Main image
Main image

First Government minister to Smith School

Science minister Lord Drayson today became the first UK Government minister to visit the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment.

He was welcomed by Smith School Director, Sir David King, who is convinced that both the Government and the School can benefit from working together.

“The school is a hub of intellectual expertise,” Sir David told Lord Drayson. “We are a unique resource that the UK and other governments can use as they seek ways of tackling climate change and other, urgent environmental challenges.”

And following his visit, Lord Drayson said on his Twitter site: “Wow. Really buzzing after an inspiring session on climate change in Oxford. Sir David has got together an absolutely top group of people.”

The School is forging links between politicians, industry and academics to research low-carbon transport fuels, advise climate change negotiators and encourage investment in green technologies in developed and developing countries.

Sir David said: “In the last century, advances in civil engineering have enabled us to have sanitised living conditions; in medicine they have enabled us to be vaccinated against deadly diseases, and in agricultural biotechnology for food production they have resulted in unprecedented improvements in human well-being.

“But the challenges we are facing this century are also unprecedented. Scientists and society at large need to work closer than ever if we are to harness our abilities in the interests of the well-being of future generations.

Coal isn’t cool

Smith School Director Sir David King has urged the Obama administration to ignore pressure from the fossil fuel industry to strengthen measures to cut emissions.

His comments followed the admission by US Energy Secretary Professor Steven Chu on BBC Radio this morning that Washington would not be following the UK’s example of banning new coal-fired power stations unless they could be fitted with carbon storage facilities.

Instead, the US would begin to “clean coal up”. More than half of US energy depended on coal and imposing restrictions on coal power plant developments would not be acceptable, Professor Chu said.

Sir David told BBC World today that investment in coal power plants without carbon capture facilities was “unwise.” He added : “It’s not clever to build assets that cannot repay their investment. When you build a coal power station you expect it to repay your investment in 40 years and these stations will not do that.

“I understand the political opposition in America and Steve and I agree 100% on the science. But we are running short of time and we need rapid progress on cutting emissions. We have been through the same process in the UK and it took us a long time to embed low carbon procedures in the political process.

“We don’t have that time now. The US needs to catch up with Europe.”

Trusting you, trusting me

Trust could be the most important piece of luggage international negotiators take to crucial climate change talks in Copenhagen this December.

Lack of trust between developing and developed nations has been a major factor in the failure to agree, and bring amount, emissions cuts to prevent world temperatures reaching dangerous levels, the Smith School’s Dr Chuks Okereke says.

“There are several credible options and proposals available that could help governments reach agreement, he said in a speech. “But this abiding atmosphere of mistrust is making it difficult for negotiators to engage in debates in a genuine and constructive manner.”

One of the main reasons for this is that the western world has broken so many of its promises to developing countries.

“Rich countries have accepted greater responsibility for climate change and the need to lead initiatives to cut emissions. But the political and economic conditions in their countries have made it difficult for many of them to reduce emissions.”

The expansion of the European Union to 27 countries in 2007 has made matters worse, Dr Okereke believes. “Within those 27, some countries are trying to water down the EU’s leadership on environmental problems.

Even Germany, one of the most powerful and proactive EU states on climate change, is not sure where she stands now.

Climate change talks have been hampered by self-interest with states aiming to enhance their political and economic status. “The result is that nearly every discussion is politicised making progress painfully slow.”

“It would have been much easier to make progress on vital issues like the rules of the Clean Development Mechanism, Adaptation Fund and technology transfer if countries had been more interested in global climate stabilisation rather than short-term economic interests.

“But some form of solid commitment and a clear sense of direction are also required of the developing countries. Rather than viewing climate change as an add-on extra to their need for economic development, they should think hard about how to mainstream environmental concerns into their development initiatives. They should also come up with concrete proposal on the nature of support they need to commit to low carbon development.”

The Copenhagen meeting is being held to try to negotiate a new treaty to replace Kyoto  – the treaty’s commitment period expires in 2012. Dr Okereke warns that it will be difficult to reach an effective, globally significant agreement without a serious commitment from the United States.

Sir David King, Director of the Smith School, is hopeful that President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao can reach an accord.

Sir David says: “A publicly stated agreement between these two leaders would have an enormous impact on climate negotiations. They need to instruct their negotiators in Copenhagen to say they are committed to significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.”

Business leaders in the making

A new course aimed at encouraging business students to care more about the environment has started at the Said Business School, with several SSEE Research Fellows involved.

One, Dr Bettina Wittneben, is one of three instructors on the course, Environment, Organisation and Sustainability, which has been made an option on the Said’s MBA.

Students will study climate change, energy security and other major environmental concerns. Many are expected to become leading decision-makers in industry and, on the new course, will learn how to integrate sustainability into their businesses.

Dr Wittneben said: “We hope the skills of examining sustainability issues will be useful for students in their jobs. A few progressive business schools are offering this type of course but ours is unique because it looks more broadly at sustainability in organisations.”

The course will analyse environmental decisions businesses and governments are making. Topics will include the regulation of markets and the use of technology to solve environmental problems.

Sir David King, the Smith School’s Director, Dr Frances Bowen, Professor Dan Bodansky and Dr Tavis Potts, all visiting research fellows at the School, will be amongst guest speakers on the course, which has a quarter of the current MBA students.

It fits well with the Smith School’s aims: to find solutions to environmental problems involving industry, policy-makers and academia.

“Students are very enthusiastic about the course,” Dr Wittneben said. “They are saying that some professors are teaching finance as if there had been no credit crunch. This course addresses the need for fresh ideas, provides something new and should help students create new business models for low-carbon economies.”

The course has been set up with Professor Steve Rayner of the Institute for Science, Innovation and Society and Dr Eamonn Molloy of Pembroke College.

It is full this year but instructors hope to repeat the course in 2010.

Save the trillionth tonne, warn scientists

Two studies published yesterday in the journal Nature show that the risk of dangerous climate change is primarily determined by the accumulation of carbon dioxide emissions over time, not by short-term emission rates.

One of the studies shows that total cumulative emissions of one trillion tonnes of carbon (1 Tt C, or 3,670 billion tonnes of CO2) over the entire ‘anthropocene’ period 1750-2500, causes a most likely peak warming of 2oC above pre-industrial temperatures. Most of the world’s governments are committed to avoiding warming in excess of 2oC. Of this budget, emissions to 2008 have already consumed approximately half (0.5 Tt C).

The second study finds that a total emission budget of about 0.9 Tt C gives a best-estimate peak warming by 2100 of 2oC, including the effects of other human influences on climate. This budget drops to less than ¾ Tt C (equivalent to 1,000 billion tonnes of CO2 between 2000 and 2050) if the risk of temperatures exceeding 2oC is limited to one-in-four.

These results present a challenge for climate policy, which the study authors detail in a commentary published with the research.  The new research stresses the need to place concentration targets or emission rates in 2020 or 2050 in the context of the need to limit cumulative CO2 emissions, which are the principle determinant of warming.

Dr Dave Frame, Deputy Director of the Smith School and an author of both studies, says that while we must start reducing emissions soon, the results create a significant opportunity. “By treating the ‘CO2 capacity’ of the atmosphere as an exhaustible resource, we could provide governments and industry with simple, clear and useful guidance for long term planning,” he says.

“If we describe the problem as one of cumulative emissions then we give economists a problem they are used to solving, since there is a large literature on how to deal with exhaustible resources,” Dr Frame adds. “The nice thing about this work is that we were able both to find measureable aspects of the climate system that constrain climate change, while also giving policy makers something that ought to prove very useful.

“While it’s not necessarily the sort of thing that ought to be under discussion in Copenhagen, it may provide a very useful core to future policy. It augments and contextualises the sorts of 2020 and 2050 targets that are currently under discussion.”

Dr Myles Allen, of the Oxford University Department of Physics and also an author of both studies, added: “Mother Nature doesn’t care about dates. To avoid dangerous climate change we will have to limit the total amount of carbon we inject into the atmosphere, not just the emission rate in any given year. Climate policy needs an exit strategy: as well as reducing carbon emissions now, we need a plan for phasing out net emissions entirely.”

Dr Malte Meinshausen, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts Research who helped author both studies, warned: “These cumulative budgets imply that substantial reductions in global emissions need to begin soon, before 2020. If we wait any longer, the required phase-out of carbon emissions will involve tremendous economic costs and technological challenges – far beyond what can be considered politically feasible today.”

Ends

Contact:

Dr Dave Frame, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, +44 1865 614913, david.frame@smithschool.ox.ac.uk

To request a figure illustrating the results or for other enquiries contact the University of Oxford Press Office on +44 (0)1865 283877 or email press.office@admin.ox.ac.uk

Notes to editors:

An editor’s summary of the studies is here.

Study one: Allen, M. R., Frame, D. J., Huntingford, C., Jones, C. D., Lowe, J. A., Meinshausen, M. & Meinshausen, N. Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne. Nature, doi:10.1038/nature08019 (2009).
Study two: Meinshausen, M., Meinshausen, N., Hare, W., Raper, S. C. B., Frieler, K., Knutti, R., Frame, D. J. & Allen, M. Greenhouse gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2°C. Nature, doi: 10.1038/nature08017 (2009).
The Commentary: Allen, M. R., Frame, D. J., Frieler, K., Hare, W., Huntingford, C., Jones, C., Knutti, R., Lowe, J., Meinshausen, M., Meinshausen, N. & Raper, S. The exit strategy: Emission targets must be placed in the context of a cumulative carbon budget if we are to avoid dangerous climate change. Nature Reports Climate Change, doi:10.1038/climate.2009.38 (2009).

Dr Allen and Dr Frame were supported by the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council http://www.nerc.ac.uk and the EC ENSEMBLES projecthttp://ensembles-eu.metoffice.com/

See also Nature News & Views article by Schmidt, G. & Archer, D. Too much of a bad thing. Nature (2009).

  • Publications


    Smith School Reports


  • Latest News


  • Follow us on: