Net Zero By 2050 and the EU’s Long Term Strategy · implemented in REF2016, and incorporates! an update of technology assumptions as conducted under the ASSET project! several major

Net Zero By 2050 and the EU’s Long Term Strategy Presentation to IMEAS conference 4 December 2018 Erica Hope, European Climate Foundation

! Context for the EU’s Long Term Strategy

! The CTI 2050 Roadmap Tool project (ECF initiative)

! The model

! Key insights of the report “Net Zero By 2050: From Whether To How”

! The European Commission’s official proposals

! Modelling approach taken

! Key messages

! Next steps for the process

06/12/18 European Climate Foundation 2

Overview



! The model




! Key messages



Overview

! In 2011 the Commission published its Roadmap, aiming at 80% GHG emission reductions by 2050


2011: European Commission Roadmap for a Low Carbon Economy

! 2011 EU Roadmap projected gradual cost reductions for wind and solar…

! … but in reality they have fallen far more steeply (IRENA)

06/12/18 European Climate Foundation with thanks to E3G 5

Since then, the context has changed: technology costs have fallen rapidly

!"#$%"&'()#*+",&(+$&+",-./,"*-+"01"$++%,"*."

).2+"3#,*+4"*-#$"54+2(.6,'7"*-.68-*""

!"#$%&'()*++,(!"#$%"&'%()*+,&#-&./0&12,(-./0((

+12%#2(-3+(

*1$45(/673+(

06/12/18 European Climate Foundation with thanks to E3G 7

Political decisions affirm the need for a new Long Term Strategy

9:;<"=#4(,">84++)+$*?"188(*1$9&5(5:"#8;(5<$4=&(<"(>"$?#81<&(12;(%"??#24%1<&(8"2@A<&$?(8"B(@$&&2:"#5&(@15(&?4554"2(;&=&8"C?&2<(5<$1<&@4&5(DE(-.-.(

F1$%:(-./0'(G:&(064.5+#$"@.6$&('"42=4<&5(<:&(+"??4554"2(<"(C$&5&2<(DE(<:&(H$5<(I#1$<&$(">(-./J(1(C$"C"518(>"$(1(5<$1<&@E(>"$(8"2@A<&$?(KL(@$&&2:"#5&(@15($&;#%9"25(42(1%%"$;12%&(B4<:(<:&(*1$45(M@$&&?&2<,(<1N42@(42<"(1%%"#2<(<:&(219"218(C8125(

9:;A?"B.2+4$#$&+"4+86'#C.$'(KL(8"2@<&$?(5<$1<&@E(<"(42%8#;&(1(5%&21$4"("2(1%:4&=42@(2&<(O&$"(PQP(&?4554"25(B4<:42(<:&(L24"2(DE(-.7.(12;(2&@19=&(&?4554"25(<:&$&1R&$S(%"#2<$4&5(<"(;&=&8"C(-.7.(5<$1<&@4&5(DE(-.-.(



! The model




! Key messages



Overview

06/12/18ECF/ClimateWorks/Climact

9

Publication in September 2018


Structure of the CTI 2050 Roadmap Tool

06/12/18 ECF/ClimateWorks/Climact 11

4 ambition levels are used as boundaries to create scenarios


Oct 2017 – May 2018: consultation, building of CTI EU 2050 model and webtool -D5,?EE,*#F+-.'%+4G$+*H+4.9:<:G+6"


13

Key messages

06/12/18 ECF/Climact 14



! The model


! The European Commission’s proposals


! Key messages



Overview


28 November 2018

3#4(567&82&94:*#;*<4%"&36(;*56&


Model suite used

=%>6+&-(#)&84(#?6%+&2#))*<<*#+&?(#?#<%"@&AB&C#;6)$6(&AD.B&

! Baseline keeps the macro-economic projections, fossil fuels price developments and pre-2015 Member States policies as implemented in REF2016, and incorporates

! an update of technology assumptions as conducted under the ASSET project

!  several major recently agreed pieces of legislation + recent Commission proposals

! Achievement of the 2030 climate and energy targets (at least 40% GHG vs 1990, at least 32% share RES in final energy consumption, at least 32.5% reduction in energy consumption

! `Results in 45% GHG reductions vs 1990 by 2030 – many argue this is insufficient

! Includes projections out to 2070


Baseline: updated REF2016

! CATEGORY 1: -80% by 2050 excluding LULUCF, with reductions driven by

!  Electrification

! Hydrogen

!  Production and use of e-fuels (power to X)

!  Energy Efficiency in buildings, industry and transport

! Circular economy in industry and (to a lesser extent) transport

! CATEGORY 2: “COMBO” scenario combining Category 1 pathways on a moderate basis (reaches ˜85% + 5% sink)

! CATEGORY 3: 1.5% degree scenarios, reaching net zero by 2050 (including sinks), achieved by

! Greater use of negative emissions technologies (BECCS)

!  Sustainable lifestyles: consumer choice in transport, circular economy in industry


8 scenarios developed, in 3 categories


Common features of Category 1 scenarios

3#4(567EF?<7GG65/64(#?%/64G5"*)%G<*H6<G5"*)%GI"6<G:#5<G?%,6<G5#)JAD.BJKLLJ%+%"M<*<J*+J<4??#(HJ6+JD/?:-&


Differences in Category 1 scenarios

3#4(567EF?<7GG65/64(#?%/64G5"*)%G<*H6<G5"*)%GI"6<G:#5<G?%,6<G5#)JAD.BJKLLJ%+%"M<*<J*+J<4??#(HJ6+JD/?:-&

“The aim of this long-term strategy is to confirm Europe’s commitment to lead in global climate action and to present a vision that can lead to

achieving net-zero greenhouse gase emissions by 2050 through a socially-fair transition in a cost-efficient manner.”

! We can and should reach net zero by 2050.

!  It is affordable and there are plenty of co-benefits.

! Existing technologies can get us a long way, and to get all the way to zero we can focus more on technologies or on behaviour change.

!  It is a vision to set direction of travel: does not propose new policies or revision of 2030 targets.

=> It is a conversation starter: not legally binding, and not yet a true strategy


Top lines of the Communication

! Deadline for submitting LTS to UNFCCC is end of 2020

! Political endorsement is needed: Heads of State should issue conclusions on the top lines and the European Parliament will also give a view

! Council endorsement could occur at any of several meetings in coming months – Sibiu summit in May?

!  Sectoral Councils should also be invited to consider the contents

!  European Parliament will prepare a resolution by March

! Then Commission will prepare a short document to submit to UNFCCC

!  In terms of underpinning policies and making the strategy “live”: European Commission work programme for 2019-2024 mandate is an important landing point

!  Priorities will be determined during 2019


What happens next?

! Overall page: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2050_en

! Communication (narrative document, 25 pages) https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files/docs/pages/com_2018_733_en.pdf

! In-depth technical analysis (393 pages) https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files/docs/pages/com_2018_733_analysis_in_support_en_0.pdf


For more details:

Thank you! [email protected]

Back-up slides


Structure of the CTI 2050 Roadmap tool

ECF/ClimateWorks/Climact 2806/12/18

Levers are grouped in 7 categories to discuss scenarios implications

+1<&@"$E( T&5%$4C9"2(

I.&(#'"5#D+4$," T&?12;A54;&(8&=&$5((;$4=&2(DE(5"%418(%"2<&U<(12;(84>&5<E8&5(

I.&(+*#'".48#$(H#C.$" T&?12;A54;&(8&=&$5((;$4=&2(DE(42>$15<$#%<#$&5(12;(D#542&55(?";&85(

=4.&+,,"()54.2+)+$*,"#$%"

+$+487"+J&(+$&7"

G&%:2"8"@4&5(<"(4?C$"=&(C$"%&55&5(12;(&2&$@E(&V%4&2%E(

K6+'",/(*&-"#$%"+'+&*4(L&#C.$" !B4<%:42@(<"(8"BA%1$D"2(>#&85((

M+4.N&#4O.$"5./+4"54.%6&C.$" *"B&$(5#CC8E(5C&%4H%(8&=&$5(

@@IEP0@@I" +1$D"2(+1C<#$&(W(5<"$1@&(C"<&29188E(%"?D42&;(B4<:(D4"&2&$@E(

Q#$%N6,+",($F," )2%$&1542@(21<#$18(542N5(<$"#@:(812;(#5&(


Summer 2018: testing, scenario development

R+)#$%"S+&-$.'.87"I-#4+%"0T.4*"


The impact of key lever groups differs significantly across the three scenarios

01N

U0K;V"

WG:XY"

BZB"+)(,,(.$,"O7"'+2+4"&#*+8.47"($",+'+&*+%"[M",&+$#4(.,(

!"%418(C1X&$25(

Y&$"A%1$D"2(C"B&$(C$";#%9"2(

Z#&8(5B4<%:(12;(&8&%<$4H%19"2(

!"%4&<18("$@124O19"2(

*$"%&55(4?C$"=&?&2<5(12;(

&2&$@E(&V%4&2%E(

++![\K++!(

]12;A#5&(542N5(

BZB"+)(,,(.$,"O7"'+2+4"&#*+8.47"($"*-+"W"$+*NH+4.",&+$#4(.,"

^F<+_-&`(


High ambition is required in all sectors, whatever the chosen pathway

A-a-(

M@$4%#8<#$&(

12;(B15<&(

-(<"(bc(

-b.(<"(aa/(

*"B&$(

.(<"(/-c( .(<"(a.(

G$125C"$<( \#48;42@5(

/70(<"(-a7(

)2;#5<$E( ]L]L+Z(

/6bb.(

c0-( ccd(

/6c0b(

00c(

A70b(<"(A7//((

))) ;;;

/JJ.(

e12@&(">(<:&(1?D49"2((

42(<:&(a(5%&21$4"5(42(-.7.(

AJJf(

AJ-f( AJ0f(

A0Jf(

Ad0f(

g/a7f(

BZB"+)(,,(.$"4+%6&C.$,"O7",+&*.4"O+*/++$";\\:"#$%"9:<:"($"*-+"W"$+*NH+4.",&+$#4(.,"]I-#4+%"+T.4*,^"S+&-$.'.87^"

R+)#$%_"^F<+_-&[E&1$`(

>%%(C.$#'"5.*+$C#'"34.)"($&4+#,+%"

($$.2#C.$"#&4.,,",+&*.4,"

/JJ.( )2%$&1542@(

&U4592@(

&h"$<5((

M;;49"218(

422"=19"2(

.(

i&<AO&$"(

-.7.(

/6aa7(

76b//(

NX<`"

N9<`"

06/12/18 ECF/ClimateWorks/Climact

Net zero requires increasing existing efforts and solutions, as well as upscaling the commercialization and deployment of new technologies and the innovation in business models

)?C1%<(

">(KL(

eKZ(

)2%$&1A(

5&;((

&h"$<5(

/.f(

/0f(

/-f(bbf(

/7f(

^F<+_-&`(

.(

/6...(

-6...(

a6...(

b6...(

76...(

d6...(

/JJ.(

-..7(

-./.(

-.//(

-./-(

-./a(

-./b(

-./7(

-./d(

-./c(

-./0(

-./J(

-.-.(

-.-/(

-.--(

-.-a(

-.-b(

-.-7(

-.-d(

-.-c(

-.-0(

-.-J(

-.a.(

-.a/(

-.a-(

-.aa(

-.ab(

-.a7(

-.ad(

-.ac(

-.a0(

-.aJ(

-.b.(

-.b/(

-.b-(

-.ba(

-.bb(

-.b7(

-.bd(

-.bc(

-.b0(

-.bJ(

-.7.(

01"BZB"0)(,,(.$,"ab*@c9+d"

e12@&(">(i&<AO&$"(C1<:B1E5(

KLeKZ(

KL+_a.[a.(

Aa-,7(KK([(a-(eK!(8&@45819"2(jk5&&(>""<2"<&l((

* This scenario is based on the latest « Non paper on complementary economic modelling undertaken by DG ENER regarding different energy policy scenarios » and is using the 33% RES / 33% EE figure for 2030, with a linear interpolation from 2016, so it slightly overestimating the latest legislation


The 2030 ambition needs to be increased level to be in line with net-zero scenarios.

U#$8+" .3" N<<`" *." NV<`" ($"

9:W:" &.)5#4+%" *." #4.6$%"""""

N<:`"($"*-+"'#*+,*"'+8(,'#C.$"


There are « no-regret » actions to implement by 2030

!&%<"$( KU1?C8&(">(m2"A$&@$&<n(1%9"2(

S4#$,5.4*" A  !<1D484O42@(<$125C"$<(;&?12;(

A  G:&(%1$(5:1$&(;&%$&15&5(<"(c.f(>$"?(1$"#2;(0.f(<";1E(

P6('%($8," A  e&1%:42@(af(122#18($&2"=19"2($1<&(j;&&C($&<$"H<l(

A  !&%<"$(<$12549"2'(Z$"?(-.a.,(2&B(D#48;42@5(?#5<(D&(o(&2&$@E(C"549=&(p(

e$%6,*47" (A(!4@24H%12<8E($&;#%42@(<:&(;&?12;(>"$(?1<&$418(12;(C$";#%<5(

j>#2%9"218(&%"2"?E,(%4$%#81$(&%"2"?E,(422"=19"2l(

=./+4" A  i&1$8E(%"?C8&<&(C:15&A"#<(">(%"18(

A  q42;(12;(5"81$(5:"#8;($&1%:(1<(8&15<(7.f(">(C"B&$(C$";#%9"2(

>KcQ1" A 812;A#5&(?#5<(>#88E(42<&@$1<&(%84?1<&(%:12@&(

A T&54@2(42%&29=&5(>"$(1h"$&5<19"2(

A F&1<(%"25#?C9"2(?#5<(D&($&;#%&;(DE(1<(8&15<(-7f(

Net-zero GHG emissions pathways can be cost-negative in the medium to long term, particularly if social and business model innovation can be channelled to increase asset utilisation

ECF/ClimateWorks/Climact

a7.(

!:1$&;(

&h"$<5(2&<A

O&$"(5%&21$4"(

KLAeKZ/d((

j+G)(

$&C$";#%9"2l(

-6b/.(

T&8<1( G&%:2"8"@E(

2&<AO&$"(

5%&21$4"(

T&8<1(

/7.(

/6J/.(

-6-d.(

Source: Yearly costs are from the EU-CTI 2050 Roadmap project, co-benefits are derived from the COMBI project https://combi-project.eu/ and they are focused on buildings, transport and industry efficiency so they should be taken as a minimum amount, figures specifically for health are from a study by DG Energy (2018), and the impact from climate damages is based on EEA report on “Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016” and finally the article by Burke et al. in Nature « Large potential reduction in economic damages under UN mitigation targets” comes to potential damages of US$ 20 trillions globally. Taking today’s share of Europe in global GDP of ~17% this would lead to a figure around EUR 3000 to 4000 billions, significantly above the costs and investment requirements.

ECF/ClimateWorks/Climact

Total energy system costs are lower than climate damages and their difference to business-as-usual is lower than the co-benefits that are reaped

^D2r[E&1$`(

/7.(-b7(

Aa7.(

/a/(

dJ(

/0.(

T&8<1(42(E&1$8E(

<"<18(%"5<5(>$"?(

KLAeKZ/d(<"(

!:1$&;(&h"$<5(

12;(<&%:2"8"@E(

5%&21$4"5(

d-7(

s&1$8E(?"2&9O&;(

4?C1%<(">(=1$4"#5(

%"AD&2&H<5((

e&5"#$%&5(

K2&$@E(5&%#$4<E(

Q&18<:(

K%"2"?E(

M=&$1@&(#2;45%"#2<&;(E&1$8E(<"<18(%"5<5(D&<B&&2(-./7(12;(-.7.(

s&1$8E(?"2&9O&;(

4?C1%<(">(%84?1<&(

;1?1@&5(

!&&((

%81$4H%19"25((

42(>""<2"<&(

/-.(

Q4@:&$(<:12(a...(^D2r[E&1$`(

Net Zero By 2050 and the EU’s Long Term Strategy · implemented in REF2016, and incorporates! an update of technology assumptions as conducted under the ASSET project! several major

Documents