1. Climate Change & Bangalore: Science, Politics and Action Sharachchandra Lele Env & Dev group Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment

2. Outline 1: Science how climate works and role of GHGs historical temperatures and evidences of change Projections Likely impacts

3. Model 1:  /4 =  T 4.  = 1368 W/m 2  T= 279K Model 2: (1-a)  /4 =  T 4. a = 0.31  T= 254K. (Adding an albedo is better science but gives a worse result.) Actual T e = 288K. Missing: An atmosphere with a greenhouse effect (responsible for 34K of warming). Earth’s Energy Balance

4. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) Carbon Dioxide & Water Vapour Methane, ozone, nitrous oxide, chlorofluourocarbons (CFC)

6. Note Greenhouse gases make life on Earth possible, but too much is bad

7. Differences in GHGs Different effectiveness of warming –Depends on lifetime in atmosphere –Efficiency of molecule Described by global warming potential (GWP) Different contributions CO 2 around 60%~80% of historical warming

8. Evidence of CC

9. Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/mlo145e_thrudc04.pdf Mauna Loa CO 2 data, 1958-2004

11. Temperature Rise

13. CO 2,CH 4 and estimated global temperature (Antarctic ΔT/2 in ice core era) 0 = 1880-1899 mean. Source: Hansen, Clim. Change, 68, 269, 2005. Temperature, CO 2, and methane track each other

14. Projections

15. IEA Projection for World Primary Energy Demand Oil and gas together account for more than 60% of the growth in energy demand between now and 2030 in the Reference Scenario Coal Oil Gas Other renewables Nuclear Hydro 0 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000 10 000 12 000 14 000 16 000 18 000 1970198019902000201020202030 Mtoe 1971

16. Global emissions grow 50% between now and 2030, and developing countries’ emissions will overtake OECD’s in the 2020s World Energy-Related CO 2 Emissions

17. Energy-Related CO 2 Emissions Global emissions grow by just over half between 2003 & 2030, with the bulk of the increase coming from developing countries 24 Gt 2030 2003 37 Gt

18. Predictions Multi-model averages and assessed ranges for surface warming IPCC Continued emissions will lead to further warming of 1.8ºC to 4ºC over the 21 st century, depending on different scenarios

19. Impacts (Global) Average temperature rise (old focus) Increased frequency of extreme evenets (more cyclones, more droughts) Melting of polar ice Stopping of gulf stream (ice age in Europe) Sea level rise, coastal inundation

20. Impacts (India) NOTE: we know very little of the details Melting of Himalayan ice stocks, and permafrost in Tibet>>changes in river flows More monsoon failures, or extreme events in an already monsoonal climate Collapse of monsoon system? Increased ET >>crop stress Sea level rise and resulting inundation Complex effects: e.g., disease vectors

21. What is required to avert ‘catastrophic CC’? Catastrophic CC tentatively defined as >2deg C rise 50%-85% reduction in global emissions of GHGs required by 2050 Many are now saying even this will not be sufficient

22. Politics of climate change Who is to blame and how much? Who should respond and how?

23. Who has contributed? Historically, LDCs have contributed only 20% or less In recent year: India ~1,750 million tCO2e in 2005 = 5% of the global GHG emission rate In per capita terms, India = 1.3 tCO2e in 1994, rising to 1.9 tCO2e in 2004 (still using 1994 population), So India is ranked 146 th amongst all countries. In contrast, per capita emissions of the USA were around 23 tCO2e in 2004. European countries are lower than USA but still much higher than LDCs

24. Where do we need to go? In per capita terms, to avert catastrophic CC requires limiting GHG emissions to ~3 tCO2e/yr

25. Core problems 1.Non-acceptance of CC as a probem (USA position till recently!) 2.Refusal to think in per capita terms or some such equitable responsibility framework 3.Equity has many dimensions 1.Historical contributions or present emissions only? 2.Per capita using which population? 3.Capacity to respond (affluence) or simply equal 4.Extent of impact (e.g., coastal) or simply equal 5.Etc etc 4.BUT, whatever the model, North has to cut back drastically and help the South also

26. Core problems 2 If commitments are to be made, North insists on trading

27. Indian position so far We did not create the problem We are not currently contributing much (‘6 th largest emitter language makes little sense’) Even if we introduce dramatic changes, our contribution to the desired reductions will be small We cannot afford to cut back We have a right to pollute in order to develop We are anyway doing a lot We need a lot of financial and tech transfer Best way to adapt is to develop We will not make binding commitments but we are willing to make some money out of trading (?!)

28. Limitations of this position 1 Science: –if the goal is 3 tCO2e/cap, we will have to move away from business-as-usual anyway TERI 2008: ~5 tCO2/capita in 2031 under business-as-usual –Current policies will put in place huge infrastructure that will be difficult to change –North does not have the technology to help us anyway

29. Limitations 2 Ethical: –There is no undifferentiated “we”: Indian elite is emitting at high level –We cannot use Northern inaction to sidetrack us from environment-worthy actions today –LARGER PICTURE: current developmental model needs to be questioned anyway! –CC overlaps with other problems

30. Limitations 3 Strategic: –We will feel the burden of impact heavily, so some compromise that leads to a climate treaty will be ok –At least invest in adaptation –We are early in the curve: develop technologies that we can actually market to the North

31. Bangalore level issues Focus on Mitigation or adaptation? Dilemmas of unilateral mitigation efforts (national or local) –How does it help if no one else is doing it –Will we get co-opted, or undermine our equity position? Can we find win-win with other local issues?

32. Possible overlaps Air pollution and CO2 emissions Traffic and CO2 emissions Electricity scarcity, building energy, & CO2 emissions Water scarcity and CC adaptation