Annex C

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Net Zero Carbon Roadmap for York

 

 

 

Andy Gouldson, Robert Fraser Williamson, Andrew Sudmant & Amelia Duncan

 

 

 

 

Contact:

a.gouldson@leeds.ac.uk

robert@williamsonconsulting.org

 

www.pcancities.org

 

 

 

     

   

/var/folders/p5/818mjcjs3g3fkplc0p2d_xzh0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/Content.MSO/C87B2D1.tmp    

 

mage result for university of leeds logo

 

 

 

      

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Contents

 

 

Executive Summary

 

1. Introduction

 

2. Our Approach:

 

 

a.        Measuring an Area’s Carbon Footprint

b.       Developing a Baseline of Past, Present and Future Emissions

c.        Setting Science-Based Carbon Reduction Targets  

d.       Identifying and Evaluating Carbon Reduction Opportunities

e.        Aggregating Up to See the Bigger Picture

f.         Developing Targets and Performance Indicators

g.        Focusing on Key Sectors

 

3. Developing a Baseline of Past, Present and Future Emissions for York

 

4. Setting Science-based Carbon Reduction Targets for York

 

5. Aggregating Up: The Bigger Picture for York

 

6. Developing Targets and Performance Indicators

 

7. Focusing on Key Sectors in York:

 

 

  1. Domestic Housing
  2. Public and Commercial Buildings
  3. Transport
  4. Industry

 

8. Innovative Stretch Measures in York

 

9. Next Steps for York

 

 

Appendix 1: League Table of the Most Carbon Effective Options for York

Appendix 2: League Table of the Most Cost Effective Options for York

Appendix 3: Detailed Sectoral Emissions Reduction Potential by Scenario

Appendix 4: Marginal Abatement Chart for York

Appendix 5: Methodology Explored

 

 

 

 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Background:

 

·         Scientific evidence calls for rapid reductions in global carbon[1] emissions if we are to limit average levels of warming to 1.5°C and so avoid the risks associated with dangerous or runaway climate change.

·         Globally, the IPCC suggests that we will have used up the global carbon budget that gives us a good chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C degrees within a decade. This science underpins calls for the declaration of a climate emergency.

·         Dividing the global carbon budget up by population gives York a total carbon budget of just over 10 million tonnes from 2020. Based only on the fuel and electricity directly used within its boundaries (i.e. it’s scope 1 and 2 emissions), York currently emits c.888,000 tonnes of carbon a year, and as such it would use up its carbon budget just over 12 years.

·         This assessment does not include it’s broader carbon footprint – for example relating to longer distance travel or the goods and services that are produced elsewhere but consumed within York (i.e. it’s scope 3 emissions).

 

Baselines and Targets:

 

·         Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions from York have fallen by 44% since the turn of the millennium. With on-going decarbonisation of grid electricity, and taking into account population and economic growth within the city-region, we project that York’s 2000 level of annual emissions will have fallen by a total of 51% in 2030 and 54% in 2050.

·         If it is to stay within its carbon budget, York needs to add to adopt science-based carbon emissions reduction targets the build on the emissions reductions already achieved to secure 65% reductions on its 2000 level of emissions by 2025, 76% by 2030, 84% by 2035, 89% by 2040, 92% by 2045 and 95% by 2050.

·         Without further activity to address its carbon emissions, we project that York’s annual emissions will exceed its carbon budget by 802,000 tonnes in 2030, and 746,000 tonnes in 2050.

 

The Cost-Effective Options:

 

·         To meet these carbon emissions reduction targets, York will need to adopt low carbon options that close the gap between its projected emissions in future and net zero emissions. This can be partially realised through cost-effective options that would more than pay for themselves through the energy cost reductions they would generate whilst often also generating wide social and environmental benefits in the area.  

·         More specifically, the analysis shows that York could close the gap between its projected emissions in 2030 and net zero emissions by 47% purely through the adoption of cost-effective options in houses, public and commercial buildings, transport and industry.

·         Adopting these options would reduce York’s total projected annual energy bill in 2030 by £287 million whilst also creating 3,570 years of employment in the city. They could also help to generate wider benefits including helping to tackle fuel poverty, reducing congestion and productivity losses, improving air quality, and enhancements to public health.

·         The most carbon effective options for the city to deliver these carbon cuts include improved deep retrofitting of heating, lighting and insulation in houses, cooling and insulation in offices, shops and restaurants, and a range of measures across the transport sector including mode shift to non-motorised transport and the wider up-take of electric vehicles.

 

 

 

 

 

The Need for Ambition and Innovation:

 

·         The analysis also shows that York could close the projected gap to net-zero emissions in 2030 by 69% through the adoption of options that are already available, but that some of these options would not pay for themselves directly through the energy savings that they would generate. Many of these options would, however, generate wider indirect benefits both economically and socially in the city.

This means that although it can achieve significant reductions in emissions by focusing on established cost-effective and technically viable measures, York still has to identify other more innovative interventions that could deliver the last 31% of shortfall between projected emissions in 2030 and a net zero target.

·         Options identified elsewhere that could be considered in York include targeting a complete transition to net zero homes and public/commercial buildings by 2030, promoting the rapid acceleration of active travel (e.g. walking and cycling), tackling food waste, reducing meat and dairy consumption and reducing concrete and steel consumption/promoting adoption of green infrastructure including accelerated tree planting plans.

·         As well as reducing York’s direct (scope 1 and 2) carbon footprint, some of these more innovative measures (e.g. reducing meat and dairy or concrete and steel consumption) could start to focus on tackling York’s broader consumption-based (i.e. scope 3) carbon footprint.

 

Next Steps:

 

·         York needs to adopt a clear and ambitious climate action plan. The case for the adoption of such a plan is supported by the evidence that much – but not all - of the action that is required can be based on the exploitation of win-win low carbon options that will simultaneously improve economic, social and health outcomes across the city.

·         The climate action plan should adopt science-based targets for emissions reduction. As well as longer term targets, it should adopt 5-yearly carbon reduction targets.

·         The action plan should focus initially on York’s direct (scope 1 and 2) carbon footprint as these emissions are most directly under the city’s influence, but in time it should also widen its scope to consider its broader (scope 3) carbon footprint.

·         The action plan should also set out the ways in which York will work towards achieving these science-based targets, drawing on the deployment KPIs listed in this report. Action should also be taken to monitor and report progress on emissions reductions.

·         It is important to stress that delivering on these targets will require action across the city and the active support of the public, private and third sectors. Establishing an independent York Climate Commission could help to draw actors together and to build capacities to take and track action.

·         Leadership groups should be formed for key sectors such as homes, public and commercial buildings, transport and industry, with clear plans for delivery of priority actions in each sector. All large organisations and businesses in the city should be asked to match broader carbon reduction commitments and to report back on progress.

 

 


 

1. Introduction

 

Climate science has proven the connection between the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the extent to which the atmosphere traps heat and so leads to global warming. The science tells us – with a very high level of confidence – that such warming will lead to increasingly severe disruption to our weather patterns and water and food systems, and to ecosystems and biodiversity. Perhaps most worryingly, the science predicts that there may be a point where this process becomes self-fuelling, for example where warming leads to the thawing of permafrosts such that they release significant quantities of greenhouse gases leading to further warming. Beyond this point or threshold, the evidence suggests that we may lose control of our future climate and become subject to what has been referred to as dangerous or ‘runaway’ climate change.

 

Until recently, scientists felt that this threshold existed at around 2 degrees centigrade of global warming, measured as a global average of surface temperatures. However, more recent scientific assessments (especially by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC in 2017) have suggested that the threshold should instead be set at 1.5 degrees centigrade. This change in the suggested threshold from 2 degrees to 1.5 degrees has led to calls for targets for decarbonisation to be made both stricter (e.g. for the UK to move from an 80% decarbonisation target to a net zero target), and to be brought forward (e.g. from 2050 to 2030).

 

Globally, the IPCC suggests that from 2020 we can only emit 344 billion tonnes of CO2 if we want to give ourselves a 66% chance of avoiding dangerous climate change. We are currently emitting over 37 billion tonnes of CO2 every year, which means that we will have used up our global carbon budget within a decade. It is this realisation – and the ever accumulating science on the scale of the impacts of climate change - that led to calls for organisations and areas to declare a climate emergency and to develop and implement plans to rapidly reduce GHG emissions.

2. Our Approach

 

2(a). Measuring an Area’s Carbon Footprint

 

Any area’s carbon footprint – measured in terms of the total impact of all of its greenhouse gas emissions - can be divided into three types of greenhouse gas emissions.

 

-          Those coming from the fuel (e.g. petrol, diesel or gas) that is directly used within an area and from other sources such as landfill sites or industry within the area. These are known as Scope 1 emissions.

-          Those coming from the electricity that is used within the area, even if it is generated somewhere else. These are known as Scope 2 emissions. Together scope 1 and 2 emissions are sometimes referred to as territorial emissions.

-          Those associated with the goods and services that are produced elsewhere but imported and consumed within the area. After taking into account the carbon footprint of any goods and services produced in the area but that are exported and consumed elsewhere, these are known as Scope 3 or consumption-based emissions.

 

In this report we focus on Scope 1 and 2 emissions, and exclude consideration of long-distance travel and of Scope 3 or consumption-based emissions. We do this because Scope 1 and 2 emissions are more directly under the control of actors within an area, and because the carbon accounting and management options for these emissions are better developed. We stress though that emissions from longer distance travel (especially aviation) and consumption are very significant, and also need to be addressed.

 

 

2(b). Developing a Baseline of Past, Present and Future Emissions

 

Having a baseline of carbon emissions is key to tracking progress over time. We use local authority emissions data to chart changes in emissions from 2005 to the 2018. We also break this down to show the share of emissions that can be attributed to households, public and commercial buildings, transport and industry.

 

We then project current emissions levels for the period through to 2050. To do this, we assume on-going decarbonisation of electricity in line with government commitments and a continuation of background trends in a) economic and population growth, and b) energy use and energy efficiency. Specific numbers for the key variables taken into account in the forecasts are presented below. As with all forecasts, the level of uncertainty attached increases as the time period in question extends. Even so, it is useful to look into the future to gauge the scale of the challenge to be addressed in each area, especially as it relates to the projected gap between the forecasted emissions levels and those that are required if an area’s emissions are to be consistent with a global strategy to limit average warming to 1.5 degrees.

 

 

2(c). Setting Science-Based Carbon Reduction Targets

 

To set science-based carbon reduction targets for an area, we take the total global level of emissions that the IPCC suggests gives us a 66% chance of limiting average levels of warming to 1.5 degrees, and divide it according to the share of the global population living in the area in question. This enables us to set the total carbon budget for an area that is consistent with a global budget. To set targets for carbon reduction, we then calculate the annual percentage reductions from the current level that are required to enable an area to stay within its overall carbon budget.

 

 

2(d). Identifying and Evaluating Carbon Reduction Opportunities

 

Our analysis then includes assessment of the potential contribution of c.130 * energy saving or low carbon measures for:

 

-          households and for both public and commercial buildings (including better insulation, improved heating, more efficient appliances, some small scale renewables)

-          transport (including more walking and cycling, enhanced public transport, electric and more fuel efficient vehicles)

-          industry (including better lighting, improved process efficiencies and a wide range of other energy efficiency measures).

 

We stress that the list of options that is assessed may not be exhaustive; other options could be available and the list can potentially be expanded.

 

For the options included, we assess the costs of their purchase, installation and maintenance, the direct benefits (through energy and fuel savings) of their adoption in different settings and their viable lifetimes. We also consider the scope for and potential rates of deployment of each option. This allows us to generate league tables of the most carbon and cost-effective options that could be deployed within an area.

 

It is important to note that we base the analysis on current capital costs, although future costs and benefits are adjusted for inflation and discounting factors. This could be pessimistic if costs fall and benefits increase as some options become more widely adopted, or if the costs increase as the rates of deployment increase. It is also important to note that, although we consider the employment generation potential of different options, we do not consider the wider indirect impacts of the different options relating to their social, economic or environmental implications.

 

Beyond the range of currently available options, we also consider the need for more innovative or ‘stretch’ options to be developed and adopted within the area if it is to meet its carbon reduction targets. These need to be developed in each area, but the some of the ideas for innovative options identified elsewhere include targeting a full transition to net zero homes and public/commercial buildings by 2030, promoting the rapid acceleration of active travel (e.g. walking and cycling), tackling food waste, reducing meat and dairy consumption and reducing concrete and steel consumption/promoting adoption of green infrastructure.

 

 

2(e). Aggregating Up to See the Bigger Picture

 

Based on this bottom-up analysis of the potential for different options to be adopted within the area, we then aggregate up to assess the potential for decarbonisation within that area, and the costs and benefits of different levels of decarbonisation. We then merge the aggregated analysis of the scope for decarbonisation with the baseline projections of future emissions to highlight the extent to which the gap between the projected and required emissions levels that can be met through different levels and forms of action.

 

To break this gap down, we merge interventions into three broader groupings:

 

-          Cost-Effective (CE) options where the direct costs of adoption are outweighed by the direct benefits that they generate through the energy savings they secure, meaning the portfolio of measures as a whole has a positive economic impact in present value. These options may also generate indirect benefits, for example through job creation, fuel poverty and improved air quality and public health.

-          Cost-Neutral (CN) options where the portfolio of interventions mentioned above is expanded to consider investments that may not be as cost effective on their own terms, but where the range of measures as a whole will have near-zero net cost.

-          The Technical Potential (TP) options where the direct costs are not (at present) covered by the direct benefits. However, the cost of many low carbon options is falling quickly, and again these options could generate important indirect benefits such as those listed above.


As it is unlikely that adopting all of the cost-effective or even technically viable options will enable an area to reach net-zero emissions, we also highlight the need for a fourth group of measures:

 

-          The innovative or ‘stretch’ options that includes low-carbon measures that are not yet widely adopted. Some of the options within this group may well be cost and carbon effective, and they may also generate significant indirect benefits, but whilst we can predict their carbon saving potential, data on their costs and benefits is not yet available.

 

 

2(f). Developing Targets and Performance Indicators

 

Linked to the analysis detailed above, we extend our evaluation of potential emissions reductions across York’s economy to substantive, real-life indicators for the levels of investment and deployment required to achieve targets. These Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) illustrate the scale of ambition required to reach the emissions savings presented in the Technical Potential scenario and are disaggregated by sector.

 

 

2(g). Focusing on Key Sectors

 

As well as presenting an aggregated picture, we also focus on the emissions saving potential in the housing, public and commercial buildings, transport, and industry sectors. We focus in on overall investment needs and returns, and present more detailed league tables of the most carbon and cost effective options that could be adopted in each sector.

3. Developing a Baseline of Past, Present and Future Emissions for York

 

Analysis shows that York’s baseline (scope 1 and 2) emissions have fallen by 44% since 2000, due to a combination of increasingly decarbonised electricity supply, structural change in the economy, and the gradual adoption of more efficient buildings, vehicles and businesses.

 

With full decarbonisation of UK electricity by 2050, and taking into account economic growth (assumed at 2.5% p.a.), population growth (assumed at 0.1% p.a.) and on-going improvements in energy and fuel efficiency, we project that York’s baseline (scope 1 and 2) emissions will only fall by a further 7% by 2030, 9% by 2040, and 10% by 2050. This is a total of just under 54% between 2000 and 2050.

 

 

 

Figure.1: York’s Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions (2000-2050)

 

 

Currently, 32% of York’s emissions come from transport, with the domestic housing sector then responsible for 31% of emissions, public & commercial buildings for 22% and industry 16%. Emissions related to land-use contribute c.0.5% and are not considered technically in this report. By 2050, we project emissions from transport will decrease very slightly (still producing c.31%) with a significant 10% increase in the proportion of emissions from housing. Small decreases are forecast in the proportion of emissions from public & commercial buildings and industry, largely a result of expansion in the output of the domestic buildings sector over this period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure.2: York’s Present and Projected Emissions by Sector

 

Related to this emissions baseline, after evaluating the range of energy sources York consumes (spanning electricity, gas, all solid and liquid fuels across sectors) we find that in 2019 £299 million was spent on energy across the city. Transport fuels generated the majority of this demand (44%), followed by domestic buildings (35%) then public & commercial buildings and industry (13% and 9% respectively). By projecting demand and energy prices into future with reasonable baseline assumptions over population, inflationary measures and efficiency gains across the economy, we find that York’s business as usual energy expenditure will likely grow to just under £320 million per year in 2030 and c.£435 million per year in 2050, with transport expenditure growing in its contribution to York’s total (see Figure 3 below).

 

Figure.3: York’s Present and Projected Energy Expenditure by Sector

4. Setting Science-based Carbon Reduction Targets for York

 

 

The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has argued that from 2020, keeping within a global carbon budget of 344 gigatonnes (i.e. 344 billion tonnes) of CO2 emissions would give us a 66% chance of limiting average warming to 1.5 degrees and therefore avoiding dangerous levels of climate change. If we divide this global figure up on an equal basis by population, this gives York a total carbon budget of c.10 megatonnes (i.e. 10 million tonnes) over period between the present and 2050.

 

At current rates of emissions output, York would use up this budget in just over 12 years at some point during the spring of 2032. However, York could stay within its carbon budget by reducing its emissions by just over 7% year on year. This would mean that to transition from the current position where emissions are 44% lower than 2000 levels to a local pathway that is consistent with the world giving itself a 66% chance of avoiding dangerous, runaway climate change, York should adopt carbon reduction targets (on 2000 levels) of:

 

·         65% by 2025

·         76% by 2030

·         84% by 2035

·         89% by 2040

·         92% by 2045

·         95% by 2050.

 

Such a trajectory would mean that the majority of all future carbon cuts needed for York to transition to a 1.5 degree consistent pathway need to be delivered in the next 10 years.

 

 

Figure.4: York’s Baseline and Science-Based-Target Emissions Pathways

5. Aggregating Up: The Bigger Picture for York

 

a)      Emissions reductions

 

Our analysis predicts that the gap between York’s business as usual emissions in 2030 and the net zero target could be closed by 47 % (379ktCO2e) through the adoption of Cost-Effective (CE) options, by a further 15% (118ktCO2e) through the adoption of additional Cost-Neutral (CN) options at no net cost, and then by an additional 7% (53ktCO2e) through the further adoption of all technically viable (TP) options. This means that York still has to identify the innovative or stretch options that could deliver the last 31% (252ktCO2e) of the gap between the business as usual scenario and net zero in 2030.

 

Figure.5: York’s BAU Baseline with Cost-Effective, Cost-Neutral, & Technical Potential Scenarios

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Reduction on BAU Baseline

CE

38%

47%

44%

44%

44%

41%

CN

46%

62%

59%

59%

59%

58%

TP

51%

69%

65%

66%

65%

65%

Reduction on Present Emissions

CE

35%

43%

39%

37%

37%

35%

CN

43%

56%

51%

50%

50%

49%

TP

47%

62%

57%

56%

55%

55%

 

Table.1: York’s Potential 5-Year Emissions Reduction Percentages

 

b)      The most carbon and cost-effect options

Figure 6 below presents the emissions savings that could be achieved through different groups of measures in York. Appendices 1 and 2 present league tables of specific measures and their potential emissions savings over this period.  

Figure.6: Simplified Emissions Reduction Potential by Measure for York

 

Simplified league tables of the most cost and carbon effective options in York are presented below (see Appendices 1 & 2 for more detailed league tables).

 

Rank

Measure

Cost Effectiveness (£/tCO2e)

1

Fabric improvements in Retail buildings

-571

2

Diesel Car to Bus (diesel) Journeys

-458

3

Improved cooling in Retail buildings

-393

4

Petrol Car to Bus (diesel) Journeys

-373

5

Diesel Car to Walk Journeys

-345

6

Diesel Car to Bicycle Journeys

-345

7

Petrol Car to Bicycle Journeys

-323

8

Petrol Car to Walk Journeys

-323

9

Fabric improvements in Public buildings

-276

10

Petrol Car to Plug-in hybrid Journeys

-214

 

Table.5: York’s Top-10 Most Cost-Effective Emission Reduction Options

 

 

 

Rank

Measure

Emissions Reduction Potential 2020-50 (ktCO2e)

1

Insulating Domestic buildings

906

2

Upgraded Heating controls in Domestic buildings

846

3

Electrical upgrades in Domestic buildings

669

4

Installing heat pumps in Domestic & Office buildings

653

5

Petrol Car to Bicycle Journeys

636

6

Petrol Car to Walk Journeys

636

7

Fabric improvements in Retail buildings

515

8

Petrol Car to Bus (electric) Journeys

485

9

Upgraded boilers in Domestic buildings

481

10

Electricity demand reduction in Domestic buildings

475

 

Table.6: York’s Top-10 Most Carbon Effective Emission Reduction Options

 

Some of the ideas for innovative options identified elsewhere that could also be considered for York include targeting a full transition to net zero homes and public/commercial buildings by 2030, promoting the rapid acceleration of active travel (e.g. walking and cycling), tackling food waste, reducing meat and dairy consumption and reducing concrete and steel consumption/promoting adoption of green infrastructure. These are highlighted in section 8.

 

c)     Investment needs, paybacks and employment creation

 

Exploiting the cost-effective options in households, public and commercial buildings, transport, industry  and waste could be economically beneficial. Although such measures would require total investments of around £1.1 billion over their lifetimes (equating to investments of 110m a year across all organisations and households in the city for the next decade), once adopted they would reduce York’s total energy bill by £287 million p.a. in 2030 whilst also creating 3,570 years of employment – or 357 full-time jobs for the next decade.

 

By expanding this portfolio of measures to at no net cost to York’s economy (the Cost-Neutral scenario), investments of £2.3 billion over their lifetimes (or £230m a year for the next decade) would generate 5,887 years of employment (or 588 jobs for the next decade) whilst reducing York’ emissions by 62% of projected 2030 levels.

 

Exploiting the all technically viable options would be more expensive (at least at current prices, c.£3 billion or £300m a year for the next decade) but realise further emissions savings – eliminating 69% of the projected shortfall in York’s 2030 emissions, whilst saving hundreds of millions of pounds on an annual basis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Cumulative Investment (£M)

CE

763

1,160

1,162

1,163

1,164

1,164

CN

1,442

2,223

2,254

2,256

2,257

2,257

TP

1,934

2,964

2,995

2,997

2,997

2,997

Annual Energy Expenditure Savings (£M)

CE

203

287

284

285

281

284

CN

188

258

256

248

239

233

TP

187

255

252

245

235

227

 

Table.2: Potential 5-Year Investments and Energy Expenditure Savings

 

Sector

Scenario

Investment (£M)

Domestic

CE

584

CN

924

TP

1,170

Public & Commercial

CE

448

CN

504

TP

909

Industry

CE

17

CN

198

TP

287

Transport

CE

115

CN

631

TP

631

Table.3: Potential Investments by Sector & Economic Scenario

 

 

Total

Domestic

Industry

Transport

Public & Commercial

Years of Employment

CE

3,570

1,250

58

157

2,106

CN

5,887

1,975

676

864

2,371

TP

8,623

2,503

982

864

4,274

Jobs

(20-year Period)

CE

179

62

3

8

105

CN

294

99

34

43

119

TP

431

125

49

43

214

Table.4: Potential Job Creation by Sector & Economic Scenario

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. Developing Targets and Performance Indicators

 

To give an indication of the levels of activity required to deliver on these broader targets, the tables below detail total deployment across different sectors in York through to 2050. We also give an indication of the rate of deployment required in the city if it is to even approximate its climate targets. These lists are not exhaustive, and also apply by measure; any one building or industrial facility will usually require the application of several measures over the period. These figures effectively become Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the delivery of climate action across the city.

 

 

Domestic Homes:

Measure

Total Homes Applied

Mean Annual Rate of Installation (homes)

Lighting Upgrades

51,631

2,963

Floor Insulation

48,546

2,732

Glazing Upgrades

45,597

2,589

Gas Boiler Upgrades & Repairs

46,800

2,506

Solar PV

35,810

2,055

Thermostats & Heating Controls

35,116

1,976

Solar thermal

36,430

1,955

Loft insulation

32,283

1,748

Wall Insulation

23,111

1,290

Draught Proofing

18,401

1,044

Cavity wall Insulation

15,350

856

Heat Pumps

3,780

215

 

 

Public & Commercial Buildings:

Measure

Floorspace Applied (m2)

Mean Annual Rate of Installation (m2)

Lighting/Heating Controls and Sensors

1,450,231

82,076

Retail Heating Upgrades

1,420,740

80,425

Wind Turbines

795,241

45,815

Office Lighting Upgrades

398,040

23,006

Office Fabric Improvements

279,564

15,595

Office Heat Pumps

114,492

6,328

Office Solar PV

93,984

5,168

 

 

Transport:

Measure

Deployment

Additional EVs Replacing Conventional Private Cars

1,536

Additional Electric-Buses Procured and In-service

85

High Quality Protected Cycling Highways Built

9 kilometres

Increase in Public Transport Ridership

4M trips per annum

 

Table.7: York’s Sectoral Emissions Reduction KPIs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7. Focussing on Key Sectors in York

 

At full deployment (technical potential) across York, we calculate that there is potential to avoid over 14MtCO2e in emissions that will otherwise be produced in the city between 2020 and 2050. The transport sector will contribute most significantly toward this total, with a decarbonisation potential of between 4MtCO2e (cost-effective scenario) and 6MtCO2e (technical potential) through the period. However, domestic housing , industry and public and commercial buildings also play a major role:; upgrading and retrofitting of York’s built environment (including the domestic, public and commercial sectors) could reduce emissions by up to c.8MtCO2e over the same period at full technical potential, with industry similarly showing the potential to decarbonise nearly 500ktCO2e under the same conditions.

 

Figure.7 York’s Emissions Reduction Potential (2020-2050) by Sector

Figure.8: York’s Emissions Reduction Potential By Sector & Economic Scenario (2020-50)

In the following section, summaries of the emissions reduction potential and economic implications of investment are presented for the four main sectors. For display and continuity purposes, each sector is displayed with a summary of the same metrics: (1) emissions reduction potential over time in the three economic scenarios, (2) 5-year totals for cumulative emissions savings, investment requirements and annual energy expenditure reductions, and (3) a simplified table of the most cost effective low carbon measures applied in each sector across York.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7(a). Housing

 

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Emissions Reductions (ktCO2e)

CE

111

154

143

144

153

143

CN

121

183

167

169

174

170

TP

148

222

203

206

209

209

Annual Energy Expenditure Savings (£M)

CE

67

110

113

116

113

118

CN

83

137

140

141

142

147

TP

70

114

116

118

118

122

Cumulative Investment (£M)

CE

368

584

584

584

584

584

CN

575

924

924

924

924

924

TP

727

1,170

1,170

1,170

1,170

1,170

 

Rank

Measure

Cost Effectiveness (£/tCO2e)

1

Electrical & Appliance upgrades in Domestic buildings

-208

2

Lighting improvements in Domestic buildings

-145

3

Electricity demand reduction in Domestic buildings

-137

4

Draught-proofing in Domestic buildings

-50

5

Installing heat pumps in Domestic buildings

-37

6

Upgraded Heating controls in Domestic buildings

-28

7

Glazing improvements in Domestic buildings

-27

8

Installing biomass boilers in Domestic buildings

-24

9

Solar thermal devices in Domestic buildings

-18

10

Upgraded boilers in Domestic buildings

-11

7(b). Public & Commercial Buildings

 

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Emissions Reductions (ktCO2e)

CE

50

74

61

60

60

60

CN

60

90

73

72

72

73

TP

67

100

82

81

80

81

Annual Energy Expenditure Savings (£M)

CE

65

107

105

110

113

117

CN

21

35

34

36

37

39

TP

33

53

52

55

57

59

Cumulative Investment (£M)

CE

278

448

448

448

448

448

CN

314

504

504

504

504

504

TP

565

909

909

909

909

909

 

Rank

Measure

Cost Effectiveness (£/tCO2e)

1

Fabric improvements in Retail buildings

-571

2

Improved cooling in Retail buildings

-393

3

Fabric improvements in Public buildings

-276

4

Lighting improvements in Public buildings

-200

5

Improved cooling in Office buildings

-198

6

Heating improvements in Public buildings

-139

7

Lighting improvements in Retail buildings

-132

8

Improved cooling in Public buildings

-97

9

Heating improvements in Office buildings

-82

10

Heating improvements in Retail buildings

-53

7(c). Transport

 

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Emissions Reductions (ktCO2e)

CE

148

148

137

127

116

105

CN

182

208

204

198

191

183

TP

182

208

204

198

191

183

Annual Energy Expenditure Savings (£M)

CE

68

67

64

59

54

49

CN

75

78

73

65

56

47

TP

75

78

73

65

56

47

Cumulative Investment (£M)

CE

100

111

113

114

115

115

CN

355

598

629

631

631

631

TP

355

598

629

631

631

631

 

Rank|

Measure*

Cost Effectiveness (£/tCO2e)

1

Diesel Car to Bus (diesel)

-458

2

Petrol Car to Bus (diesel)

-373

3

Diesel Car to Walk

-345

4

Diesel Car to Bicycle

-345

5

Petrol Car to Bicycle

-323

6

Petrol Car to Walk

-323

7

Petrol Car to Plug-in hybrid

-214

8

Diesel Car to Plug-in hybrid

-136

9

Petrol Car to EV

-133

10

Petrol Car to Bus (electric)

-129

7(d). Industry

 

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Emissions Reductions (ktCO2e)

CE

5

4

2

0

0

0

CN

19

16

12

8

7

7

TP

24

21

16

11

10

10

Annual Energy Expenditure Savings (£M)

CE

3

3

3

1

1

0

CN

9

9

9

6

4

0

TP

10

10

10

7

5

0

Cumulative Investment (£M)

CE

3

17

17

17

17

17

CN

40

198

198

198

198

198

TP

57

287

287

287

287

287

 

 

Rank*

Measure

Cost Effectiveness (£/tCO2e)

1

Improving Efficiency of Boilers and Steam Piping in Industry

307

2

Fan Correction, Repairs,  & Upgrades in Industry

663

3

Condensing & Insulation Measures to Boilers & Steam Piping in Industry

719

4

Pump Upgrades, Repairs and Maintenance in Industry

825

5

Compressed Air Systems in Industry

1,055

6

Furnace Efficiency and Heat Recovery Mechanisms in Industry

3,213

7

Refrigeration Efficiency and Technical Upgrades in Industry

15,656

8. Innovative Stretch Measures in York

 

Even with full delivery of the broad programme of cross-sectoral, city-wide low carbon investment described above, there remains an emissions shortfall of 31% between York’s 2030 BAU baseline and the net zero target. Here we briefly consider the productivity of certain key technologies and interventions that may well be able to plug this gap into the future. Many of these so-called ‘stretch options’ are innovative by nature but they will be required to reach York’s targets in future.

 

 

 

2025

2030

2035

Annual Emissions Reduction Potential (ktCO2e)

Zero Carbon Heavy Goods Transport

11

48

48

Industrial Heat and Cooling Electrification

12

12

7

870 Ha. Reforested Annually 2020-29*

47

120

148

Electrification of Domestic Heat

6

33

48

Electrification of Domestic Cooking

2

11

15

Electrification of Commercial/Public Heating

3

8

3

Table.7: Stretch Measures’ Decarbonising Potential ( * Sequestration Values)

 

Figure 10 below shows the impact that the adoption of these stretch measures would have on York’s carbon emissions, with the red dotted line showing the ‘business as usual’ baseline, the purple dotted line showing emissions after adoption of all technically viable options and the blue dotted line showing emissions after all technically viable and stretch options. This indicates that York would still have some residual emissions through to 2050. For illustration, the green dotted line shows that in theory York could offset is residual emissions through a UK based tree planting scheme, however this would require the planting of 39 million trees, which even with the densest possible planting would require 8,700 hectares of land, equivalent to 32% of the total land area of the city.

 

 

Figure.10: Sectoral Emissions Shortfall Reduction with Stretch Measures

 

 

 


 

9. Next Steps for York

 

Based on the analysis presented above, we recommend that if York wants to stay within its share of the global carbon budget, it needs to adopt a clear and ambitious climate action plan.

 

The case for the adoption of such a plan is supported by the evidence that much – but not all - of the action that is required can be based on the exploitation of win-win low carbon options that will simultaneously improve economic, social and health outcomes across the city.

 

A climate action plan for York should adopt science-based targets for emissions reduction, including both longer term targets and 5-yearly carbon reduction targets.

 

The action plan should focus initially on York’s direct (scope 1 and 2) carbon footprint as these emissions are most directly under the city’s influence, but in time it should also widen its scope to consider its broader (scope 3) carbon footprint.

 

The action plan should clearly set out the ways in which York will work towards achieving these targets, drawing on the deployment KPIs listed in this report. Action should also be taken to monitor and report progress on emissions reductions.

 

It is important to stress that delivering on these targets will require action across the city and the active support of the public, private and third sectors. Establishing an independent York Climate Commission could help to draw actors together and to build capacities to take and track action.

 

Such a Commission could act as a critical friend to the city, helping to promote stakeholder engagement and build buy-in and a sense of common ownership for the climate action plan, as well as in supporting, guiding and tracking progress towards its delivery.

 

Through such a Commission, cross-sectoral leadership groups could be formed for key sectors such as homes, public and commercial buildings, transport and industry, with clear plans for the delivery of priority actions in each sector. All large organisations and businesses in the city should be asked to match broader carbon reduction commitments and to report back on progress.


 

Appendix 1. League Table of the Most Carbon Effective Options for York

 

 

Measure*

Emissions Reduction Potential (ktCO2e)

Insulating Domestic buildings

906

Upgraded Heating controls in Domestic buildings

846

Electrical upgrades in Domestic buildings

669

Installing heat pumps in Domestic buildings

653

Petrol Car to Bicycle

636

Petrol Car to Walk

636

Fabric improvements in Retail buildings

515

Petrol Car to Bus (electric)

485

Upgraded boilers in Domestic buildings

481

Electricity demand reduction in Domestic buildings

475

Diesel Car to Walk

464

Diesel Car to Bicycle

464

Installing solar PV in Domestic Buildings

444

Petrol Car to EV

439

Petrol Car to Bus (diesel)

395

Petrol Car to Plug-in hybrid

375

Petrol Car to Hybrid

375

Diesel Car to EV

370

Diesel Car to Bus (electric)

341

Fabric improvements in Public buildings

338

Diesel Car to Plug-in hybrid

276

Lighting improvements in Domestic buildings

276

Draught-proofing in Domestic buildings

257

Installing biomass boilers in Domestic buildings

252

Hybrid Car to EV

240

Glazing improvements in Domestic buildings

228

Diesel Car to Bus (diesel)

224

Heating improvements in Public buildings

213

Solar thermal devices in Domestic buildings

193

Condensing & Insulation Measures to Boilers & Steam Piping in Industry

185

Installing air source heat pumps in Office buildings

163

Solar thermal devices in Public buildings

148

Lighting improvements in Office buildings

133

Improving Efficiency of Boilers and Steam Piping in Industry

131

Solar thermal devices in Retail buildings

125

Wind microgeneration associated with Public buildings

103

Improved lighting controls and sensors in Public buildings

89

Upgrading heating controls in Office buildings

86

Improved lighting controls and sensors in Office buildings

86

Improved cooling in Office buildings

85

Improved lighting controls and sensors in Retail buildings

72

Diesel Car to Hybrid

66

Lighting improvements in Public buildings

66

Compressed Air Systems in Industry

54

Pump Upgrades, Repairs and Maintenance in Industry

49

Heating improvements in Retail buildings

42

Fan Correction, Repairs,  & Upgrades in Industry

34

Furnace Efficiency and Heat Recovery Mechanisms in Industry

34

Installing solar PV in Public buildings

13

Fabric improvements in Office buildings

10

Improved cooling in Public buildings

10

Refrigeration Efficiency and Technical Upgrades in Industry

7

Improved cooling in Retail buildings

7

Installing solar PV in Office buildings

5

Heating improvements in Office buildings

5

Installing air source heat pumps in Retail buildings

4

Upgraded heating controls in Retail buildings

4

Installing air source heat pumps in Public buildings

4

Lighting improvements in Retail buildings

4

Wind microgeneration associated with Retail buildings

4

Upgraded heating controls in Public buildings

4

Solar thermal devices in Office buildings

4

Installing solar PV in Retail buildings

3

Wind microgeneration associated with Office buildings

3

TOTAL

14,306

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 2. League Table of the Most Cost Effective Options for York

 

 

Measure*

Cost Effectiveness (£/tCO2e)

Fabric improvements in Retail buildings

-571

Diesel Car to Bus (diesel)

-458

Improved cooling in Retail buildings

-393

Petrol Car to Bus (diesel)

-373

Diesel Car to Walk

-345

Diesel Car to Bicycle

-345

Petrol Car to Bicycle

-323

Petrol Car to Walk

-323

Fabric improvements in Public buildings

-276

Petrol Car to Plug-in hybrid

-214

Electrical upgrades in Domestic buildings

-208

Lighting improvements in Public buildings

-200

Improved cooling in Office buildings

-198

Lighting improvements in Domestic buildings

-145

Heating improvements in Public buildings

-139

Electricity demand reduction in Domestic buildings

-137

Diesel Car to Plug-in hybrid

-136

Petrol Car to EV

-133

Lighting improvements in Retail buildings

-132

Petrol Car to Bus (electric)

-129

Petrol Car to Hybrid

-114

Improved cooling in Public buildings

-97

Heating improvements in Office buildings

-82

Insulating Domestic buildings

-76

Diesel Car to Bus (electric)

-63

Heating improvements in Retail buildings

-53

Lighting improvements in Office buildings

-53

Draught-proofing in Domestic buildings

-50

Diesel Car to EV

-41

Fabric improvements in Office buildings

-38

Installing heat pumps in Domestic buildings

-37

Upgraded Heating controls in Domestic buildings

-28

Glazing improvements in Domestic buildings

-27

Upgrading heating controls in Office buildings

-26

Installing biomass boilers in Domestic buildings

-24

Solar thermal devices in Domestic buildings

-18

Diesel Car to Hybrid

-12

Upgraded heating controls in Public buildings

-11

Upgraded boilers in Domestic buildings

-11

Upgraded heating controls in Retail buildings

-8

Installing air source heat pumps in Retail buildings

-1

Hybrid Car to EV

3

Installing solar PV in Domestic Buildings

3

Installing air source heat pumps in Public buildings

10

Solar thermal devices in Retail buildings

19

Improved lighting controls and sensors in Retail buildings

29

Installing air source heat pumps in Office buildings

30

Installing solar PV in Public buildings

40

Installing solar PV in Office buildings

53

Installing solar PV in Retail buildings

55

Improved lighting controls and sensors in Office buildings

71

Solar thermal devices in Public buildings

76

Solar thermal devices in Office buildings

112

Wind microgeneration associated with Office buildings

158

Improved lighting controls and sensors in Public buildings

174

Wind microgeneration associated with Public buildings

196

Wind microgeneration associated with Retail buildings

307

Improving Efficiency of Boilers and Steam Piping in Industry

307

Fan Correction, Repairs,  & Upgrades in Industry

663

Condensing & Insulation Measures to Boilers & Steam Piping in Industry

719

Pump Upgrades, Repairs and Maintenance in Industry

825

Compressed Air Systems in Industry

1,055

Furnace Efficiency and Heat Recovery Mechanisms in Industry

3,213

Refrigeration Efficiency and Technical Upgrades in Industry

15,656


Appendix 3. Detailed Sectoral Emissions Reduction Potential by Scenario

 

 

 

 

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

2038

2039

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

2045

2046

2047

2048

2049

2050

Domestic Housing

Reduction on BAU Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

5%

10%

17%

23%

31%

40%

47%

54%

57%

58%

55%

58%

56%

53%

54%

51%

50%

49%

51%

52%

50%

52%

52%

50%

49%

52%

51%

51%

48%

47%

47%

CN

5%

12%

19%

25%

35%

44%

54%

60%

64%

66%

65%

64%

64%

61%

61%

59%

59%

59%

59%

59%

59%

59%

59%

59%

58%

59%

57%

57%

56%

55%

56%

TP

7%

14%

23%

32%

43%

53%

65%

72%

78%

80%

79%

79%

77%

76%

75%

72%

73%

72%

72%

73%

72%

72%

72%

71%

71%

71%

70%

69%

68%

68%

69%

Reduction on 2020 Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

5%

10%

17%

23%

30%

40%

47%

54%

57%

58%

55%

58%

56%

53%

55%

51%

51%

50%

52%

53%

52%

53%

54%

52%

51%

55%

55%

55%

51%

51%

51%

CN

5%

11%

18%

25%

34%

43%

53%

60%

64%

66%

66%

64%

64%

61%

62%

60%

60%

60%

60%

60%

60%

61%

61%

61%

60%

62%

61%

61%

61%

59%

61%

TP

7%

14%

22%

31%

43%

53%

64%

72%

79%

81%

80%

79%

77%

76%

75%

73%

74%

74%

73%

74%

74%

74%

74%

74%

74%

75%

74%

73%

73%

73%

75%

Public & Commercial buildings

Reduction on BAU Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

4%

8%

13%

19%

25%

29%

34%

39%

43%

45%

46%

46%

45%

44%

41%

41%

41%

42%

42%

43%

44%

44%

45%

45%

46%

46%

46%

48%

48%

48%

49%

CN

5%

10%

16%

23%

30%

35%

40%

47%

51%

54%

56%

55%

53%

53%

50%

49%

49%

50%

51%

52%

52%

53%

54%

54%

55%

55%

56%

57%

57%

57%

59%

TP

5%

11%

18%

25%

34%

39%

45%

52%

57%

61%

63%

62%

60%

59%

56%

55%

54%

56%

57%

58%

58%

59%

60%

60%

62%

61%

62%

64%

64%

64%

66%

Reduction on 2020 Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

4%

8%

12%

17%

22%

26%

29%

34%

37%

38%

38%

38%

35%

34%

32%

32%

31%

31%

31%

31%

31%

31%

32%

31%

32%

31%

31%

32%

31%

31%

31%

CN

5%

9%

15%

21%

27%

31%

35%

41%

44%

46%

47%

45%

42%

42%

39%

38%

37%

38%

37%

38%

37%

37%

38%

37%

38%

37%

37%

38%

37%

37%

38%

TP

5%

10%

17%

23%

30%

35%

39%

45%

49%

51%

52%

50%

47%

47%

43%

42%

41%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

42%

41%

42%

Transport

Reduction on BAU Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

54%

54%

55%

55%

56%

56%

57%

57%

58%

58%

59%

59%

58%

58%

57%

57%

56%

56%

55%

54%

54%

53%

52%

52%

51%

50%

49%

48%

47%

47%

46%

CN

58%

60%

63%

65%

67%

69%

72%

74%

77%

80%

83%

83%

83%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

83%

83%

82%

82%

81%

81%

80%

80%

TP

58%

60%

63%

65%

67%

69%

72%

74%

77%

80%

83%

83%

83%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

84%

83%

83%

82%

82%

81%

81%

80%

80%

Reduction on 2020 Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

54%

54%

53%

53%

53%

52%

52%

52%

52%

52%

52%

52%

51%

50%

50%

49%

48%

47%

46%

46%

45%

44%

43%

43%

42%

41%

40%

40%

39%

38%

37%

CN

58%

59%

60%

62%

63%

65%

67%

68%

69%

72%

74%

73%

73%

73%

73%

72%

72%

72%

71%

71%

70%

70%

69%

69%

68%

68%

67%

67%

66%

66%

65%

TP

58%

59%

60%

62%

63%

65%

67%

68%

69%

72%

74%

73%

73%

73%

73%

72%

72%

72%

71%

71%

70%

70%

69%

69%

68%

68%

67%

67%

66%

66%

65%

Industry

 

Reduction on BAU Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

2%

3%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

1%

1%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

CN

6%

10%

14%

17%

16%

16%

16%

15%

15%

14%

14%

14%

13%

13%

12%

12%

11%

10%

9%

9%

8%

8%

7%

7%

7%

7%

8%

8%

8%

8%

8%

TP

8%

12%

17%

20%

20%

19%

19%

19%

18%

18%

18%

17%

17%

17%

16%

15%

14%

13%

13%

12%

12%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

12%

Reduction on 2020 Emissions (ktCO2e)

CE

2%

2%

3%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

1%

1%

1%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

CN

6%

9%

13%

15%

14%

14%

14%

13%

13%

12%

12%

11%

11%

10%

10%

9%

8%

7%

7%

6%

6%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

TP

8%

11%

15%

19%

18%

17%

17%

16%

16%

15%

15%

14%

13%

13%

12%

12%

11%

10%

9%

9%

8%

8%

7%

7%

7%

7%

7%

7%

7%

7%

7%

 


Appendix 4. Marginal Abatement Chart for York

Office CoolingDomestic Electricity Demand ReductionHeating Public BuildingsLighting/Cooling in Public & Office buildingsPetrol Car to PHEVCompressor systems in IndustryFabric improvement in Public buildings14,00010,000
 
 5,000
 
 0

Heating & Cooling in Offices
Cooling & Lighting in Public Buildings
Lighting Systems in Offices
0,20,000
* Marginal abatement values (£/tCO2e) presented here are averaged across aggregated groupings of measures, across multiple applications. 
  Curve is primarily for indicative purposes and cannot be used to derive absolute investment requirements across 61MtCO2e abatement total.
 



Appendix 5. Methodology Explored

 

Sector

Measure

Application Data

Commercial

Office T5 Lighting (conversions & new luminaries)

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

Retail PIR Movement & Daylight Sensors

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

Transport

Private EV Penetration

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

 Public EV Buses

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

Domestic

Detached House Cavity Wall Insulation

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

High-Rise Flat Draught Proofing Measures

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

Industrial

  Boilers/Steam Systems Upgrades

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

Furnaces/Process Heaters Improvements

kWh/m2  -  £2018 CAPEX/OPEX/EoL  -

The figure above displays, at a high level, the methodology applied in this analysis. First, thorough evaluation of many hundreds of application-specific interventions was undertaken to develop data on what each measure will institute in energy savings (across several energy vectors), and the costs involved in its application and lifecycle. Next, lifecycle energy and cost savings are applied to reliable projections for market prices, costs, energy vector by type, emissions factor by source, and a variety of other economic and environmental variables over time. The ongoing productivity and savings of each intervention can then be then ‘scaled-up’ to the local conditions for deployment potential and place-specific penetration available in York’s context – the number of houses (by type) recommended a certain measure year-on-year, area of commercial building judged suitable, possible percentage mode-shift in transport journeys, etc. This process enables the carbon savings attributable to each intervention (specific to York) to be aggregated into the sectoral, and ultimately city-wide outputs.



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/var/folders/p5/818mjcjs3g3fkplc0p2d_xzh0000gn/T/com.microsoft.Word/Content.MSO/C87B2D1.tmp

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image result for university of leeds logo
../../../../../Desktop/Screen%20Shot%202017-08-21%20at%2011.2
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


                                                     



[1] For simplicity, we use the term ‘carbon’ as shorthand for all greenhouse gases, with all figures in this report relating to the carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of all greenhouse gases unless otherwise stated. Note that our assessment therefore differs from other assessments that focus only on CO2.

* We evaluate over 130 separate low carbon technologies/interventions applied across sectors, with variable place-specific data on how their productivity and economics will change by application. This results in over 1000 unique data points customised to York’s economy, infrastructures and demography.

Note: Due to the high cost-effectiveness of many transport mode-shift options, the TP scenario has been removed and emissions pathways are covered by CE and CN only.

* Journey transitions

* For display purposes interventions in industry have been aggregated here into the 7 relevant process types

* Measures listed here have been grouped and summed across multiple applications for display purposes; ‘ICE’ and ‘NMT’ refer to Internal Combustion Engine and Non-Motorised Transport respectively; Transport measures refer to transitions between travel modes.

* Measures listed here have been grouped and summed across multiple applications for display purposes; the cost per tonne of emissions reduction displayed here are mean values across applications.