Carbon Emission Calculation Scenario 6

CarbonEmission Calculation

Scenario6

1. Applying the logic of the Science paper to your projections take the CO2 emissions in 2020 from Scenario 5 and successively halve them each decade. What are your results (in MT CO2) for:

Accordingto Archer (2012), Kaya Identity can be used to forecasts theresulting emission of the CO₂inthe future. The Kaya identity is:

Impact= Population*Affluence*Energy Intensity*Carbon Intensity

a.2030

=½(in MT CO_2of2030)

=½ (431) = 215.5

b.2040

=½(in MT CO_2of2040)

=½ (290) = 145.0

c.2050

=½(in MT CO_2of2030)

=½ (234) = 117.0

B)Assume that the population, affluence and carbon intensity you usedin Scenario 5 remain the same, what would the Energy Intensity (inMJ/$GDP) have to be in order to meet that target in:

a.2030

Impact= Population*Affluence*Energy Intensity*Carbon Intensity

ThusEnergy Intensity =

EI= 215.5*100%/ (1.29%*1.97%*-0.54%)

EI=- 15703.54%

b.2040

EnergyIntensity =

145*100%= (1.29%*1.97%*-0.54%)

=-10566.19%

c.2050

EnergyIntensity =

EI= 117*100%/ (1.29%*1.97%*-0.54%)

=-8525.82%

C)What is the ratio of emissions in 2050 compared to Scenario 5?

Ratio= 117:234 = 0.5

=1:2

D)Use the Compound Annual Growth Rate equation to determine the growthrate in

EIneeded to meet the target (as before multiply by 100 so that 0.015would be 1.5% and entered as 1.5)

CAGR= [(-85.26/-157.04)^^(1/20)] –1

=~0.9699219 -1

Answer= -0.03

E)What is the ratio of this growth rate to the AAGR for 2004-2013 youcalculated in the prior assignment?

2004-2013 CAGR= [( 7.59/ 6.13)^^(1/10)] – 1 = 0.02

Ratio= -0.03: 0.02

=-3:2

Scenario2

1. Assume that the population, affluence and energy intensity you used in Scenario 5 remain the same, what would the Carbon Intensity (in kgCO2/GJ) have to be in order to meet that target in:

1. 2030

CarbonIntensity =

=431/ (0.0129*0.0197*-0.091)

=-18637168.91

=~ -18637169

2. 2040

CarbonIntensity =

=356/ (0.0129*0.0197*-0.091)

=15394042.07

=~15394042

3. 2050

CarbonIntensity =

=234/ (0.0129*0.0197*-0.091)

=-10118555.74

=~-10118556

B)Use the Compound Annual Growth Rate equation to determine the growthrate in

CIneeded to meet the target (as before multiply by 100 so that 0.015would be 1.5% and entered as 1.5)

CAGR= [(-10118556/ ~ -18637169)^ ^(1/30)] – 1

=-0.02

C)What is the ratio of this growth rate to the AAGR for 2004-2013 youcalculated inthe prior assignment?

CAGR= [(44.87/ 49.29)^^(1/10)]-1 = -9.35

Ratio= -0.02: -9.35

=2:935

Questionsto Ponder

1. How important is it to get the data “right”? How big a difference did it make using the past decade versus the past few decades in making your projections? How big a difference did it make to use more realistic population and GDP projections? Is the past a good guide to the future?

Rightdata is essential as it makes projections relevant and correct. Usingthe past decade data result to a big variance in terms of ratio ascompared to the result of the past few decades. Also, GDP projectionand the realistic population do not vary so much.

2. If we need to set ambitious targets to meet the goal of avoiding dangerous anthropogenic climate change what are our options for change? In this assignment I did not have you change population or affluence projections. Is that reasonable? Can we expect to or want to (as a society) develop policies that further limit population growth or economic growth? If not, are the necessary changes in energy intensity or carbon intensity reasonable? How much effort do you think we should place on improving energy efficiency versus carbon intensity?

Itis necessary to regulate the carbon intensity to avoid dangerousanthropogenic climate. Also, it is necessary for the society todevelop policies which limit population change. However, economicgrowth can be regulated to ensure that its growth does not interferewith the impact of the CO₂impact.

References

Topof Form

Archer,D. (2012).&nbspGlobalwarming: Understanding the forecast.Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley &amp Sons.

Bottomof Form