study on this topic was published in 2009 by the U.K. governmentâs Sustainable Development Commission. Initiated under the chairmanship of my friend Sir Jonathon Porritt, this study, Prosperity Without Growth , was led by Professor Tim Jackson and offers an outstanding summary of the issues. 12
The report presents some fascinating scenarios to 2050, using just the challenge of decoupling economic growth from CO 2 emissions to achieve 450 parts per million (ppm) of CO 2 concentrations. Keep in mind when reading these numbers that most scientists regard 450 ppm as an inadequate target, so the actual challenge is much greater than that expressed here.
It should also be noted that CO 2 is one of the easiest decoupling challenges because energy can be produced with no CO 2 , whereas making cars without metals or plastics, for example, would be more difficult.
The study used the measure of grams of CO 2 emissions per dollar of economic output to compare across the scenarios. In 2007, this measure was 768 g of CO 2 per dollar globally. They give four potential scenarios going forward to show the scale of change required in this, the easiest decoupling challenge:
1.   Under the midrange forecast of nine billion people and assuming economic growth continues as it has since 1990 at 1.4 percent per annum, we would require CO 2 /$ to decrease from 768 g CO 2 /$ today to 36 g CO 2 /$ in 2050, representing a 95 percent reduction.
2.   With the upper forecast of eleven billion people, it would require a reduction to 30 g CO 2 /$.
3.   If we assume that we deal with poverty and have nine billion people in 2050 at a per capita income equivalent to that in the European Union in 2007 (that is, no further per capita growth in the West), the target drops to 14 g CO 2 /$.
4.   If we assume every country is broadly equal and the standard of living is based on the EU in 2007 but grows globally at just 2 percent per year, then we need to achieve a reduction from 768 g/$ to 6 g/$, or a reduction of around 99.2 percent.
There are a few key lessons from these numbers.
First, they strongly reinforce that population growth, while material, is not the key driver of the problem compared with per capita economic growth.
Second, they show that the scale of change required is quite extraordinary. Even scenario three with a midrange population and equal incomes with no further growth in the developed world requires an improvement in efficiency of 9 percent every year for forty years and results in an economy six times as large as todayâs!
Third and most important, this is just the herculean task required to achieve action on climate with a growth economy. That is clearly the easiest challenge compared with finding the forest, land, fish, food, transport, minerals, and water to feed an economy six times the size of todayâs.
Further complicating this strategy is what is known as âthe rebound effect.â What happens when products become more efficient is that we use more of them. So as cars become more fuel-efficient through better engine technology, we make our cars heavier; as home appliances become more efficient in power use, we buy bigger ones; as air-conditioning becomes more efficient and therefore cheaper, we air-condition more homes. This means that as long as we consider only technology, rather than also considering per capita consumption, weâll keep bouncing back and hitting the limits again.
As I said earlier, the Prosperity Without Growth scenarios consider only CO 2 emissions, a significant challenge but still possible. But given that decoupling is about every resource that feeds the modern economy and weâre operating at 140 percent of capacity now, there is no conceivable decoupling scenario involving economic growth that sees us bringing the situation under control in time to avoid a crisis.
As the report itself concludes:
The truth is that there is as yet no
The report presents some fascinating scenarios to 2050, using just the challenge of decoupling economic growth from CO 2 emissions to achieve 450 parts per million (ppm) of CO 2 concentrations. Keep in mind when reading these numbers that most scientists regard 450 ppm as an inadequate target, so the actual challenge is much greater than that expressed here.
It should also be noted that CO 2 is one of the easiest decoupling challenges because energy can be produced with no CO 2 , whereas making cars without metals or plastics, for example, would be more difficult.
The study used the measure of grams of CO 2 emissions per dollar of economic output to compare across the scenarios. In 2007, this measure was 768 g of CO 2 per dollar globally. They give four potential scenarios going forward to show the scale of change required in this, the easiest decoupling challenge:
1.   Under the midrange forecast of nine billion people and assuming economic growth continues as it has since 1990 at 1.4 percent per annum, we would require CO 2 /$ to decrease from 768 g CO 2 /$ today to 36 g CO 2 /$ in 2050, representing a 95 percent reduction.
2.   With the upper forecast of eleven billion people, it would require a reduction to 30 g CO 2 /$.
3.   If we assume that we deal with poverty and have nine billion people in 2050 at a per capita income equivalent to that in the European Union in 2007 (that is, no further per capita growth in the West), the target drops to 14 g CO 2 /$.
4.   If we assume every country is broadly equal and the standard of living is based on the EU in 2007 but grows globally at just 2 percent per year, then we need to achieve a reduction from 768 g/$ to 6 g/$, or a reduction of around 99.2 percent.
There are a few key lessons from these numbers.
First, they strongly reinforce that population growth, while material, is not the key driver of the problem compared with per capita economic growth.
Second, they show that the scale of change required is quite extraordinary. Even scenario three with a midrange population and equal incomes with no further growth in the developed world requires an improvement in efficiency of 9 percent every year for forty years and results in an economy six times as large as todayâs!
Third and most important, this is just the herculean task required to achieve action on climate with a growth economy. That is clearly the easiest challenge compared with finding the forest, land, fish, food, transport, minerals, and water to feed an economy six times the size of todayâs.
Further complicating this strategy is what is known as âthe rebound effect.â What happens when products become more efficient is that we use more of them. So as cars become more fuel-efficient through better engine technology, we make our cars heavier; as home appliances become more efficient in power use, we buy bigger ones; as air-conditioning becomes more efficient and therefore cheaper, we air-condition more homes. This means that as long as we consider only technology, rather than also considering per capita consumption, weâll keep bouncing back and hitting the limits again.
As I said earlier, the Prosperity Without Growth scenarios consider only CO 2 emissions, a significant challenge but still possible. But given that decoupling is about every resource that feeds the modern economy and weâre operating at 140 percent of capacity now, there is no conceivable decoupling scenario involving economic growth that sees us bringing the situation under control in time to avoid a crisis.
As the report itself concludes:
The truth is that there is as yet no
Similar Books
