Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Fracking and climate change in Wales


Published on

Not given on powerpoint - no facilities available. 1 November 2012

  • Be the first to comment

Fracking and climate change in Wales

  1. 1. a100%renewable future
  2. 2. And Shale Gas?“Shale gas extraction brings asignificant risk of ground and surface water contaminationand until the evidence base is developed a precautionaryapproach to development in the UK and Europe is the onlyresponsible action”.“Without a meaningful cap on emissions of global GHGs,the exploitation of shale gas is likely toincrease net carbon emissions”.“Rapid carbon reductions require major investment inzero-carbon technologiesand this could be delayed by exploitation of shale gas”. Tyndall Centre, 2011
  3. 3. Groundwater“Groundwater is vulnerable to contamination… 15% ofgroundwater bodies in Wales are at risk of failing to meetWater Framework Directive objectives because ofpollution from mining”“We do not know as much about the condition ofgroundwater in minor aquifers, many of which are inWales. Because of the limitations of the data,we do not know yet what the major issues are in Wales”.“Natural processes that help clean up groundwater, whichtake days or weeks in rivers and lakes, can takedecades or centuries in groundwater”. Under Ground, Under Threat: Environment Agency, 2006
  4. 4. The Shropshire Scheme“Groundwater is pumped from the sandstone aquifer thatunderlies much of north Shropshire into the RiverSevern”.“When all phases are complete an extra225,000 m3 per day [enough for 1.4 million people]will be taken from the river for public supply” Under Ground, Under Threat: Environment Agency, 2006“The Secretary of State may prohibit an Assembly Bill if itmight have a serious adverse impact on water resources inEngland, water supply in England” Devolution Guidance Note, Wales Office, 2012
  5. 5. Waste Water“Each well… will generate between 1,300 and 23,000m3of flowback waste fluid containing water, fracturingchemicals and subsurface contaminants(including toxic organic compounds, heavy metals andnaturally occurring radioactive materials”.“Hazards include… spillage, storm water, failure of pit liner,pipework failure, insufficient storage capacity, overfilling,operator error”“the likelihood of pollution incidents associated withwider development of shale increase from the ‘possible’end of the spectrum… through to the ‘probable’” Tyndall Centre, 2011
  6. 6. a100%renewable future
  7. 7. “When I look at this data, the trend is perfectly in linewith a temperature increase of 6 degrees Celsius ,which would have ……devastating consequences for the planet.”“We have 5 years to change the energy system……or have it changed” Fatih Birol IEA Chief Economist
  8. 8. Things are getting worse! Global CO2 emission trends?~ 2.7% p.a. last 100yrs~ 3.5% p.a. 2000-2007~ 5.9% 2009-2010~ 3.2 % 2010-2011(A1FI has mean growth of 2.2% p.a. to 2020)
  9. 9. The State of Play“To hold the increase in global temperature below2 degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objectiveconsistent with science” Copenhagen Accord (2009)Committee on Climate Change global budget has56% chance of exceeding 2oCUK Government adopts a pathway with a63% chance of exceeding 2oC
  10. 10. The ChallengeUK’s target: 80% reduction in CO2e by 2050EU 60%-80% 2050Bali 50% 2050 CO2 stays in atmosphere for 100+ years 2050 reduction unrelated to avoiding dangerous climate change (2°C) It is cumulative emissions that matter (i.e. carbon budget) This fundamentally rewrites the chronology of climate change from long term gradual reductions to urgent and radical reductions
  11. 11. The Challenge“… it is difficult to envisage anything other than aplanned economic recession being compatible withstabilisation at or below 650ppmv CO2e.” Anderson & Bows 2008
  12. 12. Total Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways AR4 – 450ppmv CO2e stabilisation cumulative emission range 2015 peak 2020 peak 2025 peakEmissions of greenhouse gases (GtCO 2e) 80 Emissions of greenhouse gases (GtCO 2e) Emissions of greenhouse gases (GtCO 2e) 80 80 Low DL 60 Low DH 60 60 Medium DL Medium DH High DL 40 High DH 40 40 20 20 20 0 0 0 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Year Year Year Anderson & Bows. 2008 Philosophical Transactions A of the Royal Society. 366. pp.3863-3882)
  13. 13. … and for energy emissions?(with 2020 peak) 60 2015 peak Medium DL 2015 peak High DL 2015 peak High DH 2020 peak High DL13 of 18 scenarios 50 Emissions of CO2 alone (GtCO2) 2020 peak High DH‘impossible’ 40Even then total 30decarbonisation by 10-20% annual reductions –~2035-45 necessary 20 even for a high probability of exceeding 2°C Globally: no emission 10 space for coal, gas, or shale – even with CCS! 0 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Year
  14. 14. a100%renewable future
  15. 15. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)(Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011 ~40% chance of exceeding 2°C)
  16. 16. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)(Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011 ~40% chance of exceeding 2°C) Peak 2025 Growth 3.5% p.a Reduction 7% p.a. (2x Stern!)
  17. 17. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)(Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011 ~40% chance of exceeding 2°C)
  18. 18. Anderson-Bows: (CO2 only)(Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions – Jan 2011 ~40% chance of exceeding 2°C) Peak ~2010 Reduction ∞% p.a.
  19. 19. The Problems All scenarios showing avoidance of dangerous climate change use Bio-carbon capture and storage to give negative emissions (geoengineering) Most scenarios showing avoidance of dangerous climate change use a large expansion of nuclear power Assumptions about ‘big’ technology naively optimistic Recent historical emissions massaged Short-term emissions growth seriously downplayed Reduction rate universally dictated by economists Annex 1/Non-Annex 1 split neglected or hidden Senior Government Advisor: “We can’t tell [ministers and politicians that 2oC is] not possible”
  20. 20. And 4oC? Emissions must peak no later than 2020 A 3.5% pa reduction in energy emissions is imperative At least it’s achievable…
  21. 21. The Downside For 4°C global mean surface temperature 5°C - 6°C global land mean And an increase on the hottest days of:  6°C - 8°C in China  8°C - 10°C in Central Europe  10°C -12°C in New YorkAnd in low latitudes 4 C gives up to40% reduction in maize and riceas population heads towards 9 billion by 2050
  22. 22. The SituationThere is a widespread view that a 4°C future isincompatible with an organised global communityis likely to be beyond ‘adaptation’is devastating to the majority of eco-systemsand has a high probability of not being stable (i.e. 4°Cwould be an interim temperature on the way to a muchhigher equilibrium level).Consequently… 4°C should be avoided at all costs
  23. 23. Energy Emissions 10% reduction year-on-yearImpossible?Approximately 50% of emissions caused by 1% of globalpopulationIncluding *probably* everyone in this roomAnyone who ever sets foot on a planeAnyone in the UK earning over ~£30k
  24. 24. Wales leading the way“Wales is a definite leader inpromoting sustainabledevelopment”
  25. 25. 20 Wales leading the way ? Installed capacity of wind, wave and solar18 (normalised to 2003)161412 England10 Northern Ireland8 Scotland Wales6420 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
  26. 26. Wales leading the way ?Non-renewable installed capacity per capita (2005-2011) (MW per 1000 people)
  27. 27. a100%renewable future
  28. 28. dim mwy o nwy
  29. 29. Image and slide creditsSlide 2 3 3, 12 and 28 4, 6, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16 Kevin Anderson, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research(with permission)Slide 6 10 24 29