Professor Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering College of Engineering Seoul National University Dr. Kim, Jae Young Greenhouse Gases and Environment

김재영 서울大學校 工科大學 土木工學科 ( 都市工學 專攻 ), 學士 서울大學校 工科大學 土木工學科 ( 都市工學 專攻 ), 碩士 -1996Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, Ph.D 서울大學校 工科大學 建設環境工學部 敎授 -2004Visiting Associate Professor University of Wisconsin-Madison, U.S Visiting Scholar, 北海道大學, 日本 -2008Visiting Scholar University of Delaware, U.S. -Editorial Board for the “Waste Management” -International Advisory Board for the Sardinia International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium

Global Warming Evidences (1/3) Increasing global air temperature 0.60 ± 0.2 ℃ arising during the last century (Source: UK Meteorological Office)

Glacier retreat (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) Photographs suggesting the glaciers retreat Global Warming Evidences (2/3)

Global Warming Evidences (3/3) Sea level rise 18.5cm arising from 1900~2000 (Source: U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA)

기후변화에 대한 IPCC WG II 의 주요 연구 결과 (4 차 보고 서 )  모든 대륙과 대부분의 해양에서 관측된 증거에 의하면, 자연 시스템이 지역적 인 기후변화 특히, 온도 상승의 영향을 받고 있음을 보여주고 있다.  1970 년 이후 전 지구적 규모의 평가 자료에 의하면, 인위적 온난화는 물리적, 생물적 시스템에 뚜렷한 영향을 주고 있는 것으로 보인다.  지역적 기후변화가 자연 및 인류의 환경에 미치는 다른 영향이 적응 및 비기후 인자로 인해 점차 확인되고 있다.  극심한 기상, 기후 및 해수면 상승 현상에 대한 빈도 및 강도의 변화로 발생하 는 영향은 일정하지 않을 가능성이 크다.  대규모 기후 이변 현상은 특히, 21 세기 이후에 대단히 큰 영향을 미칠 가능성 이 있다.  기후 변화의 영향은 지역적으로 다르게 나타날 것이다. 그러나 현재까지는 이 러한 영향이 종합적으로 저평가되었으며, 지구 온도가 상승함에 따라 발생하 는 영향에 대한 연간 순비용도 계속해서 증가할 것이다. IPCC (UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 유엔정부간기후변화위원회 ) 에서 사용하는 기후변화는 자연변이 또는 인간활동에 의해 계속해서 발생하는 모든 형태의 기후 변화를 의미한다. 이는 기후변화협약에서 사용하는 의미와는 다르며 기후변화 협약에서는 직간접적인 인간 활동에서 비롯된 지구의 대기 조성 변화 및 비교 가능한 기간 동안 관측된 기후의 자연 변이에 추가로 나타나는 기후변화만을 의미한다.

Global Warming Cause Increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) (Source: Meehl et al., 2004) “Due to the increase in anthropogenic GHG concentration” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

과거 및 미래의 온실가스 (Greenhouse Gas, GHG) 배출 경향 화석연료에 기초한 전세계적 에너지 수요 증가 ( 특히, 개발도상국들 경우 ) 로 인해 최근 년간 GHG 총 배출량은 계속 증가 추세 지난 30 년간 년 평균 화석연료 사용비율 1.9% 증가 → 대기 중으로 의 CO 2 배출량 년 평균 1.6% 씩 증가 적절한 에너지 관리 정책이 시행되지 않는다면, 2030 년까지 화석연 료 사용을 기반으로 한 대기중으로의 CO 2 배출량은 2004 년에 비해 % 이상 그리고 GHG 배출량은 25-90% 이상의 증가 예상 GHG 배출량 25-90% 증가 예상 2000 년 2030 년 CO 2 배출량 % 증가 예상 온실가스 배출애 대한 IPCC WG III 의 연구 결과 (4 차 보고 서 )

Global warming ? Independently of the real fact, International organization decided to connect the greenhouse gas emission with economy. What and How they have done ? What and How we have to do ?

GWP (Global Warming Potentials) GHG : CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O, PCFs, HCFs, and SF 6 Gas GWP Lifetime (yr) CO 2 1 varibale CH N2ON2O PCFs140~6,300 HCFs6,500~9,200 SF 6 23,900 3,200 GWP (Global Warming Potential)GHG emission, 2001 H 2 O? and Other indirect greenhouse gases?

GHG emission by country Top GHG emitting countries GHG emissions growth, (Source : World Resources Institute, 2005)

World GHG emission flow chart Source : CAIT (Climate Analysis Indicators Tool) Base year : 2000

International Actions (1/2) * Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment Describing the adverse effects by continued GHG emissions † The Greenhouse Effect, Climate Change and Ecosystems, 1986 * The 1 st assessment report in 1990; the 2 nd in 1995; the 3 rd in ~1980: Great increase of scientist attention 1986: An important publication † by SCOPE* 1988: IPCC created by UN Goal: to assess on climate change, its causes and effects Three main comprehensive reports* published by IPCC Suggesting the warming caused primarily by human activities

International Actions (2/2) The global temperature rises by 1.4~5.8 ℃ until the year 2100 A further rise of sea level by 9~88cm in the 21 st century Continuing GHG emissions To result in dramatic climate changes unequaled ever * the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change The agenda for action to slow and stabilize climate change “to achieve... stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” 1992: UNFCCC* signed by 154 countries in Rio Having come into force in 1994 Possible only by stabilizing GHG concentration IPCC cautions

Key landmarks of UNFCCC 1992 : UNFCCC was signed at Rio de Janeiro 1994 : UNFCCC effectuation 1995 : COP 1 & IPCC’s 2 nd Assessment report 1997 : The Kyoto protocol was adopted at COP : Marakesh Accords at COP : Kyoto Protocol comes into force (16 Feb 2005) COP: Conferences of the Parties

UNFCCC (1/2) Goal: reducing GHG emission down to 1990 level “Common but differentiated responsibilities” Four principles for the parties to practice - Sustainable Development Principle - Precautionary Principle - Polluter-Pays Principle - Equity Principle: Intergenerational & International Equity Critical difficulty because of great disparity in GHG emissions between the developed nations and the developing nations - Annex I : industrialized countries (41) - Non-Annex I : developing countries No immediate restrictions on developing countries ∵ The strong link between industrial growth and pollution Greater responsibility on Annex I countries

UNFCCC (2/2) In 1997, the 3 rd COP (Conferences of the Parties): Kyoto Protocol ~2004: 10 sessions of Conference of the Parties Since the UNFCC entering into force in 1994 Kyoto Protocol: the first formal binding legislation To assess progress in dealing with climate change Originally, no mandatory limits in the UNFCCC However, updates to set mandatory emission limits Containing enforcement provisions If failing to reduce emissions below 1990 levels, Annex I countries must buy emission credits from elsewhere or invest in conservation

Ratification of Kyoto Protocol - Require 55 parties to the convention - Annex I parties accounting for 55% of group’s CO 2 emission in USA (36% of emissions) withdrawn from Kyoto Protocol (Mar. 2001) - Ratification by Russia in Feb for Kyoto Protocol to enter into force Requisite

Kyoto Protocol (1/3) Legally binding reduction in GHG emissions Aimed reduction: an average of 5% below 1990 levels In order to reduce practically in GHG emissions - Almost corresponding to 15% below expected emission in 2008 Aimed countries: Annex I countries (41) Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, European Union, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America

Kyoto Protocol (2/3) Legally binding reduction in GHG emissions Entering into force: February 16, Following by ratification of Russia on November 18, 2004 Participation in the Kyoto Protocol (Source: Alinor, 2006)

Kyoto Protocol (3/3) Legally binding reduction in GHG emissions The 1st commitment period: 2008~ If failing, to submit 1.3 emission allowances in a 2 nd period - Otherwise, to buy emission credits from another country or invest in conservation Flexible mechanisms (Kyoto mechanisms) Allowing Annex I to meet GHG emission limitations by -Jointed Implementation: invest in developed countries -Clean Development Mechanism: invest in developing countries -Emissions Trading: buy emission credits

Changes in GHG emissions from Annex I Parties 1990 – 2004 (%) (1/2) (Source: UNFCCC)

Changes in GHG emissions from Annex I Parties 1990 – 2004 (%) (2/2) GHG Emissions Decreased by 3.3% during (18.9 → 17.6 billion t CO 2 equivalent) EIT (Economies In Transition) countries decreased by 36.8% (5.6 → 3.5 billion t CO 2 equivalent) Non EIT countries increased by 11% (13.0 → 14.4 billion t CO 2 equivalent)

Feasibility of developing countries in the 2 nd commitment period Source : CAIT

Prediction based on the cases of countries in the 2 nd commitment period Case of Korea Scenario : 21 - Minimum : +3.4% - Maximum : -64.8% - Lower than world average : 18 - Higher than world average : 3 (Source : Korea Environment Institute, 2002)

Kyoto Mechanism (1/4) Jointed Implementation (JI) As an alternative to emission reduction, -Allowing Annex I to invest at emission reducing project in another industrialized countries -Enable to reduce costs by investing in countries with relatively lower costs for emission reductions Such Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, -Most JI projects to take place in -Because of their lower costs in reducing emissions Emission reduction units (ERUs) -Awarded emission reduction by JI projects -One ERU being equivalent to one tonne of CO 2 reduction

Kyoto Mechanism (2/4) Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) As an alternate to emission reduction, -Allowing Annex I to invest at emission reducing project in developing countries -In developed countries, generally high costs in reducing To invest in Non-Annex I with relatively lower costs Certified reduction units (CERs) -Awarded emission reduction by CDM projects -One CER being equivalent to one tonne of CO 2 reduction General preference: J IC D M <

Kyoto Mechanism (3/4) Emissions Trading (ET) Purchasing units* of GHG emission * Each unit equivalent to one tonne of CO 2 reduction - From another Annex I party to reduce emission below its target - Enable to use the units toward meeting the emissions target Only Annex I parties in participation to ET - Non-Annex I countries disable to participate in such trading The units in the forms of - Assigned amount unit (AAU): the reduction below target - Emission reduction unit (ERU): by JI - Certified emission reduction (CER): by CDM (e.g., 6-10 Euro/t CO 2 )

Kyoto Mechanism (4/4) Developed Country A Developing Country Developed Country B CERsERUs CERs CDM J I Emission Trading AAUs ERUs CERs

CDM Conditions (1/2) Sustainable contribution Consent of developing countries about the project’s contribution to their sustainable development Financial additionality Without the CDM, the project having not to happen. -An economically non-viable project becoming viable as a direct result of CDM revenues If the project being self-viable, impossible to be CDM

CDM Conditions (2/2) Environmental additionality Compared to its absent case, having to lower emission By methodologies of CDM executive board (EB) -Proving the lowered emission from the project than its baseline* *A hypothetical scenario of future emission without the project High interest in establishing a baseline with high emissions The amount of emission reduction depending on the baseline G H G Emission Baseline1 Baseline2 Expected Emission Time Variance

CDM Projects in Korea (1/5) The basic date : June, 2008 (Source: Ecoeye) Registered : 18 (1.7% of total) Estimated reduction : 16,878,143 t CO 2 /y (11.1% of total) More than 50 cases were validated.

Japan Quality Assurance Organization - Registration : Mar Japan’s CDM - Crediting period : 7years - Reduction : 1,400,000 tons of CO 2 HFC Decomposition Project in Ulsan N 2 O emission reduction in Onsan Det Norske Veritas certification - Registration : Nov Capacity : 130,000/y - Crediting period : 7years - Reduction : 9.15 Mt CO 2 CDM Projects in Korea (2/5)

Korea energy manage cooperation - Registration : March Power : 98MW - Generation : 244,400MWh - Crediting period : 10years - Reduction : 1,495,363 tons of CO 2 Kangwon wind park project CDM Projects in Korea (3/5) Sihwa tidal power plant Det Norske Veritas certification - Registration : Jun Power : 25.4MW - Generation : 552.7GWh - Crediting period : 7years - Reduction : 315,440 tons of CO 2 /y

DNV-CUK - Registration : Apr Site : 19,575m 2 - Crediting period : 10years - Reduction : 347,030 tons of CO 2 /y Switching of fuel from Low Sulphur Waxy Residue fuel oil to natural gas at Gangnam branch Korea District heatingCorporation Korea Water Resources Corporation small-scale hydroelectric power plants Det Norske Veritas certification - Registration : Oct Dams : Andong, Seongnam, Jangheung - Generation : 15473MWh - Crediting period : 7years - Reduction : 9,689 tons of CO 2 /y CDM Projects in Korea (4/5)

KEMCO - Registration : Apr Power : 1,400KW - Crediting period : 7years - Reduction : 22,575 tons of CO 2 /y Yangyang renewable energy project CDM Projects in Korea (5/5) Korea Energy Management Corporation - Registration : Mar Power : 38,000MWh/y - Crediting period : 7years - Reduction : 28,880 tons of CO 2 /y Durgun hydropower project in Mongolia

Cost for Carbon Reduction The 13 th COP (Conference of Parties) : National burden from 2013 Quantification of emission is important and the statistical system should be set up for the national report. Ratification : 16 th February 2005 For 10% reduction for Korea : Cost will be 3,000 ~ 30,000 million dollars at (Source : Hyundai Research Institute, 2005)

GHG Emission in Korea 20%40%60%80%100% 0% CO 2 CH 4 : 4.8% N 2 O : 2.8% HFCs SF 6 PFCs MTCO % Ministry of Commerce Energy & Industry/Korea Energy Economic Institute, Long-term Policies and strategies on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2005 : 3.8% GasGWP CO 2 1 CH 4 21 N2ON2O310 PCFs140~6,300 HCFs6,500~9,200 SF 6 23,900 IPCC, The Science of Climate Change, %

Landfill gas generation Christensen, et al. 1996

Methodology Emission = (Formation – Recovery) × (1-Oxidation rate)

Selection criteria of model Top-down vs. Bottom-up Public trust Domestic circumstance IPCC method

IPCC methodologies where; t = year of inventory x = years for which input data should be added A = (1-e -k )/k ; Normalisation factor which corrects the summation k = Methane generation rate constant (1/yr) MSW T (x) = Total municipal solid waste (MSW) generated in year x (Gg/yr) MSW F (x) = Fraction of MSW disposed at landfill in year x L 0 (x) = Methane generation potential [MCF(x)×DOC(x) ×DOC F ×F×16/12 (Gg CH 4 /Gg waste)] DDOCm decomp T = DDOCma T-1 × (1-e -k )

폐기물 처리에 관한 양질의 국가고유 활동자료가 있는가 ? 폐기물 처리에 관한 양질의 국가고유 활동자료가 있는가 ? 국가고유의 모델이나 파라미터가 사용 가능한가 ? 국가고유의 모델이나 파라미터가 사용 가능한가 ? 매립지가 주요 온실가스 발생원인가 ? 매립지가 주요 온실가스 발생원인가 ? 절에 따라 최근의 매립지 자료를 수집하고 다른 이력자료를 추정 Yes No 시작 국가고유의 자료를 디폴트값으로 대체하여 IPCC FOD 방법으로 발생량을 추정 디폴트값과 국가고유의 활동자료를 이용하여 IPCC FOD 방법으로 발생량을 추정 국가고유의 파라미터와 활동자료를 이용하여 고유의 방법이나 IPCC FOD 방법으로 발생량을 추정 Yes Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 출처 : IPCC 2006  매립지는 주요 온실가스 발생원이므로 Tier 2 이상의 방법을 적용해야  우리나라의 경우, 국가고유의 모델이나 변수자료가 없으므로 Tier 3 의 적용이 불가능  따라서 현재로는 불가피하게 Tier 2 방법을 적용 ※ 파라미터 : k, L 0, DOC, DOC f 활동자료 : 폐기물 조성별 매립량, 회수율 등 Tier 방법 선정을 위한 의사결정도

Comparing IPCC Methodologies

Models in developed countries CountryModelCountryModelCountryModel AustriaIPCC Tier2HungaryIPCC FOD (2006)NorwayIPCC Tier2 (2006) AustraliaIPCC Tier2 (2006)IcelandIPCC 2006PortugalIPCC Tier2 BelgiumIPCC Tier2Ireland Modified form of IPCC Tier2 RomaniaIPCC Tier1 Canada FOD method (Scholl-Canyon) ItalyIPCC Tier2SloveniaIPCC Tier2 CzechIPCC Tier1JapanIPCC Tier3SpainIPCC Tier2 DenmarkIPCC Tier2LatviaIPCC Tier2SwedenIPCC Tier2 EstoniaIPCC Tier1 Liechtenst ein No key categorySwissIPCC Tier2 FinlandIPCC Tier2LithuaniaIPCC Tier2UkraineIPCC Tier2 FranceIPCC Tier2 Luxembour g IPCC Tier2 United Kingdom IPCC Tier2 German y IPCC Tier2 Netherland s IPCC Tier2U.S.IPCC Tier2 GreeceIPCC Tier2 New Zealand IPCC Tier2 Source : IPCC NIR, 2007

IPCC 제 4 차 평가보고서 (2007)  IPCC 는 1990 년 이후 5-6 년 간격으로 기후변화 평가보고서를 발간  IPCC 는 3 개의 실무그룹 (Working Group, WG) 으로 구분되어 있으 며, 이중 WG II 는 기후변화 적응 및 완화, WG III 는 온실가스 배출 량 저감을 연구하기 위한 실무 그룹  제 4 차 평가보고서는 제 3 차 평가보고서 발간 이후의 과학, 기술, 환경, 경제, 사회 분야의 변화들을 고려하고 있음.  동 보고서는 온실가스 배출경향, 부문별 중, 단기 그리고 장기 온실 가스 저감, 기후변화 저감을 위한 정책 및 수단, 지속 가능한 발전과 기후변화 저감에 대한 내용을 포함.

기후변화 적응과 완화에 대한 WG II 의 주요 연구 결과  지난 과거의 배출로 인해 이미 피할 수 없게 된 온난화로부터 발생하는 영 향을 다룰 수 있는 적응이 필요하다.  현재, 적응에 대한 선택의 폭이 넓긴 하지만 미래의 기후 변화에 대한 취약 성을 줄이기 위해서는 지금보다 좀 더 광범위한 적응이 요구된다. 이러한 적응에는 장애와 한계 및 비용과 관련된 문제가 있으며, 아직 이런 문제들 에 대한 충분한 이해가 부족하다.  기후변화에 대한 취약성은 다른 문제들과 결합하여 더욱 악화될 수 있다.  미래의 취약성은 기후변화 뿐만 아니라 개발 경로에도 영향을 받는다.  지속가능한 발전은 기후변화에 대한 취약성을 줄일 수 있으나, 기후변화 로 국가의 지속적인 개발 행보의 모색이 방해받을 수 있다.  완화를 통해 많은 영향을 피하고 그 정도를 줄이거나 속도를 늦출 수 있다.  적응과 완화 방법의 포트폴리오를 통해 기후 변화와 관련된 위험 요소를 줄일 수 있다.

적절히 설계된 온실가스 저감 정책은 지속 가능한 발전을 위한 선택 선진국을 중심으로 한 온실가스 저감 정책은 개발도상국 및 저개발 국가들의 지속 가능한 경제 발전을 저해할 수 있음. → 지역간 경제발 전 현황을 고려한 전세계적 경감 노력은 전세계의 지속 가능한 발전 가능성을 높임.  온실가스 저감 평가를 위한 로드맵에 대한 설명 ( 상세 내용은 보고서 참조 )  제 3 차 평가보고서와의 차이점 언급 에너지, 수송, 주거, 산업, 농업, 임업, 폐기물 등 부문별 경감 대안 및 비용의 상세한 내용 소개 지역별 차이점 소개 공통의 문제 강조 ( 예 : 리스크와 불확실성, 의사결정과 정책 입안, 비 용과 잠재력 등 ) IPCC WG III 의 주요 연구 결과

References - Climate Change 1990, IPCC, Climate Change 1995, IPCC, Climate Change 2001, IPCC, Glacier Mass Balance, Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, Global warming, UK Meteorological Office, Kyoto Protocol, UNFCCC, The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Greenhouse gas emission trends and projections in Europe 2006, European Environment Agency, GHG data 2006, UNFCCC, Key GHG data, UNFCCC, 2006

(-continued) - Issues and options : The Kyoto protocol’s second commitment period, iisd, Report of the centralized in-depth review of the fourth national communication of Japan, United Nations office, Environmental policy demonstrable progress report, Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature conservation and Nuclear safety, Climate change : The UK programme, DETR, Study on participate reduction commitment of developing countries, KEI, Greenhouse gas data and international climate policy, World Resources Institute, 2005