World Climate:Negotiating a Global Climate Agreement

using the C-ROADS Climate Policy Simulation

Agenda1. Introduction and schedule

2. Roles

3. The World Climate Negotiation

4. Debrief and your feedback

Purpose of C-ROADS(Climate Rapid Overview And Decision Support)

To improve understanding of important climate dynamics among Policymakers & negotiators

Businesses, Educators, Civil Society

Media

The public

to help ensure that climate policy is informed by vetted, peer-reviewed science.

Negotiating PartiesUnited StatesEuropean UnionOther Developed Nations

Australia/NZ, Canada, Other Europe, Japan, Russia & Former Soviet Republics, South Korea, United Kingdom

ChinaIndiaOther Developing Nations

Led by Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Indonesia, and Pakistan, with other nations of Africa, Central and South America, southeast Asia, the Middle East, island states of the Pacific, Indian Ocean, and Caribbean

ProcessIntroduce yourselves to members of

your delegation

Read Briefing Memo for your nation or bloc

Begin to formulate your negotiating strategyWhat are your vital interests? What is politically feasible in

your nation/bloc?What do you need from the other nations/blocs? What can

you offer them?

Welcome Delegates

UN Climate Summit

Emissions exceed IPCC Worst-case Scenario:C

O2 E

mis

sio

ns

fro

m F

oss

il F

uel

s (

GtC

/yea

r)

Actual CO2 Emissions vs. IPCC Assumptions

US Global Change Research Program: downloads.globalchange.gov/usimpacts/pdfs/climate-impacts-report.pdf2008-2009 data: Manning et al. (2010), Nature Geoscience. Vol. 3; June, 376-377. 2010: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/perlim_2009_2010_estimates.html

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

6

7

8

9

IPCC Emissions Scenarios

IPCC WorstCase(A1FI)

Actual Emissions

2010:9.14GtC

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

Atmospheric CO2, Mauna Loa Observatory

2011: 392 ppm40% above

pre-industrial

0 °C 1.0 °C 2.0 °C 3.0 °C 4.0 °C 5.0 °C1.8 °F 3.6 °F 5.4 °F 7.2 °F 9.0 °F0 °F

IP

CC

AR

4

1.8 °F 3.6 °F 5.4 °F 7.2 °F 9.0 °F0 °F0 °C 1.0 °C 2.0 °C 3.0 °C 4.0 °C 5.0 °C

3.5 °C6.3 ° F

5.3 °C9.5 °F

7.4 °C13.3 °F

MIT Joint Program on Global Change

(Sokolov et al. 2009, Journal of Climate)

Projected mean temp increase by 2100

under BAU

10.8 °F6.0 °C

Our Global Task

Manage the Unavoidable

and

Avoid the Unmanageable

Your GoalsAchieve emissions reduction

commitments to stabilize GHG levels by 2100 at a level that limits global warming to no more than 2 °C above preindustrial levels.

Agree on a deal to share costs of mitigation and adaptation fund to aid less developed nations.

Task 1: EmissionsEach delegation will set its own fossil fuel emissions

targets. You will set:

– In what year will GHG emissions in your bloc stop growing (if any)?

– In what year (if desired), will your GHG emissions begin to fall?

– If emissions will fall, at what rate (% per year)?

REDD policies: Deforestation: 0 – 1 scale. 1 continues BAU deforestation path, 0

gradually eliminates deforestation over coming decades.

Afforestation: 0 – 1 scale. 0 = no new area set aside for afforestation; 1 = maximum feasible afforestation area.

Task 2: Burden SharingWe are creating the “UN Global Fund for

Mitigation and Adaptation” forDisaster reliefFood and waterImmigration and refugeesMitigation — Investing in any necessary non-cost-saving

mitigation to achieve Task 1 goals

Total cost is $100 Billion per year (ramping up to that level by 2020)

How much will you contribute?

How much should others contribute?

Terms?

Proposal FormRegion: ____________CO2 Emissions growth stop year: _______

CO2 Emissions decline start year: _______

Fractional rate of decline (%/year): ______

REDD+ (Reduction in Emissions from Deforestation and land Degradation)_______

India, Other Developed, Other Developing only:(1 = no reduction from BAU; 0 = max reduction)

Afforestation (net new forest area) _______ All nations/regions: (0 = no new afforestation area; 1 = maximum feasible)

Your region’s contribution to fund for mitigation and adaptation ($B/year): _______

After you prepare your proposal

2 minute plenary presentation by representative of each delegation describing their emissions proposal, their Fund commitment and why.

Designate a representative to give your Bloc’s speech.

Temp

Sealevel rise,ocean pH

Specific country

emissions

Carbon cycle

Total fossil fuel CO2

emissions

(Global, 3, 6 or 15 blocs)

Net CO2 emissions from forestsDeforestation

Afforestation Forests

GHGs in atm

Climate

Other GHGs

C-ROADS Model Structure

User Input

User Input

24

(10 layers)

Carbon Cycle• Atmosphere• Two biosphere

compartments• Ocean:

• Mixed layer• 10 deep ocean layers

• Explicit stock/flow structure for other GHGs

• CH4

• N2O

• HFCs, PFCs, SF6, etc.

• Aerosols & Black Carbon

25

(10 layers)

Radiative Balance

OtherForcings

• CO2

• CH4

• N2O

• Other GHGs

• Aerosols

• Black carbon

• Heat transfer to surface, deep ocean

C-ROADS Produces CO2 Concentration Results Consistent with Historical Records

26

400

350

300

250

200

1850 1866 1882 1898 1914 1930 1946 1962 1978 1994 2010Time (year)

ppm

C-ROADSData - Law Dome

Data - Mauna Loa

C-ROADS Produces Methane Concentration Results Consistent with History and IPCC Forecasts

27

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

1850 1875 1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025 2050 2075 2100Time (year)

ppb

C-ROADSData - GISS

Data - Law DomeProj - SRES

C-ROADS Calibration to AR4 Scenarios

C-ROADS Produces Sea Level Rise Results Consistent with Historical Records

29

60

-55

-170

-285

-4001850 1874 1898 1922 1946 1970 1994

Time (year)

mm

C-ROADSData - Tide GaugesData - Satellite

C-ROADS Scientific Review Panel

Dr. Robert Watson Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and former chair, IPCC

Mr. Eric Beinhocker McKinsey Global Institute

Dr. Klaus Hasselmann Max-Planck Institut für Meteorologie

Dr. David Lane London School of Economics

Dr. Jørgen Randers Norwegian School of Management (BI)

Dr. Stephen Schneider Stanford University

Dr. Bert de Vries Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency,RIVM

Conclusion of Scientific Review Panel

The C-ROADS model

“reproduces the response properties of state-of- the-art three dimensional climate models very well”

“Given the model’s capabilities and its close alignment with a range of scenarios published in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC we support its widespread use among a broad range of users and recommend that it be considered as an official United Nations tool.”

Full report: http://climateinteractive.org/simulations/C-ROADS/technical/scientific-review/C-ROADS%20Scientific%20Review%20Summary-1.pdf

Proposal Summary

Emissions Growth

Stop Year

Emissions Reduction Start Year

Annual Emissions Reduction

(%/year)

REDD(1 = BAU; 0 = zero

emissions)

New Afforestation

Area(0-1 [max feasible])

Contribution to (or Draw on) Fund

($ Billion/yr)

United States NA

European

UnionNA

Other Developed

China NA

India

Other Developing

Example 2075 2085 1.0%/year 0.8 0.1 $10 B/yr

Debrief Round 1

Source: Dr. Asgeir Sorteberg, Bjeknes Centrefor Climate Research, Svalbard, Norwayhttp://www.carbonequity.info/images/seaice07.jpg

Arctic Sea Ice Loss Compared to IPCC Models

Arctic ice extent to Sept. 2007 compared to IPCC models

using the SRES A2 CO2 scenario

(high CO2 scenario).

Policymaker Mental Models“Currently, in the UNFCCC negotiation process, the concrete environmental consequences of the various positions are not clear to all of us.

There is a dangerous void of understanding of the short and long term impacts of the espoused …unwillingness to act on behalf of the Parties.” 

– Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC negotiator for Costa Rica, Sept 2008 (Named to lead UNFCCC, May 2010)

Head of State Meeting, Copenhagen, Dec 2009

“Let us suppose 100 percent reduction, that is, no CO2 in the developed countries anymore. Even then, with the [target of] two degrees, you have to reduce carbon emissions in the developing countries. That is the truth.”

— Chancellor Angela Merkel.

“Thank you for all these suggestions. We have said very clearly that we must not accept the 50 percent reductions. We cannot accept it.”

— He Yafei

“People tend to forget where it is from. In the past 200 years of industrialization developed countries contributed more than 80 percent of emissions. Whoever created this problem is responsible for the catastrophe we are facing.”— Chinese deputy foreign minister He Yafei

“I say this with all due respect and in all friendship….With all due respect to China…[The developed countries have pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent.] And in return, China, which will soon be the biggest economic power in the world, says to the world: ‘Commitments apply to you, but not to us.’ This is utterly unacceptable! This is about the essentials, and one has to react to this hypocrisy!”

—President Nikolas Sarkozy

“If there is no sense of mutuality in this process, it is going to be difficult for us to ever move forward in a significant way.”

—President Barack Obama

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,692861,00.html

Round 2

Debrief Round 2

Round 3

Overall Debrief

Thank you

For more information:

climateinteractive.org

Backup

C-ROADS Development Team(Climate Rapid Overview And Decision Support)

– Dr. Tom Fiddaman, Ventana Systems

– Dr. Travis Franck, Climate Interactive/MIT Sloan School

– Andrew Jones, Climate Interactive

– Dr. Phil Rice, Climate Interactive

– Dr. Beth Sawin, Climate Interactive

– Dr. Lori Siegel, Climate Interactive

– Dr. John Sterman, MIT System Dynamics Group

Impact of 1 Meter SLR

Impact of 1 Meter Sea Level Rise