« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
6 Conclusions
This study has identified a large number of measures for reducing GHG emissions in Scotland across eight key sectors. It has determined that significant cuts in emissions can be made in each sector and that a number of these measures, particularly in transport, are cost-effective without reference to emission savings (i.e. they save money, generally through reducing fuel use).
The method developed for this study has allowed policy options across all sectors to be assessed in a common framework. The options are categorised into very high, high, medium, low and very low priority according to their likely cost-effectiveness in 2050, taking some account of uncertainty and other factors such as impacts on fuel poverty.
As shown in the figure below, a very significant cut in emissions by 2050 from 1990 levels appears to be possible, if all the practicable measures identified are introduced and are effective. For the emissions sources considered in this study these policy options have the potential to deliver by 2050 a reduction of over 75% on 1990 levels. Further reductions may be possible from the emergence of additional new technologies or from additional demand reduction measures. This level of reduction does not assume introduction of the most controversial measures identified in the course of this study, ranging from nuclear power to widespread adoption of veganism.
The cost in 2050 of achieving an emissions reduction of 63% by implementing Group 1-3 measures is estimated to be about £1.7 billion 63 expressed in 2005 prices. This impact covers just the cost of implementing the identified measures and does not taken into account the wider economic and societal costs and the wider potential benefits. It is not possible to give a reliable estimate of the additional costs of measures to achieve a greater than 63% reduction as many of the measures in Groups 4 and 5 are very uncertain at this stage. These costs need to be set against the benefits of reducing not just GHG emissions, but also emissions of other air pollutants such as fine particles, SO 2 and NO x that will also fall as a result of decarbonisation. Research for the European Commission has demonstrated that these co-benefits of climate policy can be very significant.
The results provide details of one way in which Scotland could achieve a very significant share of the 80% GHG reduction by 2050. This is not the only way by which this could be achieved, but the result serves to illustrate that a wide range of measures will be required and that the cost will progressively rise as more measures are put in place. Alternative ways by which a significant GHG reduction could be met, may feature different technologies and hence policy measures, or may feature different views of feasibility or public acceptability. In the period to 2050 it is highly likely that new technologies and hence new policy options will become practical and feasible.
Emissions savings and costs are subject to increasing uncertainty over time, particularly for emerging technologies. It is expected that costs will reduce as new technologies become more available and mass-produced, and this has been factored in where the information is available.
In a high level examination and assessment of the potential policy options, limitations in the data available and limits on the resources available during this study, mean it is not possible to address all of the potential issues associated with each policy option. We have not taken account of all costs that may be significant, for example, those associated with electricity grid upgrades linked to a widespread expansion of renewable electricity generation. These are complex matters that are linked to the combination of generation and demand in a specific grid zone. In addition these costs are not included in BERR's assessments that accompanied the Energy White Paper. Also it has not been possible to fully account for inter-linkages, interactions and trade-offs between sectors, e.g. decarbonised electricity and the implications for choice of measures in end use sectors.
The highest priority measures are in the transport, electricity, LULUCF and business sectors with some of the largest emissions reductions in the high and very high priority group expected to come from:
- Carbon capture & storage for coal- and gas-fired electricity generation plant and for Grangemouth refinery.
- Emerging renewable energy technologies.
- Increasing forest area and rotation length.
- Biomass combustion in industry.
- The introduction of battery electric cars.
Significant reductions are also possible from the agricultural sector but the costs of these measures are very uncertain.
There appears to be less potential for significant savings in the households sector, mainly because many past and planned policies to improve energy efficiency and heating efficiency in the housing stock are already built into the baseline. There is also limited potential for savings from public buildings, although policies in this area can have a positive impact by showing what's possible and setting an example for others to follow.
Application of this level of saving out beyond 2050 may be difficult. Savings through sequestration in LULUCF are cyclical and major savings in the electricity and business sectors are dependent on carbon capture and storage, and storage facilities around Scotland may have finite capacity.
This study has given a flavour of the sort of major emissions reductions that could be possible and the policies that might play a part in achieving them. Further work will be needed to develop and implement policies in each sector, and to understand the likely implications of different choices at different times. Priorities for research are likely to include:
- Technical research to reduce the uncertainties associated with promising emissions reduction options and map out when and how they might best be introduced. Possible topics might include:
- Further assessment of the potential for Carbon Capture & Storage, including power stations and major industrial installations in collaborative schemes, e.g. sharing storage and pipeline facilities
- Assessment of the prospects for new vehicle technologies including plug-in hybrids and battery-electric vehicles, including their suitability for Scotland's rural population
- Further investigation of the costs and practicality of abatement measures in the agriculture sector, in particular measures for reducing methane emissions from livestock
- More detailed assessment of existing housing stock and the measures that can reduce GHG emissions, focusing on housing types (e.g. sandstone tenements) that are specific to the Scottish housing stock
- Investigation of the likely infrastructure requirements for moving hydrogen or CO 2
- Assessment of the future demand for biomass (for housing, business, public sector and transport), and identification and prioritisation of sources of supply
- Mapping of opportunities for District Heating and CHP, to assess the additional potential for GHG reductions by providing low carbon heat and power from local sources.
- Improvements to the Scottish Greenhouse Gas inventory so it can be used more effectively as a basis for Scottish emissions projections and the analysis of Scotland-specific policies. For example, the development of more rigorous energy balance data for Scotland, including more fuel-specific and more end-user consumption data by commercial, domestic and industrial sub-sectors. Perhaps even to include fuel consumption by technology.
- Behavioural research, e.g. to assess how individuals can be encouraged to adopt efficiency measures or to change their lifestyles. Behavioural change programmes will be key to the successful introduction of new technologies and may lead to additional emissions reduction opportunities not quantified in this study. Behavioural research could also be used to explore how Scottish citizens are likely to respond to different scenarios of economic growth and climate change awareness/action, e.g. would a move to greener electricity make people more likely to leave the lights on or buy a bigger television.
- Further analysis of the long-term emissions reduction potential across all sectors with particular emphasis on the emissions reduction trajectory, i.e. which technologies should be introduced when, and how will this affect costs. A Scotland-specific GHG projection model building on the UKMARKAL model would be a possible starting point for this.
- Analysis of the emissions and abatement options associated with the minor emitting sources not addressed in this study, such as emissions from offshore oil & gas activity, CH 4 emissions from natural gas distribution, and N 2O emissions from transport.
The focus of this work on very major cuts in emissions by 2050, leads to what may at first appear to be some surprising omissions from the list of options. There is, for example, a lack of emphasis on low energy lighting systems. This is because of other measures that decarbonise electricity supply at a low cost by 2050. Before 2050, however, the use of low energy lighting should be considered a priority measure for reducing CO 2 emissions. Given that low-carbon electricity will likely cost more than electricity from current generation, the economic argument for adopting low energy lighting in the short and medium term seems likely to be further strengthened.
The Scottish Government is particularly well placed to take a lead in developing and deploying new electricity generation technologies. This applies to renewable technologies, given Scotland's wind and marine resources, and carbon capture and storage given the presence of large emission sources and potential storage sites. In some other areas, for example the development of new transport technologies, the Scottish government does not appear well placed to take a lead but could lobby for action at UK and European level.
Whilst it is important to be aware of the uncertainties in the analysis presented here, the general conclusions reached in this work are significant. Very major cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are possible, at a price that is in the same range as the costs of other environmental protection measures. The path to substantial emission cuts will no doubt change over time to that defined here, but it is a significant step forward that it is already possible to define a route to such cuts.
« Previous | Contents | Next »