Реферат: Climate change
A review and update of the CCAP was initiated in 1995, involving a
federal government interagency review process and a public hearing and comment
period. Revisions to the CCAP (and to the calculation of the effects of its
measures) were initiated in light of comments received during this process and
are reflected in this document. In addition, as called for under FCCC reporting
guidelines, the projections of the effects of measures taken are extended to
the year 2020, with the understanding that uncertainties become greater in more
distant years.
One of the principal products of the review was an assessment of the
effectiveness of the CCAP programs, which were rated to be successful at
reducing emissions. Currently, more than 5,000 organizations are participating
in programs around the United States. The pollution-prevention benefits of
these innovative programs are beginning to multiply rapidly in response to the
groundwork laid and the partnerships made. In all, the programs are expected to
achieve a large portion of the reductions projected in the CCAP. In fact, it is
estimated that these programs will result in energy cost savings of $10 billion
annually in 2000.
However, the review has also made clear the significantly reduced
impact to be expected from the programs as a result of the nearly 40 percent
reduction of CCAP funding by Congress from the amount requested by the
President, higher-than-expected electricity demand, and lower-than-expected
energy prices. In addition, before the programs' implementation, CCAP program
managers could not always anticipate the impacts of projected climate change
emission reductions. Information available from the first tranche of activity
was considered in developing the current projections.
A second product of the review was the identification of several
measures that have since been added to the CCAP portfolio. The most significant
of these is the Environmental Stewardship Initiative, which greatly expands
activities already included in the CCAP, and focuses on reducing the emissions
of extremely potent greenhouse gases from three industrial
applications--semiconductor production, electrical transmission and
distribution systems, and magnesium casting. The expanded initiative is
anticipated to reduce emissions by an additional 6.5 MMTCE by 2000, and 10.0
MMTCE by 2010. Other programs include improving energy efficiency in the
construction of and supply of energy to commercial and industrial buildings,
expanding residential markets for energy-efficient lighting products, and
providing information on renewable energy to reduce barriers to the adoption of
clean technologies.
The analysis of individual actions is integrated with revised forecasts
of economic growth, energy prices, program funding, and regulatory developments
to provide an updated comprehensive perspective on current and projected
greenhouse gas emission levels. This analysis involved an updating of the
baseline calculation in light of new economic assumptions regarding energy
prices, economic growth, and technology improvements, among other factors. In
1993, the first U.S. submission projected year 2000 baseline emissions to be
106 MMTCE above their 1990 levels; with current program funding, emissions are
now projected to exceed 1990 levels by 188 MMTCE. Two principal factors are
responsible:
·
The analysis used to develop CCAP
significantly underestimated the reductions that would be needed by programs to
return emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This was due to several
factors, including lower-than-expected fuel prices, strong economic growth,
regulatory limitations within and outside of CCAP, and improved information on
emissions of some potent greenhouse gases.
·
In addition, diminished levels of
funding by Congress have affected both CCAP programs and other federal programs
that reduce emissions, limiting their effectiveness.
While neither the measures initiated in 1993 nor the additional actions
developed since then and included in this report will be adequate to meet the
emissions goal enunciated by the President, they have significantly reduced
emissions below growth rates that otherwise would have occurred. Based on
current funding levels, the revised action plan is expected to reduce emissions
by 76 MMTCE in the year 2000--or 70 percent of the reductions projected in the
CCAP. Annual energy cost savings to businesses and consumers from CCAP actions
are anticipated to be $10 billion (1995 dollars) by the year 2000. Even greater
reductions are estimated from these measures in the post-2000 period:
reductions of 169 MMTCE are projected for 2010, and 230 MMTCE for 2020. Annual
energy savings are projected to grow to $50 billion (1995 dollars) in the year
2010.
A separate component of this chapter addresses the U.S. Initiative on
Joint Implementation. Projects undertaken through this initiative allow
private-sector partners to offset emissions from domestic activities through
reductions achieved in other countries. The Climate Convention established a
pilot program for joint implementation at the first meeting of the Conference
of the Parties. Guidelines for reporting under the pilot program were
established by the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice at
its fifth session in February 1997. This report uses those guidelines to report
on project activity.
Table 1-2
Summary of Actions to Reduce Greenhouse
Gas Emissions
(Million Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent)
|
Action
Number
|
Action Title
|
1993 Action
Plan Estimate
|
Revised
Estimate*
|
|
|
2000
|
2000
|
2005
|
2010
|
2020
|
|
Residential & Commercial Sector Actions
|
26.9
|
10.3
|
29.4
|
53.0
|
78.4
|
1 |
Rebuild America |
2.0 |
1.6 |
3.0 |
6.3 |
7.1 |
1 & 2 |
Expanded Green Lights and Energy Star Buildings |
3.6 |
3.4 |
8.5 |
16.3 |
30.2 |
3 |
State Revolving Fund for Public Buildings |
1.1 |
|
|
Terminated |
|
4 |
Cost-Shared Demonstrations of Emerging Technologies |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Operation and Maintenance Training for Commercial Building
Facility
Managers and Operators
|
3.8 |
0.0 |
0.5 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
6 |
Energy Star® Products
|
5.0 |
4.3 |
12.9 |
19.4 |
24.9 |
7 |
Residential Appliance Standards |
6.8 |
0.2 |
1.8 |
3.7 |
3.8 |
8 and 11 |
Energy Partnerships for Affordable Housing |
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
Cool Communities |
4.4 |
0.6 |
1.9 |
4.3 |
7.7 |
10 |
Update State Building Codes |
|
|
|
|
|
New |
Construction of EnergyEfficient Commercial and Industrial
Buildings |
Not included |
0.1 |
0.4 |
1.1 |
2.6 |
New |
Superwindow Collaborative |
Not included |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.4 |
1.3 |
New |
Expand Markets for NextGeneration Lighting Products |
Not included |
0.2 |
0.4 |
0.7 |
0.9 |
New |
Fuel Cells Initiative |
Not included |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.4 |
|
Industrial Sector Actions
|
19.0
|
4.8
|
8.2
|
11.5
|
16.7
|
12 |
Motor Challenge |
8.8 |
1.8 |
3.9 |
5.8 |
7.5 |
13 |
Industrial Golden Carrot Programs |
2.9 |
Merged |
into |
Motor |
Challenge (#12) |
14 |
Accelerate the Adoption of EnergyEfficient Process
Technologies |
|
Terminated |
|
|
|
15 |
Industrial Assessment Centers |
0.5 |
CCAP |
Component |
Terminated |
|
16 |
Waste Minimization** |
4.2 |
2.1 |
3.6 |
5.0 |
8.4 |
17 |
Improve Efficiency of Fertilizer Nitrogen Use*** |
2.7 |
0.8 |
0.8 |
0.9 |
1.1 |
18 |
Reduce the Use of Pesticides |
|
Terminated |
|
|
|
|
Transportation Sector Actions
|
8.1
|
5.3
|
11.5
|
15.5
|
22.1
|
19 |
Cash Value of Parking |
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
Innovative Transportation Strategies |
6.6 |
4.6 |
8.4 |
10.9 |
17.0 |
21 |
Telecommuting Program |
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
Fuel Economy Labels for Tires |
1.5 |
0.7 |
3.2 |
4.8 |
5.3 |
|
Energy Supply Actions
|
10.8
|
1.3
|
3.7
|
7.0
|
18.9
|
23 |
Increase Natural Gas Share of Energy Use Through Federal
Regulatory Reform |
2.2 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
24 |
Promote Seasonal Gas Use for Control of Nitrogen Oxides |
2.8 |
0.5 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
25 |
HighEfficiency Gas Technologies |
0.6 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
26 |
RenewableEnergy Commercialization |
0.8 |
0.3 |
2.9 |
5.6 |
16.4 |
27 |
Expand Utility Integrated Resource Planning |
1.4 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
28 |
Profitable Hydroelectric Efficiency Upgrades |
2.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
29 |
EnergyEfficient Distribution Transformer Standards |
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
Energy Star Distribution Transformers |
0.8 |
0.5 |
0.8 |
1.4 |
2.8 |
31 |
Transmission Pricing Reform |
0.8 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
New |
Green Power Network |
Not Included |
0.0 |
Not quantified |
|
|
|
Land-Use Change & Forestry Actions+
|
10.0
|
2.4
|
3.3
|
4.2
|
5.1
|
43 |
Reduce Depletion of Nonindustrial |
4.0 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
|
Private Forests |
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
Accelerate Tree Planting in |
0.5 |
0.4 |
1.3 |
2.2 |
3.1 |
|
Nonindustrial Private Forests |
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
Waste Minimization** |
4.2 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
9 |
Expand Cool Communities |
0.5 |
Not quantified |
|
|
|
|
Methane Actions
|
16.3
|
15.5
|
19.0
|
23.4
|
24.2
|
32 |
Expand Natural Gas STAR |
3.0 |
3.4 |
3.8 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
33 |
Increase Stringency of Landfill Rule |
4.2 |
6.3 |
7.7 |
9.1 |
5.9 |
34 |
Landfill Methane Outreach Program |
1.1 |
1.9 |
2.2 |
2.9 |
4.3 |
35 |
Coalbed Methane Outreach Program |
2.2 |
2.6 |
2.9 |
3.2 |
4.0 |
36 |
RD&D for Coal Mine Methane |
1.5 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
37 |
RD&D for Landfill Methane |
1.0 |
Terminated |
|
|
|
38 |
AgSTAR Program |
1.5 |
0.3 |
0.8 |
1.8 |
3.2 |
39 |
Ruminant Livestock Efficiency Program |
1.8 |
1.0 |
1.6 |
2.2 |
2.5 |
|
Actions to Address Other Greenhouse Gases
|
16.3
|
25.4
|
40.4
|
45.8
|
54.5
|
17 |
Improve Efficiency of Fertilizer Nitrogen Use*** |
4.5 |
5.3 |
5.3 |
5.3 |
5.3 |
40 |
Significant New Alternatives Program |
5.0 |
6.4 |
19.6 |
23.1 |
29.8 |
41 |
HFC23 Partnerships |
5.0 |
5.0 |
5.0 |
5.0 |
5.0 |
42 |
Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Partnership |
1.8 |
2.2 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
New |
Environmental Stewardship Initiative |
Not included |
6.5 |
8.1 |
10.0 |
12.0 |
|
Foundation Actions++
|
|
11.3
|
10.7
|
9.5
|
12.3
|
|
Climate Wise |
Not estimated |
1.8 |
2.7 |
3.7 |
4.5 |
|
Climate Challenge+++ |
Not estimated |
7.6 |
5.0 |
1.6 |
1.5 |
|
State and Local Outreach Programs |
Not estimated |
1.9 |
3.0 |
4.2 |
6.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total GHG Emission Reductions |
108.6 |
76.0 |
128.3 |
169.3 |
229.5 |
|
From CCAP Programs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes:
Several of the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) programs are part of larger
federal efforts. These programs include Actions 2, 4, 6, 7, 15, 16, 27, 32,
and 33. Only the CCAP portions of these programs are included in this table.
Also, numbers may not add precisely due to interactive effects and rounding.
*
There is uncertainty in any attempt to project future emission levels and
program impacts, and this uncertainty becomes greater with longer forecast
periods. The results of this evaluation of CCAP represent a best estimate.
They are also based on the assumption that programs will continue to be
funded at current funding levels.
**
Includes Waste Wise, NICE3, and USDA's Expansion of Recycling
Technology. Energy savings and sequestration are scored separately.
***
Energy savings and N2O savings are scored separately.
+
Additional forestry initiatives by electric utilities are included in Climate
Challenge, a Foundation Program.
++
Foundation action partners provide additional reductions in almost all
sectors and gases. These values only represent incremental savings not
accounted for in other actions or baseline activities.
+++
For the Climate Challenge program, there is considerable uncertainty at this
time in quantifying impacts beyond the year 2000, largely because partners'
Climate Challenge plans do not currently extend beyond 2000.Given that
participation levels are growing and that most utilities appear to be meeting
or expanding upon their commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it
is reasonable to expect that the Climate Challenge program will deliver more
significant reductions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and Systematic Observation
The U.S. government has dedicated significant
resources to research on global climate change. U.S. research efforts (some of
which include the private sector) are divided into several general categories,
including prediction of climate change, impacts and adaptation, mitigation and
new technologies, and socioeconomic analysis and assessment. In addition, U.S.
scientists actively coordinate with research and capacity-building efforts in
other countries.
The principal vehicle for undertaking climate change
research at the federal level is the United States Global Change Research
Program. The multiagency program was funded in fiscal year 1997 at
approximately $1.8 billion. A significant portion of the Research Program's
activities is targeted at improving capabilities to predict climate change,
including the human-induced contribution to climate change, and its
implications for society and the environment. The United States also is
committed to continuing programs in research and observation, with the aim of
developing the information base required to improve predictions of climate
change and its repercussions, as well as the ability to reduce emissions while
sustaining food production, ecosystems, and economic development.
Extensive efforts also are being made to understand
the consequences of climate change, regional impacts, and the potential for
adaptation. Another area being explored by researchers is the development of
technologies that would enable the United States to supply energy, food, water,
ecosystem services, and a healthy environment to U.S. citizens, while
simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These efforts have been
divided into short- and longer-term projects involving the private sector, as
well as government-sponsored research.
Perhaps most notable in the international component of
the research effort is U.S. participation in IPCC work. U.S. scientists
participated in the preparation and review of nearly all of the more than 100
chapters of the over 2,000-page report. Researchers also participated in the
collection and analysis of the underlying data through programs as varied as
the World Climate Research Program, the Human Dimensions of Global
Environmental Change Program, the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme
and an impressive array of bilateral scientific and technical work.
The Future
Overall, the conclusions to be drawn from this report
can be summarized in three parts:
·
Climate change is a clearly
defined problem and is well recognized at the highest levels in the U.S.
government. Senior officials (from the President to heads of cabinet agencies
and departments) have taken a strong stand in favor of seeking to reduce emissions.
·
The combined effort to address
climate change (described in this report, and including the Research Program,
the total costs of U.S. mitigation actions, and the international effort) are
in excess of $2 billion--a significant step by any standard.
·
Notwithstanding this effort,
emissions continue to grow. More aggressive actions must be taken to combat the
threat of climate change.
The United States is developing a long-term, post-2000
strategy to address the climate change problem. This effort, which has both a
multilateral, international focus and a domestic focus, is expected to be made
public in the next few months. It will be based on an extensive analytic effort
to assess the effects of an array of additional policy choices, including setting
legally binding, internationally agreed caps on emissions. It will consider the
advantages of market-based instruments for both domestic and international
emissions trading, as well as joint implementation for credit with developing
countries. It will consider approaches to be taken for gases for which
monitoring and measurement are relatively simple (e.g., for carbon dioxide
emissions from stationary energy sources), as well as those gases for which
emissions are more difficult to measure (such as nitrous oxides from
agriculture).
Currently underway, the effort is intensive and
time-consuming. It involves more than twenty agencies within the federal
government, as well as several offices in the Executive Office of the
President. Congress will be consulted in the development of policies and will
most likely need to enact legislation to implement any agreed program. A
significant stakeholder outreach program will be undertaken over the next
several months to engage the best thinking on alternative approaches, and
following adoption of a program to ensure maximum compliance with the course of
action chosen.
Ö www.state.gov
Ö http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/climate/index.html
Ö Global Warming International Center
|