Showing posts with label UNEP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UNEP. Show all posts

Monday, November 14, 2016

UNEP backs Passivhaus to help meet climate targets

[This post originally appeared on The Fifth Estate website on 9 November.]

As the latest round of global climate talks begins, the UN Environment Programme is calling on nations to ramp up their action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and is explicitly backing the use of the Passivhaus Standard to reduce emissions from buildings.



Thermal image showing how a Passivhaus refurbishment/makeover of a terraced home means it loses no heat compared to its neighbours.
Thermal image showing how a Passivhaus refurbishment/makeover of a terraced home (the blue one) means it radiates (loses) no heat compared to its neighbours (red and yellow - meaning they are radiating heat. The more red, the more heat is being lost).
Delegates in Marrakesh for yet another climate conference, the 2016 UN Conference of the Parties (COP22), have been studying a report by UNEP on what the world needs to do to meet the requirements of the Paris Agreement and halt dangerous global warming.

COP22 is about following up the just-ratified Paris Agreement. The agreement marks a turning point in the history of the world, establishing both the commitment and the framework for dealing with climate change. COP22 is about fleshing out the detail, and there is a great deal of detail to be fleshed out.

The Intended Nationally Determined Contributions from COP21 form the basis of the Paris Agreement; they are the pledges that each country laid out at year’s negotiations, showing their contribution to tackling climate. But these presently fall well short of achieving COP21’s “well below 2°C” temperature goal.

The Emissions Gap Report

Just in advance of the conference the UNEP issued its “Emissions Gap Report“, which notes the “troubling paradox at the heart of climate policy”.
Erik Solheim
Erik Solheim
In the words of Erik Solheim, the head of the program, the paradox is that “on the one hand nobody can doubt the historic success of the Paris Agreement, but on the other hand everybody willing to look can already see the impact of our changing climate”.

(Everybody, that is, apart from the Republicans in the US who elected Donald Trump and his cronies. But that is another story.)

This report estimates that we are actually on track for global warming of up to 3.4°C – way over the target. The current commitments made by nations “will reduce emissions by no more than a third of the levels required by 2030 to avert disaster”, he says.

“So, we must take urgent action. If we don’t, we will mourn the loss of biodiversity and natural resources. We will regret the economic fallout. But most of all we will grieve over the avoidable human tragedy.”

Global greenhouse gas emissions continue to grow. UNEP is calling for accelerated efforts now, prior to 2020, and for nations to increase their ambitions in their INDCs.

“Pathways for staying well below 2°C and 1.5°C require deep emission reductions after, and preferably also before 2020, and lower levels of emissions in 2030 than earlier assessed 2°C pathways,” the report says.

The report does identify where solutions are available that can deliver low-cost emission reductions at scale, including the acceleration of energy efficiency.

Much has been said, including by myself, about the effect on emissions by actors who are not nations, such as cities, regions and companies. It’s possible, the report notes, that these could reduce emissions in 2020 and 2030 by a few additional gigatonnes, but it is difficult to assess the overlap with INDCs because these are not usually detailed enough and non-state actions can overlap or mutually reinforce each other.

The importance of energy efficiency

The report emphasises that ambitious action on energy efficiency is urgent. Well-documented opportunities exist to strengthen national policies on energy efficiency.

Studies based on the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that for a cost range of between US$20 and $100 per tonne of carbon dioxide, 5.9 gigatonnes of emissions could be saved from buildings, 4.1 for industry and 2.1 for transport by 2030. These estimates are conservative and the real potential in each sector is likely to be bigger.

A more recent analysis by the International Energy Agency indicates that the cumulative direct and indirect emissions estimates to 2035 are 30 gigatonnes for buildings, 22 for industry and 12 for transport.

The two studies are not comparable due to differences in approaches, but together illustrate the significant potential in the three sectors.

Improving energy efficiency also offers many other benefits like reduced air pollution and local employment.

It is an integral part of Sustainable Development Goal 7, which aims to “ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all”.

The energy efficiency target is to double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency by 2030, from 1.3 per cent per year to 2.6 per cent. Achieving this goal will be important for achieving many of the other goals:

  • Building energy efficiency will be increased by ratcheting up the ambition of energy codes, and increasing monitoring and enforcement of building regulations with the use of energy performance certification and with encouragement to create highly efficient buildings.
  • Industrial energy efficiency will be helped the more that companies introduce energy management by adopting ISO 50001 an energy performance monitoring. Energy performance standards need to be enforced for all industrial equipment.
  • Transport energy efficiency is improved by the adoption of vehicle fuel economy standards and electric mobility for passenger transport. For freight movements sustainable logistics can be deployed.
There is a huge role for energy service companies to offer these services.

All of these efficiency savings can be encouraged by planning policy. For example:

  • Successful zoning can reduce the need to travel, and neighbourhood layouts can reduce the need for heating or cooling.
  • Spatial planning can help to improve transit options, increase and co-locate employment and residential densities, and increase the amount of green spaces.
  • Heating, cooling and electrical energy services can also be more efficiently delivered at a neighbourhood scale than at a building scale, with distributed renewable or low-carbon energy supplied by local energy service companies.

The Passivhaus standard

The report explicitly advocates the adoption of the Passivhaus standard. Passivhaus, originating in Germany, is primarily a tough quality assurance standard, which demands great attention to detail during the design and construction process to achieve certification.

Key to it is a target that annual final energy use for heating and cooling should not exceed 15 kilowatt hours a square metre a year.

The report says that the global floor area covered by Passivhaus buildings has grown from 10 million sq m in 2010 to 46 million sq m in 2016, with most activity occurring in Europe.

And importantly, it says the price for new Passivhaus buildings in several countries is comparable to standard construction costs.

Initially developed for mid and northern European climates, Passivhaus has been proven to work extremely well in hot climates too. High levels of airtightness and insulation work equally well in protecting buildings from overheating provided there is adequate solar shading.

Controlled mechanical ventilation allows options to pre-cool or pre-heat the supply air and also to humidify or dehumidify the ambient air depending on the relative humidity. In combination these strategies are capable of significantly buffering the daytime temperature swing.

Conventional cross ventilation through open windows and night purge ventilation strategies may also be used as part of the Passivhaus cooling concept when appropriate, such as during the cooler evening of a hot day.

In order to achieve the Passivehaus standard in hot countries, the outer wall must have a U-value between 0.20-0.45 W/m2K.

Depending on the heat-insulating properties of the loadbearing outer walls and on the thermal conductivity of the insulation material used, it may be necessary to install an external thermal insulation system of up to 30cm thickness.

Modern external thermal insulation composite systems based on mineral raw materials combine the best insulating properties with ease of handling. Compared to conventional insulation systems, the additional expense pays off after only a few years.

In climatic regions where the daytime temperature does not drop low enough to purge the accumulated heat gains from the building at night there will be a residual cooling load.

In such cases the Passivhaus standard permits 15 kWh/m2.yr of cooling energy to be used. A small cooling load has proven to be sufficient in almost all cases because the Passivhaus concept is highly effective in reducing unwanted heat gains.

The blower door test is used to detect leaks in the building envelope. The smaller the measured value, the higher the airtightness. Passive houses in hot countries require a value =< 1.0. This means that during the measurement at most 100 per cent of the indoor air volume is allowed to escape through leaky spots within one hour. Experience has shown that values between 0.3 and 0.4 are attainable.

Passivhaus principles can also be applied to refurbishment of existing buildings and achieve impressive results. In the UK there are many examples of ultra-low energy, low carbon retrofits.

At the same time, the Passivhaus Institut has launched a Passivhaus standard for refurbishment projects, known as “EnerPHit”, covering a range of property types, including tower blocks, terraced houses and community centres.

Given that costs are around the same as for conventional buildings but energy costs of using the building are drastically reduced, why are they not more widely adopted?

The main reasons are the lack of ambition in building codes, the lack of awareness, trained construction workers and appropriate monitoring. For the aims of the Paris Agreement to be realised this is just one opportunity that needs to be grasped.

Since the US election, the need to grasp these opportunities has become even more urgent.

David Thorpe is the author of:

Wednesday, March 02, 2016

Best Practices and Case Studies for Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement

cover of Best Practices and Case Studies for Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement
My latest publication is a collaboration with two other experts, Steve Fawkes and Kit Oung, on good energy efficiency policy for the industrial sector.

It is published by the Copenhagen Centre on Energy Efficiency on behalf of the United Nations Environment Program and called Best Practices and Case Studies for Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement.

Click on the above link for a free download of this 170pp A4 PDF.

Improving energy efficiency in the industrial sector is being prioritised in many countries. Investment to improve industrial energy efficiency can deliver large energy savings, improved productivity, and reduced environmental pollution.

However, in many cases information, financial, and regulatory barriers are continuing to prevent enterprises from fully realising the potential opportunities offered by improving energy efficiency.

A wide range of policies and programmes can be adopted to help overcome these barriers.

Countries are keen to learn from international experiences on how to accelerate energy efficiency improvements, particularly the various approaches towards policy making, their effectiveness, and disseminating success stories and best practices.

So this book is aimed at supporting countries in industrial energy efficiency policy making through sharing international experiences.

It explains preconditions for successful implementation of policies and programmes while providing concrete examples.

The overall objective is to stimulate joint actions from business, governments, and civil societies to help realise the goal of the United Nations Secretary General’s Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative, of doubling the global energy efficiency improvement rate by 2030.

This goal is in fact extremely modest. The potential has been demonstrated to be many times more.

David Thorpe is the author of:

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Blueprints for saving the world and producing green growth

brick making kilns in India which produce black soot
Two new United Nations-sponsored reports offer hope that the world will be able to reduce the severity of climate change – and bring other benefits to its people.

One report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) argues that there are plenty of opportunities for creating wealth, jobs, a more pleasant environment and improved social equality by transferring subsidies that support polluting activities to those supporting low carbon ones, up to a value equivalent to about 2% of global GDP.

Another, Integrated Assessment of Black Carbon and Tropospheric Ozone, also argues that by imposing strict limits on emissions of "black carbon" soot, methane and tropospheric ozone - a greenhouse gas that is also a significant component of smog - would clear the air, reduce human deaths and improve crop yields.

It would also reduce the impacts of climate change in the short term by 0.5 degrees Celsius (0.9 Fahrenheit) to the equivalent of a carbon dioxide presence in the atmosphere of 450 ppm.

Black carbon, caused by incomplete burning mainly of fossil fuels and wood, is blamed for accelerating global warming by soaking up heat from the sun. Soot can darken snow and ice when it lands, hastening a thaw such as in the Arctic or Himalayas.

Ozone is not directly emitted but is produced from precursors including methane and carbon monoxide. The troposphere is the lower atmosphere; higher up, ozone is beneficial as un ultra-violet sunshield.

Many studies show that existing pledges made at Cancun for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are insufficient to reach the 2 degree limit, widely viewed as a threshold to dangerous change from floods, heatwaves, desertification and rising sea levels. But the measures outlined in the report could buy the world more time to implement the measures in the other report, outlined below.

"This is not an alternative to carbon dioxide reductions, it's complementary," commented Johan Kuylenstierna, of the Stockholm Environment Institute, scientific coordinator of the report, produced also with help from the World Meteorological Organization and NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Proposed measures include cuts in flaring of natural gas, curbing gas leaks from pipelines and reducing methane emissions from livestock. Poor countries should make wider use of cleaner-burning stoves, and open-field burning of farm waste should be banned.

The scientists say that achieving widespread implementation of the measures they recommend would be most effective if it were done at a country or region level.

Transition to the green economy



The other report, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, makes a number of positive suggestions, again with multiple spin-off benefits.

It argues that investing just 2% of global GDP into ten key sectors can kick-start a transition towards a low-carbon, resource-efficient economy. These include agriculture, buildings, energy, fisheries, forests, manufacturing, tourism, transport, water and waste management.

The sum, currently amounting to an average of around $1.3 trillion a year , backed by forward-looking national and international policies, would grow the global economy at around the same rate if not higher than those forecast under current economic models.

The report comprehensively debunks the myth of a trade-off between environmental investments and economic growth and instead points to a current "gross misallocation of capital".

Removing existing and harmful subsidies in energy, water, fisheries and agriculture sectors, alone, would save 1-2% of global GDP a year, which could be used for the transition to the green economy.

The figure of 2% of global GDP assumed is a fraction of total gross capital formation; about 22% of global GDP in 2009.

The report says that greening the economy generates growth - in particular gains in natural capital (biodiversity and resources) - and in fact a higher growth in GDP and GDP per capita than business-as-usual. "It is expected to generate as much growth and employment – or more – compared to the current business as usual scenario, and it outperforms economic projections in the medium and long term, while yielding significantly more environmental and social benefits," the authors say.

The report contains many case studies to illustrate this, for example in India, where over 80% of the $8 billion National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which underwrites at least 100 days of paid work for rural households, invests in water conservation, irrigation and land development. This has generated three billion working days-worth of employment benefiting close to 60 million households.

Such measures can therefore contribute to poverty alleviation because there "is an inextricable link between poverty alleviation and the wise management of natural resources and ecosystems, due to the benefit flows from natural capital that are received directly by the poor".

New jobs will be created, which over time exceed the losses in “brown economy” jobs.

The transition towards a green economy is already happening on a scale and at a speed never seen before.

Therefore, the report concludes: “world leaders, civil society and leading businesses must engage collaboratively to rethink and redefine traditional measures of wealth, prosperity and well-being. What is clear is that the biggest risk of all would be to continue with the status quo."