RE...C and IPCC Scenario Compression

RE<<C
(and IPCC Scenario Compression)
Masdar blogging competition entry
Matthew Klippenstein
@EclecticLip matthew.klippenstein@gmail.com

Masdar blogging contest question
“What will be the most important technological development
over the next 10 years that will have the greatest impact in
reducing climate change risks?”
development: an event constituting a new stage in a
changing situation. Oxford Living Dictionary

2007: Google.org launched RE<C initiative
“Renewable Energy cheaper than Coal”
2011: the breakthrough technologies approach was shut down.
http://googlepress.blogspot.ca/2007/11/googles-goal-renewable-energy-cheaper_27.html
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/google-engineers-explain-why-they-stopped-rd-in-renewable-energ

2007: Google.org’s RE<C vision
2016: Wind and Solar now cheaper than Coal
excerpted from Lazard, Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis Version 10.0, Dec 2016.

Bloomberg, Wind and Solar Are Crushing Fossil Fuels, Apr 2016.
Coal power is no longer
“business-as-usual”.
For many years,
renewables have been
“business-as-usual”.

2026: Wind and Solar will be much cheaper than Coal
excerpted from Lazard, Levelized Cost of Energy
Analysis Version 10.0, Dec 2016.
Another decade of
experience curve effects
will magnify wind and
solar’s cost advantages.
“cost declines powered by ethical ideals and entrepreneurial zeal”

First Thesis
2007: RE<C envisioned
2016: RE<C achieved
2026: RE<<C will be achieved

First Thesis
2016: RE<C achieved
This will push our emissions trajectory downwards
strongly enough that...

2016: RE<C achieved
IPCC scenarios will begin to reflect low-coal future
Second Thesis

2016: RE<C achieved
IPCC scenarios will begin to reflect low-coal future →
IPCC scenario compression will occur
Second Thesis

IPCC Scenario Compression - Preamble
● IPCC contributors are experts in their fields
● They come from all parts of the world and the political / cultural spectrum
● Their work is fairly-often and often-unfairly politicized and demonized
● IPCC models represent our best efforts to understand climate change
● IPCC models are based on peer-reviewed science
● We are all subject to human frailties (bias, self-interest, etc.)
● Peer-review is the most effective way of freeing the pursuit of truth from the
distortions of those frailties
● Of course, no human system is perfect, or should be expected to be

Peer-review takes time -- scientific inquiry is inherently conservative --
so IPCC models are always somewhat out-of-date.

IPCC models do not factor in recent trends such as:
● Arctic sea ice death spiral
https://skepticalscience.com/climate-scientists-esld.html

● Surging methane levels
The Guardian, Rapid rise in methane emissions in 10 years surprises scientists, 12 Dec 2016
Image: Wikipedia, atmospheric methane. (Red arrow and exclamation marks by author.)
(!!)

● Surging methane levels
● RE<C (and soon, RE<<C)
excerpted from Lazard, Levelized Cost of Energy
Analysis Version 10.0, Dec 2016.

IPCC Scenario Compression
Here are IPCC’s Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) models
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report, Figure 3.2a
“RCP8.5 is representative of
the high range of non-climate
policy scenarios”.
van Vuuren, D.P., Edmonds, J.,
Kainuma, M. et al. Climatic
Change (2011) 109: 5.

Here are IPCC’s Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) models
“RCP8.5 is representative of
the high range of non-climate
policy scenarios”.
Good news: even
without climate policy,
RE<C in 2016,
RE<<C in 2026,
RE<<<C by 2100.
Coal use should be
lower than RCP8.5
projections.

All RCP’s assume higher coal use
(with or without CCS) in 2100 than 2000.
This seems unlikely. RE<C today.
Besides, CCS will only add costs to coal.
RE<<(C+CCS) might already be true.
From https://skepticalscience.com/rcp.php?t=3

Coal use may already be falling!
http://www.carbonbrief.org/bp-global-coal-use-fell-by-largest-recorded-margin-in-20
15

Coal use may already be falling!
IPCC assumptions were valid at the time.
Renewables were more expensive than coal,
and experience curves for wind and solar
weren’t widely known.
RE<C changes all of this.

Given RE<C in 2016
and RE<<C in 2026
(and RE<<<C in 2100)
the author believes that by 2026, the IPCC
will focus more on lower-coal (and therefore
lower-emission) RCPs.
RCP8.5 probably first to be de-emphasized.
Could those researchers redirect efforts
towards a zero-coal RCP?

If RE<C can prevent highest-emissions RCP scenario from coming true...
2016: given RE<C, this won’t happen

And RE<<C can reduce the likelihood of the next-highest RCP scenario...
2026: if RE<<C, maybe this won’t
happen?

...over time we may see a “compression” of IPCC scenarios.
2026: if RE<<C, maybe this won’t
happen?
Old range of IPCC
scenarios
Compressed range of
IPCC scenarios when
RE<<C (or RE<<<C)

This would be encouraging - we could avoid worst-case temperature scenarios!
Adapted from IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report, Figure SPM6 (a)
X
X
X
X
X
4°C above (1986-2005) surface temp
is apocalyptic.
is “merely” catastrophic.

It could also cast the climate challenge in opportunity, not avoidance, terms.
Adapted from IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report, Figure SPM6 (a)
X
X
X
X
X
is apocalyptic.
is “merely” catastrophic.
That’s still far too high!
Much work still to be done!
But, what a paradigm shift!

Even if IPCC Scenario Compression occurs, serious concerns remain.
We’re still on worse-than-projected trends for:
● polar ice loss
● sea level rise (Greenland, Antarctic melt not in models as of 2012)
● methane emissions
● and no doubt other factors the author is unaware of,
but which are known in the climate science community

Probable Responses to IPCC Scenario
Compression
Pollution doves will likely call for redoubled inaction and investments elsewhere.
“We’ve dodged a Permian-scale extinction, why spend billions to prevent
a Cretaceous-scale extinction?”

Probable Responses to IPCC Scenario
Compression
Pollution doves will likely call for redoubled inaction and investments elsewhere.
“We’ve dodged a Permian-scale extinction, why spend billions to prevent
a Cretaceous-scale extinction?”
Climate hawks will likely call for redoubled action and investment.
“Why unlock trillions in climate wealth over a hundred years,
when we can unlock it in twenty, as responsible stewards?”

Author’s expectations
I expect this presentation will:
● be greeted warily among progressives and climate activists
“Is he trying to sabotage future policy action?” (no, quite the opposite)
● be embraced by conservatives and climate inactivists
“Does he hate climate science or Al Gore, too?” (no, quite the opposite)
● be contentious
All opinions and any errors herein, are mine

Author’s hopes
I hope this presentation and its theses can:
● persuasively argue that RE<<C and IPCC Scenario Compression will be the
most important technological development in the next ten years;
● frame our clean technology successes;
● inspire positive action on cleantech and climate;
● assuage fears that we’re doomed to have the worst come to pass;
● provide a generational narrative (this is our ‘moon landing’);
● affirm the power of ethical ideals and entrepreneurial zeal;
● and if possible, win the competition ( just being honest )

RE...C and IPCC Scenario Compression

More Related Content

Similar to RE...C and IPCC Scenario Compression

Recently uploaded

RE...C and IPCC Scenario Compression