26
1 DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT Abstract For more than 100 years, from 1900 to 2008, there were almost 400 storms natural disasters in Europe, 40% of which occurred in the 1990s. The international prognoses for the world weather suggest a tendency toward increasing in frequency and intensity of the severe storms as the climate warms. In these circumstances, for a researcher in the field of Environmental Economics, a natural question occurs, on whether people can contribute to reducing the frequency and the magnitude of severe storms that produce disastreous social and economic effects, by acting on their causes. In researching an answer to support the public policies in the field, a cause-effect analysis applied to Europe might make a contribution to the literature in the field. This especially considering the fact that international literature regarding the factors influencing global warming contains certainties in regard to the natural factors of influence, but declared incertitudes or skepticism in regard to anthropogenic ones. Skepticism, and even tension arised during the international negotiations in Copenhagen (December 2009) in regard to the agreement for limiting global warming, with doubts being raised about the methods used by experts of the International Climate Experts Group (GIEC), and thus the results obtained, which served as a basis for the negotiations. The object of critics was in regard to the form, and at times in regard to the content. It was not about contesting the phenomenon of Global warming during the negotiations, but the methods of calculation. The methodology relies on qualitative (type top down) and quantitative (type correlations bottom up) cause-effect analysis of the storm disasters in Europe. Based on the instruments used, we proposed a dynamic model of association of the evolution of storm disasters in Europe with anthropogenic factors, with 3 variants. Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary and primary factors of storm disasters in Europe, revealed the priority of human actions to prevent and decrease natural disasters-type storm. Key words: Environmental Economics, Natural Disasters, Storms, Europe, Global Warming JEL classification: Q54- este cercet - Europene.

DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

  • Upload
    lycong

  • View
    214

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

1

DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT

Abstract For more than 100 years, from 1900 to 2008, there were almost 400 storms natural

disasters in Europe, 40% of which occurred in the 1990s. The international prognoses for the

world weather suggest a tendency toward increasing in frequency and intensity of the severe

storms as the climate warms.

In these circumstances, for a researcher in the field of Environmental Economics, a natural

question occurs, on whether people can contribute to reducing the frequency and the magnitude of

severe storms that produce disastreous social and economic effects, by acting on their causes.

In researching an answer to support the public policies in the field, a cause-effect analysis

applied to Europe might make a contribution to the literature in the field. This especially

considering the fact that international literature regarding the factors influencing global warming

contains certainties in regard to the natural factors of influence, but declared incertitudes or

skepticism in regard to anthropogenic ones. Skepticism, and even tension arised during the international negotiations in Copenhagen

(December 2009) in regard to the agreement for limiting global warming, with doubts being raised

about the methods used by experts of the International Climate Experts Group (GIEC), and thus the

results obtained, which served as a basis for the negotiations. The object of critics was in regard to

the form, and at times in regard to the content. It was not about contesting the phenomenon of

Global warming during the negotiations, but the methods of calculation. The methodology relies on qualitative (type top down) and quantitative (type correlations

bottom up) cause-effect analysis of the storm disasters in Europe. Based on the instruments used,

we proposed a dynamic model of association of the evolution of storm disasters in Europe with anthropogenic factors, with 3 variants.

Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative

correlation of sub-factors, secondary and primary factors of storm disasters in Europe, revealed the

priority of human actions to prevent and decrease natural disasters-type storm.

Key words: Environmental Economics, Natural Disasters, Storms, Europe, Global Warming

JEL classification: Q54-

este cercet

-

Europene.

Page 2: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

2

Introducere

-tropical, numit Xyntia, a adus

-

7-8 metri

cel mai puternic ciclon extra- la

produse de Xyntia, dar s-au raportat peste 60 persoane decedate (din care 50 in

-au confruntat cu dezastre naturale tot

ate ridicat

oamenilor, cl dirilor, infrastructurii

1

aproape 400 de furtuni cu caracter de dezastru natural2, din care circa 40% au avut

1990 -

-se pe locul

-au

1 CRED EM-DAT 2 Criteriile (CRED EM- in 10 persoane

zona

a

Page 3: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

3

temperaturilor medii anuale (cu 0,60 3), d

Prognozele lansate pe plan mondial avanseaz n viitor a

, ca manifestare a

context european, pentru

(al patrulea Raport al Grupului

al ONU, IPCC)4.

-

Obiectivul general este efect privind dezastrele meteorologice

.

strofe ar putea contribui la conceperea unor

1. Metodologie

-efect privind dezastrele naturale de tip furtuni severe a fost

a) -down:

Instrumente utilizate: - efect (Ishikawa sau fishbone diagram)

Diagrama - efect (Ishikawa) este un instrument grafic pe care l-am

3 Ghidul 29/2008 privind adaptarea la efectele schimbarilor climatice (GASC) 4 http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf

Page 4: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

4

cauzele determinante pentru efectul de dezastru

meteorologic.

I. : s-

evenimentele majore de furtuni seve

II. Stabilirea cauzelor principale

cone

III.

IV. -cauzelor.

b) Metoda canti :

cauze antropice

efect

naliza

rezultate din a -cauze (consumuri energetice bazate pe

-2008.

model dinamic5 de asociere a

le variabile:

i. Varianta 1 (V1) Europa sub-cauza consumuri agregate de combustibili fosili

ii. Varianta 2 (V2) Europa nivelul emisiilor de gaze cu

2), (consumuri de combustibili fosili).

iii. Varianta 3 (V3) Europa

- .

5 Model dinamic intitulat Model IEM

Page 5: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

5

2 - efect privind dezastrele naturale de tip

2.1 -efect privind dezastrele naturale de tip furtuni severe prin metoda

2.1.1 Identificarea problemei:

climatice globale

-2008), am observat

precum

ciate cu cicloane intense extra-

tropicale [

GRAFIC 1:

2008

-DAT, octombrie 2009

Mondial

Europa

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1.000

1900-'09 1910-'19 1920-'29 1930-'39 1940-'49 1950-'59 1960-'69 1970-'79 1980-'89 1990-'99 2000-'08

Nr.

eve

nim

ente

Mondial

Europa

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1.000

1900-'09 1910-'19 1920-'29 1930-'39 1940-'49 1950-'59 1960-'69 1970-'79 1980-'89 1990-'99 2000-'08

Nr.

eve

nim

ente

Page 6: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

6

Evenimentele de dezastre naturale din Europa, cauzate de fenomene meteo

severe (furtuni, tornade, uragane) din perioada 1900

CRED EM-DAT6

miliarde USD pe teritoriul Uniunii Europene).

n Europa de Est s-

71 de evenimente

(14%).

-se pe

-

intervalul 2000 2008.

(Munich Re, 1990)

-

- -2008

comparativ cu deceniul anterior.

6 l

Disaster Database - The Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters)

Page 7: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

7

GRAFIC 2: ii, pe Euro-regiuni

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Europa de Est Europa de Nord Europa de Sud Europa de Vest

1900-'79 1980-'89

1990-'99 2000-'08

Sursa: IEM 2009, pe baza datelor CRED EM-DAT, octombrie 2009

mperaturile medii

- 7.

- 8. Astfel,

oC

nivelurile pre-industriale (c oC la nivel mondial), iar 9 ani din ultimii

12 ani (1996-2008)

u devenit semnificativ mai

7 In perioada pre- - -1899,

8 Parry et al, - 2008 indicator based Assessment, 2009

Page 8: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

8

ea efectului de

-

GRAFIC 3: -2008, comparativ cu media perioadei 1850- n oC)

Fenomenele atipice ale climei (inclusiv temperaturile f

2009- incertitudini

- [Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9 /2009]

-a

Page 9: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

9

[H. Fink, T. Ermert, A. G. Pinto, 2008].

Europa cu 1-5,5 oC

-

sch

[IPCC Third Assessment Report, 2001].

turilor mai

riscul de furtuni

, ceea ce

l dintre

-climatice catastrofale induse. Eforturile ce au

Page 10: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

10

2.1.2 St ale dezastrelor naturale de tip

factori naturali-

externi- factori externi antropici

factori naturali interni:

factori naturali externi:

factori antropici externi

gazelor cu -

(antropice).

n ultimul Raport

[IPCC, 2007].

Oa

.

tastrofale la nivel planetar,

o

pre-

2) [Scenarii realizate de IPCC 2001, 2007]

Page 11: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

11

GRAFIC 2

- -

Jola, USA, 1999

TABEL 1: 2 global

Anul

1750 278,00

1755 278,00

1760 278,00

1800 282,90

1900 295,80

1950 310,70

1970 325,00

2000 368,79

2003 374,76

2008 385,10

Sursa: pe baza datelor din MC 2008, http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperat.htm

Page 12: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

12

a dezastrelor naturale de tip lor cu efect de

2.1.3 -cauzelor:

de

majorarea emisiilor de CO2

u

IPCC, 2007]

a foarte probabil bazate pe combustibili fosili (de exemplu, pentru generarea energiei electrice),

special prin de IPCC, 2007]

consu -au

50 ppm9 -

s-

-

emisiilor de

9

Page 13: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

13

2.1.4 Diagrama Ishikawa - efect privind dezastrele naturale

-a realizat

grafic - efect Ishikawa.

identificate.

FIGURA 1: - efect Ishikawa 10

extreme

Sursa: specialitate

10 Diagrama Ishikawa Mai poart - fishbone diagram).

climatice-

solare pe Terra

Variabilitatea interna a climatului

atmosfera

oceane

banchize

axei polilor

parametrilor orbitali pe Terra

Activitate

Activitate

vulcanice

atmosferice globale de gaze cu

factori antropici

Emisii CO2

Consum combustibili fosili

ri

Reducerea

Co2

Fenomene meteo extreme: furtuni severe

Emisii particule

gaze

Page 14: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

14

2.2 REZULTATELE ANALIZEI -EFECT PRIN METODA CADEZASTRELE NATURALE DE TIP FURTUNI

-efect sunt: analiza

cauze antropice (consumuri energetice bazate pe

2 efect Pe

baza acestora, am elaborat modelul dinamic IEM11 .

bottom-up

evenime sub-cauze

cauze secundare cauze principale

-2008.

2.2.1 Modelul dinamic IEM

:

Varianta V1 sub-cauza consumuri agregate de combustibili fosili

Varianta V2

rezultate din activi

Varianta V3 ca variabile sub-cauzele (c

-

a) dezastrelor hidro-meteorologice, inclusiv a c

factori antropici.

b)

.

11

Page 15: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

15

Baza de date:

-DAT, iar cele referitoare la consumuri

2.2.1.1 Varianta V1 sub- i

-2008

n 199

-

-

arele

-europene,

-

-

Page 16: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

16

GRAFIC 5: Model dinamic IEM-

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

70

Cons

um E

nerg

etic

(Cva

drili

oane

Btu

)

TOTAL Consum Combustibili fosili(Cvadrilioane* Btu)

debutul unei

-

(la 12-

13 evenimente/an)

, -1999 niveluri

-a majorat treptat, la un nou maxim, de 22

Page 17: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

17

-a -o ten

-

te 22 evenimente severe de tip

Concluzii:

evenimente In intervalul 1980- 2008 au existat 8 ani cu

combustibili fosili comparativ cu anul anterior.

onsumului energetic

de evenimenpe parcursul anilor 2000.

2.2.1.2. Varianta V2 nt

CO2

-au majorat de la 22,6

12

perioada 2000-2007.

12 State of the World, Into a Warming World, 2009, Worldwatch Institute

Page 18: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

18

Observ

n perioada 1980- nivelului

-

cu nivelul GES.

GRAFIC 6: Model dinamic IEM

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

4.000

4.100

4.200

4.300

4.400

4.500

4.600

4.700

4.800

Emis

ii C

O2

din

Con

sum

c. f

osili

(mil.

t.)

Emisii CO2 din consum combustib. fosili (milioanetone)

2010

- -

-2007 la atingerea unor niveluri record, de circa

Page 19: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

19

4.700 milioane tone (echiv. CO2

Europa cu nivelul ridicat al emisiilor de gaze cu efect de ser .

Inceputul crizei economico-

As -

1999, 2002, 2005, 2007, dar

numai doi ani-

anterior.

Concluzii:

GES

anii 1993, 1994 (123-

evenimente/an), 2005 (26 evenimente).

), dar r 2

(carbuni, care emit o mare cantitate de GES).

Page 20: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

20

GRAFIC 7: pe emisii

3.000

3.200

3.400

3.600

3.800

4.000

4.200

4.400

4.600

4.800

5.000

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Mili

oane

tone

CO

2

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

70

Cva

drili

oane

Btu

Emisii CO2 din consum combustib. fosili (milioane tone)

TOTAL Consum Combustibili fosili (Cvadrilioane* Btu)

010203040506070

1980

1983

1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

2004

2007

2.2.1.3 Varianta V3 -cauzele (c

-

-2008 au ex

Europa: 1984, 1990, 1993, 1994, 1999, 2002, 2005, 2007;

Page 21: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

21

GRAFIC 8: Model dinamic IEM- combustibili fosili - 2) - dezastre meteo de

s-emisiilor de gaze cu efect

p de 1-3 ani.

n 1990 s-

-

cvasi-

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

Emis

ii CO

2 di

n Co

nsum

c. f

osili

. Con

sum

c. f

osili

TOTAL Consum combustibili fosili ( cvadrilioane Btu )

Emisii CO2 din consum combust. fosili (miliarde tone x 10)

Page 22: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

22

Europa din perioada de circa 30 de

Concluzii:

A -

nu -cauza consum energetic

pe ba - -

2 a

tot mai rapide a

global. -

-

-

6,5 miliarde tone de CO2 . Mai mult, sistemele naturale ale

Terrei- -

ciclul carbonului sau fluxurile de

-

Page 23: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

23

provenite din arderea

n zonele terestre cu

conduce la o

- .

FIGURA 2: carbonului

Worldwatch Institute, 2009

Page 24: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

24

GRAFIC 9: 2 -2008

S The Climate Dilemaa in a Nutschel, State of the World 2009,

Worldwatch Institute, 2009

n anul 2008 nivelul a

In fapt, se

de manifestare a acesteia- feno

- efect (Ishikawa

.

- forturile, nu

Page 25: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

25

Anexa 1: Surse ale

-

Sursa Emisii GES, echiv. CO2

Furnizarea de

energie

25,9 %

Industrie 19,4 %

chimice

Silvicultura 17,4 %

agricole

Agricultura 13,5 %

Transport 13,1 % ul , cu vaporul

7,9 %

2,8 %

Climate change, Guide and Glossary, Worldwatch Institute

2009

Page 26: DEZASTRE NATURALE DE TIP B N EUROPA: ANALIZA CAUZA-EFECT · Results: The diagram cause-effect (Ishikawa or fishbone diagram) and quantitative correlation of sub-factors, secondary

26

BIBLIOGRAFIE

(Coordonatori),

Impactul dezastrelor produse de fenomene meteorologice extreme asupra economiilor europene, Program

fundamental al Acad

interdisciplinar de prevenire a fenomenelor cu risc

IEM, 2009

, The Climate Dilemaa in a Nutschel, State of the World

2009, Worldwatch Institute, 2009

Leca, Aureliu (coordonator), I SPOS 2009, IER,

2010

Climate change Guide and Glossary, Worldwatch Institute

2009

Parry et al, - 2008 indicator based Assessment, 2009

XXX State of the World, Into a The Warming World, 2009,

Worldwatch Institute

XXX IPCC Third Assessment Report, 2001, Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change: www.ipcc.ch

XXX IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007, http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-

report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf

XXX Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii, Institute of

Oceanography, University of California La Jola, USA, 1999

XXX MC 2008,

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperat.htm

XXX Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9 /2009

XXX CRED EM-DATE, International Disaster Database - The

Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters XXX United Nations Environment Programme:

www.unep.org/themes/climatechange XXX United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change: www.unfccc.int

XXX Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center:

www.cdiac.ornl.gov/faq.html