Costing climate change

Download PDF
14 downloads 71034 Views 696KB Size Report
Comment
Geographical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Darwin Building, ... economic best interest' (Kleiner 2001). .... For more details, see The Real Nappy Association Web site http://www.realnappy.com. ..... He enjoys running, DIY and gardening.
10.1098/rsta.2002.1063

Costing climate change By David S. R e a y Ecology and Resource Management, School of Earth, Environmental and Geographical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Darwin Building, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JU, UK ([email protected]) Published online 16 October 2002

Debate over how, when, and even whether man-made greenhouse-gas emissions should be controlled has grown in intensity even faster than the levels of greenhouse gas in our atmosphere. Many argue that the costs involved in reducing emissions outweigh the potential economic damage of human-induced climate change. Here, existing cost–benefit analyses of greenhouse-gas reduction policies are examined, with a view to establishing whether any such global reductions are currently worthwhile. Potential for, and cost of, cutting our own individual greenhouse-gas emissions is then assessed. I find that many abatement strategies are able to deliver significant emission reductions at little or no net cost. Additionally, I find that there is huge potential for individuals to simultaneously cut their own greenhouse-gas emissions and save money. I conclude that cuts in global greenhouse-gas emissions, such as those of the Kyoto Protocol, cannot be justifiably dismissed as posing too large an economic burden. Keywords: greenhouse gas; abatement strategy; cost–benefit analysis; Kyoto Protocol

1. Introduction Exaggerated claims and forecasts of climate meltdown in the media have naturally given rise to both fervent belief in, and hardened scepticism of, measures, like the Kyoto Protocol, to limit global greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. Many of those who argue against the need to reduce GHG emissions at the present time cite economic analyses as proof that such measures would not be ‘cost effective’. Though such economic arguments might sometimes be dismissed on moral or ideological grounds, we live in a world where the importance of money cannot be ignored (Swingland et al . 2002). Here I aim to examine some of the various ‘cost–benefit’ aspects of global warming and GHG abatement. In addition to discussing costs on a national and international scale, I will also examine the costs and benefits of GHG reductions in our own day-to-day lives. How much GHG do most of us produce in a lifetime? Can we easily make large reductions? And, if so, will these reductions cost us money? Two theoretical Londoners, one who lives a comparatively ‘GHG-ignorant’ life and the other who lives a more ‘GHG-aware’ life, are compared. One contribution of 20 to a Triennial Issue ‘Astronomy and Earth science’. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002) 360, 2947–2961

2947

c 2002 The Royal Society 

2948

D. S. Reay

2. The rise and fall of GHG-abatement costs In justifying their abandonment of the US commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, George W. Bush’s spokesman, Ari Fleischer, stated ‘. . . it is not in the United States’ economic best interest’ (Kleiner 2001). As the world’s biggest GHG polluter though, it is vital that the US be involved sooner rather than later in efforts to reduce global GHG emissions. However, certain cost–benefit analyses do seem to bear out some of the US administration’s objections to GHG cuts. Several studies have indicated that ‘Kyoto Protocol-like’ GHG-emission limits may have potentially large economic costs (Nordhaus 1994; Lutter 2000; Nordhaus & Boyer 2000), with more-extensive reductions leading to an ever escalating cost per unit of GHG (Lomborg 2001). However, there are also many cost analyses of specific GHG-abatement strategies that have shown that cuts are often possible at low or no cost. These include new energy technologies (Morthorst 1998; Brown et al . 1998), solid-waste treatment (Ayalon et al . 2001), biogas use (Smith et al . 2000), afforestation (De Cara & Jayet 2000) and land management (De Jong et al . 2000). Indeed, even in the US, significant reductions in GHG emissions are possible at essentially no net cost to the US economy (Brown et al . 2001). The implementation of large-scale GHG-reduction schemes here in the UK is already under way. Nationally, the government aims to replace 10% of our energy requirements with energy from renewable resources by 2010. Cost–energy analyses of such schemes in Scotland have indicated great potential for wind, wave and tidal power at costs of ca. 3 pence kW−1 h−1 (Scottish Executive 2001). Technological development has always been a key area to consider in economic analyses of GHG abatement (Nordhaus 1994). Future technological developments and consequently their impact on abatement costs can be very difficult to predict. One aspect of such technological change is that of the abatement policy itself driving further technological development. In his analysis of this induced innovation as pertaining to wind power in Denmark, Rasmussen (2001) showed that such ‘added value’ may significantly reduce abatement costs. In a cost analysis of implementing the Kyoto Protocol in Italy, De Leo et al . (2001) demonstrated that, where costs incurred in rectifying damage to human health, material goods, agriculture and the environment are included with those of energy production, the cost argument for inaction tends to break down. As they state, the social and environmental costs of GHG emissions are not included in company balance sheets, but must be included in national balances. The financial costs of implementing the Kyoto Protocol may also be significantly reduced by the use of a ‘multi-gas control’ strategy (Reilly et al . 1999). Figure 1 shows the potential savings possible using such a ‘multi-gas’ approach, the reduction cost per tonne of carbon equivalent being markedly lower when a range of GHGs are targeted rather than just CO2 . Greater flexibility in the timetable of GHG cuts under Kyoto may also lower overall abatement costs (Toman et al . 1999). Yet another ‘fringe benefit’ of GHG-reduction strategies, which may lead to reduced implementation costs, is that of associated reductions in local and regional air pollution. Cutting coal combustion, for instance, will not only reduce GHG emissions but will also lead to savings in public health costs arising from air pollution (Buttraw et al . 1999; De Leo et al . 2001). Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

Costing climate change

2949

300

200

100

0

CO2

gr CO ee 2 nh + ou ot h se er ga se s

$US 1985 per tonne carbon equivalent

400

400 800 megatonne carbon equivalent

Figure 1. Marginal abatement curves calculated for CO2 in the USA and for total greenhouse gases. Reproduced with the kind permission of Reilly et al . (1999) and the Nature Publishing Group.

So, the implementation of GHG cuts, such as those of the Kyoto Protocol, cannot be reasonably dismissed as posing too large an economic burden (Howarth 2001). While some critics of the Kyoto Protocol argue that the GHG reductions it proposes are woefully inadequate, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) maintains that the Kyoto Protocol is only the start of the process of tackling global warming. The eventual size of GHG reduction may need to be many times that outlined in the current Kyoto Protocol, with much-increased abatement costs as a consequence. However, the very high costs predicted for such wide-reaching GHG-emission cuts do not mean that immediate action, albeit on a relatively moderate scale, should not be taken.

3. Place your bets The key difficulty faced in predicting both the economic costs of global warming and the costs of GHG-reduction strategies is the, often large, degree of uncertainty inherent in such predictions. On a time-scale of hundreds of years, predictions involve a significant amount of guesswork, but such time-scales are short in terms of global climate dynamics. Even the most convincing economic argument against cuts in GHG emissions is essentially gambling on our future, betting against the possibility of catastrophic global-warming events. The UNFCCC promotes action on global warming in spite of the large degree of uncertainty, based on what is called the ‘precautionary principle’. This principle basically allows the international implementation of GHG-reduction strategies like the Kyoto Protocol before there is absolute scientific certainty, based on avoidance of possible serious or irreversible damage to the environment (UNFCCC 2001). The economist William Nordhaus asserts that, although ‘a massive effort to slow climate change would be premature’, we must be alert to the possibility of ‘catastrophic Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

2950

D. S. Reay GHG-ignorant lifestyle

annual greenhouse gas emission (kg CO2 equivalents)

25 000

GHG-aware lifestyle

transport holiday household food related waste

20 000

15 000

10 000

5000

0

0

20

40

60

0 age (years)

20

40

60

Figure 2. Annual GHG emissions over a 75-year lifespan, for GHG-ignorant and GHG-aware lifestyles.

and irreversible changes’ (Nordhaus 1994). It seems then that we are essentially faced with the option of either doing nothing to reduce GHG emissions, and so gamble on the resulting effects being within those predicted by existing models, or to insure ourselves and future generations against the possibility of catastrophic climate change. Overall, a start to the reduction of global GHG emissions seems not only to be economically viable, but also vital as a basis for any future international response to GHG-driven climate change. The use of the UNFCCC’s ‘precautionary principle’ appears entirely correct given the magnitude of the catastrophe that climate change may bring about, not only for us, but also for our descendants. As members of a global society, we each have a stake in, and responsibility for, the global environment. The UNFCCC emphasizes the need to educate individuals about climate change, to try and change the way we think about our impact on the environment, both now and for future generations. Let us now examine such individual environmental impacts, the GHG emissions of a lifetime and the savings possible.

4. GHG budgets for individuals The on-going political wrangling over how to tackle increasing GHG emissions on an international scale, and the sheer enormity of the global-warming issue, can make us as individuals feel relatively powerless to act. However, though governments may fail to reach global agreement, the actions of individuals on a global scale could have a profound effect on GHG emissions. It is in our own lifestyles that many of the most cost-effective reductions in GHG emissions can be made. If we add to this the ‘bottom-up’ effect such lifestyle changes could have on community, business and eventually governmental GHG policy, then the huge importance of individual GHG emissions on a global scale is clear. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

Costing climate change

2951

2500

2000

cost (£ year −1)

GHG ignorant 1500

1000

GHG aware

500

0 0

20

40 age (years)

60

Figure 3. Annual financial cost associated with GHG emissions over a 75-year lifespan, for GHG-ignorant and GHG-aware lifestyles.

To assess what kind of GHG-emissions reductions might be possible, and the monetary cost of these reductions for typical westerners, let us consider two people born in modern-day London. For the purposes of this comparison both our Londoners will live for 75 years, one living a ‘GHG-ignorant’ life and the other a ‘GHG-aware’ life. To avoid confusion we will call the two subjects Mr Carbone and Mr Bellamy, respectively. GHG-emission results of these analyses are shown in figure 2, using five ‘source’ categories. Similarly, the associated financial costs over a lifetime for our two subjects are shown in figure 3. Details of GHG-emission and monetary calculations for each stage of our subjects’ lives, together with any assumptions made, are given in Appendix A. Although, for most of their respective childhoods, our two Londoners will not be able to determine their own lifestyles and therefore their own GHG emissions, we will initially explore how their parents can affect the GHG budgets of their children. (a) Baby (aged 0–2) The first big ‘GHG-sensitive’ decision our subjects’ parents face is that of whether to use disposable or real nappies. Mr and Mrs Carbone decide to go for disposable nappies for their son, while Master Bellamy’s parents opt for ‘real nappies’.† The high energy cost for manufacture of disposable nappies, relative to that of both † For more details, see The Real Nappy Association Web site http://www.realnappy.com. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

2952

D. S. Reay

manufacture and cleaning of reusable nappies†, leads to Master Carbone’s nappies causing ca. 12 kg more GHG emission than the ‘real’ nappy option each year. The added environmental problems disposable nappies pose, due to very slow breakdown times, may also result in increased Local Authority costs for landfill maintenance, refuse transport and the like. (b) Toddler (aged 2–4) After nappies, the next major ‘GHG-sensitive’ decision our two sets of parents make is that of transport to nursery school. While the Bellamys opt for taking their son to the nearby nursery by bicycle, the Carbones use their large four-wheel drive for all of these short journeys. Consequently, while going to nursery costs nothing in terms of GHG produced or fuel bought for the Bellamys, the Carbones have to pay around £55 extra on petrol and produce an extra 211 kg of GHGs each year. (c) Infant (aged 4–7) Now our two ‘GHG guinea pigs’ are old enough for infant school, they both qualify for a free bus service. However, the Carbones decide against using this service and opt to continue using their four-wheel drive, despite these infant-school trips (10 km total) being around twice the distance of those to the nursery (5 km). This decision costs the Carbones about an extra £176 on petrol and produces ca. 677 kg of GHGs each year. The Bellamys do make use of the free bus service and so pay no extra money. The bus only produces ca. 53 kg of GHGs to carry the young Bellamy to and from infant school over the course of the year, a saving of more than half a tonne of GHGs. (d ) Junior (aged 7–11) Now our two subjects are getting older, their parents decide they are old enough to start going on holiday. As both families live on the outskirts of London they have relatively easy access to all major road, rail and air routes. The Bellamys decide to spend their annual holiday in Plymouth, UK, while the Carbones opt for holidays in Paris. Travelling by train from London to Plymouth and back with the young Master Bellamy costs an additional £29 and produces ca. 12 kg of GHGs each year. Meanwhile, the Carbones clock up an extra 100 kg of GHGs and a bill of around £94 to fly young master Carbone to Paris and back each year. The Carbones continue to use their four-wheel drive for school trips, while the Bellamys still make use of the free bus service, so widening the divide in both GHG produced and cost between the two families. For the first time, our young subjects begin to become directly responsible for some of their GHG emissions. Initially this takes the form of Master Carbone leaving the television, video and video-games console on for hours at a time when he is not using them. This extra energy use adds up to an extra 120 kg of GHGs and costs his parents about £6 each year, while young Master Bellamy usually switches off these appliances. † For more details, see http://www.bestfootforward.com. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

Costing climate change

2953

(e) Senior (aged 11–18) In this last period, before our two subjects will gain complete control of their lifestyle and its associated GHG emissions, they can already make quite an impact on their GHG emissions. Master Carbone now routinely leaves his computer, stereo, TV and video on while they are not being used, so clocking up an extra 160 kg of GHGs at a cost of £10 each year. He has also got into the habit of turning on the heating at home instead of putting on a jumper. His use of an electric radiator in his room for an extra 2 h each day, compared with the jumper-wearing Master Bellamy, results in 700 kg of extra GHG emissions at a cost of about £35 to his parents every year. For holidays during this period the Bellamys travel to Chester each year by train, at a cost of £22.20 and producing 17.6 kg of GHGs each time. The Carbones, on the other hand, fly to Cairo every summer with the flights for the teenage Master Carbone costing £225 and producing over 1 tonne of GHGs. Both our subjects have also moved on to senior school in this period. Master Bellamy again takes advantage of the free bus service to school, a journey that produces ca. 211 kg of GHGs over the course of each year. The Carbones persist with using their car for these longer school runs, at an extra annual cost of some £706 and producing ca. 2707 kg of GHGs. (f ) Student (aged 18–21) Having left their family homes, our two subjects have now become much more responsible for their personal GHG emissions. One of the first and most important decisions they make is their form of transport while students in London. Mr Bellamy opts for his bicycle and an annual public transport pass costing £264 and leading to annual GHG emissions of ca. 260 kg. Meanwhile, Mr Carbone chooses to buy and use a seven-year-old Ford Escort for his transport. Purchase and maintenance costs aside, this option costs him around £407 a year in fuel and produces 2050 kg of GHGs. For their holidays during this time Mr Carbone travels each year to Bangkok at a price of £427, with the flights producing a massive 2745 kg of GHGs each year. Mr Bellamy instead travels by train to Bath at a cost of £26.10, and producing only 10.5 kg of GHGs. The GHG-emission and monetary savings possible in their rented student accommodation is fairly limited for both our subjects. As relatively ‘low’ energy users in London, each would normally produce ca. 4750 kg of GHGs from ‘household’ sources, at a cost of nearly £300 in energy bills each year. However, Mr Bellamy saves over £14 and ca. 300 kg of GHGs by setting his computer to ‘sleep mode’ for those times when he is away from his desk for more than a few minutes. He saves a further £10 a year in electricity bills and ca. 200 kg of GHGs by replacing the two light bulbs in his bedroom with ‘energy-efficient’ bulbs. (g) Young adult (aged 21–30) Having finished their studies, our two subjects have now taken on the responsibility of their first jobs and homes. Together with transport, holidays and food, they are now directly responsible for the majority of their ‘personal’ GHG emissions. Consequently, it is during these years that a very large divergence between their respective GHG emissions becomes evident. As ‘medium’ household energy users in London Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

2954

D. S. Reay

they would both normally produce ca. 9200 kg of GHGs at a cost of £519 each year. Mr Bellamy though, cuts his household emissions by ca. 4.6 tonnes and his energy bill by £154 each year by making use of a range of energy-saving strategies around the house. These include using an energy-efficient washing machine, dishwasher, shower and water heater and energy-efficient lighting. Improved house insulation and home design complete the savings. Mr Bellamy is able to save a further 125 kg of GHGs each year, at no cost to himself, by simply leaving his old newspapers out for recycling instead of putting them straight in the bin. Avoiding waste going into landfill, by recycling or even aerobically composting it, can reduce the amount of methane produced per kilogram of rubbish; with methane being ca. 20 times more potent a GHG as carbon dioxide this can make a big difference. Our subjects’ increasing affluence enables them to be more selective about their diet. Mr Carbone does his food shopping at a large out-of-town supermarket; the food he buys is fairly varied with quite a lot of organic fruit and vegetables. However, he is unaware of the ‘food miles’ many of the items he buys have clocked up. His weekly shopping basket of ca. 16 kg of goods is responsible for ca. 2184 kg of GHGs over the year. Taking advantage of the local farmers’ market, Mr Bellamy is able to buy most of his family’s food from local sources; though there is little saving as far as cost goes, Mr Bellamy’s shopping basket of 16 kg is responsible for only 74 kg of GHGs per year. For their holidays during these years Mr Carbone travels by plane to Madrid each summer at a cost of £134 and produces 361 kg of GHGs. Mr Bellamy opts to spend his annual holiday in Manchester, travelling by rail at a cost of £66.20 and producing 19 kg of GHGs. For day-to-day transport as young adults, Mr Bellamy again combines use of his bicycle with London’s public transport system, his all-year ticket costing £380 and his transport emissions totalling 528 kg. Mr Carbone trades in his old Ford Escort for a new Volkswagen Golf GTI. As a result, his petrol costs alone rise to £580, with related GHG emissions of 4773 kg each year. (h) Older adult (aged 30–45) With greater affluence, the opportunity to increase GHG emissions through ‘energy-rich activities’ grows, while the relative financial incentive for cost-effective emission reduction falls. This trend is underlined by the now huge difference in GHG emissions (figure 2) and their associated monetary costs (figure 3). With a higher income and children of their own to look after, our two subjects are faced with more and more GHG-sensitive decisions. Mr Carbone sells his Volkswagen Golf and instead buys a new Volvo V70 Estate. This new car costs £673 in fuel and creates 5444 kg of GHGs each year. Mr Bellamy sticks to biking and public transport at the annual cost of £380 and with an associated GHG emission of only 528 kg. With growing families, the food purchases of both our subjects rise to 33 kg of goods each week; with Mr Carbone continuing to buy without regard to ‘food miles’, the GHG arising from the transport of this food goes up to ca. 4368 kg. Meanwhile, the transport of Mr Bellamy’s food, sourced locally, gives rise to only 147 kg of GHGs over the course of a year. The increase in family size leads to Mr Carbone’s household-waste-related GHG emissions rising to more than 1000 kg. Mr Bellamy limits this increase by continuing to recycle paper, leading to a saving of 240 kg of GHGs a year. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

Costing climate change

2955

The energy use of both Mr Carbone’s and Mr Bellamy’s families could be expected to rise into the ‘high-user’ category at this point in their lives. Indeed, Mr Carbone’s household energy related GHG emissions rise to over 13 t per year at a cost of £739. Using various energy saving strategies, Mr Bellamy is able to cut emissions by over 4.5 t below this level and save £154 in energy costs. During this period, Mr Bellamy opts to take his holidays in Skegness each year, travelling by rail at a cost of £43.20 and giving rise to ca. 13 kg of GHGs each time. Mr Carbone flies each year to Seattle at a cost of £249 and produces 2229 kg of GHGs on each round trip. (i ) Pre-retirement (aged 45–60) Until now we have examined only those activities of our two subjects that have an impact on their GHG emissions at home and while travelling. However, as holders of senior posts, both Mr Carbone and Mr Bellamy now have responsibility for GHGsensitive decisions at work. With 70 employees, energy use and associated GHG emission is large. By replacing the 200 lights in his block of offices with energyefficient lighting and ensuring waste paper is recycled wherever possible, Mr Bellamy is able to cut GHG emissions by over 20 t per year and save over £1400 in energy costs. These office-based GHG savings are so large that they have been left out of the comparison figures to improve clarity. At home, our subjects’ children have moved out and the subjects’ energy usage would normally drop back to the ‘medium’ energy-use bracket. However, Mr Bellamy’s energy-saving strategies around the house maintain the previous cuts in household-energy-related GHG emissions on costs. Similarly, his sourcing of locally grown food and recycling of household waste makes further reductions in individual GHG emissions. Both Mr Carbone and Mr Bellamy continue to clock up ca. 18 000 km in day-to-day travel each year. With no young children and more expendable income, Mr Carbone decides to buy a Mercedes Benz S500, which leads to annual GHG emissions of nearly 7 t at a fuel cost of over £1700. Mr Bellamy’s chosen combination of public transport and bicycle continues to produce only 528 kg of GHGs and cost only £380 each year. For his annual holidays Mr Bellamy decides to stay in London and visit the various museums, galleries and shows the capital has to offer. By making use of his annual public transport pass he is able to travel around London for free, his 25 trips each summer producing only 7 kg of GHGs. Mr Carbone flies each year to Lima at a cost of £459, producing almost 3 t of GHGs on each round trip. (j ) Retirement (aged 60–75+) Free from the need for daily trips to work and with grown-up children, our two subjects should see substantial drops in their energy use, GHG emissions and energy costs. Indeed, both could be expected to drop into the ‘low’ household-energy-user bracket, though with Mr Bellamy making further cuts in household GHG emissions and energy costs as outlined previously. However, Mr Carbone negates much of this ‘retirement’ decrease in emissions and energy costs by buying himself a petrolguzzling Jaguar XJ8, which, even though only used for 9000 km of travelling each year, produces over 3 t of GHGs and costs £863 in fuel. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

2956

D. S. Reay Table 1. Cumulative lifetime GHG emissions and associated costs for two theoretical Londoners (see text)

Mr Carbone Mr Bellamy

GHG (tonnes)

cost (£)

1 251 370

131 000 48 845

Worse still for Mr Carbone’s annual GHG budget is his decision to travel to Auckland for his annual holiday, a flight which costs £655 and creates over 5 t of GHGs on each round trip. Meanwhile, Mr Bellamy continues using public transport to get around and opts for annual holidays in Aberdeenshire, the return ticket to Aberdeen costing £94 and the round trip producing ca. 27 kg of GHGs. (k ) The final bill The final bill, both in terms of their lifetimes’ GHG emissions and their associated costs, is vastly greater for Mr Carbone (table 1). Through relatively modest changes in lifestyle, Mr Bellamy succeeded in cutting his total GHG emissions by 70% and saved himself around £80 000 compared with Mr Carbone. It is clear that, if such reductions are extrapolated to scales of millions of individuals, huge GHG and energy savings are possible on a national and international scale. From a political perspective, the promotion and subsequent incorporation of such ‘individual cuts’ into national GHG budgets would seem extremely attractive. Certainly, recent years have seen increasing governmental interest in this area. The UK government is promoting domestic energy efficiency via better information, financial incentives and tighter regulations. Indeed, they predict that implementation of these strategies could cut UK carbon emissions by ca. 5 million tonnes by 2010 (DTLR 2000b). As the deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, states: We have a responsibility to take action, but it is also in our own interests to do so. Measures to reduce GHG emissions can be good for the economy, for businesses and for our communities. Other governments too, are active in the promotion of GHG-emissions cuts at the individual level. The Australian Greenhouse Office, for instance, last year launched ‘Cool Communities’†, which not only provides detailed information on how individuals might reduce their own GHG emissions, but also provides funds for communities to implement these household GHG-reduction strategies. In pure ‘cost per unit GHG-reduction’ terms, no definitive figures exist for reductions via the ‘increased public awareness’ route, but there seems little doubt that this option has huge potential in industrialized countries like the UK. For instance, were a million people with a ‘Mr Carbone’-type lifestyle to switch to a ‘Mr Bellamy’ lifestyle, the annual reduction in UK GHG emissions could be more than 5 million tonnes with a monetary saving of around £1 billion. If we add in the likely spread of ‘GHG awareness’ of individuals to their place of work, choice of business suppliers and ultimately their political representative, major reductions in national GHG emissions may ensue. † For more details see http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/coolcommunities/. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

Costing climate change

2957

5. Conclusion Economic concerns have been used by some as an excuse for inaction in cutting GHG emissions. Though cost–benefit analyses of global warming have often been dismissed on ethical grounds, it seems that, in many situations, GHG-abatement strategies can in fact be implemented at no net cost. Indeed, the possibility of catastrophic climate change would seem to justify GHG abatement even where significant costs are incurred. Contrary to the assertions of the US administration, the cuts proposed under the Kyoto Protocol are both economically viable and vital as a basis for future international GHG abatement. An area with great potential for cost-effective GHG abatement is that of individual GHG budgets. In industrialized countries, like the UK, implementing relatively modest lifestyle changes can make large savings in both the GHG emissions and energy costs of individuals. Indeed, if only one or two of the lifestyle changes outlined here were implemented on a wide scale, significant reductions in national GHG emissions may be possible. The key to successfully realizing this huge potential for GHG abatement is, ultimately, increased public awareness. D.S.R. thanks Sarah Reay for her help and time with manuscript preparation and readability checks.

Appendix A. General assumptions and exceptions made for individual GHG budgets Financial costs of nappy and food purchase were not included in these analyses. GHG emissions represent CO2 equivalents, unless otherwise stated. GHG-emission data obtained from non-UK datasets (US and Australia) are assumed to be valid for the UK. Where cost analyses required conversion of US or Australian dollars to pounds sterling, conversion factors of 1.6:1 and 2.5:1, respectively, were used. Emissions and cost analyses take no account of possible future technological, economic and social variability in the UK. For household-related GHG emissions and energy costs, Mr Carbone and Mr Bellamy are assumed to be ultimately responsible for total emissions even where the presence of a spouse/children is inferred (i.e. household related emissions may not always be per capita). (a) Baby (0–2 years) Calculation assumes a ‘high’ ecological footprint (Best Foot Forward, http://www. bestfootforward.com), electricity use at 3.6 MJ kWh−1 , and a GHG-emission rate of 1 kg GHG kWh−1 electricity (Australian Institute of Energy, http://www.aie.org. au). (b) Toddler (2–4 years) Calculations assume 100 trips to nursery per year, with a 5 km round trip. GHGemission data for the four-wheel drive data are for a 2001 Isuzu Trooper 4WD 3.5 l (US Department of Energy, http://www.fueleconomy.gov) based on the Greet model (Argonne National Laboratory, http://www.transportation.anl/ttrdc/greet/index). Fuel-cost data were obtained from the UK Vehicle Certification Agency (http:// www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/). No account was taken of car or bicycle purchase and maintenance costs. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

2958

D. S. Reay (c) Infant (4–7 years)

Calculations for the four-wheel drive are as described above, but this time for a 10 km round trip and 160 trips per year. GHG emissions from bus journeys are based on the assumption of 33 g GHG emission per km per person carried (AGO 2001). (d ) Junior (7–11 years) Flight GHG emissions were derived from the IPCC results (IPCC 1999). Flight prices were for 2002 and were obtained from ‘CheapFlights.co.uk’ (http://www. cheapflights.co.uk). Train-journey GHG emissions were based on the assumption of 33 g GHG per km per person carried (AGO 2001). Train ticket costs were obtained from ‘The Trainline.com’ (http://www.thetrainline.com) and assume ‘Saver return’ tickets. Household GHG-emission data were based on a television, video recorder and games console being left on standby, rather than being switched off (AGO 2001). (e) Senior (11–18 years) GHG emissions and related costs calculated as previously stated, assuming 160 school trips per year at 40 km each time. (f ) Student (18–21 years) Student transport assumes the car to be a 1995 Ford Focus (2 l) and annual distance travelled to be 9000 km. For Mr Bellamy, distances were assumed to be 8000 km per year via public transport, 1000 km per year by bicycle. Public transport fare was obtained from ‘Transport for London’ (http://transportforlondon.gov.uk) assuming the purchase of an annual pass to travel in London travel zones 1–4 and with 30% discount for a ‘Youth’ pass. Housing energy costs calculated on the basis of ‘low’ energy use: 10 000 kWh gas and 1650 kWh electric; ‘medium’ energy use: 19 050 kWh gas and 3300 kWh electric; ‘high’ energy use: 28 000 kWh gas and 4950 kWh electric. These data were based on London Electric ‘dual fuel’ at standard credit (Energywatch, December 2001, http://www.uSwitch.com). GHG-emission estimates for energy used were calculated using 1 kg GHG kWh−1 electricity and 0.31 kg kWh−1 for gas (AGO 2001). (g) Adult (21–30 years) Distance and transport-type data for theoretical ‘shopping trolley goods’ were obtained from Sustain (http://www.sustainweb.org/). GHG emissions were calculated for air freight using IPCC (1999). Lorry transport emissions were derived from the UK DTLR (2000a) assuming 33 tonne twin-axle articulated lorry in 45 mph speed bracket. Van emissions were calculated fora Volkswagen Multi-Van (UK Vehicle Certification Agency, http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/) travelling 100 km. Recycling data assume total newspapers amounting to 50 kg in weight each year. Savings of 2.5 kg GHG per kg of recycled newspaper, relative to landfill (EPA 1998). Transport data calculated assuming 18 000 km per year on public transport and 1000 km on bicycle for Mr Bellamy (annual public transport pass now without 30% ‘youth’ reduction in price) and 18 000 km per annum for Mr Carbone, 2001 Volkswagen Golf GTi 1.8 l (GHG emissions and fuel costs obtained as described above). Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

Costing climate change

2959

(h) Older adult (30–45 years) Mr Carbone’s car was a 2001 Volvo V70 (2.4 l), travelling 18 000 km per year. GHG emissions and related costs calculated as described above. (i ) Pre-retirement (45–60 years) GHG and monetary savings from lighting policy calculated using ‘Work Energy Smart Lighting Calculator’†, assuming a change of 200 lights from 80 W Flouro halo T8 to 12 W Compact (CFL). Total operating hours per year: 1500, leading to total reduction in GHG emissions of 18.7 t per annum. Savings in sterling, £1400, calculated using an electricity price of 7 pence kWh−1 . Waste-recycling saving based on recycling of 500 kg of paper per year, with an associated GHG saving of 2750 kg relative to landfill (EPA 1998). Other data obtained as described above. (j ) Retirement (60–75 years) Mr Carbone’s car was a 2001 Jaguar XJ8 (4 l), travelling 9000 km per year. This and other data were obtained and calculated as described previously.

References AGO 2001 A home guide to reducing energy costs and greenhouse gases. Australian Greenhouse Office, Canberra, Australia. Ayalon, O., Avnimelech, Y. & Schlecter, M. 2001 Solid waste treatment as a high-priority and low-cost alternative for greenhouse gas mitigation. Environ. Mngmt 27, 697–704. Brown, M. A., Levine, M. D., Romm, J. P., Rosenfeld, A. H. & Koomey, J. G. 1998 Engineeringeconomic studies of energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: opportunities and challenges. A. Rev. Energy Environ. 23, 287–385. Brown, M. A., Levine, M. D., Short, W. & Koomey, J. G. 2001 Scenarios for a clean future. Energy Policy 29, 1179–1196. Buttraw, D., Krupnick, A., Palmer, K., Paul, A., Toman, M. & Bloyd, C. 1999 Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity. Resources for the Future. Discussion Paper no. 99-51. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. De Cara, S. & Jayet, P. A. 2000 Emissions of greenhouse gases from agriculture: the heterogeneity of abatement costs in France. Eur. Rev. Agricult. Econ. 27, 281–303. De Jong, B. H. J., Tipper, R. & Montoya-Gomez, G. 2000 An economic analysis of the potential for carbon sequestration by forests: evidence from southern Mexico. Ecol. Econ. 33, 313–327. De Leo, G. A., Rizzi, L., Caizzi, A. & Gatto, M. 2001 The economic benefits of the Kyoto Protocol. Nature 413, 478–479. DTLR 2000a NERA report on lorry track and environment costs. London, UK: Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions. DTLR 2000b Delivering emission reductions. In Climate change: the UK programme. London, UK: Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions. (Available from http:// www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/cm4913/index.htm.) EPA 1998 Greenhouse gas emission from management of selected material in municipal solid waste. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency. † For more details see http://www.energysmart.com.au/WESlight.shtml. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

2960

D. S. Reay

Howarth, R. B. 2001 Intertemporal social choice and climate stabilization. Int. J. Environ. Pollut. 15, 386–405. IPCC 1999 Air transport operations and relation to emissions. In Aviation and global atmosphere. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report (ed. J. E. Penner, D. H. Lister, D. J. Griggs, D. J. Dokken & M. McFarland). Cambridge University Press. Kleiner, K. 2001 Heat is on. New Scientist online. (Available from http://www.newscientist.com/ news/news.jsp?id=ns9999566.) Lomborg, B. 2001 The skeptical environmentalist. Cambridge University Press. Lutter, R. 2000 Developing countries’ greenhouse emissions: uncertainty and implications for participation in the Kyoto Protocol. Energy J. 21, 93–120. Morthorst, P. E. 1998 The cost of reducing CO2 emissions: methodological approach, illustrated by the Danish energy plan. Biomass Bioenergy 15, 325–331. Nordhaus, W. D. 1994 Managing the global commons: the economics of climate change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Nordhaus, W. D. & Boyer, J. 2000 Roll the dice again: economic models of global warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rasmussen, T. N. 2001 CO2 abatement policy with learning-by-doing in renewable energy. Resour. Energy. Econ. 23, 297–325. Reilly, J., Prinn, R., Harisch, J., Fitzmaurice, J., Jacoby, H., Kicklighter, D., Melillo, J., Stone, P., Sokolov, A. & Wang, C. 1999 Multi-gas assessment of the Kyoto Protocol. Nature 401, 549–555. Scottish Executive 2001 Scotland’s Renewable Resource 2001: executive summary. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Smith, K. R., Uma, R., Kishore, V. V. N., Zhang, J. F., Joshi, V. & Khalil, M. A. K. 2000 Greenhouse implications of household stoves: an analysis for India. A. Rev. Energy Environ. 25, 741–763. Swingland, I. R., Bettelheim, E. C., Grace, J., Prance, G. T. & Saunders, L. S. (eds) 2002 Carbon, biodiversity, conservation and income: an analysis of a free-market approach to landuse change and forestry in developing and developed countries. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 360, 1563–1900. Toman, M. A., Morgenstern, R. D. & Anderson, J. 1999 The economics of ‘when’ flexibility in the design of greenhouse gas abatement policies. A. Rev. Energy Environ. 24, 431–460. UNFCCC 2001 Understanding climate change. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change report. (Available from http://www.unfccc.de/resource/beginner.html.)

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A (2002)

AUTHOR PROFILE D. S. Reay Dave Reay was born in Fleet, Hampshire, in 1972. He studied Marine Biology at the University of Liverpool and graduated in 1994. He went on to gain a PhD at the University of Essex, studying the response of Southern Ocean algae and bacteria to temperature change. After gaining his doctorate, he continued working as a Postdoc at Essex, investigating the impact of land-use on the soil methane sink. In 2001 he moved to the University of Edinburgh to investigate emissions of the greenhouse gas ‘nitrous oxide’ from agriculture, and continues to work there as a Postdoctoral Research Fellow. He is designer and editor of the new science Web site ‘GreenHouse Gas Online’ (http://www.ghgonline.org) and Google UK’s top Southern Ocean Web site (http://website.lineone.net˜dave reay/). He enjoys running, DIY and gardening to Test Match Special.

2961