Adaptation

You are currently browsing the archive for the Adaptation category.

Is the UK’s critical national infrastructure prepared for climate change?

April 4, 2011 in Adaptation, Adaptation Sub-Committee by Committee on Climate Change

David Thompson, ASC Senior Analyst

David Thompson, ASC Senior Analyst

By David Thompson, Senior Analyst

The health of the nation’s critical infrastructure in energy, transport, water, sewage and ICT is vital to the performance of the UK’s economy and for our general quality of life.  Much of the UK’s infrastructure has been in place for decades, even centuries, and was designed to operate in our current climate.  Projected changes in the UK’s future climate, such as warmer, drier summers and wetter, milder winters could have significant implications for how well our infrastructure delivers in the future.

The level of investment required for both upgrading existing infrastructure and providing new infrastructure in the UK is expected to increase in coming decades, in response to socio-economic changes, the need to move to a low-carbon economy and the replacement of ageing infrastructure.  It has been estimated by Infrastructure UK that an average of £40-50 billion will need to be spent every year between now and 2030.  A substantial proportion of new infrastructure will be in use long after 2030, so the risks from climate change should be factored in to their design and siting and where necessary adaptation measures incorporated to help ensure their resilience.  At the same time, a flexible approach is needed to guard against the risk of ‘over-investing’ in measures that may prove to have been unnecessary or ineffective.

In a recent speech to a conference of industry experts looking at the future of utilities, the ASC’s Chair Lord Krebs stated that

“The provision of national infrastructure is an adaptation priority for the UK.  However, in our first report, the ASC noted that investment decisions do not always take into account the costs and benefits over the full lifetime of infrastructure.   Businesses and investors should take climate change into account for long-lasting decisions when planning and designing the UK’s infrastructure”.

The ASC is undertaking further analysis of how investment decisions in the water sector are accounting for long-term climate risks.  This will be published as part of our wider assessment of the UK’s preparedness for climate change in July.

China gets serious about curtailing its carbon emissions

March 28, 2011 in Adaptation, Adaptation Sub-Committee, Climate Change Act, Dr Samuel Fankhauser by Committee on Climate Change

Dr Samuel FankhauserBy Dr Samuel Fankhauser, Committee member.

Britain’s carbon budgets are domestic emissions objectives, adopted because they make sense for the UK. But climate change is a global problem. So it is important to see other nations taking action as well. The most eye-catching development in recent weeks has been the commitments China has made under the 12th five-year plan, which was approved in March 2011.

Anyone who follows the international negotiations on climate change will be familiar with China’s assertive stance on emissions targets. Like other emerging emitters, and not without justification, China insists on the concept of “common but differentiated responsibilities”, which puts the onus for most emissions cuts firmly on industrialised countries.

The tone of China’s domestic debate is quite different, as I learned during a recent visit.  As part of a small government delegation I was touring China from 14-18 March to discuss emission reduction policies and share the UK’s experience with government officials and think tanks.

During the entire visit there was not a single debate, heated or otherwise, about the merit of decarbonisation, international burden sharing or the science of climate change. The tone was business-like and the focus firmly on how Chinese emissions may be reduced – although no doubt the broader discussions are taking place too.

Officials are responding to the guidance contained in China’s latest five-year plan, which has just been approved.  The 12th five-year plan stipulates targets for both energy intensity and carbon intensity.  Energy use per GDP is to fall by 16% over the five years and carbon emissions per GDP by 17%.  The share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption is to rise to 11.4%.

There is an interesting parallel here to the UK, which was not lost on my counterparts, although the context is fundamentally different.  In both countries action on climate change builds on clear, legally / politically binding and widely accepted foundations: the new five-year plan in the case of China and the Climate Change Act in the case of the UK. Both countries hope that clarity about the objectives will help to focus on delivery.

Officials were keen to learn from the policy experience of the UK, which many had studied in some detail.  There was an open debate about the use of fiscal instruments and the possibility of a cap-and-trade scheme. There were many concerns, but they were all practical, rather than conceptual, and surprisingly similar to those raised in the UK. The impact of climate policies on poverty is understandably a big issue.  I was more surprised by the widespread concern about competitiveness, at least until I remembered that successful competitors constantly work to improve their game.

One scenario is that China may experiment with a cap-and-trade pilot at provincial level, perhaps restricted to electricity to reduce the risk of carbon leakage between provinces.  Fiscal instruments are more likely to be in the form of industrial subsidies than a carbon tax, although some taxation is also contemplated. As in the UK, there is a recognition that achieving the ambitious targets will require the use of all the policy tools “in the box”.

The UK Foreign Office is playing a discreet but important role in shaping the debate through dialogue and technical assistance. The work has obvious global benefits. In time it might also help to reduce the competitiveness concerns of UK firms with respect to China.

A 17% reduction in carbon intensity will not be sufficient to stabilise Chinese emissions, given that the economy is expected to grow at 7.5% a year, or over 40% in the course of the five-year plan. The new target will also have to be followed by higher carbon intensity reductions in the 13th five-year plan if China is to meet its Copenhagen pledge of a 40-45% intensity reduction from 2005 by 2020.

This will not be easy. But China is clearly making a serious effort and is recognizing the severity of the problem. Britain would do well to continue the dialogue on policy and indeed explore opportunities for deeper cooperation.

Dr Samuel Fankhauser is a member of the Committee on Climate Change, member of the Adaptation Sub-Committee and Principal Fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the London School of Economics.

Protecting London from current and future flood risks

March 21, 2011 in Adaptation, Adaptation Sub-Committee, Thames Barrier by Committee on Climate Change

Sebastian Catovsky, ASC

Sebastian Catovsky, ASC

By Sebastian Catovsky, Head of the Adaptation Sub-Committee

The Thames Barrier is one of the country’s most high-profile symbols of adaptation. It was fitting, therefore, that the Committee on Climate Change adaptation team recently visited the Thames Barrier for its monthly test closure.

  • Protecting London from sea level rise. There are over £200 billion of capital assets in the Thames tidal floodplain, including 500,000 properties, nearly 100 tube/train stations, City airport, 400 schools, 16 hospitals and 8 power stations.  1.25 million people live or work below the Thames average high tide.  The Thames Barrier means that the flood defences in central London are three metres lower than they would have been without the barrier in operation.
  • Indicator of a changing climate. The Thames Barrier has been closing with increasing frequency since it was built.  It was closed 34 times in the 1990s to protect London from flooding and 80 times in the 2000s.  Rather than just closing to protect London from a tidal surge up the Thames, the Barrier has been increasingly closing to keep high freshwater flows from combining with a high tide.
  • Long-term resilience.  When the Thames Barrier was designed, there was no knowledge of climate change and its impacts on sea level rise.  The design engineers at the time were however aware that the South East was slowly sinking – the result of a natural geological phenomenon.  They had the foresight to build an 8mm per year sea level rise allowance into the design of the barrier.  This means that the Thames Barrier’s current standard of protection (0.1% chance of overtopping in a given year or once in 1000 years) will last until 2030.
  • Decision-making under uncertainty. The Environment Agency project “Thames Estuary 2100” looking at options for protecting London after 2030 has pioneered an approach that shows how you can take long-term decisions to adapt flexibly to climate change in the face of uncertainty.
Thames Barrier closing

Thames Barrier closing

This month’s test closure was a bit different, because it was timed to coincide with a simulated East Coast storm surge, as part of Exercise Watermark, the Government’s test-run of its emergency procedures to respond to a severe flood event.  The exercise was set up in response to the Pitt Review after the major floods in Summer 2007, which damaged 55,000 homes, led to the death of 13 people, and cost the economy £3.2 billion (2007 prices).

As the Adaptation Sub-Committee’s first report highlighted, emergency planning is a priority for early adaptation action.  It will make the UK more resilient to today’s climate and increase the UK’s preparedness in the future.  The benefits from better emergency planning for extreme weather will remain regardless of the amount of climate change in the future, and therefore the measure is known as a “low-regrets” adaptation option.

In its second report due this summer, the Adaptation Sub-Committee will develop some of the themes highlighted by the Thames Barrier visit.  In particular the Sub-Committee will set out some indicators to measure how the UK’s vulnerability to climate is changing and how climate risks are being incorporated into decisions in priority areas for early adaptation action.

Tags:

How well prepared is the UK for climate change?

October 6, 2010 in Adaptation, Adaptation Sub-Committee, Caroline Spelman, Climate Change Act by Committee on Climate Change

David Thompson is a Senior Analyst at the CCC, working on measuring the progress the UK is making in preparing for climate change.

The Adaptation Sub-Committee was established in June 2009 to provide independent advice to the Government on the risks to the UK from climate change and to assess progress being made to adapt to future risks and opportunities.

Our first progress report was launched on the 16th September at an event in the House of Commons hosted by Lord John Krebs (chair of the ASC) and with a keynote address from Caroline Spelman MP, Secretary of State for Defra. The report assesses what progress the UK is making in preparing for a changing climate.

The Committee found that some progress has been made by government in raising awareness, but crucially, that very little tangible action has taken place on the ground. The emphasis should therefore now be on moving from talking about adaptation to taking action in 5  priority areas: land use planning, infrastructure, buildings, natural resources and emergency planning.

Recent research suggests that taking measures to adapt to climate change could halve costs of climate change, and that the costs of failing to adapt will outweigh the costs of acting in the short term. In addition, the UK stands to benefit from new economic opportunities if it plans for these now. For example, lengthened growing seasons will make growing exotic crops like apricots, walnuts, champagne and wine more viable. UK businesses could benefit by developing products and services that will be required in the retrofit of old buildings and to improve the resilience of supply chains.

There was widespread coverage of the report from national and international media as well as very positive reactions from key stakeholders and from the Secretary of State, who described it as a “wake up call” and used the opportunity to set out the new Government’s position on the importance of taking action on adaptation.

Over the next year, we will work to develop a further, more detailed, assessment of preparedness, together with formal advice on the draft climate change risk assessment, as required under the Climate Change Act.