Published yestarday. Would be the world's first legally required carbon emission cuts:
The Labour Government says it will set targets for Britain to cut its carbon emissions by 30 per cent by 2020, and 60 per cent by the year 2050, and it says those targets will be legally binding.link
Environmental groups are hoping for required cuts of 3% per year making for 75-80% reduction by 2050. Instead, there are reviews every 5 years, with legal ramifications for governments missing targets. Personally, I think cuts should err on the side of being ambitious, but I commend this first step in the right direction.
Related: See Felicifia for an ongoing discussion of climate economics.
What would these cuts mean for the planet?
These cuts look like those recommended by the Stern Review. If so, and if the cuts were made planet-wide, then atmospheric greenhouse gas would stabilize in the 450-550ppm range with average warming in the 1-4.7 deg C range. From the Stern Review Executive Summary (pdf) p.11:
Stabilising at or below 550ppm CO2e would require global emissions to peak in the next 10 - 20 years, and then fall at a rate of at least 1 - 3% per year. The range of paths is illustrated in Figure 3. By 2050, global emissions would need to be around 25% below current levels. These cuts will have to be made in the context of a world economy in 2050 that may be 3 - 4 times larger than today - so emissions per unit of GDP would need to be just one quarter of current levels by 2050.
To stabilise at 450ppm CO2e, without overshooting, global emissions would need to peak in the next 10 years and then fall at more than 5% per year, reaching 70% below current levels by 2050.
From Figure 2 (p.5) we see that 450ppm represents average warming in the 1 to 3.8 deg C range and 550ppm represents average warming in the 1.5 to 4.7 deg C range.
What would it take to make these cuts?
One way of reducing emissions might be a straightforward carbon tax. I've been working my way through the carbon tax literature and don't yet have anything conclusive to tell you (I'll diary it when I do), but these cuts probably correspond to a US gas tax in the $1 to $2.75 range, assuming my calculations are correct.
UK's Minister for Climate Change, Ian Pearson on how to cut emissions:
I believe very strongly that market-based mechanisms such as trading schemes are a very good way of achieving the lowest cost reductions in CO2 emissions.
There are significant differences between a carbon tax and an emissions trading scheme, namely in trading, an initial assignment of emissions rights is involved. The best solution may be a combination of these and perhaps other schemes.
What about the UK economy?
Pearson: since 1990 the UK economy has grown by 40 per cent. And at the same time, we're on target to double our Kyoto commitments.... we were the first country in the world to go through the Industrial Revolution. I think we need to be the first country in the world to go through the low-carbon revolution.
Grr, bragging rights. We certainly don't get them.
A legitimate concern here is if UK acts alone, business there may be punished because cost of doing business could be lower elsewhere where there's no emissions legislation. Hmm, but what if elsewhere had emissions legislation too?