Table Of ContentMetric choice for trading off short- and
long-lived climate forcers
Atransdisciplinaryapproach
usingtheexampleofaviation
vorgelegtvon
Dipl.-Ing. TU-Berlin
OdetteN.Deuber
ausLosAngeles,USA
vonderFakultätVIPlanenBauenUmwelt
derTechnischenUniversitätBerlin
zurErlangungdesakademischenGrades
DoktorinderNaturwissenschaften
–Dr. rer. nat.–
genehmigteDissertation
Promotionsausschuss:
Vorsitzender: Prof. Dr. DieterScherer
Gutachter: Prof. Dr. OttmarEdenhofer
Gutachter: Prof. Dr. RobertSausen
TagderwissenschaftlichenAussprache: 2. Mai2014
Berlin,2014
D83
Thebesttimetoplantatreewas20yearsago.
Thesecondbesttimeisnow.
Proverb
FacultyPlanning–Building–Environment
InstituteforLandscapeArchitectureandEnvironmentalPlanning
EconomicsofClimateChange
TechnicalUniversityofBerlin
D–10623Berlin
inco–operationwith
GermanAerospaceCenter
InstituteofAtmosphericPhysics
DynamicsofAtmosphere
MünchnerStr.20
D–82234Oberpfaffenhofen–Wessling
0
Contents
Nomenclature v
Summary ix
Zusammenfassung xiii
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Climatechangescience,policyandmitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Anthropogenicclimatechange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 Inter-andtransdisciplinarychallenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.3 Climatepolicytarget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2 Aviationandclimatechange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2.1 Climateimpacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2.2 Climatechangemitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.3 Climatemetricdesign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.4 Objectives,researchquestionsandmethodologicalapproach. . . . 14
1.5 Outlineofthethesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2 Physico-economic evaluation of climate metrics: A conceptual frame-
work 19
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2 Generalformulationofanemissionmetric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.2.1 Impactfunction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.2 Weightingfunction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.3 Characterizingclimatemetrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.1 Thefirst-bestapproach:GlobalDamagePotential . . . . . . 22
2.3.2 Classificationofothermetricapproaches . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3.3 Synthesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.4 Discussionandconclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3 Metric-based framework for evaluating the climate trade-o(cid:27) between
CO2 andcontrails 33
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
i
Contents
3.2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.2.1 Trade-offsituation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.2.2 Metric-basedevaluationoftheturningpoint . . . . . . . . . 36
3.2.3 Modeldescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.2.4 Sensitivityanalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.2.5 Furtherinputdata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3.1 Policyobjective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3.2 Sensitivity to background conditions and aviation emis-
siontype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.3.3 Parametricuncertainty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.4.1 Theturningpointconcept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.4.2 Metricchoiceandassumptionsonfuturedevelopment(CBA) 44
3.4.3 Shortcomingofdefiningarigidpolicytarget. . . . . . . . . 46
3.4.4 Scientificuncertaintyandcommonsensedecisions . . . . . 47
3.5 Conclusionandoutlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.6 Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4 CO2 equivalencesforshort-livedclimateforcers 51
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.2.1 Metric-basedCO equivalencesforSLCF . . . . . . . . . . . 53
2
4.2.2 Globalmeanmetricapproaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.2.3 Modellingofphysicalclimatechange . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.2.4 Analysissetting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.3.1 Economicforcing-basedCO equivalentfactors . . . . . . . 57
2
4.3.2 PracticalApplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.4.1 Globalmeanversusregionaldifferentiatedperspective. . . 63
4.4.2 Normativevaluejudgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.6 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5 Thenegotiationprocesstoincludeinternationalaviationinapost(cid:21)2012
climateregime 67
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.2 Politicalframeworkforapost–2012climateregime . . . . . . . . . 69
5.3 Specific challenges to including aviation in a binding global cli-
materegime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5.3.1 AssignmenttoParties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
5.3.2 Institutionalsettingandprinciples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
5.4 Negotiationprocessforincludingaviationinapost-2012climate
regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
5.4.1 PossiblePolicyApproachesintheAviationSector. . . . . . 74
ii
Contents 0
5.4.2 Nationstate’spositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.4.3 RoleoftheEuropeanEmissionTradingSchemeinaviation 78
5.5 Aglobalsectoralapproachininternationalaviationcoupledwith
theneedforadaptationfunding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
5.6 Summaryandconclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
6 SynthesisandOutlook 85
6.1 Overviewofresearchhypothesesandquestions . . . . . . . . . . . 85
6.2 Climatemetricdesign(RQI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
6.3 Trading-offSLCFandCO –criticalmetricdesignissues(RQII) . 90
2
6.4 Lessonslearntfortheaviationsector(RQIII). . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
6.5 Outlook. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
7 Statementofcontribution 95
8 Acknowledgement 97
Bibliography 99
A Supplementarymaterial 117
A.1 Chapter3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
A.2 Chapter4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
iii
0
Nomenclature
Symbol Explanation
Latinsymbols
C concentration
D economicdamage
E efficacy
I impactfunction
H timehorizon
M metric
n damagefunctionexponent
r discountrate
R ratio
T global-meantemperature
W weightingfunction
Units
◦C degreeCelsius
ft feet
ppm partspermillion
Abreviations
AM absolutemetric
CBA cost-benefitapproach
CC climatechange
CEA cost-effectivenessapproach
CI climateimpact
CBDR commonbutdifferentiatedresponsibility
DAI dangerousanthropogenicinterference
EM emission
EUETS EuropeanEmissionTradingScheme
LLCF long-livedclimateforcers
LinClim linearclimateresponsemodelLinClim
MLCF medium-livedclimateforcers
MAC marginalabatementcosts
MDC marginaldamagecosts
PI physicalimpactparameter
RCP RepresentativeConcentrationPathway
RF global-meanradiativeforcing
RFI RadiativeForcingIndex
RQ researchquestion
SLCF short-livedclimateforcers
WG WorkingGroup
TP turningpoint
v
Nomenclature
Abbreviations-InstitutionsandGroups
AOSIS AllianceofSmallIslandStates
AGDG AviationGlobalDealGroup
CATE CentreforAviationTransportandEnvironment
CICERO CentreforInternationalClimateandEnvironmentalResearch-
Oslo
DLR DeutschesZentrumfürLuft-undRaumfahrt
EU EuropeanUnion
GIACC GrouponInternationalAviationandClimateChange
IATA InternationalAirTransportAssociation
ICAO InternationalCivilAviationOrganisation
IPCC IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange
LDC LeastDevelopedCountries
MMU ManchesterMetropolitanUniversity
OPEC OrganizationofPetroleumExportingCountries
PIK PotsdamInstituteforClimateImpactResearch
UNFCCC UnitedNationFrameworkConventiononClimateChange
Metricsandequivalencefactors
CEPT Cost-effectiveTemperaturePotential
EGWP EconomicGlobalWarmingPotential
EQ Equivalencefactor
FEI ForcingIndexEquivalent
GCP GlobalCostPotential
GDP GlobalDamagePotential
GTP GlobalTemperaturePotential
GWP GlobalWarmingPotential
MGTP MeanGlobalTemperaturePotential
RF GlobalmeanRadiativeForcing
TEMP TemperatureProxyIndex
Furthersubscriptsandunitextensions
A1 A1scenario
B1acare B1acarescenario
base basecase
cba cost-benefitpolicyframework
cea cost-effectivenesspolicyframework
cmc contrailmitigationcase
const constant
p pulse
ref referenceconcentrationpathway
s sustain
scen scenarioemissions
t time
tar target
t0=TEM pointintimeofemissionrelease
tx endpoint
thres threshold
vi
Nomenclature 0
Emissions
CO2 carbondioxide
CH4 methane
NOx nitrogenoxide
O3 ozone
Greeksymbols
∆T global-meantemperaturechange
(cid:101) proxyforSLCF
θ-function unitstepfunction
δ-function DiracDeltafunction
γ damageco-efficient
λ climatesensitivity
τ timeconstantoftheearthclimatesystem
vii
