Dr Tim Fox CEng MIMechE, the Institution’s Head of Energy and Environment, represented the UK engineering profession at the landmark United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen. Just back from Denmark, Dr Fox gives this assessment of the likely outcomes of the fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP15) and the engineering solutions that realistically will be needed to try to meet the challenge of climate change.
Tim Fox is firmly established as one of the UK’s leading experts on the engineering and technology which supports action on climate change. With Institution members he developed the holistic, combined policy of MAG: mitigation, adaptation and geo-engineering. He regularly advises the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) most recently contributing to the Department’s 2050 Vision, and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
The Institution’s work on climate change led to its role as the UK representative for the global engineering research project, Future Climate. The national UK 2050 Energy Plan produced by the Institution for Future Climate was submitted to the UNFCCC and formed part of the expert evidence available to the COP15 delegates and negotiators.
Dr Fox was invited to attend COP15 to represent the UK engineering profession. He was on hand to provide expert opinions on the implications of climate science for engineering, with insights into decarbonisation, adaptation and geo-engineering to international media via broadcast interviews for the UK’s Channel 4 news, BBC news and the US National Public Radio.
Speaking just before the Conference closed, Tim offered his assessment of some of the outcomes that could be expected: “Without doubt, all of the delegates from the 192 nations represented at the Conference know that COP15 is the last opportunity to agree a replacement to the Kyoto Protocol and avert dangerous climate change. All the signs suggest that at best what will emerge will be a loose political agreement to act on climate change, and at worst, that nothing will be agreed at all.”
“Certainly, the progress of the negotiations towards some kind of agreement has been stymied along the way. Perhaps the most serious impasse was created by the small island states and least developed countries (LDC) - a grouping that includes poorer nations of Africa and Latin America - asking for severe carbon emissions reductions, predominantly from the developing world. This was diametrically opposite to the strategy proposed by other nations in the G77 bloc, such as India and China. Climate scientists predict that 90% of future emissions will be coming from developing nations, and so it is perhaps not surprising that sharp divisions emerged during the Conference between the developed world, large developing nations and what could be described as the more ‘vulnerable’ nations.”
“If a loose, political consensus can be reached, the next question is what action needs to be taken, by when and in what order. The Institution has been vocal in its campaign to illustrate to government, policy makers and the public the sheer magnitude of the decarbonisation task ahead, and that realistically there is a need for a wider raft of planned solutions which would include significant long-term adaptation as well as a short-term deployment of practical geo-engineering techniques incorporated into mitigation approaches.”
“As an international organisation, representing engineers in 130 countries and from every continent world-wide, the Institution is uniquely placed to offer insight into solutions to tackle the global issue of climate change, understanding the differing needs of countries from the various stages of economic development.”
“With this in mind, the outcomes that the world should be hoping to see post-COP15 are a commitment to decarbonisation, using the technology that makes sense for each nation: for example, here in the UK that would be wind power, marine energy, and nuclear. Secondly, adaptation will be crucial, given that even with decarbonisation at an incredible rate, there is now the likelihood of exceeding a 2°C rise, so it is crucial that nations adapt to climate change.”
“Thirdly, practical geo-engineering should be brought into the mitigation fold, particularly air capture for CO2 removal: what many are now calling ‘negative’ emissions. Comprising solutions such as biochar sequestration and artificial trees, these approaches could play a significant role in delivering short term results, to buy the world more time to decarbonise and adapt.”
“Moreover, post-COP15, the UNFCCC could usefully provide the framework for all countries to create a route to global governance for the development and deployment of adaptation and geo-engineering. The UK, for example, leads the world in its understanding of the impacts of climate change, adaptation methodology, research and development. The Met Office and the Tyndall Centre are genuine world-leaders in this field. Potentially, there could be a real economic advantage in the sale of that knowledge to other nations, and the rise of an adaptation driven economy. Conversely, there is an argument that for something as important as the guaranteed long-term survival of modern civilised society as we know it, countries such as the UK have a moral obligation to provide their expertise and help to vulnerable nations as adaptation aid.”
“Engineering is a truly global discipline, largely operating within the context of industrialised free market economies, and to solve society’s most challenging problems engineers are entirely reliant on legislative, commercial or strong cultural drivers, or combinations of these in order to implement their solutions. The ultimate outcome from Copenhagen must be this: the world’s politicians have to create a global culture which can support meaningful change; they have to show real leadership to put in place radical policies and frameworks necessary to correct market failures, engender behavioural change and plan for a world secure against climate change through mitigation, adaptation and geo-engineering. Unfortunately, they are unlikely to achieve this at COP15.”