accounting for carbon at the point of consumption prof. john barrett university of leeds october 13...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
218 views
TRANSCRIPT
Accounting for carbon at the point of consumption
Prof. John BarrettUniversity of Leeds
October 13th, 2011
Scale of Traded Emissions - National
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 500
600
700
800
900
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
Kyoto greenhouse gas basketFull TerritorialConsumer
CO2e
(mt)
Source: University of Leeds
Scale of Traded Emissions - Sector
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
China Japan Ger-many
United
Kingdom
China USA
Russian Federa-tion
ChinaChina
USA
UK
Share of domestic consumption by country of origin of steel
Source: University of Leeds
Global Emissions captured in trading schemes
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
Global emissions EU ETS sectors
Mil
lio
n t
onn
es C
O2
an
d C
O2e
q
CO2
Other GHGs
9% of CO2
Source: University of Leeds
CO2 or GHG Emissions
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
Global emissions EU ETS sectors All sectors
Mil
lio
n t
onn
es C
O2
an
d C
O2e
q
CO2 Other GHGs
9% of CO2
2% of GHGs
CO2
Other GHGs
14% of CO2
7% of GHGs
Source: University of Leeds
Capturing Carbon in Trade
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
EU ETS Proposed schemes
Direct onsite
imports
Direct imports
Direct onsite
imports and onsite
elec.
Direct imports
and elec
All embedded
Mil
lio
n t
onn
es C
O2
EU Australia and New Zealand USA Japan and South Korea
30%28% 28% 28%
9%
31%
US 13%
38%
Source: University of Leeds
Best Available Technologies
All embedded; All sectors; source country GHGs
All embedded; All sectors; BATs GHGs
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Emissions attributed to USA, Japan and South Korea
Emissions attributed to Australia and New Zealand
Emissions attributed to EU
Emissions captured by trading schemes
Source: University of Leeds
What Counts?
• All embodied emissions (8% difference• “Real” emissions, not false assumptions (10% difference)• Inclusion of the US and Japan in domestic schemes (15%
difference)
What doesn’t count • Least developed countries (under 1%)• Full GHG emissions (at least for existing sectors) (under 2%)
Challenges
• Complex carbon accounting system that is robust• Difficulty of border carbon adjustments that would
make a difference
Smaller scheme
Larger scheme
Cooperative
Uncooperative
Smaller uncooperative
All non-LDC material partners, BAT - EU, Existing, Direct, CO2,
Most at risk
Smaller corporative
All non-LDC partners, Real exporter, Existing + proposed,
Direct + electricity, , CO2, Most at risk
Larger uncooperative
All non-LDC material partners, BAT- EU, Existing, Direct power sector, CO2, All
EUETS sectors
Larger co-operative
All non-LDC partners, Real- exporter, Existing + proposed, Embedded (by
sectors), All Kyoto, All sectors