Climate Change

In the 21st Century

Week 8
Prof. W Menary
Mid-point Summary: Where are we?
• Adding an infrared-absorbing gas will warm the climate
• We are adding infrared-absorbing gases (known as greenhouse gases) to the atmosphere
• Based on this, you would predict the climate should be warming. Indeed this is what we
observe.
• In fact, the warming we see is most likely associated with the emission of greenhouse gases

When talking about public policy, we tend to focus on the future – So,

What is the future of Climate Change?

This will be our focus for second part of course

In order to understand how to predict climate, let’s look again at this equation.

Climate determined by 3 parameters: solar constant, albedo & # of layers (measure of amount of
greenhouse gases in our atmosphere)

Primary factor driving future climate change is increase in “n” as we emit GG

Thus, to predict future climate, we need to predict how this will change ie how much GG humans
adding to atmosphere each year. Such estimates are referred to as emission scenarios.

Emission scenario (ES): an estimate of greenhouse gases emitted to the atmosphere each year,
mainly from human activities.

In order to understand ES, useful to realize that GG emissions are a side effect of economic activity.
Every good / service you receive requires energy; generation of this energy releases CO2 and other
GG to atmosphere.
1 iPhone produced in 2019 released ~60kg CO2 eq.
1 Cheeseburger releases ~ 5kg CO2 eq.

What are the factors that control emissions?

Factors that control emissions
1) Population
Av. Person responsible ~5t of CO2 emissions every year (ie
sum of goods /services consumed).
>people=>consumption=>emissions

2) Affluence per person

ie how rich people are (=richer person is the more they
consume (cars, trips, phones, bigger house etc etc). Total
consumption = Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
GDP = total value of goods and services consumed = total
value of economic output. World average GDP US$11,000
pp/yr (2018); In USA US$60,000; In poorer countries
~<US$1000 pp/yr
Compare with a subsistence Farmer…
Factors that control emissions
To convert

• Population
• Affluence per person (GDP per person)

to CO2 emissions we need:

• Technology
Amount of CO2 emitted when generating economic output. Reflects technology
used to generate energy as well as how efficiently the economy utilizes it
Let’s review the units of each term

population # of people

Affluence (wealth,
expressed as…) $ of GDP / person

Technology (converts US$

to CO2 emissions) CO2 emissions / $ of GDP
 We can write down the

technology
population
total CO2 emitted as

affluence
the product of these
three terms

•  

# of people x x
 technology
# people cancel and the

population
dollars of GDP also cancel

affluence
Thus the product of
•  
population times affluence
times technology is the
carbon dioxide emitted

Often referred to as IPAT

relation. I = Impact ∝ CO2
emissions

CO2 emitted = # of people x x

I=PxAxT
Controlling factors for CO2 emissions

I=PxAxT
CO2 emissions are side effect of economic activity

Going back to ES…estimating future climate change requires est. of future CO2
emissions as well as emissions of other GG.

This requires future predictions of P A T. If we can predict these controlling factors

we can predict future emissions which allows us to predict future climate.

One last adjustment to IPAT relation required:

••  
Technology term: The technology term is what converts
dollars of GDP into CO2 emissions

• = x
To understand the factors that control this
term we will split the technology term into
the product of two different terms –
energy intensity and carbon intensity

energy carbon
intensity intensity
••  
Technology term:

• = x
Numerator from the first term cancels
the denominator for the second so the
product of these two terms equal to
the technology term.

The advantage of this decomposition

is that these terms have specific
meanings:
energy carbon
intensity intensity
•   How efficiently Technology used to Energy intensity is a measure of how
many joules of energy it takes to produce
energy is used generate energy a dollar of economic output – reflects
energy efficiency energy is consumed

Carbon intensity is a measure of how

much CO2 is emitted per joule of energy
generated. Determined by the
• = x Technology.

energy carbon
intensity intensity
Fuel Carbon intensity
Coal 90 g/MJ
Oil 70 g/MJ
Natural gas 50 g/MJ
Wind 0
Solar 0
nuclear 0

Carbon intensities of various fuels. Choice of energy source has huge

impact on emissions
 If CI = zero, other
Zero terms do not matter

•CO2
  emitted = # of people x = x

We can use IPAT

relation to write
emissions as a
product of 4 terms population

affluence

intensity

intensity
Carbon
Energy
This decomposition
gives insights into
how to solve climate
change problem.

How have these terms been changing?

Pop. doubled since 1960s.
Affluence measured in GDP per person.
Affluence has nearly tripled over same
period (each person consuming x3)

If everything else were the same, this would correspond to six times the emissions today
as there were in the 1960s.

Increase in affluence genrally good: 40% of World Population lived in extreme poverty in
1982 (<US$2 / day) – decreased to 10% in mid-2000s
While Population and Affluence increased,
energy intensity declined by ~30%
• We pay for energy…market incentive to produce
more efficient equipment - General increase in
efficiency (eg refrigerator now more efficient tan
1970s)
• Shift from heavy manufacturing to low energy service
economy
Carbon intensity
showed big declines
until ~2000. Switch
from Coal to Natural
Gas.

However, trend
reversed in 2000 due to
resurgence in Coal
(coal-fired energy in
China).
If we look at actual CO2
emissions, we see that
increase by a factor of
~3 since 1960s

Driven by Increasing
pop & affluence but
offset by decreases in
energy intensity and
carbon intensity
Controlling factors for
CO2 emissions and how
they have changed over
past few decades.

Again, if we can predict

how these controlling
factors will change in the
future then we can
predict emissions which
allows us to predict
future climate

Predictions, however,
are hard.

No one in 1980s would

have predicted rise of
China as economic
superpower.

Who will be elected in

Peru?
Emission scenarios
Because it’s so difficult to predict the future, scientists have
developed a set of emissions scenarios
• The full set of scenarios should span the range of possible
futures
• Each scenario is an internally consistent vision of one way
the world could evolve (ie PAT do not vary independently)
For example, here are the
controlling factors for two
Population
different emissions scenarios

1st shows affluence increasing

rapidly & pop. Peaking in mid-
century then declining back to
~7billion (these are linked – Affluence
studies show that as society
gets richer, women have fewer
children).

Energy intensity declining

rapidly – connected to increase Energy
in affluence and adoption of
new tech. which require large intensity
increases in affluence to
support it.

2nd scenario show smaller

increase in affluence. People
are poorer. Shows rapid pop. Carbon
Increase. Energy intensity not
declining much. Consistent with
intensity
anemic growth in affluence.
Representative Concentration Pathways
Scientific community completed a prediction exercise and created the
representative concentration pathways, Abbreviated RCPs.
Each one is a prediction of how emissions might evolve over 21st century and
beyond
• Four RCPs - RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6, and RCP8.5
• The number after RCP (RCPx) is the radiative forcing in 2100. For example, RCP6
has 6 W/m2 of radiative forcing. RCP8.5 scenario will have the most warming.
They span the possible range of future emissions. We do not know where, but it
will probably be somewhere between the low and high scenario.
Given the predictions of
PAT we can predict
emissions

RCP8.5 = worse case

scenario (we burn all
fossil fuels we can!).
Emissions rise from
10GtC / year today to
30GtC in 2100
Under RCP2.6 is a world
where we switch to
renewable energy sources
and emissions peak in the
2020s and decline
thereafter.
If we run emissions through
a carbon cycle model, we
can calculate how much
carbon is removed from the
atmosphere.

This plot shows what we

expect atmospheric CO2 to
look like.
RCP8.5 = ~1800ppm (x4)
As CO2 increases we expect this to warm the climate

We can use sophisticated global climate models to take these predictions of

carbon dioxide and make quantitative estimates of how the climate will
change
 This plot shows the
predictions of
climate change
relative to the late
20th century

Under RCP8.5
worst-case
scenario, the
temperature may
be 4 degrees
warmer in 2100.

Under RCP2.6
best-case scenario
it may only be 1
degree warmer.

Relative to 20th century

The RCP scenarios
predict relatively similar
warming until they
begin to diverge around
2040-2050.

1) Emissions in near
term are locked-in
by present mix of
technology. Heat
capacity of ocean
also a factor.
2) We do have
significant influence
over warming
experienced in 2nd
half of century
Also reveals one of the many
aspects of climate change
that makes it so difficult to
solve.

Addressing climate change

will require us to make
investments now and in next
few decades in our energy
system that will only really
pay dividends in the second
half of century

Tough sell politically!

Warming may not appear a

lot, just a few degrees but we
shall see over next few
weeks this is a huge amount
of warming

Scenarios are run through

large # of climate models
that handles details of
physics of climate system
differently
Right hand panel shows range of temps. For RCP scenarios generated by computer models. Eg RCP2.6 predict average warming
between 0.3 and 1.8. Considerable range – consider to be one estimate of uncertainty.
Range of temp.
increase
scenario to
expect during
21st century.

But temp.
doesn’t stop
increasing at
2100.

Let’s have a look

at a 30,000 year
period…
Fossil fuel era started @ Ind. Revolution and will end soon.
CO2 measurements for past 20,000 years. 180-270ppm as climate
transitions from last ice age to present interglacial.
This plot shows a mid to
high emission scenario
(RCP6-RCP8.5)

Scale for prediction on

right-hand side

We can see emissions last a

few hundred years, peaks
at 1000ppm and then
remain in atmosphere for
long time

Global Warming therefore

also going to last very long
time
This plot shows the associated temperature trajectory. You can see temp. increase as we transition
out of ice age. Temps. Peaked ~7000 years ago and were declining until Ind. Rev. (year 0 on this
plot). Temps. Then rise rapidly until they cease. 10,000 years after they peak, they have only
declined 1 degree (3 degree warmer than today). CO2 stays in atmosphere long time & heat
capacity of ocean (long time to cool). DECISIONS WE MAKE TODAY HAVE SIGNIFICANT
CONSEQUENCES
Weather vs Climate
How good is our ability to predict the future climate?
• Weather: the exact state of the atmosphere at a particular instant in
time
• Climate: the statistics of the atmosphere over a period, typically a
few decades or so

Many examples where predicting the exact outcome is imposible but

predicting the statistics of the outcome is trivial eg rolling a dice
Individual roll: unpredictable

Many roles:
1: 16.6%
2: 16.6%
3: 16.6%
4: 16.6%
5: 16.6%
6: 16.6%
Another example, Jan & Feb in Lima is warmer than July & August. We
can say that many months in advance without knowing what the exact
temp. will be.

This reflects difference in weather and climate forecast. Climate

predictions require knowledge of how planetary energy balance is
changing.
In N summer
hemisphere,
most energy

As tilt of earth
relative to sun
changes in
winter, more
solar energy
falls on S
hemisphere
IPCC 1990 prediction
Assessed Activity
Read: Tragedy of the Commons (Spanish or English) & Climate Change: The
Ultimate Tragedy of the Commons?
https://youtu.be/0b2Tl0x-niw
Questions:
Describe the concept of tragedy of the commons.
Discuss climate change as a tragedy-of-the-commons problem. Identify the
“commons” and the “tragedy”.
Explain why “atmospheric sinks for greenhouse gases” can be considered as a
“commons”.
Discuss different types of governance solutions for climate change as a tragedy of
the commons. Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each type of solution.