http://blogs.shell.com/climatechange/2015/03/netzero/

David Hone
Climate Change Advisor for Shell

11th March 2015
Getting to net-zero emissions
It is looking increasingly likely, but not a given, that a reference to
global net-zero emissions or even a specific goal to achieve net-zero
emissions by a certain date (e.g. end of the century) will appear in the
climate deal that is expected to emerge from the Paris COP at the end of
this year. But like many such goals, it is both open to interpretation and
raises questions as to how it might actually be achieved.

The background to this is that the issue itself implies that this outcome
is necessary. The IPCC says in its 5th Assessment Report;

Cumulative emissions of CO2 largely determine global mean surface warming
by the late 21st century and beyond. Limiting risks across RFCs (Reasons
for Concern) would imply a limit for cumulative emissions of CO2. Such a
limit would require that global net emissions of CO2 eventually decrease to
zero and would constrain annual emissions over the next few decades (Figure
SPM.10) (high confidence).

However, the term net-zero needs some sort of definition, although this is
currently missing from the UNFCCC text. One online source offers the
following;

Net phase out of GHG emissions means that anthropogenic emissions of
greenhouse gases to the atmosphere decrease to a level equal to or smaller
than anthropogenic removals of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

The above effectively means stabilization of the atmospheric concentration
of CO2, which also aligns with the ultimate aim of the UNFCCC Convention
(stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a
level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the
climate system). This could still leave room for some level of emissions in
that climate models show atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide will
decline if anthropogenic emissions abruptly stopped. In a 450 – 500 ppm
stabilization scenario emissions could remain in the range 7-10 billion
tonnes CO2 per annum without driving the atmospheric concentration higher.
This is far below current levels (35 billion tonnes per annum from the
energy system alone), but it isn’t zero. It can be classified as net-zero
though, in that the atmospheric concentration isn’t rising.

However, such an outcome, while stabilizing the atmospheric concentration
may not be sufficient to prevent dangerous interference with the climate
system. In that case an even lower level of emissions may be required, such
that atmospheric concentrations do begin to fall and stabilize at a lower
concentration.

Another definition of net-zero may simply apply to anthropogenic emissions
directly, irrespective of what the concentration in the atmosphere might be
doing. In this case, any remaining emissions from anthropogenic sources
(and there will be some) would have to be offset with sequestration of
carbon dioxide, either via CCS or a permanent forestry solution. In the CCS
case, the carbon dioxide would need to come from a bio-source, such as the
combustion of biomass in a power station. This is what the IPCC have termed
BECCS.

A final step which goes beyond net-zero, is to have an anthropogenic
net-negative emissions situation, which is drawing down on the level of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through some anthropogenic process. This
would be necessary to rapidly lower the concentration of carbon dioxide in
the case of a significantly elevated level that comes about in the
intervening years between now and the point at which the concentration
stabilizes. Very large scale deployment of BECCS or an atmospheric capture
solution with CCS would be required to achieve this.

Finally, there is the consideration that needs to be given to greenhouse
gases other than carbon dioxide. Methane for example, while a potent
greenhouse gas, is relatively short lived (a decade) in the atmosphere so
will require some thought. Even in a zero energy emissions system, methane
from agriculture and cattle will doubtless remain a problem.

Both of the Shell New Lens scenarios end in a  net zero emissions outcome
by the end of the century, but this is within the energy system itself and
does not encompass the full range of other sources of CO2 emissions and
other long lived greenhouse gases. Nevertheless, with extensive deployment
of CCS the Mountains scenario heads into negative emissions territory by
2100 and the Oceans scenario soon after that (which means there is
potential to offset remaining emissions from very difficult to manage
sources). Oceans relies on this approach in a major way to even approach
zero in the first instance

Many look to renewable energy as a quick solution to the emissions issue,
but the reality is far more complex. While we can imagine a power
generation system that is at near zero emissions, made up of nuclear,
renewables and fossil fuels with CCS, this is far from a complete solution.
Electricity currently represents only 20% of the global final energy mix
(see below, click for a larger image: Source IEA).

Global final energy 2012

Solutions will need to be found for a broad range of goods and services
that give rise to greenhouse gas emissions, including non-energy sources
such as limestone calcination for cement and cattle rearing for dairy and
direct consumption. While we can also imagine a significant amount of
global light transport migrating to electricity, shipping, heavy transport
and aviation will not be so simple. Aviation in particular has no immediate
solution other than through a biofuel route although there is some
experimentation underway using high intensity solar to provide the energy
for synthesis gas manufacture (from carbon dioxide and water), which is
then converted to jet fuel via the well-established Fischer–Tropsch
process. There are also dozens of industrial processes that rely on
furnaces and high temperatures, typically powered by fuels such as natural
gas. Metal smelting currently uses coal as the reducing agent, so a carbon
based fuel is intrinsic to the process. Solutions will be required for all
of these.

Whether we aim for a very low level of emissions, true net-zero
anthropogenic emissions or negative emissions is somewhat academic today,
given the current level of emissions. All the aforementioned outcomes are
going to require a radical re-engineering of the energy system in a
relatively short amount of time (< 80 years).

Filed under Aviation, Carbon capture & storage, Climate Science, Energy
technology, Greenhouse gases, Paris COP21, Scenarios, UNFCCC

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to