Presentation of Johan C.I. Kuylenstierna, Director of the Stockholm Environment Institute York Centre It describe the main findings of an Integrated Assessment developed under UNEP and WMO on tropospheric ozone and black carbon. This has been put together by key experts around the globe, with Drew Shindell of NASA-GISS as the Chair of the Assessment and which has been coordinated by the Stockholm Environment Institute. Tropospheric ozone is ozone which is formed in the lower atmosphere – different from Stratospheric ozone layer. This ozone is not emitted but created in the atmosphere from emitted precursors, of which methane and carbon monoxide are important ones. Black carbon is emitted as particles of carbon – essentially the main compnent of soot. These substances warm the atmosphere and act as air pollutants and there has been a lot of interest recently in the potential for reducing climate warming by addressing these substances.

1. Multiple Benefits of SLCP
Mitigation in Alpine and Polar
Regions
Johan C.I. Kuylenstierna
Director, Stockholm Environment Institute York Centre
johan.kuylenstiernaUK@sei-international .org

2. UNEP/WMO Integrated
Assessment of Black
Carbon and
Tropospheric Ozone
Johan Kuylenstierna, Stockholm
Environment Institute, SEI, Scientific
Coordinator and lead author
Drew Shindell, NASA-GISS, Chair;
Vice-Chairs: Frank Raes, Joint
Research Centre, EC; V. Ramanathan,
Scripps Institution of Oceanography;
Kim Oanh, AIT; Luis Cifuentes,
Catholic University of Chile
Coordinating lead authors: David
Streets, Argonne National Laboratory;
David Fowler, CEH; Lisa Emberson,
SEI; Martin Williams, Kings College
London
50 Contributors, over 100 reviewers
UNEP/WMO Coordinators: Volodymyr
Demkine, UNEP / Liisa Jalkanen, WMO

3. Near-term Climate and
Clean Air Benefits:
Actions for Controlling
Short-Lived Climate
Forcers
Lead authors: Johan Kuylenstierna (SEI);
Cristina Zucca (UNEP); Marcus Amann
(IIASA); Beatriz Cardenas (INE, Mexico);
Bradnee Chambers (UNEP); Zbigniew
Klimont (IIASA); Kevin Hicks (SEI);
Richard Mills (IUAPPA); Luisa Molina
(MIT); Frank Murray (Murdoch University);
Pam Pearson (ICCI); Surya Sethi (UoS);
Drew Shindell (NASA-GISS); Youba
Sokona (ACPC); Sara Terry (US EPA);
Harry Vallack (SEI); Rita van Dingenen
(EU JRC); Martin Williams (Kings
College); Eric Zusman (IGES)
Editorial assisstance from Joseph Alcamo
(UNEP) and Svante Bodin (Swedish
Ministry of Environment)
49 external reviewers

4. Climate and Clean Air Coalition to reduce
Short-Lived Climate Pollutants
There is a lot of scientific and political interest – Why?

5. What are short-lived climate pollutants?
Short-lived climate pollutants: Cause global
warming & relatively short-lived in the
atmosphere.
Black carbon, methane, tropospheric ozone
Multiple benefits of reducing short-lived climate
pollutants:
• Reduce air pollution - Protect health and crops
• Slow down near-term global warming, reduce
regional impacts of climate change
Also some HFCs

6. Lifetimes in the atmosphere

7. Air pollution: unfinished business on the
sustainable development agenda
Outdoor air pollution
“Some progress” : Despite some
progress, outdoor air pollution continues
Progress towards global
to have serious impacts on the
environmental goals
environment & human health.
(UNEP GEO-5)
About 1.2 (3.7?) million premature deaths each year due to
outside air pollution.
Indoor air pollution
“little or no progress”
“Indoor air pollution from particulate matter continues to have major
health impacts, particularly on women and children.”
• about3 billion people cook and heat using open fires and leaky
stoves burning biomass and coal
• Around 2 million people die each year prematurely from illness
attributable to indoor air pollution
Source: WHO statistics

8. Ground level
ozone
increasing over
wide areas
Due to methane
and other
precursors
Reducing ground level
ozone:
• protects public health
• reduces ozone damage
to crops
Source: UNEP GEO-5, HTAP

9. Impact of the Tropospheric Ozone on Crop yields
Exposure of wheat to ozone in Pakistan
Clean air
Air with
ambient
ozone

10. A package of 16 measures can substantially reduce
emissions and achieve multiple benefits
IIASA ranked mitigation measures by the net climate impact (using GWP) of
their emission changes (considering CO, CH4, BC, OC, SO2, NOX, NMVOCs,
and CO2), picked the top measures – about 90% of warming benefit
Black carbon measures
• addressing emissions from incomplete
combustion
- BC, OC, methane, CO, NMVOCs
Methane measures
• reducing methane emissions
No technical breakthroughs
These measures already implemented in many countries
Cost-effective

11. The measures aiming at reducing methane emissions
Intermittent aeration -paddy Recovery from wastewater Recovery from oil and gas
Recovery from landfill Recovery from livestock manure / feed
Coal mine methane capture Reducing pipeline leakage

12. The measures aiming to reduce black carbon
emissions
Improved biomass stoves Modern coke ovens Remove big smokers / DPF
Cooking with clean fuel
Improved brick kilns
Pellet biomass heating stoves
Coal briquettes replacing coal Reduce agricultural burning Reduce flaring

13. Effect of measures on emissions projected in 2030 relative to 2005
9 BC measures
reduce
̴80% of BC
Reference: CH4 increases
7 CH4 measures reduce
̴ 25% of CH4 (2005); or
̴ 40% relative to 2030
BC measures
reduce
CO

14. Premature mortality avoided (1000s of deaths) 2.4 million avoided premature deaths - from outdoor PM
S, W & C
Asia
1.15
million
deaths/yr
Africa
200
thousand
deaths/yr

15. Health Benefits by Country

16. About 32 (range 21-57) million tonnes yield loss avoided
in 2030
reduces air pollution & saves lives

17. Crop Benefits in Different Countries

18. Temperature changes over 20th Century
Source: NASA GISS

19. Estimated historic contributions to Arctic warming from
CO2 and from SLCFs. Reflective aerosols produced a
substantial cooling effect (based on data in Quinn et al.,
2008).

20. Global and regional temperature changes relative to
2009 projected under the reference scenario for
different global regions
• Largest projected increases in Arctic

21. Result for Global Temperature Change:
CO2 and SLCF measures are complementary strategies
Source: UNEP/WMO (2011). Integrated Assessment of Black Carbon and
Tropospheric Ozone. UNEP, Nairobi

22. The share of global temperature reduction from methane measures

23. The share of global temperature reduction from methane measures

24. Near-term framing
National action against air pollution
can slow down global warming
Slowing down near term global warming. How much?
16 measures reduce global warming up to 2040 ≈ 0.4/0.5oC relative to baseline
 almost halving of temperature rise; 0.7oC reduction in Arctic
Glacier lake
Why slow down near term global warming? outburst floods
• Bursting glacier lakes;
• increasing heat waves
• Melting arctic land ice, ice caps,  sea level rise
Also reduce regional climate change impacts
Glacier melting; arctic ice melting; precipitation patterns
Cannot replace CO2 reductions
Need both –
1. Reducing short-lived climate forcers: slow down near-term global warming
2. CO2 reductions for long term climate protection

25. Time series estimates of glacier mass balance in
different regions of the world (from Kaser et al., 2006).
Panel a. shows mass balance normalized to the glacierized area in
each region (specific mass balance), a measure of the relative
response of each region, while Panel b. shows change in total mass
balance, reported in millimetres of sea-level equivalent (SLE)

26. Global and Regional Temperature Change Relative to the
Reference Scenario (hybrid modelling of GISS, ECHAM
informed by the literature)
Methane measures:
Relatively uniform benefits,
low uncertainty
BC measures:
Larger benefits in North, greater
uncertainty for temperature (large
regional precipitation & glacial melting
benefits)
Reduced Arctic warming by 0.7oC by
2040 compared to the reference
Scenario, with measures taken
2010---2030. Mitigating ~2/3 of
projected 1.2oC warming

27. Global and Regional Temperature Change Relative to the
Reference Scenario (modelling using of GISS)
Global and regional temperature changes due to widespread use of pellet
stoves and boilers in industrialized countries and coal briquettes in the
residential sector in China.

28. Annual average surface temperature change (ºC) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the biggest temperature benefit occurs

29. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

30. Regional Climate Changes: Preventing Disturbance of
Rainfall Patterns
Change in atmospheric forcing at 2030 relative to the reference
case in the two models.
• Dark areas: where the biggest energy change to the
atmosphere occurs
• This drives regional weather pattern changes

31. How much does it cost?
Costs of implementing 16 measures
50% of black carbon and methane emission reductions:
Low cost or no-cost  Recovery of methane, better fuel
efficiency
Black carbon measures
• Improved stoves
• Upgraded brick kilns
Methane measures
• Recovery from fossil fuel production
(coal mines; gas distribution)
• Waste / landfill management

32. Conclusions
• Addressing SLCPs is a development issue – countries
reducing emissions will benefit from improved health (avoid 2.4
million deaths), crop yields (avoid > 30 million tonnes loss) etc
• 16 identified measures, implemented by 2030, would reduce
global warming by 0.5oC (0.2-0.7oC) in 2050 – half the
warming projected by the Reference Scenario
• Near-term measures would improve the chance of not
exceeding 2oC target, but only if CO2 is also addressed,
starting now (complementary strategies; not alternatives)
• Substantial regional climate benefits: e.g. in the Arctic reduce
warming by 0.7 oC (range 0.2-1.3oC by 2040), for Himalayas
and South Asian monsoon
• The identified measures are all currently in use in different
regions around the world; much wider and more rapid
implementation is required to achieve the full benefits
• Many measures achieve cost savings over time.

33. ‘An Integrated Assessment of Black Carbon and
Tropospheric Ozone’
http://www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/BlackCarbon_SDM.pdf
Near-term Climate and Clean Air Benefits: Actions for
Controlling Short-Lived Climate Forcers
http://www.unep.org/publications/ebooks/SLCF/

34. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

35. How much does it cost?
Costs of implementing 16 measures
GROUP 1: Cost Savings or Low Cost
e.g.
- Recovery and utilization of vented gas during oil production
- Replacement of traditional brick kilns with more efficient kilns
GROUP 2: Moderate Cost,
e.g. Coal mines: oxidation of ventilation methane
GROUP 3: High Cost,
e.g. Applying Euro VI/6 standards to vehicles

36. Actions on the National, Regional and Global Scales
Why national action?
• Most health benefits close to emission sources;
local sustainable development; unique mix of
emission sources
• Fast action on obvious emission sources, National Action
Plans
Why regional action?
• Reduce regional-scale pollution, e.g. black carbon transported long
distances to Himalayas, Arctic
• Integrate abatement of black carbon and methane into existing or new
regional air pollution agreements
Why global action?
• Support and catalyze national and regional action – awareness raising,
financing, technical assistance
• Control international emission sources  Work within existing treaties: e.g.
Reduce black carbon emissions through MARPOL?

37. Actions on the National, Regional and Global Scales
Why national action?
• Most health benefits close to emission sources; local
sustainable development.
• Fast action on obvious emission sources, National Action Plans
Why regional action?
• Reduce regional-scale pollution, e.g. black carbon
transported long distances to Himalayas, Arctic
• Integrate abatement of black carbon and methane into
existing or new regional air pollution agreements
Why global action?
• Control international emission sources  Work within existing treaties: e.g. Reduce
black carbon emissions through MARPOL?
• Support and catalyze national and regional action – awareness raising, financing,
technical assistance  Climate and Clean Air Coalition

38. Political action now: the Coalition
Coalition for Climate and Clean Air
February, 2012: 6 countries + UNEP
End 2012: + 10 countries + other
partners ?
Action on Reducing Short-Lived
Climate Pollutants
• Awareness raising
• National action plans
• Black carbon from vehicles, brick kilns
• Methane from landfills, oil & gas
production
• HFCs from refrigeration & air
conditioning

39. Conclusions
Urgent questions about SLCPs require scientists and other experts to
work on two tracks:
3. Quick response  Costs and benefits of emission reduction
measures  science-basis for priority actions
4. Focused medium-term research  Reduce uncertainties
Acting on SLCPs an important opportunity
Convergence of interests, new impulse to ...
Link solutions to climate change, air pollution and development
1. Reduce 2nd most important greenhouse gas – methane
2. Address major public health danger & important air pollutant –
particulate matter – a priority for sustainable development

40. Further thoughts
Coalition needs to achieve some rapid successes –
showing progress over the next year
To encourage further participation from Asia, Africa
and Latin America, highlight multiple benefits of
SLCP mitigation – allow countries to find key issues
they want to address in the SLCP agenda.
Link SLCP mitigation to on-going activities in
different countries – e.g. national development
plans in sectors such as waste management,
energy access
Needs to understand barriers and solutions to
implement different measures – informed by past
experience and case studies
Better characterised costs and wider societal
benefits of health improvement and infrastructure
development need to be made accessible

41. Observed (left) and modelled (right) surface BC
concentrations (ng/m3) (Koch et al., 2009a).
• showing rather sparse measurements but reasonable Source: Koch et
correlation between model and measurement al., 2009a

42. Black carbon and ozone concentrations (daily averages)
measured from March 2006 to February 2008 at the GAW-
WMO Global station "Nepal Climate Observatory - Pyramid"
at 5 097 m above mean sea level near Mt. Everest
550 ng m-3
showing values comparable with polluted Source: Bonasoni et al.,
areas during several pre-monsoon day 2010

43. Impact of the Measures on Health and
Crop yields
• Models give PM2.5 and ozone concentrations for health and crop
yield impact assessment
• Concentration-response relationships from literature used to
evaluate global impacts
Exposure of wheat to ozone
in Pakistan
Clean air
Air with
ambient
ozone

44. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

45. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

46. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

47. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

48. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

49. Annual average albedo forcing change (W/m2) from
implementing all measures
• Dark areas: where the forcing benefit from increased albedo occurs

50. Warming in different latitude bands due to O3 and
aerosols only following the reference scenario for
emission projections from 2010 to 2030 and then
assuming constant emissions at 2030 levels thereafter
• Largest projected increases in Arctic

51. stratosphere
Tropospheric Ozone
stratospheric O3
8 – 15 km
chemical production chemical destruction
troposphere
CH4 CO VOCs NO O3
deposition
ls
bi ing
m ks
ss s
ga ttle
fo uel
ue
ea
in
il f
ca
of
sl