3 The UK's domestic targets and budgets
Setting targets and budgets
35. International action and domestic action on climate
change are linked.[84]
Success depends on developed countries acting to reduce their
emissions and developing countries committing to halt the growth
in their emissions at some point in the future (and in some cases
to reducing their emissions). The IPCC has recommended that global
emissions need to be cut by 50% by 2050 relative to 1990 levels.
As the burden for tackling climate change falls mainly on developed
nations, the 50% cut in global emissions equates to cuts of 80-95%
by 2050 relative to 1990 levels for developed nations. The Committee
on Climate Change has estimated that the UK's fair share of the
global burden to be an 80% cut in its emissions by 2050 relative
to 1990 levels.[85] Lord
Turner made clear that the Committee on Climate Change believed
that emissions should continue to fall after 2050, to 2100 and
beyond.[86]
The 2050 target
36. Carbon dioxide poses a particular problem because
on the length of time it remains in the atmosphere. It is not
vital to meet any specific budget in any specific year as long
as cumulative emissions are limited on the way to meeting longer-term
targets. But there is a risk that the UK could meet the near-term
targets and budgets and still fail to deliver on the longer-term
targets or to bear down on cumulative emissions. For example,
a switch to gas would allow the UK to meet near-term targets and
budgets but would prevent us from meeting the 2050 target by locking
us into a particular emissions pathway.[87]
By combining the long-term targets with carbon budgets to describe
how the targets will be reached, the Committee on Climate Change
has rightly focused on cumulative emissions.[88]
Ministers must ensure that policy makers in all parts of government
have a good understanding of the importance of limiting cumulative
emissions. It is important that the Government focuses action
not only on meeting the carbon budget in any one year but also
on taking action now to ensure that targets and carbon budgets
can be met in the medium- to long-term. The Government must pay
close attention to the milestones and indicators that the Committee
on Climate Change has set out, and will use to monitor the Government's
progress.
Carbon budgets
37. Collectively the EU has committed to reduce its
emissions by 20% on 1990 levels by 2020 and it is willing to increase
this to 30% by 2020 should other countries commit to a similar
degree of action as part of international climate change negotiations.[89]
The Committee on Climate Change concluded that the straight line
trajectories to the 2020 target as proposed in the EU framework
were an appropriate basis for setting the UK's carbon budgets.[90]
It followed the EU framework and produced two sets of budgets:
an intended budget, which should apply following a global deal
on climate change, and an interim budget, to apply before a global
deal is reached. The Government will tighten its carbon budgets
if proposals for sharing out any new EU target are agreed. Table
1: Carbon budget levels recommended by Committee on Climate Change
and adopted by the Government
| Budget 1
(2008-2012)
| Budget 2
(2013-2017)
| Budget 3
(2018-2022)
|
Interim budget recommended by the Committee on Climate Change (MtCO2e)
| 3018 |
2819 | 2570
|
Intended budget recommended by the Committee on Climate Change (MtCO2e)
| 3018 |
2679 | 2245
|
Budget proposed by Govt
| 3018 |
2782 | 2544
|
Annual equivalent percentage reduction below 1990 levels (%)
| 22 |
28 | 34
|
Traded sector (MtCO2e)
| 1233 |
1078 | 985
|
Non-traded (MtCO2e)
| 1785 |
1704 | 1559
|
38. The Government set carbon budgets based on the UK's share
of the EU's target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 20% below
1990 levels by 2020 and followed the Committee on Climate Change's
interim budgets. The Government's budgets were slightly tighter
than those recommended by the Committee on Climate Change because
the EU climate package agreed in December 2009 differed in a number
of respects from the European Commission's original proposals.[91]
The Met Office said the carbon budgets were consistent with the
2050 target and the IPCC's 4th assessment report.[92]
The EEF, the manufacturers' organisation, made a similar point
but expressed concerns about delivery against the budgets (see
section 4).[93] Professor
Ekins told us:
The Committee on Climate Change's budgets are the minimum
that would be consistent with an 80% UK (50% global) emissions
reduction target by 2050, and this is the minimum that is consistent
with any chance of achieving a 2oC temperature increase
target.[94]
39. Carbon budgets have not been set beyond 2022. Currently they
describe an emissions pathway to 2022 and will go further once
the Committee on Climate Change presents its advice on the fourth
budget period (2023-2027) later this year. The Met Office felt
there was a case for setting budgets further in advance to ensure
that the pathway remains consistent with the longer-term aims.[95]
Given the importance of limiting cumulative emissions and stability
in the policy framework the Government should examine carefully
the case for setting carbon budgets further in advance than currently
provided for by the Climate Change Act 2008.
The 2020 target
40. The Climate Change Act 2008 gave the Government a 2020 target
of reducing UK emissions by at least 26% on 1990 levels. The interim
and intended carbon budgets recommended by the Committee on Climate
Change imply different 2020 targets:
· The
interim budgets require an emissions reduction of 34% in 2020
relative to 1990 (21% relative to 2005).
· The intended
budgets require an emissions reduction of 42% in 2020 relative
to 1990 (31% relative to 2005).
41. In setting a 2020 target Committee on Climate
Change took into account three factors:
· the
level of emissions reduction in 2020 commensurate with the UK
being on the path to an 80% reduction in 2050;
· the contribution
by the UK to required global emission reductions in 2020; and
· the UK's obligation
under the recent EU climate framework.[96]
It said:
Equal percentage reductions from 2006 to 2050
would require CO2 emissions in 2020 to be 39% below
the 2007 level and 43% below the 1990 level. This could be seen
as an ideal benchmark: anything less in 2020 means that the challenge
in subsequent years is increased.[97]
42. When the carbon budgets were announced with the
Budget in 2009 the 2020 target was increased to a 34% reduction
in greenhouse gas emissions with respect to 1990 levels by 2020.
This was broadly in line with the Committee on Climate Change's
recommendation for the interim budget.[98]
The 2020 target could rise to 42% under the intended budget if
the EU 2020 target was increased to 30% following a global deal.[99]
David Kennedy expected that the interim budget would be in place
for two years.[100]
Over this timescale Professor Anderson thought there would little
difference in cumulative emissions between the interim and intended
budgets.[101]
43. Weaker 2020 targets increase the risk of crossing
tipping points.[102]
They also make the task of meeting the 2050 target more difficult
and costly.[103] More
emissions in the near-term will result in the world being locked-in
to higher temperature rises and greater costs (because mitigation
becomes more challenging and greater investment is needed in adaptation).
A higher target in 2020 does more to bear down on cumulative emissions
and is consistent with the key messages from the IPCC and Stern
that as much action as possible should be taken as early as possible.
Lord Stern has said that the need to cut per capita emissions
by at least 80% by 2050 in developed economies implies reductions
of 20-40% are needed by 2020.[104]
Many NGOs believe that even a 30% cut would be insufficient and
that developed countries need to adopt an aggregate reduction
target of more then 40% to play a fair part in protecting the
global climate.[105]
Dr Cameron Hepburn, from the Smith School of Enterprise and the
Environment at the University of Oxford, thought a 2020 target
as high as 42% would be costly but not economically irrational.[106]
The Association for the Conservation of Energy believed that the
intended budget should be adopted irrespective of whether there
was a global deal.[107]
Professor Ekins considered that the UK's 2020 target was at the
bottom end of what we need to do if we are to make a scientifically
appropriate contribution.[108]
44. The carbon budgets and the 2020 target were based
on the EU's targets but the EU's targets were based more on political
feasibility than up-to-date science.[109]
The EU's target to reduce emissions by 20% by 2020 falls outside
the range of reductions recommended by the IPCC. Professor Anderson
said that a higher EU target was needed.[110]
Professor Ekins told us:
Rather than tightening the targets (which could
certainly be justified scientifically) the emphasis should now
be on getting the UK on a trajectory to meet those that have been
set.[111]
45. A target to reduce emissions in 2020 by 42% on
1990 levels is the basis for Committee on Climate Change's intended
budget. The case for moving to the higher budget and target now
is compelling. We believe Professor Ekins was right to emphasise
the importance of meeting the targets we have rather than strengthening
them, but we also accept the points made by Dr Cameron Hepburn,
from the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University
of Oxford, and Professor Kevin Anderson about leadership and credibility.[112]
We believe that a move to 42% now would send a clear signal about
the Government's commitment. It would appear to be scientifically
justified on the basis of emerging evidence and would help to
give greater policy stability. We recommend the Government
should move to a target of a 42% cut by 2020 and should implement
the intended budget irrespective of whether or not the EU moves
to a 30% target for cutting its emissions. This should increase
the long-term stability of the policy framework by removing any
uncertainty about whether the higher target and budget might be
imposed. But the Government should only move to increase the 2020
target once it is on track to meet its current targets and budgets.
Aviation and shipping
46. Emissions from aviation and shipping are set
to continue growing making their future inclusion in carbon budgets
increasingly difficult.[113]
The Aviation Environment Federation told us that the carbon budgets
to 2022 do not include aviation and as such were inconsistent
with the 2050 target for reducing emissions, which does include
aviation and shipping.[114]
They pointed to evidence that not all departments had understood
that the emissions from shipping and aviation are included in
the long-term targets but not the medium-term budgets.[115]
The Tyndall Centre has also been critical of the Committee on
Climate Change's treatment of aviation and shipping emissions.[116]
The Association for the Conservation of Energy believed that aviation
and shipping should be included in the carbon budgets.[117]
47. In January 2009 the Government said UK aviation
emissions of carbon dioxide in 2050 not to exceed 2005 levels.[118]
The Committee on Climate Change was asked to advise on options
for meeting this objective and on the implications it had for
aviation expansion. It concluded recently that aviation growth
of around 60% would be compatible with keeping carbon dioxide
emissions in 2050 no higher than in 2005, taking into account
developments in fuel efficiency and other measures to reduce emissions.[119]
48. Under the Climate Change Act 2008 the Committee
on Climate Change was required to consider whether international
aviation should be included in the first three carbon budgets.
Its position in 2008 was that international aviation would ideally
be included in carbon budgets but complexities arising from allocation
methodologies in the EU ETS allowances led it to conclude that
for the time being aviation emissions should not be included.[120]
The final methodologies in the EU ETS Directive (published in
January 2009) reduce these complexities and the Committee on Climate
Change has announced they will reconsider the case for inclusion
of international aviation emissions in carbon budgets.[121]
49. The Government must make clear the impact
of emissions from aviation and shipping on progress towards meeting
the UK's targets for reducing emissions and its carbon budgets.
The Government should ensure that any growth in aviation is within
the bounds set by the Committee on Climate Change and does not
impact adversely on the UK's targets for reducing emissions or
its carbon budgets.
84 Q 155 [King] Back
85
Ev 102 Back
86
Qq 228-229 Back
87
Q 213 Back
88
Q 6, Q 11, Q 73, Q 76, Q 119 and Q 161 Back
89
Committee on Climate Change, First Report of the Committee, Building
a low carbon economy- the UK's contribution to tackling climate
change, December 2008, p94 Back
90
Committee on Climate Change, First Report of the Committee, Building
a low-carbon economy-The UK's contribution to tackling climate
change, December 2008, p94 Back
91
DECC, Explanatory memorandum to The Carbon Budgets Order 2009,
April 2009 Back
92
Q 127, Q 146 [Lowe] and Ev 53 Back
93
Ev 129 Back
94
Ev 75 Back
95
Ev 53 and Q 119 Back
96
Committee on Climate Change, First Report of the Committee, Building
a low carbon economy- the UK's contribution to tackling climate
change, December 2008 Back
97
Committee on Climate Change, First Report of the Committee, Building
a low-carbon economy-The UK's contribution to tackling climate
change, December 2008, p106 Back
98
HMT, Budget 2009: Building Britain's future, April 2009,
para 7.10 Back
99
Ev 101 Back
100
Q 11 [Kennedy] Back
101
Q 79 Back
102
University of Copenhagen, Key messages from Climate Change:
Global Risks, Challenges & Decisions, held in Copenhagen
March 2009, http://climatecongress.ku.dk/newsroom/congress_key_messages/ Back
103
University of Copenhagen, Synthesis Report from Climate Change:
Global Risks, Challenges & Decisions, held in Copenhagen
March 2009, http://climatecongress.ku.dk/pdf/synthesisreport Back
104
Stern, Key elements of a global deal on climate change,
LSE, 2008 Back
105
Climate Action Network International, Position on am Annex
I aggregate target, April 2009 Back
106
Q 159 Back
107
Ev 127 Back
108
Q 187 Back
109
Q 12, Q 13 and Ev 126 Back
110
Q 80 Back
111
Ev 75 Back
112
Q 78, Q 158 [Hepburn] Back
113
Ev 125 Back
114
Ev 124 Back
115
DfT Reforming the framework for economic regulation of UK airports,
March 2009, Annex 5, section 1.8 Back
116
Tyndall Centre, Making a climate commitment: analysis of the
first report (2008) of the UK Committee on Climate Change,
March 2009 Back
117
Ev 127 Back
118
HC Deb, 15 January 2009, col 360 Back
119
Committee on Climate Change, Meeting the UK Aviation target-options
for reducing emissions to 2050, December 2009 Back
120
Committee on Climate Change, First Report of the Committee, Building
a low carbon economy- the UK's contribution to tackling climate
change, December 2008 Back
121
Committee on Climate Change, Meeting the UK Aviation target-options
for reducing emissions to 2050, December 2009 Back
|