Download POLLUTION PROBE

Joint Air Quality and Climate
Change Strategies: Challenges
and Opportunities
Quentin Chiotti*
Ken Ogilvie*
John Drexhage#
Mary Pattenden*
qchiotti@pollutionprobe.org
www.pollutionprobe.org
*Pollution Probe
# IISD
NERAM V October 17 2006
Energy and Air Issues
Energy
Production
and Use
Emissions
Atmospheric
Issues
ACID RAIN
NOX
COAL
VOCs
OIL
SO2
NATURAL
GAS
OTHER*
* Limited
emissions from
various
sources,
including
biomass
burning.
SMOG
N2O
CH4
CLIMATE
CHANGE
CO2
PARTICULATE
MATTER
TOXICS
NERAM V October 17 2006
HAZARDOUS
AIR
POLLUTANTS
MAIN ISSUES
Key sources
Atmospheric
chemistry and
interactions
Direct and indirect
health effects
Policies
Solutions –
Technical and nontechnical
NERAM V October 17 2006
Co-benefits or
unanticipated
outcomes
Knowledge Gaps: AQ & CC
• Atmospheric science: highly complex, uncertainties,
forecasts/scenarios
• Scale: hemispheric, transboundary, local – [GHG] truly
global
• Temporal differences between pollutants and response
times
• Sources: Energy/Electricity, Transportation, Agriculture,
LIEs, SMEs
• Health effects: Climate change on air quality; synergistic
impacts of heat stress; other health effects (e.g. WNV)
• Technological and non-tech solutions: similar challenges
but significant differences
• Policies: silos; counteractive; synergistic
NERAM V October 17 2006
So How Do We Move Forward?
Need to Move Past the
Four Stages of Denial
• Deny there is a problem
• Deny you are a source/part of the
problem
• Deny that there is a technological
solution
• Deny that the technological solution is
economically feasible or affordable
NERAM V October 17 2006
Framework To Evaluate AQ and
Climate Change Strategies
• Degree of scientific certainty about the
problem and health effects
• Knowledge of main emission sources?
• Agreement on solutions and expected
outcomes?
• Which are economically feasible and
politically acceptable?
• Direct and indirect impacts of solutions and
how are these being contested in the political
arena? (e.g. nuclear option)
NERAM V October 17 2006
Key Linkages: Chapter 5
• Chemical/atmospheric interactions
• Actions that directly reduce GHGs and
other air pollutants
• Actions that indirectly reduce energy
use and emissions
• Actions that are both mitigation and
adaptation – measures which reduce
emissions and enhance adaptive
capacity
NERAM V October 17 2006
Climate Change – Air Quality: IPCC
• Co-benefits: big picture is challenging
• Substantial health benefits from CO2
mitigation strategies via improved AQ
• Need for integration: options for harvesting
synergies
– Coal AQ technologies lock in coal, can undermine
alternatives (e.g. renewables, efficiency)
– Agriculture: ammonia emissions – nitrous oxide
and methane
– Methane as a precursor to tropospheric ozone
– Tropospheric ozone a potent GHG
– Biofuels and black carbon
– Diesel: CO2 and PM2.5
NERAM V October 17 2006
Air Quality – Climate Change
Q. What is the perspective from AQ
experts?
A. ??????????????????????????????
Our Challenge Tomorrow:
• Guidance Document
• Recommendations from NERAM
Colloquium V
NERAM V October 17 2006
Engineered interventions to avoid
• Aerosols help reduce 25% regional effects of
climate change (cooling effect)
– Produce more locally based sulphates
• NOx scavenges O3:
– Encourage more car use to reduce smog
These types of
decisions best
left to a higher
authority!
NERAM V October 17 2006
Actions to Consider
• Actions that are
ethical, consider
environmental
justice and lead to
a clear
environmental and
health gain
• Need to address
more than just the
symptoms, but also
the underlying
causes
• Should focus on
sources and
solutions that
produce the
biggest benefits
NERAM V October 17 2006
Does addressing air quality issues through actions
that reduce GHG emissions produce a broader suite
of benefits and clear outcomes, than addressing
climate change by reducing emissions of other air
pollutants?
2006
AIR QUALITY
CLIMATE CHANGE
NERAM V October 17 2006
What about 2026?
AIR QUALITY
CLIMATE CHANGE
NERAM V October 17 2006
What do we do in 2050 when the
Climate Change Dog becomes the
[Dangerous] Killer Rabbit?
NERAM V October 17 2006
4XCO2
3XCO2
2XCO2
NERAM V October 17 2006
UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change
• Article 2
• “ … stabilization of greenhouse gas
concentrations in the atmosphere at a level
that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate system.
Dangerous – how much change?
Stabilization – at what level?
The EU has chosen 2C global warming as the
“dangerous” level – only 1.3C more warming.
NERAM V October 17 2006
The abundance, atmospheric lifetime, and
Global Warming Potential of GHGs vary
considerably
GHG
Abundance
Lifetime
GWP
(1998, ppbv)
(years)
(100 yr)
CO2
Carbon
Dioxide
365,000
variable
1
CH4
Methane
1745
12
23
N 2O
Nitrous
Oxide
314
114
296
up to 0.5
2-1700
120-14,000
up to 0.02
0.3-220
12-12,000
up to 0.08
2600-50,000
5700-22,200
CFCs,
HCFCs
Halo
HFCs
Carbons
PFCs, SF6
NERAM V October 17 2006
Kyoto and the Inevitability
of Climate Change
Robert Watson, Chair of IPCC to
CoP6 Delegates, The Hague,
November 2000
Stabilization: 40 Kyotos Needed
800
700
Concentration (ppmv)
“The overwhelming majority of
scientific experts, whilst
recognizing that scientific
uncertainties exist, nonetheless
believe that human-induced
climate change is inevitable. . The
question is not whether climate
will change... but rather how
much... how fast, and where”
BAU
1
600
2xCO2
500
Kyoto
400
300
2000
2020
Based in IMAG E 2 mode l ou tput
2040
Year
2060
2080
1
2100
IS92a
Adaptation is necessary
More mitigation is needed
NERAM V October 17 2006
Urgency of Situation:
Window is 0-15 years
EU: 25% reduction by 2020; Global reductions of 60 to 80% by 2050
NERAM V October 17 2006
Canada’s Projected GHG
Emissions
900
Business as Usual
Projections
Mt CO2 equivalent
850
800
+23%
750
700
2010 Emissions
809 Mt
(1999)
699 Mt
1990 Emissions
607 Mt
BAU Gap
238 Mt
650
33% above 1990
600
550
36 Mt
Kyoto Target
571 Mt
6% below 1990
500
1990
1995
2000
2005
NERAM V October 17 2006
2010
2015
2020
Smog Advisories/Alerts
Year Advisories Days
1993
1
1
1994
2
6
1995
6
14
1996
3
5
1997
3
6
1998
3
8
1999
5
9
2000
3
4
2001
7
23
2002
10
27
2003
7
19
2004
6
14
2005
31
55
2005
• 48 smog alert days
• 19 heat-alert/extreme heat-alert days
NERAM V October 17 2006
OMA Estimates
2005
2015
2026
PD
5,829
7,436
10,061
HA
16,807
20,067
24,587
ERV
59,696
71,548
87,963
MI
29,292,100
31,962,200 38,549,300
How will climate change affect air quality?
NERAM V October 17 2006
Heat waves in Canadian cities will become
more frequent
Fredericton
20802100
Quebec
20412069
20202040
Toronto
Number of hot
days above
30C
19611990
London
Winnipeg
Calgary
Victoria
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Background ambient levels of O3 could increase by 40 ppm
Emission increase by 20% by 2050 and 32% by 2080. The annual total
number of poor O3 days would increase 4-11 and 10-20 respectively.
Air pollution mortality will increase by 20-25% and 30-40% by 2050 and 2080
Number of heat-related deaths will double and triple
NERAM V October 17 2006
Where do we need to make reductions?
NERAM V October 17 2006
Transportation Example
1. Further reduce the
emissions of the
current transportation
system using new and
improved technologies
2. Get more people out
of their cars and onto
public transit
3. Change development
patterns to slow urban
sprawl and to
encourage denser
development
NERAM V October 17 2006
Accomplishments?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Low sulphur fuels
Improved technologies
Inspection and maintenance
Gas tax allocation to support transit
Infrastructure renewal
Tax credits for transit passes
Ethanol/biodiesel
CAFE standards
Mercury switch-out
Vehicle retirement
NERAM V October 17 2006
Pollution Probe: Current Activities
Related to Transportation
• Education and awareness: Clean Air Commute
• Fuel efficiency
• National vision and strategy on TDM (Cross
Canada workshop series)
• National conference on commercial goods and
freight
• Merits of mobile emissions reduction credits
• Application of the net-gain approach to land use
planning
• Alternative fuels – LCA
NERAM V October 17 2006
Canadian Attitudes Towards the
Environment
• 10% identified environment as the most
important issue facing Canada today
• 23% identified air pollution as the most
important environmental issue
• 4% climate change/global warming
• 91% agreed that we have a responsibility to
the next generation to do all we can to correct
climate change
• 77% agreed that Canada must act now on
climate change because the risk of waiting is
too high
NERAM V October 17 2006
Thank You
NERAM V October 17 2006