that could be instrumental in bringing atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide back to 280ppm.