Memorandum submitted by WWF-UK
INTRODUCTION
The implications of the Climate Change Draft
Bill have relevance for the EAC inquiry "Beyond Stern: Forecasting,
cost-effectiveness, and climate change". This paper is a
short summary of WWF-UK's position on the Climate Change Draft
Bill, to help inform the Committee. WWF-UK will be responding
in full to the Defra consultation on the draft Bill in full in
due course.
SUMMARY
Publication of the Climate Change Draft Bill
is a considerable achievement, for which the Government should
be congratulated. However, in order to fully deliver on the UK
making its fair share of the international effort needed to prevent
average global temperature rises exceeding 2°C, the Bill
needs to commit to:
— Reducing UK carbon emissions by at
least 3% each year up to 2050.
— Setting binding carbon budgets with
annual milestones.
— Including the UK's share of international
aviation and shipping in the carbon budgets.
— Annual reporting against those carbon
budgets, scrutinised by an independent committee with the power
to advise on corrective action to be taken if carbon emissions
go over budget.
— Obliging every government to publish
a strategy for reducing emissions in line with the carbon budgets,
which specify the emissions reductions by sector, and the instruments
by which the Government will ensure that each sector stays within
its carbon budget.
LEVEL OF
EFFORT
The science shows that the Bill's target of
a 60% emissions reduction by 2050 will not be enough to prevent
global temperature rises exceeding 2°C, unless the bulk of
those reductions are achieved early on in this period. Slow progress
at the turn of the century means that the 2050 target will need
to be tougher to compensate. At least a 3% reduction every year
from 2010 to 2050 will be required, which would lead to an overall
emissions reduction of at least 80% over this period. The Bill
should make this target explicit: as the Stern Report shows, postponing
emissions cuts will carry far greater economic costs than facing
up to them now.
CLIMATE BILL
SECTORAL COVERAGE
Currently, the draft bill does not propose the
framework covers emissions from international aviation and shipping.
It is essential that these emissions are included and reduced
as part of the overall 2050 target.
CARBON BUDGETING
The Bill rightly adopts carbon budgeting as
the basis for achieving emissions reductions. Climate change is
driven by the total amount of carbon we put into the atmosphere,
not just the annual emissions in 2020 or 2050. However, the Bill
currently suggests five year budget periods. With Parliaments
frequently lasting only four years, failure to reduce emissions
under this scenario would too easily be blamed on past governments'
mistakes.
WWF-UK favour annual carbon budget milestones.
They would be the short-term objectives of the national emissions
reduction strategy, calculated to add up to a binding carbon
budget set over three-year intervals in line with the government's
Spending Review cycle.[3]
If in any one year the annual milestone is exceeded, the Secretary
of State would have a duty to implement proportionate contingency
measures to ensure that the excess emissions are eliminated over
the course of the following year and are not carried over into
future years' carbon budgets.
WWF-UK has always agreed that the Government
needs some flexibility to deal with factors (like cold winters)
that fluctuate from year to year. Annual milestones achieve this,
but there must be a binding carbon budget set over the three-year
period. The whole system would have little meaning if excess emissions
could be carried over from one budget period into the next, which
would allow governments to pass on the burden of past failures
to future governments.
COMMITTEE ON
CLIMATE CHANGE
We support the establishment of a Committee
on Climate Change as proposed in the Bill. However, it must be
genuinely independent and have real power not only to monitor
progress, but also to advise on any corrective action that may
be necessary. It should be free to make decisions guided by the
latest climate science, without being subject to short-term political
pressures.
TRADING IN
CREDITS
The EU Emissions Trading Scheme already covers
nearly half of the UK's CO2 emissions, meaning emissions
reductions achieved outside the UK already contribute towards
the UK's emissions targets. However, the independent Carbon Committee
should also report annually on the actual emissions from the UK.
It should highlight any excessive reliance on imported credits
or allowances, either through the EU ETS, or under Kyoto's Clean
Development Mechanism, expressed as a percentage of the total
UK carbon budget for that year.
The Committee should set a limit on the use
of allowances or credits, and if this limit is exceeded, the Committee
should investigate and make recommendations. This would allow
Parliament to consider whether the UK is moving towards a low
carbon economy or simply buying its way out of the problem in
the short term, while locking us into a high carbon infrastructure
for the future. Tough limits should also be set for the total
use of CDM credits by business and government. This would give
real teeth to the principle that we have a moral obligation to
make our own fair share of emissions cuts within the UK, rather
than relying on buying emissions reductions from poor countries.
March 2007
3 Three-year periods would allow alignment with government
departments' planning cycles within the Treasury's Spending Review
process: carbon budgets would be allocated alongside spending
budgets. Back
| 
