Global warming has become a major obsession in our press yet I find that few really understand the basics of the issues. Here is an attempt to decode the way the problem is presented.
First, it is clear that global warming is a reality. Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases) for a long time. There is no scientific debate on this point. The scientific community has spoken and the Nobel committee has endorsed these findings with their latest prize for Al Gore and IPCC. The IPCC- i.e. the intergovernmental panel on climate change- set up by the UN with participation from 2500 scientists in more than 130 countries, studied the issue for over a decade and came to the conclusion that climate change was real and that it was caused primarily by human intervention. Industrialization, deforestation, and pollution greatly increased atmospheric concentrations of water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, all greenhouse gases, which helped trap heat near Earth's surface causing global warming.
The IPCC projects a best estimate of global temperature increase of 1.8 - 4.0°C with a possible range of 1.1 - 6.4°C by 2100. This increase could lead to large-scale food and water shortages and have catastrophic effects on wildlife.
Now what were the main causes of the increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? From the IEA data, the main contributions come from the burning of coal, liquid fuels and gases. Humans have been pouring carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in much greater quantities than can be absorbed by the oceans and plant life. In 2006, of the total carbon dioxide contribution of 29.2 billion metric tonnes, coal accounted for 42%, liquid fuels 38 % and gas 20%.
And who were the main culprits in this ?When you look at the countries contributing to the emissions of 29.2 billion metric tones in 2006, the top of the charts were the US at 5.9, China at 6.0 and Europe at 4.7 billion metric tonnes representing almost 57% of all the emissions in the world. India contributed 1.29 billion metric tonnes, slightly more than Japan at 1.25.
It is now being projected by various authorities that the total carbon dioxide emissions will grow to 40.4 billion metric tones by 2030. Of these about 25.8 billon metric tonnes or about 63% would now come from the non OECD countries with China’s share of pollution rising to 11.73 billion metric tonnes.
It is important to note that the per capita contributions from the major countries project a different picture even in 2030 – US will still emit more than 17 tonnes per capita with Japan at 9.8 and OECD Europe at 7.96 while China at 8 and India at 1.4 are far behind. It is also worth noting that despite the public outcry in the US, the per capita emissions have only gone down marginally over the last two decades- US emitted 19.6 tonnes per capita in 1990.
While the per capital contribution is a relative measure, it becomes huge when you estimate the total contribution of these countries. Thus the US would contribute 6.4 billon tonnes (16%) while China would contribute 11.73 billion tonnes (or 29 %) and India 2.11 billion tonnes(5 %) of the total 40.4 billion metric tones in 2030. OECD countries as a whole would contribute 14.6 billion metric tonnes or 37%.
It is true, however, that from 1980 till now, the US emitted 141 billion metric tonnes and OECD 122 while the contributions from China were only 76 and from India only 20 billion metric tones. And despite their public postures both the US and OECD country’s per capita contribution of carbon dioxide emission has not declined appreciably in the last twenty years. In recent years both the US and OECD countries have tried to move towards some forms of carbon emission reduction either using a carbon tax or some form of cap and trade system. An excellent analysis of these options is in this article.
In the developing countries, however, the outlook remains uncertain. And this is for one reason – control of carbon emissions is seen as possible only if economic growth is lowered. One of the forgotten statistics in all this is the fact that the carbon dioxide emissions are an outgrowth primarily of increased energy consumption in these countries. And energy consumption is almost linearly related to economic growth. Put differently, for economic growth to occur, the developing countries need energy but increased energy consumption causes increased carbon dioxide emissions.
Since the per capita GDP of China in 2006 was $4690 while that of the US was $44,830,(and corresponding energy per capita consumption was 1433 kgoe and 7768 respectively), it is clear that the countries like China and India would continue to increase their energy consumption in their attempts to reach higher levels of economic development.
So what is essential is to realize that the carbon dioxide emission problem is at heart an economic development problem. Solutions will lie in increasing the efficiency with which energy is used for economic growth as well as spurring the means for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from the energy that is used by them. The first requires greater energy efficiency measures, while the later requires a shift in choice of fuel away from both coal and liquid fuels to either natural gas or renewable energy. Both require investments in new technologies. Hence the developing countries emphasis on transfer of technologies to help cushion the transition to a lower carbon based economies as well as their argument that it was the developed world which has polluted the planet in the past when they were growing economically and so needs to do more to control emissions than it has been willing to do.
The dilemma arises from the fact that if China and India were to reach the levels of the US in terms of energy consumption by 2030, an unlikely prospect, we would then be looking at world carbon dioxide emission at least double those estimated today- a prospect that nobody wants.
No comments:
Post a Comment