Blog Archives

Climate Friday FAQ #5: What’s in a degree?

2/26/2015

In 2010, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) set an international policy goal to keep global warming below 2°C to limit the dangerous impacts of climate change. Some of the impacts that may occur if we exceed a 2°C increase in Earth’s average surface temperature include:

Increased risk of extinction for 20-30% of plant and animal species worldwide
Significant risks to many unique and threatened ecosystems
Substantial loss of coral reefs
20% reduction in freshwater availability and significant and widespread droughts
70-100cm sea level rise by 2100
Reduced crop yields in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia

Examples of impacts associated with global average temperature change from IPCC AR4. Impacts will vary by extent of adaptation, rate of temperature change and socio-economic pathway). http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/figure-3-6.html

Even below 2ºC, there can be significant impacts from global warming. Over 100 nations (mostly developing) have appealed to the U.N. that they could not survive in a world that is 2°C warmer and called for the policy target to be lowered to below 1.5°C. The 2014 IPCC assessment confirmed that the evidence is now overwhelming that 2°C of warming is intolerably dangerous due to projected disastrous or catastrophic impacts on human populations and ecosystems, but as we approach the 21st U.N. climate negotiations in Paris this December, a 2ºC limit remains a key international goal.

A Climate Friday FAQ reader’s question

I was delighted when Climate Friday FAQ reader, Jonathan Victory, sent me his climate science question last week: “Even if we stay under 2ºC, could that trigger feedback loops that send us over?” It’s clear that Jonathan already has an understanding of climate science based on his awareness of the 2ºC limit and the concept of feedback loops. For the rest of the blog-reading world, who may not be familiar with the concept of a feedback loop, I’ll explain before I answer Jonathan’s question.

What are feedback loops?

www.thisbluemarble.com

Feedback is the process in which changing one quantity changes a second quantity, and the change in the second quantity in turn changes the first (i.e. loop). Feedback processes may increase or decrease the effect of the forces that affect climate (e.g. increased greenhouse gas emissions). One example of a climate feedback is when global warming caused by carbon dioxide emissions increases evaporation from water bodies and thus increases the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere. Since water vapour is a greenhouse gas itself, this increased evaporation in turn leads to further global warming.

Modelling all the Earth’s feedback processes to make predictions about future climate is extremely complicated. Climate models to date include “fast feedbacks”, which are processes that act on an immediate time scale, such as evaporation and water vapour formation. “Slow feedbacks” (e.g. the loss of the cooling effect due to melting of ice sheets causing further warming) are slow to respond to warming. Since climate models don’t go beyond 100-200 year predictions, slow feedbacks are not included in IPCC global warming models. When slow feedbacks do finally respond to warming, they can lead to catastrophic acceleration of warming.

“Even if we stay under 2ºC, could that trigger feedback loops that send us over?”

In 2013, James Hansen and 17 other technical experts published a call to abandon the 2ºC target and aim to keep warming below 1ºC. One of the main arguments that Hansen and associates employed was that a 2ºC temperature increase would spur “slow feedbacks and eventual warming of 3–4°C with disastrous consequences”.

Excluding slow feedback processes was appropriate for climate models of the last century when conditions were more stable. However, in order to predict warming for the 21st century and beyond, Hansen argued that slow feedback processes must be considered because their “instigation is related to the danger of passing ‘points of no return’, beyond which irreversible consequences become inevitable, out of humanity’s control”.

These ‘points of no return’ that Hansen refers to are also called ‘tipping points’ because, like the tipping over of a wine glass, they move the earth from one stable state (upright and full glass) to another stable, yet irreversible, state (tipped over, spilled glass). One example of a tipping point in climatology is the melting of the Greenland ice sheet – When the earth’s temperature reaches a certain level of warming (somewhere between 1-4ºC), the entire melting of the Greenland ice sheet will be “locked in” and eventually result in a global sea level rise of over 7m. Such an event would be irreversible and catastrophic.

The short answer to Jonathan Victory’s excellent question is yes. - Even if we keep our greenhouse gas emissions low enough to stay under 2ºC, feedback loops could cause temperatures to increase further and send us over 2ºC. Our climate models do not account for slow feedbacks and some of the fast feedback modelling (e.g. cloud formation) is still uncertain. If we aim for 2ºC limit based on current models, in the long term (after 2100) the slow feedback processes could result in further warming of 4ºC or more, which would make life very difficult for those who have to try to exist on such a planet.

What does this mean for us?

People's Climate Ireland and Young Friends of the Earth campaigning on Global Divestment Day 2015

The earth has warmed about 0.8ºC since the industrial revolution, but there is a delay between our actions and the planet’s response. Our actions to date have already committed the planet to a further 0.8ºC of warming by 2100. Current international commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are too weak and still have us heading to 3-5ºC warming by 2100.

We’ve seen from IPCC reports that even 1.5ºC of warming will cause significant ecological impacts and that warming beyond 2ºC is unsafe for humanity and our ecosystems. Keeping our earth’s temperature below 2ºC is still possible if we reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40-70% by 2050 and near zero emissions by 2100.

The scientific evidence on the extent and impacts of warming is the reason we need full “decarbonisation” of our society to completely cut our dependence on carbon-based fossil fuels. Moderate emissions reductions will not stop runaway climate change. That’s why many of us get angry when we hear leaders paying lip service to climate action without putting real work into transforming our society. That’s why organisations like the Green Party are fighting for Ireland to become “Fossil Free in a Generation”. Whether we’re trying to keep Earth’s temperature from increasing 1.5ºC or 2ºC, we’re still a long way from achieving either at the moment and the planet’s feedback processes will only further accelerate warming. The longer we wait to take action, the more expensive and harder it becomes to stop runaway climate change.

Thanks for the great question, Jonathan.
Keep fighting the good fight!
-Cara

If you like this post, please Tweet or share on Facebook.

Stay tuned next Friday for FAQ #6 - based on my upcoming talk at Dublin City University's Communicating Climate Change seminar on Thursday, March 5th. Hope to see some of you there!

Feel free to contact me through e-mail, Twitter, or Facebook with any climate-related questions you’d like to see addressed in future posts.

1 Comment

Climate Friday FAQ #4: Why wind?

2/19/2015

2 Comments

In my last Climate Friday FAQ, I explained that part of Ireland’s national solution to climate change must involve complete decarbonisation of our energy supply from a fossil fuel based system to one based on clean, renewable technologies. The evidence I found on how to make that transition in Ireland relied almost entirely on expansion of wind energy. However, I know there are criticisms, questions, anger and accusations around wind energy in our country. Ireland has committed to wind energy development more than any other renewable technology. So, this week, I wanted to find out, Why is wind the solution to climate change for Ireland’s energy sector?

Wind basics

Wind power is extracted from air flow using turbines or sails to produce mechanical or electrical power. Contrary to fossil fuels, wind energy is renewable, widely distributed, clean, and produces no greenhouse gas emissions during operation. World wind generation capacity more than quadrupled between 2000 and 2006, doubling about every three years. In 2014, global wind energy production was approximately 4% of total worldwide electricity usage and is expected to reach 8% by 2018. Europe accounts for approximately half of the world’s total wind power generation capacity. At least 83 countries now use wind power on a commercial basis.

There are currently 222 wind farms on the island of Ireland, 85% of which are based in the Republic of Ireland. These windfarms generate enough electricity to power the equivalent of 1,877,850 homes. To date, we have saved approximately one billion Euro in fossil fuel imports in Ireland through the development of our wind industry.

Historically, hydro power was the largest contributor to renewable electricity in Ireland. However, since 1990, wind energy production has increased so that it now accounts for over 80% of the renewable electricity generated in the country. Wind, hydro and biomass electricity accounted for 16.3%, 2.1% and 1.7%, respectively, of Ireland’s gross electricity consumption in 2013. It is clear that wind energy is a fast growing, global industry, but "just because everyone else is doing it" is not reason enough for Ireland to follow.

Why is Ireland focusing primarily on wind as our renewable energy solution?

Spatial distribution of regional wind regimes in Europe. U.K., Ireland and Denmark possess favourable conditions for wind energy, while areas like Eastern Mediterranean are not favourable to wind energy.

Ireland is required to increase its share of renewable energy sources under the EU Renewables Directive and our international commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to help prevent runaway climate change. There are many technologies we could employ to achieve these commitments (e.g. solar, biomass, hydro, geothermal, and even nuclear). No energy source is without problems and risks. However, for legal, moral, health, and energy security reasons, we must develop at least one renewable energy resource to move away from fossil fuel dependency. In Ireland, we have clearly demonstrated a preference for wind.

There are accusations that industry is pushing the Irish government into over-development of the wind energy sector above other renewable resources. The reality is that, in Ireland, wind can make the most significant contribution to decarbonising our energy supply for the following reasons:

Wind speed: Ireland possess some of the most favourable wind conditions and highest onshore wind speeds in Europe. This gives us a competitive advantage at harnessing a renewable energy resource whose feedstock is essentially limitless. Other renewables require resources (e.g. land, unique geology, biomass, large water systems) that are in less plentiful supply in Ireland.

Environmental impact: The environmental impacts of wind energy are generally less problematic than other renewables. Wind turbines have the least impact on global warming compared to all other existing low carbon power sources. Only hydro power rivals wind with respect to its climate impact, but it suffers from the challenges of finding sites appropriate for dam construction and from impacts on fisheries and water quality. Unlike other renewables, wind farms do not compete with other land uses (e.g. food production) since turbine infrastructure occupies a relatively small area. There are also no waste products generated from wind energy production.

Technological maturity: Globally, wind energy is the most technological mature and widely adopted of all the renewable technologies. Wind energy is more applicable and reliable than other forms of renewable energy (e.g. Wind has more potential operational hours than solar). This allows wind to be developed and maintained with greater ease and efficiency than other renewables.

Cost competitiveness: Onshore wind is an inexpensive source of electricity that is competitive with, or cheaper than, fossil fuel plants. Wind power is capital intensive but has no fuel costs. The price of wind power is therefore much more stable than the volatility of fossil fuel prices. Wind turbines are also half the cost of solar panels per kWh. Only geothermal and hydro power rival wind in their levelized cost. However, the availability of appropriate locations of geothermal and hydro-electricity are far more restrictive than wind, particularly in Ireland.

Obstacles to providing wind energy

Reliability: Wind energy is not without problems, the most obvious one of which is reliability -Electricity can’t be generated when the wind doesn’t blow. Economies of scale is one piece of the solution to this problem - As more turbines are connected over larger areas, the average power output becomes less variable and more predictable. Unlike conventional energy sources, wind power hardly ever suffers major technical failures since failures of individual wind turbines have almost no effect on overall power supply. Presently, grid systems with large wind penetration require a “spinning reserve” relying on fossil fuels to prevent a loss of electricity in the event that wind conditions are not favorable. However, technology is continuing to improve with respect to energy storage, turbine design and smart grid technology that will overcome these obstacles. Research indicates that 100% renewable energy production dominated by wind is already technologically possible if renewable resources such as biomass, solar and/or hydro are used as back-up power and interlinked with HVDC (high voltage direct current) transmission lines. This research also demonstrated that the costs of electricity production and HVDC transmission with such a system are relatively close to the current costs of electricity produced with conventional technologies.

Aesthetics: Wind turbines are often criticised as having a significant visual impact on the landscape. This is a highly personal issue that confirms the belief that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. However, surveys of public attitudes across Europe and in many other countries show strong public support for wind power. A 2010 survey in Scotland demonstrated that 52% of respondents disagreed with the statement that wind farms are "ugly and a blot on the landscape" and 59% agreed that wind farms were necessary to meet current and future energy needs and how they looked was unimportant. Strong public consultation and community ownership are essential in overcoming negative opinions on the aesthetic impact of wind turbines.

Habitat impacts: Wind turbines can result in increased bird and bat mortality and interference with wildlife or sensitive habitats. Therefore, it is important not to locate wind farms near sensitive ecological sites. Incentives could be provided for wind farm developments to be located in areas other than the coast and uplands, such as intensive farmland or industrial areas, where wildlife impacts are likely to be less severe.

Human impacts: Wind turbines have been accused of causing adverse human health impacts, such as noise disturbance, electro-magnetic radiation and shadow flicker. The noise detected 300 metres from a wind turbine is slightly louder than a refrigerator. One mile from a wind turbine, it is inaudible. Peer reviewed research indicates there are no negative health effects from audible or sub-audible sound from wind turbines. Only shadow flicker, in which wind turbines cast long shadows when the sun is low in the sky, has been demonstrated to irritate residents living near wind turbines. Irish wind farm sites are not likely to encounter significant shadow flicker very often, but the potential for flicker can be calculated prior to construction and turbines can be sited to minimise impacts on local residents. Wind turbine software is also available to turn off the relevant turbines during shadow flicker events.

Why Wind? - Conclusion

Ireland has chosen wind as the primary technology to address our EU and international commitments to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector. The case for developing wind power over other renewable technologies is based in large part on our climatic and geographic conditions, land usage, and the technological and economic advantages of wind turbines compared to other renewable energy sources. Critics will cite the limitations of wind energy as an obstacle to achieving 100% fossil-free energy in a generation. However, the evidence detailed above demonstrates that technology already exists, and will continue to improve, to enable a wind-dominated energy system to become a reality in Ireland. Public involvement, community benefits and good planning must be prioritised to achieve such a system.

Keep fighting the good fight!
-Cara

If you like this post, please share it on Twitter or Facebook.

Feel free to contact me through e-mail, Twitter, or Facebook with any climate-related questions you’d like to see addressed in future posts.

Stay tuned next Friday for Climate Friday FAQ #5, when I'll tackle a reader's question: "Even if we stay under 2C of warming, could that trigger feedback loops that send us over?"

2 Comments

Cara's Climate Friday FAQ #3: Is there a national solution to climate change for Ireland?

2/12/2015

3 Comments

EPA.gov - GHG concent. in atmosphere from Yr 0 to 2000. Exponential increases of these GHGs began during the industrial revolution (1750-1850).

Welcome to Climate Friday FAQ #3! This week, I faced a difficult question that I didn’t have an immediate answer to. I’ve studied the science of climate change for over a decade, and I have no doubt about the ecological and social risks we face from pumping greenhouse gases into our finite atmosphere. However, I’m less certain about the solutions to this crisis. Solutions to climate change go beyond science and draw upon engineering, economics and policy, so I’ve decided to move outside of my comfort zone and find out: Is there a national solution to climate change for Ireland?

The problem starts with the fact that our economic prosperity is historically linked to greenhouse gas production. The industrial revolution (from 1750) was a period of radical technological change, which fuelled economic growth while simultaneously increasing the amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) in our atmosphere leading to climate change. Wealthy countries continue to base their economies on relatively cheap, carbon-intensive energy sources (e.g. coal, oil / fossil fuels). It seems futile to try to reduce GHG emissions without tackling this dependency on carbon-based energy for economic growth.

If you read the list of Ireland’s efforts to reduce our GHG emissions in my last climate FAQ, you’ll notice everything we have done to date has only slightly modified the existing system. We’ve chipped away at converting some of our carbon-based energy production to renewables, but we’re still a heavily carbon-dependent society. Our efforts to reduce emissions in transport have only pushed consumers to purchase more efficient, but still carbon-fuelled, vehicles. Our efforts to reduce GHG emissions have been constrained by our need for continued economic growth in a carbon-based economy. Without a seismic shift away from a carbon-based energy system and towards a fossil-free system, we are beating a dead horse with meagre actions that will not be enough to halt runaway climate change.

This week, Ireland’s Green Party is announcing its “Fossil Free in a generation” campaign. It’s ambitious - I love this kind of visionary thinking, and I know that this concept would transform Ireland into the clean climate leader it needs to become, not only to help solve climate change but also to remove our dependency on imported, insecure, and unsustainable fuel sources. There will be those that doubt “Fossil Free in a generation” is possible – Is it pie-in-the-sky thinking or something that can actually be achieved in Ireland? I needed evidence to find out if this is Ireland’s solution to climate change.

Fossil fuel – a material (e.g. coal or gas) used to provide heat or power that was formed in the geological past from organic, carbon-based materials (i.e. the remains of living organisms). Fossil fuels are non-renewable resources due to the long timescale required to produce them. The burning of fossil fuels contributes significantly to climate change through the emission of carbon dioxide.

What does “fossil free in a generation” mean?

When I imagine a fossil-free Ireland, it’s my idea of a utopia. The benefits are extensive and well worth pursuing in their own right. Then I think about what “a generation” means: 2050 - It’s just 35 years from now. My daughter will be under 40 years old. The fossil-free Ireland I imagine seems far too different from reality to believe it could happen in my lifetime or hers.

It sounds idyllic, but can “fossil free in a generation” really happen in Ireland?

Fossil-free power

At present, Ireland’s fuel mix for electricity generation is dominated by fossil fuels (83%), including gas (48%), coal (22%), peat (12%) and oil (1%). It may seem like an impossible task to convert 83% of fossil fuels to renewable fuels for energy production by 2050, but here’s the reality:

SEAI’s wind energy roadmap demonstrates that Ireland has the potential to produce enough electricity from wind to exceed domestic demand by 2030.
The National Economic and Social Research Council’s 2012 report confirms that a fully decarbonised Irish energy system built on wind and other renewables can be achieved by 2050 by developing a smart grid in Ireland and integrating this into a clean EU energy system.
The EU energy roadmap for 2050 calls for a nearly zero-carbon power supply by 2050 through use of existing technologies to change the way energy is both used and produced.

Such a large transformation in our energy sector won’t be easy. It requires moving investments and subsidies away from fossil fuels and into renewable energy sources and smart grid infrastructure, but the long term benefits in lowering energy costs and improving our energy security would be worth the effort and investment. Ireland has already agreed to be part of Europe’s zero carbon electricity power system by signing the 2030 policy framework for climate and energy. However, in order for this transition to begin, decarbonisation of our energy supply needs to be a core objective of the DCENR Energy White Paper to be published in September, 2015.

Fossil-free heat

We heat our homes and buildings in Ireland using a wide variety of fuels, including solid fuels (turf, wood, coal), oil, gas, and electricity. With the exception of renewable electricity, all these fuels are carbon-based and thus emit greenhouse gases when burned. There are a many things we could do to make the heating systems in new buildings energy efficient and fossil free (e.g. passive construction, solar/geothermal heating, and district heating systems). Our options to retrofit existing buildings for fossil-free heat are more limited, but not unachievable. When combined with energy efficiency improvements such as insulation, it is possible to install heat pumps cost-effectively so heat can be provided by a fossil-free electricity grid. This excellent article from Ireland’s Engineers Journal explains how 100% fossil-free heating is technically possible for Ireland’s new and old building stocks.

Fossil-free transport

At first thought, the idea of a transport system independent of fossil fuels in the next 35 years seemed unrealistic to me. Our government has committed to a target of 10% of vehicles run on electricity by 2020, which they’re unlikely to achieve at present rate. Could we really create a completely fossil-free transport system in 35 years?

In 2008, Min. Simon Coveney (then Fine Gael Energy Spokesperson) claimed that the Fianna Fail-Green Party government goal of 10% electric vehicles by 2020 was under ambitious, and stated it was “both feasible and realistic to aspire to achieve the complete replacement of petrol and diesel engine driven cars with electric vehicles within 15 years”. I couldn’t find evidence to support Min. Coveney’s claim of being able to achieve fossil-free transport in 15 years, but recent peer-reviewed evidence for Ireland demonstrates that we could de-carbonise our transport system within 35 years by replacing 80% of our transport fleet with electric vehicles and powering heavy duty vehicles with biofuels or synthetic fuels. The EU low carbon roadmap aims to undertake a complete transition to hybrid and electric cars and fuel heavy duty vehicles with sustainable biofuels from 2025. While converting our fossil fuel based transport system into a fossil free system seemed unrealistic to me at first, it is technically possible and on its way to becoming a reality at EU level.

Carbon-neutral agriculture

What does carbon-neutral agriculture mean?

The 2012 NESC report defined a carbon-neutral society as one where the net greenhouse gas emissions associated with activities within that society’s geographic area are zero. Teagasc extended this definition to agriculture by defining carbon-neutral agriculture as the “scenario in which national GHG emissions from agriculture are fully offset by carbon sequestration by grassland soils, forestry and other land use”. The NESC Secretariat proposed carbon-neutrality as a ‘horizon point’ for 2050 to which Irish agriculture could aspire.

Is carbon-neutral agriculture possible in Ireland?

Teagasc conducted a qualitative investigation to answer this question in their 2013 report, Carbon Neutrality as a horizon point for Irish Agriculture. They cited a host of uncertainties in future policy and market developments (e.g. price of carbon credits) and in scientific understanding (e.g. how carbon sequestration measures such as afforestation will respond to a changing future climate), all of which prohibited them from giving a definitive answer to this question. However, nowhere in the report does it state that carbon-neutral agriculture by 2050 is impossible.

What’s noteworthy is that the report emphasises the longer we wait to take action, the more difficult this goal of carbon-neutrality will be to achieve, and “even with the uncertainties surrounding the policy and economic landscapes between now and 2050, an ‘early start’ on the pathway towards carbon neutrality will be required”. For example, the report cites the need for immediate action to develop a substantial forestry sink as a cost-effective mitigation measure for the future.

The most encouraging part of the Teagasc report is their conclusion that implementing the concept of carbon neutrality in Irish agriculture “allows a significant expansion in the potential and positive contribution that agriculture can make” to reducing national GHG emissions. In their words, “full carbon-neutrality for agriculture by 2050 may be difficult to achieve, but this should not distract from efforts to approach carbon-neutrality as a horizon point.” Even aspiring toward carbon-neutrality in agriculture would make a significant difference in our country’s GHG emissions.

Is “fossil free in a generation” Ireland’s solution to climate change?

The “fossil free” concept is not new. In 2014, Friends of the Earth called on the Irish government to make Ireland fossil fuel free, and rigorous research was published in the International journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management, which detailed how Ireland could transition to a 100% renewable energy system and consequently create 100,000 additional jobs without increasing the costs of energy. As early as 2006, the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change emphasised the need to decouple carbon-consumption and economic growth.

When I began this post, I was sceptical that the “fossil free in a generation” concept was a realistic solution to combat climate change in Ireland. However, when I broke it down into its components, I was surprised how easily I was able to find evidence to demonstrate that a fossil-free society is achievable. It won’t be easy, but the technology to undertake this ambitious transformation already exists and new technologies will continue to develop to expedite the process. The only thing that prevents such a large-scale transformation from happening is political will and the tendency to maintain the status quo rather than tackle long-term challenges.

Green Party critics could claim their “fossil free in a generation” call is an unsubstantiated dream, but this vision is truly possible for Ireland and would undoubtedly revolutionise our society. If we want to live in this fossil-free world and enjoy all the benefits it has to offer, we simply have to elect representatives to carry out our vision.

Keep fighting the good fight!
-Cara

If you like this post, please Tweet or share on Facebook.

Stay tuned next Friday for FAQ #4: Why wind?

Feel free to contact me through e-mail, Twitter, or Facebook with any climate-related questions you’d like to see addressed in future posts.

3 Comments

Cara's Climate Friday FAQ #2: Has Ireland done anything to reduce our impact on climate change?

2/5/2015

1 Comment

EPA, 2014 - GHG emissions by sector (1990-2013)

Welcome to Climate Friday FAQ #2! Last week, I answered the question, “Why should Ireland take action on climate when the bigger countries aren’t doing anything?” I argued that, despite our small population, Ireland produces a significant amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) per capita due to our relatively comfortable lifestyle, and I provided evidence to show how bigger countries are already reducing their GHG emissions through investment in renewable energy and other measures. The obvious question that followed was whether or not Ireland was doing anything to reduce our impact on climate in comparison?

Those of us involved in climate activism here often complain that Ireland is not doing enough. In policy terms, our last National Climate Change Strategy (2009) expired in 2012 and a new one has yet to be published, leaving government departments in a holding pattern on climate action. Ireland’s climate bill, first proposed in 2007, has still not passed, and it remains to be seen whether or not the climate bill that’s about to be passed will be worth the paper it’s printed on. To make matters worse, the most recent EPA projections indicate we will fail to meet our EU 2020 GHG emission reduction targets and face heavy fines as a result.

I’d like to believe that our green island is somewhat “green” in reputation too, and I’d love some good news stories on climate action in Ireland to be proud of. So, let’s forget about inactive governments, failed policies, and EU commitments for a moment and look at the real actions in Ireland that have led to GHG emission reductions over the last 15 years. Have we done anything to reduce our impact on climate change?

Energy: The most significant improvement in Irish GHG emissions has been in the energy sector, where carbon dioxide emissions decreased by 36% from 2001-2013 despite over 7% increase in electricity consumption at the same time. How?

Improvements in efficiency of modern gas fired power plants
An increased share of energy generated from renewable resources (mostly wind), which now provides approximately 19% of our electricity requirements.
An increase in electricity imported through the interconnectors with the UK from 2012, which is not included in Ireland’s greenhouse gas inventory estimates but provided 8.7% of our total energy requirements from 2012-2013.

Renewable energy penetration is projected to reach 26% by 2020, but while it looks like good news for future GHG emissions reductions in the energy sector, these reductions are partially offset by a projected 19% increase in coal combustion by 2020, continued peat extraction, and by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources ambition to prioritise oil and gas drilling over the next five years. In the battle between clean and dirty energy, it's still anyone's game...

We might be able to pat ourselves on the back for the current emission reductions in our energy sector if we were like the U.S.A, whose majority of emissions come from the “dirty” energy production. However, Ireland is unique - A majority of our emissions come from agriculture (32% in 2014). In the sector where we could make the most difference to our overall GHG emissions, what have we done so far?

Agriculture: Agriculture and climate change is a surprisingly contentious issue in Ireland. On one hand, we see farmers as the stewards and protectors of our environment and the people who will be most affected by the impacts of climate change. On the other hand, some see action on climate as an inhibitor to the ambitious growth and production targets set out in the government’s Food Harvest 2020 roadmap. The sector argues that, at best, it can only reduce emissions by 4% while maintaining productivity. While that sounds paltry in comparison to the emission reductions in energy, Irish agricultural emissions peaked in 2007 and are almost back to their 1990 levels. In fact, research indicates that Irish agriculture is more “GHG-efficient” (unit GHGs emitted per unit product) compared to countries in the developing world and within the EU due to our grassland-based farming practices. However, the projections for intensive growth in the agricultural sector don’t bode well for GHG emissions. Without an effective strategy, increased food production leads to increases in fertiliser use, livestock numbers, and energy consumption, all of which lead to increased GHG emissions.

There are opportunities for Irish agriculture to be leaders in innovative, cost-effective GHG emission reduction strategies. We’re leading the way in carbon foot-printing on farms through the Bord Bia and Origin Green carbon calculator. At least 90% of our beef farms and almost all of our dairy farms have signed up to their system in an effort to prove their environmental credibility to consumers. However, it remains to be seen whether the sector will turn its strengths in carbon accounting and GHG efficiency into actions on the ground that actually reduce GHG emissions.

Some representatives in the agricultural sector argue it’s unfair to expect them to reduce their GHG emissions and that Ireland’s climate commitments should be made in other sectors instead. GHG emissions in transport have more than doubled since 1998 and now comprise 19% of our overall emissions. Despite huge increases in emissions, Ireland’s transport sector has attempted to reduce their emissions through the following measures:

Transport:

VRT and Motor Tax: In 2008, the government implemented new vehicle registration tax (VRT) and motor tax charges, which reflected their emissions performance. As a result, consumers began purchasing lower CO2 emitting cars to reduce their tax burden. We’re now the 6th best performer in Europe for new car carbon dioxide emissions. Unfortunately, the most recent increases in motor tax and VRT hit the more carbon efficient vehicles the hardest, and it’s unknown how this will affect consumer behaviour.
Carbon Tax: While politically unpopular, tax on carbon usage is a well-known, cost-effective method to reduce emissions. The carbon tax was introduced in Ireland in 2010 and applied to motor gasoline and diesel and heating oil at €15/tonne CO. In 2011, the Fine Gael-Labour coalition raised the carbon tax by 33% to €20/tonne. Emissions from transport fell by over 10% between 2009-2011. Ireland is now considered an EU leader in the implementation of carbon tax, which both helped re-shape our behaviour in carbon emissions and avoided the need to raise income tax. Still not convinced? Read this policy piece on all the economic benefits of our carbon tax.

We made a decent start at tackling transport emissions from 2008, but the emissions trajectory is still rising in the transport sector. Despite interest from all political parties to increase the number of electric vehicles in Ireland by at least 250,000 by 2020, it now looks like we will fall far short of that target with only 50,000 electric vehicles on Irish roads by that time. Based on current policies, our transport emissions are projected to increase a further 23% from 2013-2020.

Our government has taken some actions to reduce GHG emissions in the transport, energy, residential, and waste sectors, but has failed to make any efforts to reduce GHG emissions in the largest sector (agriculture) and industry. The result is that, despite our efforts, we’re not going to meet our EU climate commitments for 2020 and we haven’t done anything progressive enough to lead to significant reductions by 2030 or 2050 either.

I’ll confess that I wrote this blog as much to evaluate what Ireland has done for myself as I did to inform you. When I read through the list above, I see a case of one step forward, two steps back. We’ve made some progress in the past, but we haven’t done much lately and the political will for action seems to have stalled. Furthermore, the division of emissions into sectors seems to abdicate everyone from making any significant change. It’s easier to just hope another sector will “take the hit” than to do the long-term planning required to transform your own sector. Maybe we need to think beyond sectors and look at solving the problem as a nation. Which brings me to my next "burning question" - Stay tuned next week for Climate Friday FAQ #3, where I'll attempt to find out if there really is a national solution to climate change for Ireland.

Keep fighting the good fight!
-Cara

If you like this post, please Tweet or share on Facebook.

As always please feel free to contact me through e-mail, Twitter, or Facebook with any climate-related questions you’d like to see addressed in future posts.

1 Comment

Climate Change - What might you lose that you love?

2/2/2015

0 Comments

Environmental campaigners are calling for people to declare their love for the planet this Valentine’s Day. The Climate Coalition's show the love campaign asks people to submit photos of things they love that they fear losing due to climate change. The Guardian is running a photo assignment asking, "What things do you treasure that could be affected by climate change?" Here's my submission on my beloved Inishbofin island.

Inishbofin - The island I love

East Beach, Inishbofin, Co. Galway, Ireland Photo credit: Cara Augustenborg

0 Comments

Climate Friday FAQ #5: What’s in a degree?

A Climate Friday FAQ reader’s question

What are feedback loops?

“Even if we stay under 2ºC, could that trigger feedback loops that send us over?”

What does this mean for us?

Climate Friday FAQ #4: Why wind?

Wind basics

Why is Ireland focusing primarily on wind as our renewable energy solution?

Obstacles to providing wind energy

Why Wind? - Conclusion

Cara's Climate Friday FAQ #3: Is there a national solution to climate change for Ireland?

What does “fossil free in a generation” mean?

It sounds idyllic, but can “fossil free in a generation” really happen in Ireland?

Is “fossil free in a generation” Ireland’s solution to climate change?

Cara's Climate Friday FAQ #2: Has Ireland done anything to reduce our impact on climate change?

Climate Change - What might you lose that you love?

Archives

Categories