NERAM V October 17 2006

Quentin Chiotti*

Ken Ogilvie*

John Drexhage#

Mary Pattenden*

qchiotti@pollutionprobe.org

www.pollutionprobe.org

Joint Air Quality and Climate Change Strategies: Challenges

and Opportunities

*Pollution Probe# IISD

NERAM V October 17 2006

Energy and Air Issues

* Limited emissions from various sources, including biomass burning.

COAL

OIL

NATURALGAS

OTHER*

NOX

VOCs

SO2

N2O

CH4

CO2

PARTICULATEMATTER

TOXICS

ACID RAIN

SMOG

CLIMATECHANGE

HAZARDOUS AIRPOLLUTANTS

Energy Productionand Use

Emissions AtmosphericIssues

NERAM V October 17 2006

MAIN ISSUES

Key sources

Atmospheric chemistry and interactions

Direct and indirect health effects

Policies

Solutions – Technical and non-technical

Co-benefits or unanticipated outcomes

NERAM V October 17 2006

Knowledge Gaps: AQ & CC• Atmospheric science: highly complex, uncertainties,

forecasts/scenarios• Scale: hemispheric, transboundary, local – [GHG] truly

global• Temporal differences between pollutants and response

times• Sources: Energy/Electricity, Transportation, Agriculture,

LIEs, SMEs• Health effects: Climate change on air quality; synergistic

impacts of heat stress; other health effects (e.g. WNV)• Technological and non-tech solutions: similar challenges

but significant differences• Policies: silos; counteractive; synergistic

NERAM V October 17 2006

• Deny there is a problem

• Deny you are a source/part of the problem

• Deny that there is a technological solution

• Deny that the technological solution is economically feasible or affordable

So How Do We Move Forward?Need to Move Past the Four Stages of Denial

NERAM V October 17 2006

Framework To Evaluate AQ and Climate Change Strategies

• Degree of scientific certainty about the problem and health effects

• Knowledge of main emission sources?• Agreement on solutions and expected

outcomes?• Which are economically feasible and

politically acceptable?• Direct and indirect impacts of solutions and

how are these being contested in the political arena? (e.g. nuclear option)

NERAM V October 17 2006

Key Linkages: Chapter 5• Chemical/atmospheric interactions• Actions that directly reduce GHGs and

other air pollutants• Actions that indirectly reduce energy

use and emissions• Actions that are both mitigation and

adaptation – measures which reduce emissions and enhance adaptive capacity

NERAM V October 17 2006

Climate Change – Air Quality: IPCC• Co-benefits: big picture is challenging• Substantial health benefits from CO2

mitigation strategies via improved AQ• Need for integration: options for harvesting

synergies– Coal AQ technologies lock in coal, can undermine

alternatives (e.g. renewables, efficiency)– Agriculture: ammonia emissions – nitrous oxide

and methane– Methane as a precursor to tropospheric ozone– Tropospheric ozone a potent GHG– Biofuels and black carbon– Diesel: CO2 and PM2.5

NERAM V October 17 2006

Air Quality – Climate Change

Q. What is the perspective from AQ experts?

A. ??????????????????????????????

Our Challenge Tomorrow:

• Guidance Document

• Recommendations from NERAM Colloquium V

NERAM V October 17 2006

Engineered interventions to avoid• Aerosols help reduce 25% regional effects of

climate change (cooling effect)– Produce more locally based sulphates

• NOx scavenges O3:

– Encourage more car use to reduce smog

These types of decisions best left to a higher authority!

NERAM V October 17 2006

Actions to Consider• Actions that are

ethical, consider environmental justice and lead to a clear environmental and health gain

• Need to address more than just the symptoms, but also the underlying causes

• Should focus on sources and solutions that produce the biggest benefits

NERAM V October 17 2006

AIR QUALITY

CLIMATE CHANGE

Does addressing air quality issues through actions that reduce GHG emissions produce a broader suite

of benefits and clear outcomes, than addressing climate change by reducing emissions of other air

pollutants?

2006

NERAM V October 17 2006

AIR QUALITY

CLIMATE CHANGE

What about 2026?

NERAM V October 17 2006

What do we do in 2050 when the Climate Change Dog becomes the

[Dangerous] Killer Rabbit?

NERAM V October 17 2006

2XCO22XCO2

3XCO23XCO2

4XCO24XCO2

NERAM V October 17 2006

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

• Article 2• “ … stabilization of greenhouse gas

concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

Dangerous – how much change?Stabilization – at what level?

The EU has chosen 2C global warming as the “dangerous” level – only 1.3C more warming.

NERAM V October 17 2006

The abundance, atmospheric lifetime, and Global Warming Potential of GHGs vary

considerably

GHG Abundance(1998, ppbv)

Lifetime(years)

GWP(100 yr)

CO2 365,000 variable 1

CH4 1745 12 23

N2O 314 114 296

CFCs, HCFCs

up to 0.5 2-1700 120-14,000

HFCs up to 0.02 0.3-220 12-12,000

PFCs, SF6 up to 0.08 2600-50,000 5700-22,200

CarbonDioxide

Methane

NitrousOxide

Halo

Carbons

NERAM V October 17 2006

Kyoto and the Inevitability of Climate Change

“The overwhelming majority of scientific experts, whilst recognizing that scientific uncertainties exist, nonetheless believe that human-induced climate change is inevitable. . The question is not whether climate will change... but rather how much... how fast, and where”

Robert Watson, Chair of IPCC to CoP6 Delegates, The Hague, November 2000

Stabilization: 40 Kyotos Needed

Based in IMAGE 2 model output

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100300

400

500

600

700

800

Kyoto

Year

Co

nc

en

trat

ion

(p

pm

v)

1IS92a

BAU1

2xCO2

Adaptation is necessaryMore mitigation is needed

NERAM V October 17 2006

Urgency of Situation:Window is 0-15 years

EU: 25% reduction by 2020; Global reductions of 60 to 80% by 2050

NERAM V October 17 2006

Canada’s Projected GHG Emissions

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Kyoto Target 571 Mt6% below 1990

2010 Emissions 809 Mt

1990 Emissions 607 Mt

BAU Gap

238 Mt33% above 1990

Mt

CO

2 eq

uiva

len

t

Business as Usual

(1999)

699 Mt

Projections

36 Mt

+23%

NERAM V October 17 2006

Smog Advisories/AlertsYear Advisories Days1993 1 11994 2 61995 6 141996 3 51997 3 61998 3 81999 5 92000 3 42001 7 232002 10 272003 7 19 2004 6 142005 31 55

2005

• 48 smog alert days

• 19 heat-alert/extreme heat-alert days

NERAM V October 17 2006

How will climate change affect air quality?

2005 2015 2026

PD 5,829 7,436 10,061

HA 16,807 20,067 24,587

ERV 59,696 71,548 87,963

MI 29,292,100 31,962,200 38,549,300

OMA Estimates

NERAM V October 17 2006

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Victoria

Calgary

Winnipeg

London

Toronto

Quebec

Fredericton 2080-2100

2041-2069

2020-2040

1961-1990Number of hot

days above 30C

Heat waves in Canadian cities will become more frequent

Emission increase by 20% by 2050 and 32% by 2080. The annual total number of poor O3 days would increase 4-11 and 10-20 respectively.

Air pollution mortality will increase by 20-25% and 30-40% by 2050 and 2080

Number of heat-related deaths will double and triple

Background ambient levels of O3 could increase by 40 ppm

NERAM V October 17 2006

Where do we need to make reductions?

NERAM V October 17 2006

Transportation Example1. Further reduce the

emissions of the current transportation system using new and improved technologies

2. Get more people out of their cars and onto public transit

3. Change development patterns to slow urban sprawl and to encourage denser development

NERAM V October 17 2006

Accomplishments?• Low sulphur fuels• Improved technologies• Inspection and maintenance• Gas tax allocation to support transit• Infrastructure renewal• Tax credits for transit passes• Ethanol/biodiesel• CAFE standards• Mercury switch-out• Vehicle retirement

NERAM V October 17 2006

Pollution Probe: Current Activities Related to Transportation

• Education and awareness: Clean Air Commute• Fuel efficiency• National vision and strategy on TDM (Cross

Canada workshop series)• National conference on commercial goods and

freight• Merits of mobile emissions reduction credits• Application of the net-gain approach to land use

planning• Alternative fuels – LCA

NERAM V October 17 2006

Canadian Attitudes Towards the Environment

• 10% identified environment as the most important issue facing Canada today

• 23% identified air pollution as the most important environmental issue

• 4% climate change/global warming• 91% agreed that we have a responsibility to

the next generation to do all we can to correct climate change

• 77% agreed that Canada must act now on climate change because the risk of waiting is too high

NERAM V October 17 2006

Thank You