IS KYOTO THE KEY? Global Warming, Industry and Economy OVERVIEW Global Warming: Established fact or Scientific Uncertainty? The role of the chemical industry The Kyoto Protocol and it’s global impact What should and can be done? Current advancements “GLOBAL WARMING” Greenhouse gases: naturally occurring (CO2, CH4, nitrous oxide, ozone, water vapor) and not naturally occurring (HFC’s, PFC’s, SF6) Sinks and land-use FACT OR FICTION? Known: Atmospheric composition is changing Greenhouse gases trap heat and tend to warm planet Human activity produces greenhouse gases Uncertain: Extent that humaninduced greenhouse gases responsible Projecting impactsespecially local “Some of the largest uncertainties are associated with events that pose the greatest risk to human societies.” GREENHOUSE GASES CO2 by far largest contributor Vary in ability to absorb heat in atmosphere HFC’s and PFC’s highest NOx>CH4>CO2 Often measured in MMTCE, weighted by GWP CARBON DIOXIDE Combustion of waste, fossil fuels and wood Primarily in transportation sector U.S.: 1400 MTC/yr~ 23% of worldwide emission METHANE Decomposition of organic wastes in landfills Production and transportation of fossil fuels Livestock NITROUS OXIDE Agriculture, energy and industry 73% from Agriculture, 22% Energy, 5% Industry Nitrogen fertilization of soil Fossil fuel combustion Adipic acid and nitric acid production GLOBAL APPROACH-IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Established in 1998 by United Nations and World Meteorological Organization Open to all WMO and UN members Designed to answer to scientific questions about global warming Three branches- science, impact, mitigation THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL 1987:, Designed to halt deterioration of ozone layer-ratified by 172 countries United States ratified in 04/88 Ozone depletion may affect ocean as sink for greenhouse gases, as well as UV-B radiation Phased out CFC’s, HCFC’s, halons, methyl bromide→ HFC’s and PFC’s In general, not successful: ’98/’99 Antarctic hole largest, deepest ever…additional hole over UK/Scandinavia THE KYOTO PROTOCOL 1997 Kyoto, Japan IPCC: Designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions→ global warming Commits parties to legally-binding targets to reduce or limit greenhouse gas emissions Targets total 5% overall reduction in greenhouses gases from 1990 figures 149 countries involved, not all under emission reduction KYOTO MEASURES “Enhancement of energy efficiency…” “Protection and enhancements of sinks…” “Promotion of sustainable form of agriculture…” “Research…development and increased use of new and renewable forms of energy…” “…phasing out of market imperfections, fiscal incentives, tax and duty exemptions and subsidies in all greenhouse gas emitting sectors…” “…reduction of methane emissions through recovery and use in waste management, as well as in the production, transport and distribution of energy.” ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS “…The Parties shall strive to implement policies in such a way as to minimize adverse effects, including …climate change, effects on international trade, and social, environmental, and economic impacts…” CURRENT STATUS 143 of 149 parties have ratified, accepted, approved or accented as of March 1, 2005 Parties not ratifying: Australia, Croatia, Kazakhstan, Monaco, Zambia and the United States Parties that committed to emissions reduction committed 0-17.4% reductions Controversial in feasibility, value added, economics WHO IS WEIGHING IN? Russian Federation: Ratified Kyoto Protocol on 11/18/04 Russian aide to the president, Andrei Illarionov: “It is a very dangerous, harmful and destructive document for Russia,” noting that Kyoto requires 80% reduction in carbonic acid emissions by 2050 which would reduced Russia’s economic potential by 70%. “The GDP and personal income levels will drop by 2.5-3 times.” (02/04/05) WHO’S WEIGHING IN? Australia: has not ratified Ian Castles, Australian Bureau of statistics and David Henderson,OECD’s economics and statistics department head criticize underpinning economic assumptions global warming→CO2 → projected world economic output/energy consumption Castles and Henderson: IPCC analysis assumes too low economic output in developing world and too fast a closing of gap with developed world →too fast growth in world GDP and carbon-intensive development “…Kyoto itself will arguably super-charge carbon emissions…” –Terry McCrann, Herald Sun (2/16/05) WHO IS WEIGHING IN? United States: Clinton signed in ’97, Senate refused to ratify citing economic concerns President Bush does not support Kyoto Richard Schmalensee, MIT- U.S. would have to close all of its coal-fired power plants by 2012 just to get halfway to Kyoto's targets Alan Manne, Stanford- following the Kyoto requirements would be the equivalent of a $1,600 per year tax on every family of four. "It may well be unworkable," William Nordhaus, Yale, Council of Economic Advisers under Carter WHERE DOES A ChE FIT IN? CO2: combustion fossil fuels→ alternative fuels, increased efficiency Methane: landfill waste→ new materials, utilize gas for energy; livestock → design of new feed NOx: nitrogen fertilizers→ alternative chemicals; improved industrial practices MOVING FORWARD Carbon Dioxide Reduction by sector: “Five-labs Study” UTILITY SECTOR costs of carbon-reduction estimated to be positive-net investment required Retrofitting power plants for natural gas instead of coal Co-generation Renewables BUILDINGS SECTOR Improved sensors and controls for better management- react to energy prices in real time Self-powered buildings Material development- thermal resistance of building shell, utilize environmental changes Multi-functional appliances Advanced lighting systems- mixing artificial and natural light INDUSTRIAL SECTOR Includes manufacturing, agriculture, mining, and construction Manufacturing~70% of industrial-sector energy consumption. About half of that comes iron and steel, pulp and paper, and petroleum refining Retrofitting boilers for co-generation Industry specific improvements- coke-less steel production, carbon-less anode aluminum production Improved usage of biproducts- cement industry TRANSPORTATION SECTOR Reduced aerodynamic drag, lower rolling resistance of tires, decreased engine friction, leaner burning engines, and variable valve timing Engines designed for higher fuel economy Fuel cells METHANE REDUCTION Natural gas production: vapor recovery in storage, additional flash separation recovery, low-bleed NG pneumatics Natural gas transmission: leak detection and wrap composite repairs, specific equipment fitting Ruminants: improved feed composition for better efficiency NOx REDUCTION Adipic and nitric acid Production: improved catalysts, catalytic decomposition of tail gases Agriculture: alternative fertilizers, cultivation practices Energy: transportation improvements SOURCES Kyoto Protocol, available at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf http://www.yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/gg99rpt/nitrous.html#industrial McCrann, Terry. “Global Warming’s Core Flaw.” Herald Times, February 16, 2005. http://www.globalwarming.org “Economists Support Bush on Kyoto.” American Enterprise, Oct. 2001. http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id=160&msg_id=5377079&startrow=1 &date=2005-02-04&do_alert=0 “Technologies to Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the Next Decade.” Physics Today, Nov. 2000 http://www.coalinfo.net.cn/coalbed/meeting/2203/papers/naturalgas/NG02 0.pdf QUESTIONS Is Kyoto realistic? Is it worth it, considering the benefits? Are we sure of the benefits and do we need to be? What, if anything should the United States do? Is legislation necessary? How do you balance economic and environmental concerns? What is industry’s responsibility? What other technologies are being developed?