A climate-neutral city, but how?

Scientifically, the relationship between global warming and greenhouse gas emissions is undisputed. It is also established that a temperature increase of more than 1.5°C compared to the temperature in the pre-industrial period is disastrous. Nevertheless, it is feared that the increase in temperature will exceed 2°C.

The world has failed to meet its short-term goals. Instead of the target reduction in CO2 emissions, global emissions increased by 1.6% in 2017 and 2.7% in 2018. The main reasons are growing car ownership and increasing use of coal for electricity production. The graph below shows that all continents except Europe are responsible for this.

Most governments emphasise the urgency of reducing CO2 emissions and plan to halve emissions by 2030, i.e. within ten years. There are serious doubts as to whether these intentions will be achieved. Authoritative institutions such as Bloomberg and Arcadis predict, based on currently available plans, that by 2050, the use of coal and oil will be reduced by no more than 50%.

By 2050, solar and wind energy will meet almost half of the global energy demand. This puts an end to the dominance of fossil energy sources. The share of solar energy in particular will increase significantly.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF)

What are we talking about?

In the first place, it is better not to talk about CO2 emissions, because there are other greenhouse gases as well. Each of these gases is created by human activities and contributes to global warming. 76% of heating over a 100-year period is caused by carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuel combustion, land use (deforestation, ploughing) and industrial processes (respectively 62, 11 and 3 percent of total heating). Methane (CH4) comes from biomass combustion, rice paddies and livestock (16% of total heating), nitrogen oxide (NO2) comes from fertilizers (6%) and fluorinated gases comes from refrigerants and industrial processes (2%).

Secondly, following the pioneering work of the Drawdown project, it is better to focus on the sectors of the economy responsible for global warming rather than the type of emissions. This makes it easier to discuss solutions.

Five major sectors; electricity, food and land use, industry, transportation, buildings and homes are causing the problem. Burning coal, oil and natural gas to generate electricity is the largest source of global emissions, but the food and land use sector follows closely behind.

After the energy sector, the cement industry is the largest source of CO2 emissions. It accounts for 5 to 6% of all emissions. Researchers in the US have developed a method for producing cement without CO2 emissions. They estimate that the new production process will also be cheaper than the existing process. Solar energy is used directly to heat and melt the limestone above 800 degrees Celsius. Then electrolysis takes place, resulting in lime with carbon monoxide and oxygen as by-products. The process still requires a lot of heat.

Third, we must realise that the Earth itself is capable of absorbing 55% of greenhouse gas emissions, especially the oceans and forests. Creation of new forests, restoration of carbon-rich soils in agricultural areas and restoration of coastal ecosystems will help increase the absorption capacity destroyed by deforestation.

Finally, the impact of global warming differs between and within countries. According to a recent study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, countries in Africa, South Asia and Central America are more affected as they are already located in the warmest parts of the world. A warmer climate in countries in temperate zones can lead to higher productivity, higher agricultural yields and higher well-being. For example, warming in Norway has already increased the national product per capita by 34%, while India experienced 31% less growth than it would have without global warming.

This does not mean that wealthier nations as a whole benefit. The southern states of the US are already seeing an increase in extreme weather events, hurricanes, droughts and wildfires, which will lead to a shift of wealth north and west and thus further regional inequality.

The role of municipalities

In discussing the policies of cities with regard to climate change, the work of the C40 Climate Leadership Group cannot be ignored. The group has been around for more than 12 years and now represents 96 of the world's largest cities with a combined population of more than 650 million, including London, New York, Paris, Amsterdam and Kuala Lumpur. The C40 cities want to make a substantial contribution to the success of the Paris Agreements. Detailed plans have been made for this. It is estimated that by 2050, global warming-related disasters will endanger 1.3 billion people and assets worth $158 trillion.

Most cities are already experiencing changes in climate. Which, show the diagram below.

It is imperative that the C40 cities limit greenhouse gas emissions to 22 GtCO2-e between now and 2050. Then global warming will be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Naturally, the national government, the business community and the other cities must also make their contribution. In addition, 31GtCO2-e. are removed from the atmosphere (negative emission).

C40, together with Arup and McKinsey, have published some solid reports that together are a roadmap for the 1.5 degrees Celsius trajectory, distinguishing different types of cities. The latest report The future of urban consumption in a 1.5 degrees Celsius world (June 2019) also maps consumption-based emissions, what urban businesses and citizens use, eat and wear, and how these things are made and transported. . That is no small feat, 85% of the emissions associated with goods and services that citizens of the C40 cities use take place outside these cities.

As mentioned above, the contribution of cities to the reduction of the greenhouse effect includes both emissions produced in the city itself or those resulting from consumption by citizens. All these actions together can lead to a reduction of emissions by 51%. Of this 51%, only 20% is the result of activities initiated by the boards of the municipalities involved. The other 80% comes from activities of other stakeholders within these cities, whether or not stimulated, coordinated and subsidized by the municipal government.

So far, these target numbers are nowhere near being reached. An inventory from the Carbon Disclosure Project found that of the 696 largest cities, only 43 are taking significant action, including 24 in North America, such as Toronto, Boston and New York. Furthermore some European cities like Barcelona, Reykjavik, London and The Hague.

Activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions involve millions of people worldwide. They must decide to have fewer children, to send girls to college, to use energy-saving appliances, to cover their roofs with solar panels, to invest in insulation and heat pumps and to change their consumption patterns. However, the impact of these decisions is negligible when compared to decisions that have to be made at the company level.

In a thought-provoking article, Derrick Jensen highlights that in the US, domestic energy consumption in the period 1994 - 2009 was less than 25% of total energy consumption, 90% of fresh water goes to agriculture and industry, and household waste only 3% of total waste production. He concludes that if all Americans did everything they could to reduce their carbon footprint by not driving and going vegan, the greenhouse gas emissions in the US would be reduced by only 22%.

A recent report from the Carbon Disclosure Project reveals that 100 global oil and gas producing companies are responsible for 71% of all greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. These companies hold the main key to reducing the production of carbonaceous fuels. It is worth noting that in the years since the signing of the Paris accord, financial institutions have invested more than $478 billion in coal exploitation.

The contribution of urban-level activities to mitigation of the main sources of greenhouse gases is discussed below, with an emphasis on activities initiated by urban governance. The perspective of the humane city is also introduced here, because it is not inconceivable that policies to reduce greenhouse gases will widen the gap between rich and poor. For example, 78.9% of US electric car subsidies went to individuals with incomes over $100,000.

Energy

The reduction of the greenhouse effect is usually associated with the replacement of carbon-based fuels with renewable energy sources. The Drawdown report lists many additional options. Below we list a few, with an emphasis on sources that reduce emissions by more than 10 gigatons of CO2 equivalents. We refer in brackets to the ranking of each measure (between 1 – 100) and the estimated reduction in emissions of CO2 equivalents (in gigatons): Onshore wind (2; 89.60), solar parks (8; 36.90), solar panels on roofs (10; 24.60), geothermal heat (18; 16.60), nuclear energy (20; 10.09), offshore wind (22; 14.09) and concentrated solar energy (25; 10.90). The circumstances and priorities differ per country: Think of offshore wind, solar panels on the roof, biomass and thermal heat.

Many cities want to green electricity production by 50% in the next 10 years, but decisions about large-scale power plants are rarely made at the municipal level, with the exception of world cities such as London and New York that have their own plants. On the other hand, many owners (and sometimes tenants) of houses and buildings are buying solar panels en masse, often with the help of the municipalities where they live. Cities actively engage in or promote third-party campaigns that provide homes and commercial properties with free solar panels. It is often mandatory that new houses and buildings are energy neutral.

The state of California has taken an important step: from 2020, all new homes will be equipped with solar panels and their own battery storage. There are still many opportunities for citizens to cut back on energy consumption.

Nest and Sense: Affordable devices to help citizens reduce their energy consumption

The Nest learning thermostat programs itself. The thermostat first investigates a user's habits when it manually sets the temperature. Then the thermostat automatically chooses the most likely temperature at any time of the day and continues to learn manual adjustments. The thermostat also tracks energy consumption over time, allowing users to adjust their habits. Another tool, Sense, allows consumers to see at any time which electronic devices are being used and how much electricity they are consuming. As a result, consumers can replace appliances or lamps if they wish.

In many places, the possibilities to expand the number of solar panels are limited due to capacity problems on the electricity grid. It would be better if municipalities stimulated the establishment of energy cooperatives at neighborhood level instead of concentrating on the purchase of solar panels. Energy cooperatives do not limit themselves to the production of electricity, but also regulate the storage and trading of energy in the event of surpluses or shortages.

The development of smart grids is an alternative to expensive expansion of the capacity of the existing network as a result of the increasing use of electricity and the number of energy suppliers. The production and consumption of energy at the neighborhood level can be optimised by using IoT to allow all devices that use, store and produce energy to communicate with each other. Ideally, the members of energy cooperatives decide the rules behind the algorithms in the computerised operating system.

Buildings and houses

Buildings and homes are the largest consumers of energy in cities (heating, cooling, hot tap water and lighting) not to mention the energy used in the production of building materials. They account for 40% of global energy consumption. Mass realisation of energy-neutral buildings is therefore a top priority. Copenhagen aims to be carbon neutral by 2025 and is on track despite substantial growth in population and jobs. District heating and cooling of almost the entire city is the main means of achieving this goal, along with the limitation of car use. Copenhagen is implementing a smart thermal grid, which uses all residual heat from industrial and commercial activities. Seawater is used for cooling.

Copenhagen is a shining example for the rest of Europe. There is enough industrial residual heat to supply 90% of the heat demand of all buildings and homes. The Heat Europe project tries to link areas with a surplus of residual heat to areas with a shortage of residual heat. The video below shows the ambitions, contours and potentially fascinating results of this project.

New York is an example in another way. The Dirty Buildings Bill requires 50,000 buildings in the city to reduce emissions by 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050. This includes installing new windows and insulation. The law applies to buildings of more than 2,500 m2. Together these account for half of all emissions, despite only 2% of the real estate in the city. In an informative article, experts describe dozens of available artificial intelligence technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the built environment.

Building permits are useful means of influencing energy consumption and promoting circularity. They may include requirements regarding the use of less cement and steel and, of course, the limitation of energy consumption. Switching to sustainable wood is an option for 90% of the houses and 70% of the offices being built. On the other hand, building in an energy-neutral or even energy-positive way offers many advantages. That is why 37% of British developers are convinced that their portfolio will consist to a large extent of green buildings in a few years' time.

A city like London could save more than $11 billion over the next 5 years by using existing buildings more efficiently and avoiding new construction.

BREEAM: Sustainable buildings

The Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) is a set of indicators for the sustainability of buildings. An example of an almost completely sustainable building is the Bloomberg headquarters in London. Among the many partly technological means used in this building is a green living wall, a natural ventilation system and 4,000 integrated ceiling panels that combine heating, cooling and lighting. Probably the best example in the Netherlands is The Edge, Deloitte's head office in Amsterdam. The building is energy neutral. To achieve this, the entire southern facade is equipped with solar panels. Rainwater is collected and reused. There is a heat-cold storage installation that uses thermal energy. Both buildings use Philips Ethernet-powered LED lighting system, which saves approximately 40% energy.

Another angle for urban administrators is insulation of the existing stock of buildings and houses. In the case of new construction, regulation is possible, in the case of renovation, the municipality can play a supporting role by subsidising projects by individual owners of houses and buildings and housing associations. Conveniently, many housing associations and institutional investors have also committed to the Paris Agreements.

Mobility

Reducing emissions from cars contributes significantly to the reduction of total emissions within municipalities. There is growing awareness that the positive impact of electric cars is overshadowed by the side effects of battery production. The same also applies to the production of raw materials for solar panels. These raw materials must be imported from a limited number of countries where production has questionable environmental and social impacts.

From an energy perspective, promoting electric cars is a good thing, even if they mainly use grey electricity for the time being. However, from the point of view of quality of life, a reduction in the total number of cars is necessary. Cities are right to opt for a car ban in certain parts of the city. As in many other respects, such decisions must have sufficient support or risk being reversed after the next election. Due to restrictions on the ownership and use of private cars In C40 municipalities, 170 million square meters of parking space on the street can be reused, for example for the planting of 2.5 million trees or the construction of 25,000 km of bicycle paths.

In any case, the replacement of petrol cars by (green) electric cars will take place gradually. At the same time, municipal authorities must offer alternatives, such as efficient, safe, affordable and user-friendly public transport, supplemented with a safe and fast connection for micro transport such as bicycles and electric scooters. In addition to this, a software-supported MaaS system can perform good services. This allows rental cars to be added to the range of available alternatives.

Consumption

Municipalities can stimulate the transition to sustainable forms of agriculture, as described in the Drawdown report, within their borders. In addition, they can promote a more plant-based diet and avoid food waste. Stimulating joint cultivation of crops by residents can help with this. The Drawdown report recommends reducing meat consumption to a maximum of 16 kg per person per year and dairy products to 90 kg per person per year. In the US that is now 58 kg of meat and 155 kg of dairy.

We have not discussed the necessary changes in industry, aviation and (international) transport because urban authorities have little influence on this.

Investments

Permanently ending greenhouse gas emissions in C40 cities by 2050 will require massive investments, roughly $50 to $200 per cubic meter of "saved". At the same time, these investments provide a global economic stimulus of $16,600 billion. From 2016 to 2050, each C40 city will need to invest an average of $10 billion to meet the ambition of the Paris Agreement. This is an investment of more than $1000 billion in all C40 cities combined. $375 billion is needed in the next four years alone.

Sustainability in the humane city

Achieve the Paris targets, municipal authorities are working with all stakeholders, not least citizens, to reduce global warming.

The main activities to achieve this goal are:

• Covering all suitable roofs with solar panels.
• Installing windmills in seas adjacent to densely populated areas and in other suitable places.
• Creating sufficient storage options for energy.
• Construction of smart grids to manage the production and consumption of electricity.
• Heating of houses by district heating systems powered by industrial waste heat, hydrogen, thermal energy or heat pumps.
• Significant reduction in energy consumption through insulation and smart thermostatic systems.
• Significant reduction in the number of car kilometers by increasing walking and cycling opportunities and expanding public transport.
• Eliminate or at least reduce the use of fossil fuels to the level where the earth itself can break down greenhouse gas emissions.
• Reuse of waste at the highest possible level.
• Intensification of responsible food production.
• Adjustment of the consumption pattern by citizens.

All of this only meets half of the challenge facing cities.

There is energy poverty in many countries. This term refers to increasing inequality due to the reduction of global warming. Populist politicians are fueling this growing discomfort. Understandable, as long as other politicians don't take action.

The Green New Deal initiative in the US by House of Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey is a prime example of connecting the fight against global warming with the fight against poverty and growing social inequality. often along racial divides. At the same time, the ambition to reduce global warming requires a massive increase in a skilled workforce. That is why massive training programs for the renewable energy, insulation and renovation sectors are necessary. Such programs are also desirable for workers in the fossil fuel industry.

The short video below, published by the US news agency Fox, summarizes the New Green Deal.

In itself, the transition to climate-neutral cities should still be possible, although it requires an increasing trend break. And other governments, companies and citizens can still provide their necessary share. This transition is possible with existing knowledge and technologies. Money is not the big problem either. The necessary investments will pay for themselves in the long term and the transition to clean technology will contribute to responsible economic growth.

What causes more headaches is the lack of skilled labor and this is where the connection with the humane city lies. Providing jobs, a reasonable income, adequate housing and education go hand in hand with combating global warming. Jobs are the best guarantee of a reasonable income and job opportunities are an incentive to invest in training. But there are not enough challenging jobs. The transition to a climate-neutral society can provide this.

The overriding problem is the awareness of the urgency of the problem and the will to act on it.

This applies to business, government and citizens. Compared to the pre-industrial period, the temperature has now risen by 1%. Over the next 30 years, the temperature increase should be limited to an average of 0.5%. Given that greenhouse gas emissions have never been higher than in 2018, this target is further ahead than ever. Whether it can be achieved despite this will become apparent in the next three years.

Actions for a humane approach to climate-neutral cities

• Reducing CO2 emissions and the consumption of products with a large ecological footprint, also because of the connection with health.
• Cities are collectively committed to reducing the undesired environmental and social impacts of the production of raw materials for batteries and solar cells.
• The international community allows countries disproportionately affected by the effects of global warming to tax imports from countries that contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gas emissions. This money will be used for projects to reduce the effects of global warming at urban, regional and national levels.
• Actions within cities to reduce the effects of global warming are primarily aimed at protecting the densely populated neighbourhoods.
• Cities support the development of energy cooperatives at the local level. These cooperatives are funded to insulate and equip homes with sustainable heating, cooling and cooking equipment. These investments are paid, at least in part, by the difference between the actual and new monthly energy expenditure.
• As a fairer alternative to taxing carbon emissions, businesses, including farmers, are allowed to temporarily have a certain level of emissions that will decrease year after year. Interest free loans are available to invest in this purpose. Exceeding the permitted emission is penalised.
• All cities are developing transition plans to a low-carbon future. These are the result of collaboration between companies, (knowledge) institutions, groups of citizens and municipal authorities. They are revised every two years based on the progress made and new insights.
• Cities no longer invest in expanding road capacity for passenger cars. Instead, they are investing in car-free parts of the city, in public transport in micro-transport and in facilities for carbon-free delivery of goods. As a special focus, the mobility of disabled people will be improved.
• To maximize the use and efficiency of district heating, cities work together at a regional level to match supply and demand for industrial waste heat or cooling.
• Cities invest in large-scale education projects to train thousands of new employees for the sustainability industry (solar panels, rolling out heat networks, insulation). Because many of these employees will have no work experience, their introduction to the labor market is carefully supervised.
• Owners of houses and buildings are obliged to cover suitable roofs with solar panels for their own use or for use by energy cooperatives. Where possible, solar panels are integrated into the roof. Monumental buildings can opt for exemptions for aesthetic reasons.