climate change: a step toward realism joel schwartz visiting fellow american enterprise institute...
TRANSCRIPT
Climate Change: A Step Toward Realism
Joel Schwartz
Visiting Fellow
American Enterprise Institute
Industrial Environment/California Manufacturers and Technology Association Annual Meeting
November 8, 2007
San Diego, California
2
Environmentalists claim air pollution will increase in future due to greenhouse warming
3
Back in the real world: Rising Temperatures…Declining Air Pollution
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Ozo
ne (
days
/yea
r)
P
M2.
5 (u
g/m
3)
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1 Tem
perature ( oC) (rel. to 1951-80 m
ean)
OzonePM2.5Temperature
Sources: GISS, EPA
Ozone: 8-hour exceedance days/year; PM2.5: annual average. Temperature and pollution levels are national averages.
4
-96% -94%-79% -74%
-63%-40% -37% -28% -20%
+61%
+95%+109%+114%
Le
ad
Ozo
ne
, 1-h
r exce
ed
an
ce d
ays
Ozo
ne
, 8-h
r exce
ed
an
ce d
ays
Ca
rbo
n M
on
oxid
e
Su
lfur D
ioxid
e
Fin
e P
articu
late
s (PM
2.5
)
Oxid
es o
f Nitro
ge
n
Ozo
ne
, 1-h
ou
r
Ozo
ne
, 8-h
ou
r
Co
al U
sag
e
Au
tom
ob
ile M
iles
Die
sel T
ruck M
iles
GD
P
-100%
0%
100%
Percent C
hange 1980-2005
Air p ollu tion g oin g d own
F ossil fu el u seg oin g u p
More driving, more energy…less air pollution (1)
Sources: EPA, DOT, DOE
Change in ambient pollution levels, 1980-2005
5
More driving, more energy…less air pollution (2)
-96%
-67%-50% -49% -42%
-30%
+61%
+95%+109% +114%
Lead
Particu
late Matter
Vo
latile Org
anic C
om
po
un
ds
Carb
on
Mo
no
xide
Su
lfur D
ioxid
e
Nitro
gen
Oxid
es
Co
al Usag
e
Au
tom
ob
ile Miles
Diesel T
ruck M
iles
GD
P
-100%
0%
100%
Percent C
hange 1980-2005
Em iss ions going down
F oss il fue l usegoing up
Sources: EPA, DOT, DOE
Change in pollutant emissions, 1980-2005
6
Air pollution will continue to decline
Motor vehicle standards will eliminate more than 80% of vehicle NOx, VOC and PM, even after accounting for growth in driving
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) will eliminate more than 70% of SO2 and more than 50% of NOx during the next two decades
MACT rules eliminate most emissions from a wide range of industrial sources
Overall, existing requirements will eliminate at least 70%-80% of remaining air pollution during next 20 years or so
7
Long-term ambient, on-road, and stack measurements confirm pollution reductions On-road emissions:
Average automobile’s emissions are dropping: VOC -12%/yr; NOx -6%/yr; CO -10%/yr.
Heavy-duty diesel trucks: NOx -4%/yr; soot -8%/yr Rate of NOx and soot declines will accelerate as vehicles built to
new Tier 2 (2004) and heavy-duty (2007) emissions standards begin to permeate the on-road fleet
Power plant emissions: NOx SIP Call recently reduced coal-fired NOx emissions nearly
60% below 1998 level. SO2 down 23% since 1998.
Ambient levels of directly emitted pollutants: Steady declines in NO2, CO, SO2, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, total
VOC, etc. All dropping a few percent to several percent per year.
8
So how did NRDC come up with rising air pollution levels in the future?
NRDC’s press release“Smog Poses Greater Health Risk Because of Global WarmingMore Bad Air Days for Southern, Eastern U.S. Cities WASHINGTON, DC (September 13, 2007) -- People living in ten mid-sized metropolitan areas are expected to experience significantly more 'red alert' air pollution days in coming years due to increasing lung-damaging smog caused by higher temperatures from global warming. Researchers project that, unless action is taken to curb global warming, by mid-century people living in a total of 50 cities in the eastern United States would see:A doubling of the number of unhealthy ‘red alert’ daysA 68 percent (5.5 day) increase in the average number of days exceeding the current 8-hour ozone standard”
9
NRDC’s Sleight of Hand
Used the 1996 EPA emissions inventory to “predict” ozone levels in the 2050s But 1996 ozone-precursor emissions were more than
30% higher than 2006 emissions
In other words, NRDC got higher future ozone levels by assuming a large increase in future ozone-forming emissions. However, NRDC obscures this fact in its report and press release.
10
NRDC’s response to Schwartz’s critique of Heat Advisory: Deception and evasion NRDC: “The project on which Heat Advisory is based kept anthropogenic
ozone precursor emission levels constant as a way of evaluating the effect that climate change alone could have on ozone concentrations.”
Misleading: “Constant” really means “constant at 1996 levels”, which really means more than 30% higher than today, and at least four or five times higher than emissions in coming decades
NRDC: “While we would expect significant reductions in precursor emissions over the next decade there are no reliable estimates of precursor emissions extending to the mid 21st century.”
Climate activists assume climate models provide accurate predictions of future temperatures without batting an eye. But when it comes to ozone, NRDC pleads uncertainty and then chooses increases in future ozone-forming emissions that are patently at odds with any plausible future scenario.
If anything, the statement that “there are no reliable estimates….extending to the mid 21st Century” is far more applicable to greenhouse gas emissions and climate models’ predictive skill than it is for ozone-forming emissions.
Imagine NRDC’s reaction if climate skeptics assumed CO2 emissions would stay constant at 1996 levels to predict future climate
11
NRDC then claimed Heat Advisory wasn’t really making predictions of future ozone levels:
“The project on which Heat Advisory is based kept anthropogenic ozone precursor emission levels constant as a way of evaluating the effect that climate change alone could have on ozone concentrations. Other researchers may choose alternative assumptions about how anthropogenic ozone precursors could change in the future, and will arrive at different projected ozone concentrations. Projections of how global warming would affect ozone levels are not predictions of what will happen.”
Now look at NRDC’s press release:
Smog Poses Greater Health Risk Because of Global WarmingMore Bad Air Days for Southern, Eastern U.S. Cities WASHINGTON, DC (September 13, 2007) -- People living in ten mid-sized metropolitan areas are expected to experience significantly more 'red alert' air pollution days in coming years due to increasing lung-damaging smog caused by higher temperatures from global warming. Researchers project that, unless action is taken to curb global warming, by mid-century people living in a total of 50 cities in the eastern United States would see:A doubling of the number of unhealthy ‘red alert’ daysA 68 percent (5.5 day) increase in the average number of days exceeding the current 8-hour ozone standard
12
NRDC certainly knows that air pollution will decline—their press releases highlight the new regulations
EPA Rule Means Progress Against Diesel Pollution According to Natural Resources Defense Council, May 10, 2004 These standards…will reduce particulate soot and nitrogen oxide
emissions [from non-road diesel vehicles] by 90-95 percent in most cases
NEW DIESEL FUEL HITTING PUMPS NATIONWIDE ON OCTOBER 15 CUTS POLLUTION, ENABLES NEW LOW-EMISSION ENGINE TECHNOLOGY, October 10, 2006 …when combined with a new generation of engines hitting the road in
January, it will enable emission reductions of up to 95 percent, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council
EPA touts new, cleaner cars, January 26, 2004: Mike Leavitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, unveiled 17
new cars and trucks designed to meet stricter "Tier 2" emissions standards set in 1999. The vehicles, which burn low-sulfur fuel, are 77 percent to 95 percent cleaner than current models.
13
What makes Heat Advisory even more egregious is that the report was actually written by university and government scientists
Heat Advisory’s authors are from major universities and gov’t agencies
Activism thinly cloaked in a scientific wrapper
14
Heat Advisory’s results have also been published in two journal articles
Knowlton et al., “Assessing ozone-related health impacts under a changing climate,” Environmental Health Perspectives, 112 (2004): 1557-63
Bell et al., “Climate change, ambient ozone, and health in 50 US cities,” Climatic Change, 82 (2007): 61-87
These studies both manufacture increases in future ozone by assuming increases in ozone-forming emissions that are patently at odds with any plausible future scenario.
Both studies are peer-reviewed. Both are published in prestigious journals. And both have nothing to do with reality.
15
“Let’s pretend” is almost standard in peer-reviewed scientific studies
Sitch et al., “Indirect radiative forcing of climate change through ozone effects on the land-carbon sink,” Nature, 48 (2007).
Study uses IPCC A2 scenario for future ozone precursor emissions.
But A2 scenario has no relationship to reality. A2 assumes rising NOx and VOC in developed countries—just the opposite of the actual trend.
Actual U.S. and European trends in total NOx emissions compared with IPCC A2 scenario
projection for OECD countries
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Year
Inde
x (1
990
= 1
.0)
IPCC A2 scenario projection(OECD countries)
European Union (EEAestimate)
U.S. (EPA estimate)
16
Sitch et al.’s modeled ozone levels also conflict with measured levels
Average June-August Ozone, 1984-2004(based on 24-hour averages)
-
20
40
60
80
100
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
24-h
ou
r O
zon
e (p
pb
) Modeled current average U.S. ozone from Sitch et al., Nature (2007) is twice as high as actual average
Observed ozone at worst location in U.S. (Crestline, CA)
Observed average ozone at 193 continuously operated sites
17
Only one study has tried to use a realistic estimate of future air pollutant emissions
18
GA Tech/NESCAUM assumptions & results
Assumptions Climate warms about 2.5˚F by 2050 (IPCC A1B scenario) NOx and SO2 emissions drop 50%; VOC emissions drop more
than 40%
Results “The combined effect of climate change and emission reductions
lead to a 20% decrease (regionally varying from 11% to 28%) in the mean summer maximum daily 8-hour ozone levels (M8hO3) over the United States. Mean annual PM2.5 concentrations are estimated to be 23% lower (varies from 9% to 32%).”
Modeling suggests warming alone increases ambient pollution in some regions of U.S. and decreases it in others, but effects are small compared to effect of emission reductions
19
GA Tech study is actually too pessimistic
Future air pollution declines will be greater than Georgia Tech/NESCAUM study predicts NOx has already declined more from 2001-2006 than
study assumed for 2001-2020. VOC has already declined more than half the amount predicted for 2001-2020.
In last six years, the U.S. has achieved more than one-fourth the ozone and PM2.5 decline predicted for 2001-2050
20
California Wildfires—Any Connection with Human Caused Climate Change?
Activists and journalists were quick to blame the southern California wildfires on drought purportedly caused by climate change.
In fact—as anyone who lives in southern California knows—SoCal has virtually no rain from May through September
In fact, it is wet winters that help create conditions amenable to wild fire, by stimulating growth of vegetation
21
The Real Causes of SoCal Wildfires “These [SoCal] fires often occur in conjunction with Santa Ana weather
events, which combine high winds and low humidity, and tend to follow a wet winter rainy season…over a century of watershed reserve management and fire suppression have promoted fuel accumulations, helping to shape one of the most conflagration-prone environments in the world.”
“charcoal records from Santa Barbara Channel sediments indicate the frequency of wildfires in the region has not changed significantly in the last 500 years.”
“The severity of the immediate human impact of the October 2003 wildfires was exacerbated by the rapid growth of an extensive wildland-urban interface proximate to a population of nearly 20 million in southern California…The intensity of the fires and the severity of their ecological impact on the region’s forests were exacerbated by the long-term accumulation of fuels such as snags, logs, and heavy brush due to 20th Century fire suppression policies and watershed preservation efforts since the late 1800s.”
“Precipitation tends to be above normal in the winter or early spring prior to the fire season, suggesting that large fall and winter fires are preconditioned two or more seasons in advance.”
Westerling et al., “Climate, Santa Ana Winds and Autumn Wildfires in Southern California,” EOS, 85 (2004): 289, 296.
22
What about the effect of future warming?
“warmer temperatures might tend to reduce the moisture available to plants during the growing season.” In other words, warming = less plant growth = lower fire risk
“Preliminary results of a Santa Ana wind analysis indicate, however, that the frequency of Santa Ana events in early fall, when temperatures are still high, may decrease by the end of the century, which would serve to reinforce any reductions in southern California fire risks due to changes in temperature and precipitation.” In other words, models suggest warming = fewer Santa Ana’s =
lower fire risk
Westerling et al. “Climate change and wildfire in California,” Climatic Change, in press
23
Southern California Monthly Precipitation, 2000-2007
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Pre
cipi
tatio
n (in
ches
)
24
No human signal in long-term SoCal precipitation trend
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
Pre
cipi
tatio
n (in
ches
)
Dec-Mar
May-Sept
25
According to Cal-EPA...
But note that decline is not volume of runoff, but percent of total runoff occurring from April-July (Source: Cal-EPA AB1493 briefing package)
26
California’s Water Supply Is Not Shrinking
Index is unimpaired runoff. Source: CA Dept. of Water Resources
Sacramento River Index, 1906-2007
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Year
Run
off (
mill
ion
acre
-fee
t)
April-July
Annual
27
No signal of human-caused climate change in long-term Sacramento River Index
0
10
20
30
40
900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000
Year
Ru
no
ff (m
illio
n a
cre
-fe
et) Reconstructed historic runoff Measured runoff
Sacramento River Index, 900-2007
Reconstruction is based on tree-ring data.
Sources: Measured runoff: CA Dept. of Water Resources. Reconstructed runoff, NCDC/NOAA
28
According to Cal-EPA…
True, but sea level has been rising since the 1920s—decades before humans emitted enough GHGs to affect the climate. Cal-EPA’s own graph shows this. In fact, the graph shows sea level rose as much from 1860-1885 as it did from 1950-2000.
Source: Cal-EPA, AB 1493 briefing
29
Sea level rise has slowed or stopped since mid-1980s
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
10
18
50
18
60
18
70
18
80
18
90
19
00
19
10
19
20
19
30
19
40
19
50
19
60
19
70
19
80
19
90
20
00
Year
Se
a L
eve
l (fe
et)
Blue: monthly average Black: annual averageRed: decadal average
Source: NOAA, Historic Tide Data
San Francisco coastal sea level trend, 1854-2007
30
World sea levels don’t show a global warming signal
Sea level has been rising since at least the beginning of the 20th Century
But 94% of all human CO2 emissions occurred after 1910; 90% after 1920
Rate of sea level increase slowed down during the 20th Century
31
Rate of sea level rise is 27% lower than IPCC estimate
Study used GPS data to measure vertical land movements and correct for these movements in estimating sea-level trend from tide gauges
After factoring in vertical land movement, average rate of world sea level rise is 27% lower than IPCC estimate
32
Reality: Stabilizing atmospheric CO2 means developed world must deindustrialize
“India, at 1 tonne [annual CO2 emissions] per capita, is the only large-sized economy that is below the desired carbon emission levels of 2050. ‘India should keep it that way and insist that the rich countries pay their share of the burden in reducing emissions,’ says Mr [Nicolas] Stern.”
India Times, Nov. 5, 2007CO2 emissions data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration
0
5
10
15
20
Country/Region
CO
2 pe
r Per
son
(met
ric to
ns)
Actual CO2/person, 2004
Allowable CO2/person for atmosphericstabilization
33
Wealth requires abundant energy, which in practice means mainly energy from fossil fuels
US
C anada
Mexico
W es tern Europe
JapanS. Korea
Aus /NZ
R us s ia
Eas tern Europe
C hina
As ia
Middle Eas t
AfricaBraz il
O ther-Am er
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
G DP per Capita $US
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
CO
2 E
missions per C
apita (metric tons)
Ind ia
CO2/person vs. GDP/person, 2004
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration
Allowable CO2 per capita for stabilization
34
The relationship between abundant energy and prosperity explains why it is so hard to get
people to produce less CO2, even in countries that claim to be
very concerned about climate change
35
No magic bullets for reducing fossil fuels Europeans have been
paying $5 or $6 per gallon of gasoline for decades. But their cars still run on gasoline and diesel. They drive smaller
cars than we do, and they drive them less.
Europeans pay a price—not just in Euros—but in less useful and less comfortable cars, and in lower mobility
36
How about getting people out of their cars and into transit? Europe is going in the opposite direction.
Source: European Environment Agency
EU15 trend in person-miles per capita by mode
• Transit’s market share dropped from 25% to 16% between 1970 and 2000
• Autos account for 78% of travel miles
• Vast majority of new development is suburban
37
People buy cars as soon as they become wealthy enough to afford them
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000
GDP per Person
Car
s pe
r 1,
000
Peo
ple
It’s not just Americans who have a “love affair with the automobile”
“Love affair” is also the wrong metaphor.
People the world over buy cars because no other transport mode offers comparable flexibility, speed, privacy, convenience, or autonomy
Cars/capita vs. GDP/capita, 2002
Source: Int’l Monetary Fund
38
Unintended consequences when governments try to pick technology winners through a political process
New research suggests that N2O from fertilizer used to grow fuel crops more than offsets any CO2 savings N2O has about 300x the greenhouse potential of CO2
“we have shown that, depending on N[itrogen] content, the use of several agricultural crops for energy production can readily lead to N2O emissions large enough to cause climate warming instead of cooling by ‘saved fossil CO2’.”
39
Energy realism from a climate alarmistI’ll tell you one of the horrifying facts of global warming, and why it is so inexorable. Suppose that you and I wanted…[to] guarantee that the concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere…would not go up any more.
...You’d have to cut [world carbon dioxide emissions] by 75 percent.
That’s a horrific number if you think about everything that you do: whether it’s talking on the telephone, or driving our cars, or heating or cooling our homes. Think of everything that’s manufactured, energy used to extract metals, for example…You would have to have a radical change in your lifestyle.
…In fact, it’s worse than I talk about, because suppose that we’re able to produce the miracle – the absolute miracle – of reducing 75% in our emissions globally. Guess what? Over the next hundred years, the Earth would warm up another degree Fahrenheit, even though we produced that miraculous result.
…it’s really hard to do something about it in a relatively short period of time, say over the next three decades. It’s really, really hard.
— Jerry Mahlman, NOAA Climate Scientist, Earth & Sky interview
40
Don’t underestimate the benefits of abundant, inexpensive energy
41
To contact me
To read my papers and presentations
www.joelschwartz.com