Developing regional and local scenarios

for climate change mitigation and adaptation

Part 1: A framing of the East of England

John Turnpenny, Sebastian Carney,

Alex Haxeltine and Tim O'Riordan�

June 2004

Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research Working Paper 54

Developing regional and local
scenarios for climate change
mitigation and adaptation

Part 1: A framing of the East of

England

John Turnpenny, Sebastian Carney*,

Alex Haxeltine, Tim O’Riordan
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research,
University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ

* Tyndall North, UMIST, Manchester

Contact email: j.turnpenny@uea.ac.uk

Tyndall Centre Working Paper No. 54

June 2004

1
Summary – Greenhouse gas emissions and their drivers

This is the first major part of the Tyndall Centre case study creating a set of scenarios of how the East
of England Region may look in 2050 under large greenhouse gas emission reductions and with
adaptation to residual climate changes. We set out an assessment (a ‘framing narrative’) of the region
from the perspective of climate change. This involves describing and analysing the current state of the
East of England’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, its vulnerability to climate change and how these
are influenced by factors outside the Region. There are two main purposes to this exercise:

1) To identify the most important drivers of climate change

2) Establish a base from which to build our scenarios

All activities emit GHGs, some more than others. We have used a spreadsheet emissions inventory
model (GRIP) developed by the Tyndall Centre, regional strategy documents and reports, academic
literature and local knowledge to build our framing and assess where the key areas are. The principal
findings are (with approximate GHG proportions for 2000):

DOMESTIC. 25%
The main drivers of domestic emissions are poor energy efficiency of housing and an overall trend to
increasing energy use.

INDUSTRY AND ECONOMY. Commercial sector 7%; Other industries 16%

Emissions per unit of GVA are not high in the Region, since the commercial sector, a relatively low
emitter, is a major contributor to GVA. The trends are towards more development of the 'cleaner'
businesses such as finance and ICT. The two main issues for GHGs are the danger of appearing
cleaner by exporting major industrial emissions sources to developing countries, and the location of
development, with its links to the need to travel.

TRANSPORT. 29%
The large rural areas and reliance on commuting make the East the largest transport emitter per head
of all Regions. There is rising pressure nationally on increased road transport, and major links to the
location of development and the need to travel.

PUBLIC SECTOR. 5%
The total is not high, but the value of 'leading by example' in reducing emissions from council
activities, schools, hospitals etc. is high.

CULTURE. This includes tourism and leisure, and it is difficult to quantify exactly how much GHG
is emitted directly from these activities. These are important sectors for the Region, and rely on
efficient transport. Under climate change the sector is likely to expand, with implications for GHG
emissions.

AGRICULTURE. 10%
Agriculture, more than any other sector, indicates the links between climate change impacts and
mitigation. Agriculture is a relatively large emitter of GHG (mainly from soils) for its GVA, and is
very vulnerable to climate change.

WASTE. 3%
The Region is nearly at capacity for landfill waste, and has a major strategy to reduce waste. The
future is likely to see lower emissions from waste from the region, but possibly at the expense of
moving emissions to other locations.

WATER

2
Emissions from energy used in providing clean waster and treating sewage are less than 1% of the
total, but this sector is also vulnerable to the drier summers expected under climate change.

LOCATION OF DEVELOPMENT
We believe that in addition to the recognised social and economic consequences, location of
development is a major pressure for GHG emissions in the Region. The pattern of development can
significantly influence the need and type of travel, linking transport, housing, industry, schools and
retail.

3
List of acronyms used in the document

LWCC “Living with Climate Change in the East of England” Summary Report
RCS “Regional Cultural Strategy” Living East
RES “ East of England 2010. The Regional Economic Strategy”
RENVS “Our Environment, Our Future: the Regional Environment Strategy for the East of
England.” July 2003
RHS “East of England Regional Housing Strategy 2003-2006.”
RPG14 “Consultation on options leading to Regional Planning Guidance (RPG14) for the
East of England 2021”. September 2002
RSS Regional Social Strategy Consultation, September 2003
RT36 “Regional Trends No. 36 (2001 Edition). Office of National Statistics”
SDF “A sustainable development framework for the East of England” July 2001.
LAs “Climate change and local communities – how prepared are you?” UKCIP adaptation
guidance for local authorities. July 2003

4
1 Introduction – the East of England: climate change cause, effect and action

1.1 Climate Change and the East of England Region

Human-induced climate change, primarily caused by burning of fossil fuels, is likely to be one of the
biggest challenges the world faces over the next century. It is becoming increasingly clear that, even
in the most optimistic of futures, climate change will require both deep reductions in emissions
(“mitigation”) of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and adaptation to the impacts of climate change. The UK
government’s recent Energy White Paper (published in February 2003) contained an ambition to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions (from current levels) by 60% by 2050. From a scientific point of
view, this is the minimum needed to stabilise GHG concentrations in the atmosphere below the level
thought to cause “dangerous and destructive” climate change.1

Historically, there is a strong link between carbon emissions and the size of economy, as measured by
GDP2. Since growth in the economy would tend to increase emissions over the period to 2050, 60%
represents a reduction in emissions of great proportion compared to a future where no action was
taken. Action will be taken over the next few decades by central government, and by international
agreement, which will take us onto a lower carbon track. Much of the consequences of these steps
will be felt at the regional and local scales. All aspects of regional and local decision-making will be
affected by such steps. Spatial planning, transport, housing, industry, cultural life and public services
will all be affected, not least because the link between prosperity and GHG emissions will have to be
broken. This will involve major changes in the way society is run, and the assumptions on which
action is based. Institutions and areas of responsibility are still in the process of formation at the
regional and local level. In addition to ‘top down’ legislative pressure, community efforts towards a
sustainable future (such as the carbon reduction project CRed) are likely to be an important driver of
regional bodies’ priorities.

However, even if the ambition is met, there will still be a residual degree of climate change which we
will need to adapt to. There is an expanding body of research indicating the potential impacts of
climate change and guidance on how organisations might deal with and adapt to these impacts. The
scoping study “Living with climate change in the East of England”, in particular, provides scenarios of
future changes in climate and set out the options for adaptation in the east of England – thus providing
a key foundation for this study.

How does the Region think about the future at the moment? There are several interlocking regional
strategies on the economy, environment, social inclusion and planning which provide a snapshot of the
Region as it is now, and set out the context and plans for the Region over the next 10 – 20 years. Part
of these plans include addressing the impacts of climate change and a move towards the principles of
sustainable development. However, they do not address the radical changes over the next fifty years
which would accompany large scale reductions in GHG emissions.

1.2 What our study will show

The study is built on the premise that emissions reductions of at least 60% are needed by 2050, and
that we will have to adapt to residual climate changes. Through creating a set of scenarios of how the
Region may look in 2050 under such changes, we believe we can highlight some of the key decisions
on climate change over the next 20 – 50 years within the context of longer term goals for mitigation
and adaptation. These will include an assessment of the sectors and activities which contribute most
to climate change, and which will be the easiest to tackle.

1
RCEP (2000) Energy: the changing climate. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution Twenty-Second
Report.
2
IPCC (2001) Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the IPCC TAR, p. 88

5
2 The purpose of this document

This first major part of the case study sets out an assessment (a ‘framing narrative’) of the East of
England region from the perspective of climate change. This involves describing and analysing the
current state of the East of England’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, its vulnerability to climate
change and how these are influenced by factors outside the Region. There are two main purposes to
this exercise:

1) We can identify the most important drivers of climate change and hence focus the study on the most
important areas
2) Through knowledge of the current state, we can build our future scenarios based on different
combinations of changes to the present situation

The first vital question for the framing is “what are the drivers of increasing GHGs in the region?”.
The second is: “how is the region vulnerable to the twin pressures of climate change and the need to
reduce GHG emissions?”. The framing draws on a range of existing work, including regional
strategies, climate change impact assessments and emissions inventory methods. Much of the
information contained within these studies and strategies is assumed to be familiar; we use them to
draw conclusions about our key questions.

3 The Regional Strategies for the East of England

Recent changes in the patterns of governance in the UK, including a move towards regional
government, have required that the English Regions develop integrated plans for sustainable
development of their areas3. The East of England is currently (December 2003) preparing such an
integrated strategy, consisting of several parts:

3Counsell D.; Haughton, G. (2002) Sustainable Development in Regional Planning Guidance: Regional Report
No. 2 – East Anglia and the East of England. March 2002.

6
REGIONAL Planning Transport Waste Economic Environment Social Housing Cultural Living
STRATEGY Guidance Management With
Climate
Change
ABB RPG14 RTS RWMS RES RENVS RSS RHS RCS LWCC
Purpose Spatial Transport sustainable Economic natural and Inequality, Location, Culture (eg. impacts
location and planning waste development built exclusion, type, historic, of and
type of management, environment renewal number of sporting), adaptation
development reduction in housing regional to climate
waste identity change
Body EELGC under under RPG14 EEDA EERA & EERA Regional Regional SDRT
RPG14 EEEF Housing Cultural
Forum Forum
Housing * * * * * *
Transport * * * * * *
Environment * * * * * * *
Culture * * * * * *
Waste * * *
Economy * * * * *
Community * *
safety
Health *
Education * *
Participation *
Agriculture * *
/forestry
Energy * *
Water * *

Table 1: Regional Strategies for the East of England and the areas they cover. SDRT = Sustainable Development Round Table; EERA = East of England
Regional Assembly; EEEF = East of England Environment Forum; EEDA = East of England Development Agency; EELGC = East of England Local
Government Conference

7
Table 1 outlines the different strategies, the responsibility for their production, and assesses which
regional sectors and activities are covered by each. These sectors and activities are given broad
generic names to cover their different expressions within the strategies. The overarching document for
all these strategies is the region’s Sustainable Development Framework (SDF), produced by EERA
and SDRT, a “guiding template to encourage adoption of sustainable development principles in all
Regional Strategies and Action Plans”4.

The national government’s devolution of power to the Regions has led to criticism of the UK-wide
process of creating regional strategies. This especially relates to the Economic Strategies, and more
particularly conventional economic growth, taking primacy over environmental and social issues5. In
the East of England, this criticism is being addressed by an ongoing process of joint development and
progressive revision of the strategies development is iterative. However, the definition of sustainable
development is based on the UK Government’s four key principles6, which have drawn criticism for
setting much more precise goals for the economic ‘plank’ while remaining vague about social and
environmental targets. There has been extensive criticism of the assumed link between economic
growth (as measured by GDP) and welfare (eg. Daly & Cobb7; SDC8 among many others).

In this paper we are concerned with the relationship between climate change and policy, and we
examine some of these tensions between economic development, and environmental and social issues.
Discussion in this paper relates to the strategies as they stand at a particular time (December 2003),
and in the ongoing process these are certain to change. However, we believe that a ‘snapshot’
assessment can be a useful input to the process.

3.1 Climate Change and the Regional Strategies

The Region’s primary document on climate change is the ‘Living with climate change’ study,
launched in March 2004. This study comprehensively addresses the potential future climates of the
Region, their potential impacts on a wide range of regional sectors and activities, and appropriate
measures to address these impacts within the regional planning framework. The UK Climate Impacts
Programme (UKCIP) have also produced a document in conjunction with local government
associations (“Climate Change and local communities – how prepared are you?”) aimed at informing
local councils about impacts and adaptation to climate change. It is not the purpose of this paper to
repeat previous work, but it is instructive to briefly review some of the effects climate change will
have on the Region9,10. These include:

Housing, as a significant immovable capital investment, is especially vulnerable to climate-related

issues like subsidence and flooding. Currently, 125 000 properties in the East are at risk from
sea/river flooding (5% of population)11. Under climate change, without further adaptation policy,
flooding occurrence is likely to increase in winter, both on floodplains and at the coast.

Economy: Proposed developments, especially the Thames Gateway and the coasts, are very much at
risk from climate change through reduced water supply in the summer, winter flooding and sea level
rise. CC impacts on biodiversity: species loss and reduction, especially coasts and wetlands through
changing temperatures and flooding.

4
SDF, Introduction
5
Counsell & Haughton, ibid.
6
DETR (1999) A Better Quality of Life: the UK Strategy for Sustainable Development
7
Daly, H.; Cobb, J.B. (1989) For the Common Good. Beacon Press
8
Sustainable Development Commission (2003) Redefining Prosperity: resource productivity, economic growth
and sustainable development. 27 June 2003, SDC.
9
LWCC
10
LAs
11
RENVS, p. 29

8
Heavy reliance on transport infrastructure is also vulnerable to the impacts of climate change through
flood disruption, melting roads, buckling rails, embankment slip through increased rainfall intensity
and road subsidence in summer.

Public services are principally vulnerable to climate-related impacts through their statutory
responsibilities to provide effective societal support. For example, the health sector has to deal with
the consequences of sunburn/skin cancer and incidences of heat and cold stress, food poisoning and air
pollution. These disproportionately affect the most vulnerable such as the old and financially poor.

305,000 ha of Grade 1 and 2 agricultural land is at risk of fluvial flooding and 54,000 ha at risk from
coastal flooding, equivalent to two thirds the entire area of Norfolk. Agriculture is a high water user in
the region. There is therefore high vulnerability to environmental factors such as drought. Under
climate change, there is likely to be increased growing season, but decreasing soil moisture;
waterlogging in winter and species change will be significant.

Awareness of climate change impacts is already being used to inform policy, for example, RENVS’
Strategic Aims 4 and 6: “Reduce vulnerability to climate change” and “Harness environmental
benefits arising from climate change”. RPG14 is concerned with location of development in flood-
prone areas, and recommends “development should be avoided in areas at greatest risk of river and
coastal flooding”.

The regional strategies are also concerned with mitigation of GHGs: “we must significantly reduce the
production of greenhouse gases”12. Unsurprisingly, the SDF takes a lead on the unsustainable
activities and trends, including energy use and travel, location of development and large numbers of
imports, setting reducing one of the GHGs, CO2, as a high level target. However, it sets no
quantitative targets. Policies on mitigation are much harder to identify and implement, especially at
the local level. There are so many links with larger spatial scales that it is not obvious exactly what
emissions are at present (for example do we count the miles food has travelled to reach our plates?),
and attributing these to particular localities is particularly vexing. For example, consider a scenario
where the East of England builds large numbers of wind turbines, but sells the electricity to the grid.
If most of the Region’s consumers then buy power from companies that mainly use fossil fuels, can
the emission reductions legitimately be attributed to the Region? In order to achieve significant cuts in
GHG emissions, it is important to understand how these may be achieved, and what the potential
consequences are, in addition to understanding how this may happen in the context of climate change
adaptation.

In the rest of this document we concentrate on illuminating the debate on GHG mitigation, by setting
out a framing of the current state of the East of England region.

4 A quantitative sector-based mapping of greenhouse gas emissions for the East of England

The first steps in addressing the “key questions” involve an assessment of from which sectors, and
how much, GHG is currently emitted. This is not an easy task, partly due to the complexity and range
of the sources, but also due to availability of data. It becomes easy to get bogged down in data
collection, refining the methods and developing ever-more precise numbers; so much so that the
overall purpose of creating the inventory is lost. In addition, greater numerical precision does not
always equal greater accuracy, and with so many assumptions in setting out an inventory there is
necessarily a limit to accuracy. Our approach is to use the GRIP model, a top-down method
developed at Tyndall North (UMIST) which uses a mixture of directly measured regional data and
national statistics adjusted for the region. The assumptions and methods in GRIP, and a summary
table of data are given in Appendix 1.

12
RPG14, p. 37

9
Although carbon dioxide is the most often quoted, and even used to mean “all GHGs together”, mainly
because the quantities are much larger than other GHGs, these others can cause much more climate
change per tonne of gas. Hence they can contribute significantly to climate change in spite of their
small quantities, especially in sectors such as waste and agriculture where methane is emitted in the
largest quantities. The factor which determines these gases’ contributions, the ‘Global Warming
Potential’, is difficult to define since it depends on the timescale under consideration. We have used
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s values for a 100 year timescale13; each
tonne of the following gases is equivalent to X tonnes of CO2, where X =

Methane (CH4)…………………23
Nitrous oxide (N2O)……………296
SF6……………………………...22 200

We have examined several greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide [CO2] , methane [CH4], nitrous oxide
[N2O] and others [halocarbons and SF6]) and combined all into a CO2 equivalent. In the discussion
below, we quote the contribution of all gases together as a CO2 equivalent.

5 Sectoral analysis of emissions inventory

On the basis of the sectoral classification above, we now explore in more detail the areas of concern
for the major sectors of the East. For each sector, we examine some of the main statistics relevant to
GHG emissions, and discuss the underlying drivers for the levels of emissions. We also discuss
qualitatively the likely changes in these emissions under the general strategic directions proposed the
Regional Strategies and other sources. A sectoral approach is necessarily limiting since there are links
between all of the sectors; we have sketched some of these links in the text below.

5.1 Housing

Key statistics
The East of England has 5 388 200 people14 in 2.25 million households15, the population having grown
by 6% since 199116. 40% of the population is aged over 45. The population of the East is projected to
increase by 11.5% by 2021, with a corresponding increase in number of households by 18.5% by
202117. Growth will mainly occur through migration – principally from London (and hence
internationally)18.

Key issues for climate change

There are two fundamental parts to how housing relates to climate change: first, the energy use in
construction, demolition, restoration and running of the housing stock and second, the effects of the
spatial location patterns of the housing.

There is not a noticeably high domestic energy use in the East compared to other parts of the UK;
energy spend per household is slightly below the national average19. However, in absolute terms,
energy used is large compared with other EU countries. Even new-built homes in the UK use 3.5

13
IPCC: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the IPCC TAR, p. 388
14
2001 UK Census
15
1999 figure from RT36
16
RPG14
17
RHS
18
RPG14; “The Provision of Affordable Housing in the East of England 1996 – 2021”. Supplementary
document to RPG14, June 2003
19
RT36, Table 8.11, p. 112

10
times as much energy as equivalent properties in Germany20. In the region, 25% of GHG emissions
come from the domestic sector. This is from energy consumption in the home (gas, electricity, solid
and non-transport liquid fuel). The high baseline coupled with pressure from population expansion,
and increasing household numbers means that domestic energy use is a key driver of emissions in the
East. Domestic energy consumption in the UK has increased by about 20% since 198021. Unless
much more stringent energy efficiency design standards are implemented, along with reduction in
energy use through more efficient appliances, the housing sector’s contribution to climate change will
continue. These principles are endorsed in a general way by the RPG14 and the RENVS (Strategic
Aim 3) but no quantitative targets are given.

The location of housing is also of great importance, primarily from an emissions perspective because
of its links with transport. This is dealt with in more detail in Section 5.10.

5.2 Industry and economy

Key sectors and statistics

The East of England’s GVA is £76 billion per year22. Within this, there are certain ‘key sectors’,
identified in the Economic Strategy, which were chosen through criteria such as current size and
growth prospects. Together they form half of the region’s GVA23:

GVA in 2000, £ million

Finance and business services 9166
ICT 4140
Agriculture and food processing 2954
Tourism, leisure and heritage 2784
Hi-tech manufacture 2547
Automotive 937
Transport gateways 923
Media & cultural industries 902
Life sciences 551

Two important subregions identified within RPG14 are Cambridge – an area for economic expansion,
through further development of the hi-tech and related industries - and the Thames Gateway – a
priority for economic regeneration through increased employment, housing and transport links.
Deprivation is greatest in the north of region and in the cities. There are economic benefits from
proximity to Europe and London24. More than 10% of the wealth created by those in the East was in
the London economy; this figure is 25% for Essex, Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire25. Exports make
up 20% of the region’s GDP, the highest for any region.

The sectors and activities above are useful in identifying which are the main areas of overall interest in
the region, but for the purpose of our study we need to identify how different activities contribute to
GHG emissions and which are the biggest emitters. There are two main parts to industry’s emissions:
1) from the energy used (as in the domestic sector) and 2) the emissions from the industrial processes
themselves. The industrial and commercial sectors together are responsible for about 23% of the total
GHG emissions.

20
Energy Saving Trust “Towards an energy efficiency strategy for households to 2020” supplementary
submission to PIU Energy review, October 2001
21
DTI (2003) Digest of UK Energy Statistics, 2003
22
RPG14
23
RES, p. 46
24
RPG14
25
RES, p. 5

11
Commercial sector
This covers a wide range of activities including Retailing, Distribution, Hotels & Catering, Banking &
Finance, Insurance, Professional services, Computing services and IT and scientific research.
Together, these make up about 7% of the total GHG emissions in the Region, the largest single
contributor. This sector covers five of the EEDA ‘key sectors’: Finance & business services, Tourism
& leisure, Transport gateways, Media cultural industries, Life sciences and ICT, which together
account for nearly a quarter of the Region’s GVA. These activities do not consume much energy per
unit of GVA, unlike the heavier manufacturing industries.

Oil and gas supply

There are around 12 000 jobs in oil & gas supply in the East of England26. Extraction and distribution
of these fuels incurs emissions in itself (as opposed to when the fuels are burnt). These so-called
‘fugitive losses’ appear separately in our inventory, and account for about 3 - 4% of the total.

Minerals (Glass, ceramics, cement, bricks etc.)

The Region has a significant minerals industry, consisting of sand and gravel manufacture, clay,
quarrying, cement and aggregates production. This sector contributes about 2% of the total, about half
of which comes from process emissions.

Food
Agriculture and food processing is more important in the East than many other Regions. The Food
and Drink industry (mainly processing) accounts for about 2% of emissions. Emissions from
agriculture is covered in its own section below.

Electrical and mechanical engineering

This sector includes manufacture of electrical and communication equipment, as well as machinery
and metal products, ie. it includes the “Hi-tech manufacture” key sector. About 2% of the total
emissions come from this sector.

Vehicles & trailers

The manufacture of vehicles, engines and parts is a key industry in the Region, and accounts for over
2% of emissions.

Implications for the future

The key goal for the region over the next 10 years is to be one of 20 wealthiest regions in Europe
(measured by GDP/head) by 2010. This will need GDP growth of 3.2% per year, compared to the
2.3% derived from extrapolating current trends. The Economic Strategy sets out the principles of
sustainable development for the Region, including economic growth in all communities and
safeguarding the Region’s natural environment. These are broadly mirrored in the RPG14 document.
There are critiques elsewhere of the impacts of these principles on the environment (eg. 27, 28) and we
do not repeat them here. In this document, we are specifically concerned with pressure on increasing
GHG emissions. The Economic Strategy acknowledges that emissions will rise by a factor related to
economic growth, and “encourages conservation of fossil fuels”. In addition, there is an identified
need to assess the economic impacts of climate change (p. 129) “and also minimise the impact of non-
renewable energy sources on climate change”.

The key sectors identified for most growth currently contribute relatively little to GHG emissions.
This is because many are in the relatively non-energy intensive service and commercial sectors.
Improved energy efficiency in offices, and increased renewable supply could therefore make a
difference to industry emissions in the future, unlike in heavy manufacturing industry, where large

26
RPG14, p. 102
27
Counsell & Haughton (2002), ibid.
28
“Sustainability appraisal of RPG14 Options consultation document”. Levett-Therivel and Land Use
consultants, September 2002

12
amounts of energy are often necessary for the processes. Indeed, national trends show the energy use
by industry (excluding the commercial sector) fell by nearly 30% between 1980 and 200029. However,
there are two areas which will significantly increase emissions over the next ten years:

1) the aim for a clear identity and international profile, opportunities for business to tap into
international markets and the need to promote international trade (p. 16). Apart from the increase in
emissions from increasing international trade, environmentally damaging production can also be
transferred to other countries, giving the appearance of much better progress on emissions reduction in
the region at the expense of other sustainability indicators30.

2) Location of development. The major theme of “investing in success wherever it is found” (p. 12)
has implications for the location of development within the Region, and hence implications for the
level of transport and housing required, with their associated GHG emissions. The Economic Strategy
emphasises the key challenge to promote brownfield development, sustainable building design and
affordable housing.

5.3 Transport

Key statistics
Transport is treated as a sector in its own right rather than as part of other sectors such as industry,
principally because it is such an important activity contributing to climate change. Nationally, since
1980, road travel has increased by 77%, shipping by 66%, rail travel by 30% and air travel by 300%31.
Improvements in energy efficiency have countered some of these increases, but energy use from
transport as a whole still increased by nearly 60% between 1980 and 2000.32

The Eastern Region contains 9.4% of the UK’s total road mileage33, and on average each person
travels 7062 miles per year by private car34. This is 23% more than the national average. This is in
spite of the fact that 20% of households in the region have no car35, although car ownership is still
10% above the national average.36 Rural population growth is high, with increasing reliance on the
car37, and 33% of people live in settlements with populations less than 10 00038. However, rural areas
of the north are some of the poorer parts of the region39, and 16% of rural households have no car40.
Rail travel is higher than the national average but for the average person is still only about 10% of the
distance travelled by car.41

There are two major UK airports in the Region: at Luton and Stansted (6.17 million and 11.86 million
passengers in 2000 respectively)42. Norwich International airport also handles 0.4 million passengers
per year43. In response to forecasts of future demand, the White Paper on the future of air transport
has backed the construction of one new runway at Stansted and expansion of Luton up to maximum

29
DTI (2003) Digest of UK Energy Statistics, 2003. Table 1.1.5
30
SDF
31
Department for Transport (2002) “Transport Trends” DfT Statistics
32 DTI (2003) Digest of UK Energy Statistics, 2003
33
“East of England Regional Transport Strategy. Final Report”. April 2003
34
RT36 Table 10.6, p. 133
35
“East of England Regional Transport Strategy. Final Report”. April 2003
36
Vehicle Licensing Statistics 1992-9 (HMSO)
37
RENVS
38
RHS
39
DETR “The Indices of Deprivation” 2000
40
RSS p. 19
41
RT36 Table 10.6, p. 133
42
RT36 Table 10.19, p. 140
43
RPG14, p. 33; Norwich airport pers. comm.

13
use of its existing runway44. This could increase passenger numbers by 600%. It also implicitly
supports expansion of Norwich airport. Felixstowe and Harwich together handle 35.6 million tonnes
of freight per year45, and there is pressure to develop ports like Felixstowe and Great Yarmouth as key
transport gateways. For example, the 2002 expansion of Felixstowe to increase cargo-handling by up
to 20%46

In all, transport accounts for about 27% of the region’s GHG emissions, nearly all from road transport.
Emissions from air travel are important for climate change but currently they are major difficulties in
assigning responsibility for them. Should the emissions from the entire journeys of all planes leaving
the region’s airports be attributed to the region? And to whom should they be attributed? The
passengers, airlines or the economy generally? These questions are intended to provoke discussion;
for now, we have simply included the emissions from aircraft takeoffs and landings in the Region
rather than their whole journeys.

Key issues for climate change

The statistics paint a picture of a Region of two parts:

1) a mostly rural area with low population density (the north of the Region), where car use is
important for mobility between scattered settlements, but where a large minority of the population has
no car;

2) an area of significant commuting in the south. As indicated in the Economy section, commuting is
very important, with many people living in Essex, Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire and commuting
daily to London. Traffic congestion is a problem in some of these areas. However, economic
differences across region have led to long distance commuting from other parts of the region into
London47. In addition, most towns and villages across the region are commuter bases for the larger
regional towns such as Norwich48.

The relatively high level of rail travel confirms this picture – the main railways in the Region radiate
from London. Pressure for expansion of air travel, especially at Stansted, is also an issue for the
region, with the associated transport increases required to reach the airport. There is also significant
transport of goods across the region from the container ports, which brings economic benefits to the
region49 but significantly adds to the contribution to GHG emissions.

These factors combine to make relatively high levels of transport a key factor in the emissions from
the region.

Transport futures
Within the Regional Strategies, there is a strong commitment to reducing the need to travel50, using
more sustainable forms of transport, and, in the Environment Strategy, focussing on need not demand
in catering for transport (p. 35). The Economic Strategy states that transport must be more
sustainable, bringing cost and environmental benefits through cleaner fuels and higher efficiency, and
encouragement of public transport use; this is repeated in a different way in the Sustainable
Development Framework51. The European Commission has a voluntary agreement with car
manufacturers to cut emissions from cars by 25% by 2008 through improved engine technology.
RPG14 sets out quantitative targets (p. 90), which includes quadrupling the freight carried by rail by
2020; the national government target is to increase rail passengers by 50% by 2010. The possibility of
44
DfT “The Future of Air Transport”. White Paper, 16 December 2003
45
RT36, Table 10.20, p. 140
46
Port of Felixstowe Press Release, 12 December 2002
47
RPG14
48
RENVS
49
RPG14
50
RENVS (SA2);
51
SDF, Issue 3 (Transport)

14
road user charging is also discussed (p. 81), as is the need to manage transport demand. However, the
pressure to improve the road network in the short term “major investment in road structure may be
needed in the short term to prevent transport conditions worsening and harming the economy” (p. 30).
Airport expansion will be supported52 – for example, with an extra runway, Stansted could be handling
up to 80 million passengers per year by 203053. This is partly due to the importance of international
trade for the region. However, the Sustainable Development Framework states the need to reduce the
global impacts of our lifestyles, such as through cutting down the amount of miles food travels to
reach us. The Framework also flags imports as a key unsustainable activity and trend for the Region.

Transport is a large contributor to GHG emissions in the East, and this leaves the Region’s economy
vulnerable to government legislation on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

5.4 Public services

‘Public services’ includes a wide range of activities, not all operations publicly owned, but which form
a broad base of the region’s infrastructure including post and telecommunications, public
administration & defence (eg. local and national government operations), education, health & social
work, and waste treatment. Overall, the direct contribution to greenhouse gases is relatively small,
amounting to just under 5% of the Region’s GHG emissions.

In spite of the low contribution to the problem, the value of ‘leading by example’ is important, and
many local and regional authorities, for example, are acting to reduce their own GHG emissions, in
some cases through the Local Authorities’ Carbon Management Programme (formerly Councils for
Climate Protection) or through participation in UKCIP regional climate change impact studies.

There are indirect implications of, for example, increased choice of schools, leading to increased
transport, and the trend to large centralised hospitals which require more car miles to reach; these
examples both affect the emissions from transport. The Economic Strategy implicitly acknowledges
this, by encouraging networked learning (p. 102), thus reducing the need to travel and boosting the
ICT sector – one of the Region’s ‘key sectors’.

5.5 Culture

Culture and tourism is economically vital for the region, especially the North. Cultural pursuits,
including the arts, creative industries, holidays, museums and visitor attractions, account for £3.7
billion (1998) of the regional economy, and 12.3 million visitor trips54. The impacts of tourism on
GHG emissions are mainly counted through other activities, such as increased transport from outside
the region, water use and energy use in hotels and restaurants (see commercial and public services
sections).

Tourism in the Region is likely to increase under climate change, with warmer, drier summers and
more outdoor living55. The green tourism sector is encouraged by the Economic and Environmental
Strategies. Transport is a significant emissions source from tourism, and increased pressure on water
resources are issues which must be addressed in the expansion of tourism.

5.6 Agriculture

52
RES, p. 104
53
RPG14, p. 33
54
RES, p. 124
55
LAs

15
As one of the ‘key sectors’ in the Region, agriculture forms an important part of the East of England’s
landscape and economy, and the rural environment generally provides a home for 43% of the Region’s
population. 72% of agricultural land is under cultivation (compared with 29% nationally)56. The East
of England has 26% of England's cereal hectarage57; 40% of the Region’s crop land is covered with
winter wheat58. Livestock farming is also important to the Region: 21% of the UK’s pig population
and 17% of its poultry population live here59.

Agriculture accounts for 10 – 11% of the Region’s GHG emissions. This is the most notable example
of the potency of GHGs other than CO2. The relatively small amounts of other gases (27 000 tonnes
of methane and 13 000 tonnes of nitrous oxide compared to 736 000 tonnes of CO2 from the sector)
become highly significant when accounting for their effect on the climate.

Since the Region has a small cattle and sheep population, only a quarter of the agricultural emissions
comes from methane (from manure and enteric fermentation). The rest is N2O, mainly from direct
emissions from soils and nitrogen fertiliser use.

Links with other sectors

75% of journeys in rural areas are made by car – and it is difficult for many rural dwellers to survive
without one: “no job, no car; no car, no job”60. This contributes to the relatively high transport
emissions in the Region. However, these are a lesser consideration than the direct emissions.

Issues for the future

There is a priority in Economic and Environment Strategies for more sustainable and less intensive
agriculture61. This will reduce emissions from nitrous oxide, but organic arable agriculture, for
example, requires more manure, which may increase methane emissions. Water availability will
reduce in the summer, which will affect the type of crops planted, and the need for fertiliser, and also
the balance between livestock and arable farming. The emergence of biofuel planting could also have
an impact.

5.7 Waste

Waste from the region’s activities amounts to over 20 million tonnes per year, and a further 4 million
tonnes is imported from London62. About 15% of the Region’s waste is household waste, and about
80% of this is landfilled. More than a quarter of the total is from agriculture.

2 - 3% of the Region’s emissions (by CO2 equivalent) come from waste. 90% of this comes from
landfill methane, and most of the rest from nitrous oxide produced from sewage works. This may
seem small, but it is equivalent to the contribution of half of the entire public sector.

Key issues for the future

The Region is committed to reducing waste, especially since there is only 6 – 10 years’ landfill
capacity left63. The Regional Waste Management Strategy aims for “recovery” (ie. waste from which
value is recovered, either by reduction of volume, recycling, re-use, composting, energy recovery) of

56
RENVS, p. 11
57
ACCELERATES East Anglia case study from www.geo.ucl.ac.be/accelerates
58
“REGIS: Regional Climate Change Impact Response Studies in East Anglia and North West England”.
DEFRA.
59
DEFRA Agricultural statistics, 2000
60
RES, p. 87
61
eg. RENVS, SA9 pp. 46-48
62
RENVS; RPG14, p. 105
63
RES, p. 123 and 125

16
70% by 2015 (municipal) and 75% (commercial & industrial)64. This is a major challenge given that
at current rates, waste amounts would double by 202065

5.8 Electricity Supply

Electricity supply is often seen as a national issue rather than a regional one, and hence environmental
issues at the local scale are usually focussed on biodiversity and water management66 rather than
emissions from energy supply. In fact, since nearly all electricity is currently supplied through a
national grid, in our framing we have assumed that emissions per GWh of electricity used are the same
as the national values (see Appendix 1).

However, changes in energy policy in the future will have to be implemented at the regional and local
levels, and it is important to examine the potential for change in Regional supply sources. It is also
not clear whether we will move towards a more decentralised energy supply system – this is a key
aspect which will be examined in our future scenarios.

Currently, 0.45% of the Region’s energy demand is met by renewables. A report for the East of
England Sustainable Development Round Table67 identifies potential renewable energy targets for the
Region; these have since been adopted by the Environment Strategy (p. 41), RPG14 (p. 93) and the
Sustainable Development Framework (Issue 17, Energy). By 2010, 14% of the Region’s electricity
should be produced from renewables by 2010, 70% of this from wind power. The recommended
balance implies a 9% CO2 reduction, with 810 MW of wind turbines and 139 000 ha for energy crops.
However, this implies a quarter of the area of Norfolk would be covered in energy biomass to provide
only 2% of the region’s electricity needs. In addition to more renewables, a move to more efficient
uses of energy, tackling fuel poverty and internalising the social and environmental cost of energy are
encouraged.68

5.9 Water Supply

Water is important as a resource highly dependent on the climate. It also requires energy to provide
clean water; hence there are links between climate change impacts and efforts to mitigate emissions.
Over 2 billion litres of water are abstracted daily in the Region69. The supply of groundwater is
currently in balance. However, water is pumped around the region (eg. to maintain flow in rivers such
as the Great Ouse during the summer).70

The energy used to provide a clean water supply and treat sewage is fairly small (less than 0.5% of the
total emissions) – but this will rise with corresponding increases in population and tourism. Under
climate change, water availability and quality will decrease in summer71. It is already recognised that
demand management will be vital72, as will sustainable design73 in properties, appliances and
industrial processes.

64
Regional Waste Management Strategy, Appendix 2
65
Cabinet Office Strategy Unit (2002) “Waste Not, Want Not: A strategy for teckling the waste problem in
England”
66
Counsell D.; Haughton, G. (2002) Sustainable Development in Regional Planning Guidance: Regional Report
No. 2 – East Anglia and the East of England. March 2002.
67
Hams, T.; Evans, N.; Taylor, D. (2001) Renewable energy and land-use planning study – a report to the East
of England Sustainable Development Round Table., p. 14
68
SDF, Issue 17 (Energy)
69
RENVS, p. 24
70
RENVS, p. 24
71
LWCC
72
RPG14, p. 37
73
RENVS, SA3

17
5.10 Cross-cutting themes – Spatial and cultural considerations

In this section we examine some of the issues which do not neatly fall into the above sectors. A vital
driver of greenhouse gas emissions is the link between transport, housing and location of jobs.
Generally, as density of housing rises the number of transport miles decreases – for example,
Londoners travel about half the distance by car in a year that east of England residents do74. The
number of houses built on previously used land is also a proxy for the number of car miles travelled.
Within the East, between 1997 and 2000, 54% of new dwellings were built on previously-used land75.
This compares to the ODPM target of 60%; however, the housing density for these was 22 per
hectare.76,77 This is the lowest figure for any British region.78 In addition, the region mirrors the
national trend to large centralised shopping and hospitals, increased travel to schools and more
frequent and further international travel. The implication is that the relatively high transport miles in
the East are partly due to the low density of development. Other national trends are reflected in the
East. Changing patterns of work have also contributed to a rise in emissions. With greater flexibility
in employment, workers change jobs much more frequently and often stay living in the same place and
commute further. The loss of jobs in agriculture and in seaside towns79, while these areas remain well-
populated implies increases in transport to allow people to reach work. However, 16% of rural
households have no car80, which has serious implications for their ability to find employment. The
south of the Region has relatively low unemployment, and high costs of living, resulting in shortages
of essential workers. The phenomenon of transporting people from other parts of the Region to fill
these vacancies has become common practice.

Culturally, the East of England Region is a diverse place. The Region was created in its present form
in April 2001 from the old East Anglia (Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridgeshire) and part of the South East
(Essex, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire). The latter three counties have much more in common with other
parts of the South East (eg. close employment and cultural links to London, more ethnic diversity,
higher incomes) than with East Anglia. Residents generally identify with London or with East Anglia
rather than the East of England – in fact a survey in 2001 showed only one in ten people know they
live in the “East of England", while 35% identify with East Anglia and 23% the South East.81 The
implications of this for the future are explored below.

The future
There are several strands to the issue of spatial location. The first is the major Economic Strategy
theme of ‘invest in success wherever it is found, backing the future prosperity of [the Region’s] most
successful areas’ (p. 11). This focuses principally on the economic success of Cambridge, driven by
knowledge and hi-tech industries. In fact, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and Essex are all above the
regional average for GDP/head growth, implying on this definition a focus of development in these
areas. However, the Strategy also acknowledges that “deprivation will tend to be reinforced by
enhanced economic growth” and “It is vital we bring jobs, enterprise and opportunities to
communities suffering exclusion” (p. 133). There is a clear statement of the need to spread growth to
reduce social exclusion82 and to ‘counter tendency for business to locate in already advantaged
areas’83. In addition, the Environment Strategy makes clear that “the fundamental objectives of Green

74
RT36, Table 10.6, p. 133
75
RPG14
76
RHS
77
RENVS, p. 21
78
RENVS, p. 28
79
RSS, p. 7
80
RSS, p. 19
81
RCS
82
SDF, Issue 2 (Location of Growth); RSS
83
SDF, Issue 6 (Poverty and Deprivation)

18
Belt policy should continue to be supported and pursued” (p. 50), and the landscape and townscape
character should be strengthened and maintained.84

RPG14 deals extensively with the possibilities for location of future development. It outlines five
spatial principles for location of development, summarised as:

• reduce the need to travel

• use brownfield development in higher densities
• ensure a balance of housing and employment development to discourage long-distance
commuting
• develop first in urban areas, then urban extensions, then new settlements
• encourage living in cities rather than suburbs or rural towns
• promote sustainable transport

It also lays out four possible scenarios for spatial development85:

Scenario 1 – continue existing policies

Scenario 2 – building on the strengths of regional centres (essentially encouraging development spread
across the Region)
Scenario 3 – building on regional strengths (essentially focussing development in the south of the
Region)
Scenario 4 – create a new settlement

The inherent tension within the Regional Strategies is expressed most clearly in the Sustainability
Appraisal of the RPG14 draft. This identified a broad trade-off between scenarios: Scenario 2 will be
more environmentally and socially sustainable, Scenario 3 will be more economically attractive.
However, that economic attractiveness would be unevenly distributed across the region. The
implications of these complicated issues for GHG emissions are that a scenario focussing development
on the south of the region will enhance existing trends as described in the first part of this section, and
hence increase emissions. The issue of adaptation to climate change is also an important factor in
scenario choice. In spite of efforts to build a regional identity, its current absence may affect the
choice of scenario. The cultural differences between the north and south of the region may mean that
there is competition between them for development in their areas rather than a cooperative integrated
Regional effort. The richer and more populous south would be likely to win such competition, with all
the implications for social inclusion, development and environment, including increased GHG
emissions. The latest plans (February 2004) for development of the M11 corridor, with an additional
half million new homes by 2021, imply a move already towards Scenario 3.

6 Next steps

The framing narrative has:

• Discussed the treatment of climate change mitigation and adaptation in current regional plans

• Presented a sectoral greenhouse gas emissions inventory which indicates the relative
contributions of different activities in the region

• Discussed what we believe are the key drivers of GHG emissions both now and under the
Regional Strategies

84
RENVS, SA10
85
RPG14, Ch 6 (pp. 39 – 52)

19
 • Indicated qualitatively how links between activities and sectors affect GHG emissions

The next steps are to use this analysis as a basis for creating scenarios of 60% emissions reductions,
coupled with impacts and adaptation to climate change. The scenarios will contain different
permutations of changes in the sectors and activities above, and will include pathways and key
decision points to reaching those 60% targets.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank members of the East of England Sustainable Development Round Table and
Norfolk County Council for their support in developing this document, Cambridge Econometrics and
the Environment Agency for data advice, Alison McCartney (DEFRA), and NWDA and Enviros.

20
Appendix 1: Technical Methods

The GRIP model was developed by Sebastian Carney of Tyndall North (UMIST) as part of a jointly
funded project between the Tyndall Centre and The Environment Agency. The GRIP model and the
ideas behind it have designed with consistency, accuracy, ease and compatibility in mind. As a result
of this the model can be applied to all Government Office Regions and the three devolved
administrations providing a clear and consistent picture of their contribution to the UK’s emissions
totals.

GRIP divides emissions between the following activities and sectors: Transport, Domestic, Industry
(various sectors), Commercial services, Public services, Agriculture and Waste. In addition there are
more detailed methods to account for fugitive emissions from oil and gas supplies and industrial
process emissions. Included in estimates of energy use are electricity (attributed on an end user basis),
gas, solid and liquid fuels.

GRIP sector names GRIP SIC codes Details

Food & Drink 15,16 Food, Drink Tobacco
Textiles 17,18, 19 Textiles, Clothing & Leather
Paper & paper prods. 21,22 Paper, Printing & publishing
Chemicals 24,25 Pharmaceuticals, Chemicals, Rubber & Plastics
Mineral products 26 Non-metallic mineral products
Basic metals 27 Basic metals
Electrical engineering 31,32 Electronics, Electrical engineering (Note these are SIC 30, 31, 32)
28-30,33 Metal goods, Mechanical engineering, Instruments (note these are
Mechanical engineering
SIC 28, 29, 33)
Vehicles, trailers, etc. 34 Motor vehicles
13,14,35,36,41,20 Other mining, Wood, Aerospace, Other transport equipment,
Other industries.
Manufacturing & Recycling, Water supply
Construction 45 Construction
agriculture 01, 02,05 Agriculture, Forestry
50, 51,52,55, 65-74 Retailing, Distribution, Hotels & Catering, Banking & Finance,
commercial sector Insurance, Professional services, Computing services, Other
business services
64, 75,80,85, 90-93 Communications, Public administration & defence, Education,
public administration
Health & Social Work, Waste Treatment, Miscellaneous Services

Table A1: Division of industry sectors in GRIP, and corresponding SIC codes

A1.1 Methodology and assumptions

Emissions inventories can be compiled in two ways: bottom up, or top down. Bottom up inventories
represent the most accurate kind, these are compiled on the basis of raw data pertaining to: Energy
consumption, Animal population, Activity data of Part A regulated sites and Waste. Alternatively an
emissions inventory can be compiled on the basis of Top Down data, where national level totals are
utilised and disaggregated using representative data, this approach has the benefit of being timely in its
production but has high levels of uncertainty associated with it. GRIP offers a formalised
methodology for calculating Greenhouse Gas emissions on a regional scale this is the first
methodology of this type for the express purpose of calculating GHG emissions. The GRIP
methodology operates at three levels: Level 1: Entirely Bottom Up; Level 2: A combined Top Down
and Bottom Up approach; Level 3: Entirely Top Down. The methods utilised are outlined below,
together with the level of the methodology to which they apply. A more detailed explanation of the
GRIP methodology can be gained from Sebastian Carney at Tyndall North, UMIST
(sebastian.carney@umist.ac.uk).

21
A1.2 Energy Use

This covers use of Electricity, Gas, Solid Fuel and Non-transport Liquid Fuel. Data on energy
consumption on a regional scale are either not currently available, deemed commercially confidential
or too costly to extract. The GRIP methodology does however permit such data to be interjected at a
later stage should it become available. As a result of this disaggregates have been used to calculate
consumption.

Emissions associated with electricity have been attributed to the End User; this approach has been
chosen primarily with policy setting in mind. Consumption of Natural Gas is available on a post code
basis from Transco.

The following represent the simplified calculations for ENERGY consumption

Domestic: (Level 2: GRIP)

Er = (En*Fr*Hr) / (Fn*Hn)

Industry/commercial/public sector/agriculture: (Level 2: GRIP)

Er = (En*GVAr) / GVAn

Railways: (Level 2: GRIP)

Er = (En*Mr) / Mn

Where:
E = sectoral energy use (TJ)
F = average weekly spend on fuel (£)
GVA = Gross Value Added (£)
H = no. of households
M = miles of railway track

Subscript n = national; Subscript r = regional

All of these results are calculated for each fuel type for each sector.

Data sources: DUKES; Regional Trends; ONS (other); NAEI; Transco (Gas only); IPPC

A1.3 Emissions from energy use

The table gives the emissions in thousands of tonnes of each gas based on energy use. The conversion
factors are based on

CO2 CH4 N2O

Electricity 0.43*GWhr (1/5505)*[0.43*GWhr] 0.238*[0.43*GWhr]
Gas Er*Various Er*Various Er*Various
Solid Fuel Er*Various Er*Various Er*Various
Non-transport liquid fuel Er*Various Er*Various Er*Various

Er = sectoral energy use in region (TJ)

GWh = sectoral energy use (GWh)

Various – emissions factors

22
Emissions factors may vary depending on the calorific content and combustion efficiency. Emissions
associated with electricity are calculated on the basis of national data sets in order to derive at a
representative emissions factor for the year studied.

A1.4 Emissions from other activities

Sector/activity Regional Emissions (EMSr)

Industry (level 1)
Road transport (Level 3: GRIP)
Railways (Level 3: GRIP)
Marine transport (Level 3: GRIP)
Aircraft (Level 1: GRIP)
Agriculture (Level 1: GRIP)
Waste – landfill methane (Level 2: GRIP)
Waste – other (Level 3: GRIP)
Industrial processes – individual industry reported
(source: Environment Agency)
Direct communications from companies where
figures cannot be ascertained from PI, for
example where CO2 emissions are coupled with
energy emissions, to ensure no double counting
takes place. Emissions include Non Energy CO2,
N2O, CH4 together with HFC, PFC and SF6
emissions. Sum of = Total Process emissions
(EMSn*MRr*Pr) / (MRn*Pn)
(EMSn*Mr) / Mn
(EMSn*MOr) / MOn
MOr*EF
NAr*EF
(EMSn*MSWr)/MSWn*EF
(EMSn*Pr)/Pn

EMS = emissions
MO = movement of vessels/aircraft
MR = road miles per person per year
MSW = waste to landfill (tonnes)
NA = number of animals
P = population
EF = Emissions Factor

Sources of data
Agriculture: NAEI (national emissions); DEFRA (regional animal numbers)
Waste: NAEI (national emissions); RES (regional waste totals); ONS (office for national statistics);
CAA (Civil Aviation Authority); Personal Communications; IPPC, Marine Transport Statistics.

A1.5 The REWARD Inventory

The REWARD project (www.reward-uk.org) has compiled baseline inventories for a range of
pollutants including greenhouse gases for the East of England region. REWARD’s data are designed
to fit with an economic model used to examine environmental consequences of economic policies,
mainly for industry, in the short term (10 – 20 years). REWARD’s total emissions figure for the
region is 49.8 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. This compares with 49.3 mt CO2 equiv. for GRIP.
Within the necessarily broad nature of the assumptions of an inventory, these figures are very similar.
It is difficult to make detailed comparison between the two models due to the different sector
classifications and attribution of electricity emissions, but there appears to be order-of-magnitude
similarity between the two models' figures for the various sectors such as transport, domestic and
industry. GRIP was designed as a simple spreadsheet with the express purpose of making long-term
scenario creation easy. It does not resolve as many sectors as REWARD, but when looking at 50 year
timescales, the approximate figures are more important than details.

23
The trans-disciplinary Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research undertakes integrated research into the
long-term consequences of climate change for society and into the development of sustainable responses
that governments, business-leaders and decision-makers can evaluate and implement. Achieving these
objectives brings together UK climate scientists, social scientists, engineers and economists in a unique
collaborative research effort.
Research at the Tyndall Centre is organised into four research themes that collectively contribute to all
aspects of the climate change issue: Integrating Frameworks; Decarbonising Modern Societies; Adapting to
Climate Change; and Sustaining the Coastal Zone. All thematic fields address a clear problem posed to
society by climate change, and will generate results to guide the strategic development of climate change
mitigation and adaptation policies at local, national and global scales.
The Tyndall Centre is named after the 19th century UK scientist John Tyndall, who was the first to prove the
Earth’s natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in atmospheric composition could bring
about climate variations. In addition, he was committed to improving the quality of science education and
knowledge.
The Tyndall Centre is a partnership of the following institutions:
University of East Anglia
UMIST
Southampton Oceanography Centre
University of Southampton
University of Cambridge
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
SPRU – Science and Technology Policy Research (University of Sussex)
Institute for Transport Studies (University of Leeds)
Complex Systems Management Centre (Cranfield University)
Energy Research Unit (CLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory)
The Centre is core funded by the following organisations:
Natural Environmental Research Council (NERC)
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
UK Government Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)

For more information, visit the Tyndall Centre Web site (www.tyndall.ac.uk) or contact:
External Communications Manager
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
Phone: +44 (0) 1603 59 3906; Fax: +44 (0) 1603 59 3901
Email: tyndall@uea.ac.uk
Recent Working Papers

Tyndall Working Papers are available online at

http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/publications/working_papers/working_papers.shtml

Mitchell, T. and Hulme, M. (2000). A Country-by- Shackley, S. and Gough, C., (2002). The Use of
Country Analysis of Past and Future Warming Integrated Assessment: An Institutional
Rates, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 1. Analysis Perspective, Tyndall Centre Working
Paper 14.
Hulme, M. (2001). Integrated Assessment
Models, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 2. Köhler, J.H., (2002). Long run technical change
in an energy-environment-economy (E3)
Berkhout, F, Hertin, J. and Jordan, A. J. (2001).
model for an IA system: A model of
Socio-economic futures in climate change
Kondratiev waves, Tyndall Centre Working Paper
impact assessment: using scenarios as
15.
'learning machines', Tyndall Centre Working
Paper 3. Adger, W.N., Huq, S., Brown, K., Conway, D. and
Hulme, M. (2002). Adaptation to climate
Barker, T. and Ekins, P. (2001). How High are
change: Setting the Agenda for Development
the Costs of Kyoto for the US Economy?,
Policy and Research, Tyndall Centre Working
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 4.
Paper 16.
Barnett, J. (2001). The issue of 'Adverse Effects
Dutton, G., (2002). Hydrogen Energy
and the Impacts of Response Measures' in the
Technology, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 17.
UNFCCC, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 5.
Watson, J. (2002). The development of large
Goodess, C.M., Hulme, M. and Osborn, T. (2001).
technical systems: implications for hydrogen,
The identification and evaluation of suitable
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 18.
scenario development methods for the
estimation of future probabilities of extreme Pridmore, A. and Bristow, A., (2002). The role of
weather events, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 6. hydrogen in powering road transport, Tyndall
Centre Working Paper 19.
Barnett, J. (2001). Security and Climate
Change, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 7. Turnpenny, J. (2002). Reviewing organisational
use of scenarios: Case study - evaluating UK
Adger, W. N. (2001). Social Capital and Climate
energy policy options, Tyndall Centre Working
Change, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 8.
Paper 20.
Barnett, J. and Adger, W. N. (2001). Climate
Watson, W. J. (2002). Renewables and CHP
Dangers and Atoll Countries, Tyndall Centre
Deployment in the UK to 2020, Tyndall Centre
Working Paper 9.
Working Paper 21.
Gough, C., Taylor, I. and Shackley, S. (2001).
Watson, W.J., Hertin, J., Randall, T., Gough, C.
Burying Carbon under the Sea: An Initial
(2002). Renewable Energy and Combined Heat
Exploration of Public Opinions, Tyndall Centre
and Power Resources in the UK, Tyndall Centre
Working Paper 10.
Working Paper 22.
Barker, T. (2001). Representing the Integrated
Paavola, J. and Adger, W.N. (2002). Justice and
Assessment of Climate Change, Adaptation
adaptation to climate change, Tyndall Centre
and Mitigation, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 11.
Working Paper 23.
Dessai, S., (2001). The climate regime from
Xueguang Wu, Jenkins, N. and Strbac, G. (2002).
The Hague to Marrakech: Saving or sinking
Impact of Integrating Renewables and CHP
the Kyoto Protocol?, Tyndall Centre Working
into the UK Transmission Network, Tyndall
Paper 12.
Centre Working Paper 24
Dewick, P., Green K., Miozzo, M., (2002).
Xueguang Wu, Mutale, J., Jenkins, N. and Strbac,
Technological Change, Industry Structure and
G. (2003). An investigation of Network
the Environment, Tyndall Centre Working Paper
Splitting for Fault Level Reduction, Tyndall
13.
Centre Working Paper 25
Brooks, N. and Adger W.N. (2003). Country level
risk measures of climate-related natural
disasters and implications for adaptation to
climate change, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 26
Tompkins, E.L. and Adger, W.N. (2003). Building
resilience to climate change through adaptive
management of natural resources, Tyndall
Centre Working Paper 27
Dessai, S., Adger, W.N., Hulme, M., Köhler, J.H.,
Turnpenny, J. and Warren, R. (2003). Defining
and experiencing dangerous climate change,
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 28
Brown, K. and Corbera, E. (2003). A Multi-
Criteria Assessment Framework for Carbon-
Mitigation Projects: Putting “development” in
the centre of decision-making, Tyndall Centre
Working Paper 29
Hulme, M. (2003). Abrupt climate change: can
society cope?, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 30
Turnpenny, J., Haxeltine A. and O’Riordan, T.
(2003). A scoping study of UK user needs for
managing climate futures. Part 1 of the pilot-
phase interactive integrated assessment
process (Aurion Project), Tyndall Centre
Working Paper 31
Xueguang Wu, Jenkins, N. and Strbac, G. (2003).
Integrating Renewables and CHP into the UK
Electricity System: Investigation of the impact
of network faults on the stability of large
offshore wind farms, Tyndall Centre Working
Paper 32
Pridmore, A., Bristow, A.L., May, A. D. and Tight,
M.R. (2003). Climate Change, Impacts, Future
Scenarios and the Role of Transport, Tyndall
Centre Working Paper 33
Dessai, S., Hulme, M (2003). Does climate policy
need probabilities?, Tyndall Centre Working Paper
34
Tompkins, E. L. and Hurlston, L. (2003). Report to
the Cayman Islands’ Government. Adaptation
lessons learned from responding to tropical
cyclones by the Cayman Islands’ Government,
1988 – 2002, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 35
Kröger, K. Fergusson, M. and Skinner, I. (2003).
Critical Issues in Decarbonising Transport: The
Role of Technologies, Tyndall Centre Working
Paper 36
Ingham, A. and Ulph, A. (2003) Uncertainty,
Irreversibility, Precaution and the Social Cost
of Carbon, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 37
Brooks, N. (2003). Vulnerability, risk and
adaptation: a conceptual framework, Tyndall
Centre Working Paper 38
Tompkins, E.L. and Adger, W.N. (2003).
Defining response capacity to enhance climate
change policy, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 39
Klein, R.J.T., Lisa Schipper, E. and Dessai, S.
(2003), Integrating mitigation and adaptation
into climate and development policy: three
research questions, Tyndall Centre Working Paper
40
Watson, J. (2003), UK Electricity Scenarios for
2050, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 41
Kim, J. A. (2003), Sustainable Development and
the CDM: A South African Case Study, Tyndall
Centre Working Paper 42
Anderson, D. and Winne, S. (2003),
Innovation and Threshold Effects in
Technology Responses to Climate Change,
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 43
Shackley, S., McLachlan, C. and Gough, C. (2004)
The Public Perceptions of Carbon Capture and
Storage, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 44
Purdy, R. and Macrory, R. (2004) Geological
carbon sequestration: critical legal issues,
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 45
Watson, J., Tetteh, A., Dutton, G., Bristow, A.,
Kelly, C., Page, M. and Pridmore, A., (2004) UK
Hydrogen Futures to 2050, Tyndall Centre
Working Paper 46
Berkhout, F., Hertin, J. and Gann, D. M., (2004)
Learning to adapt: Organisational adaptation
to climate change impacts, Tyndall Centre
Working Paper 47
Pan, H. (2004) The evolution of economic
structure under technological development,
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 48
Awerbuch, S. (2004) Restructuring our
electricity networks to promote
decarbonisation, Tyndall Centre Working Paper 49
Powell, J.C., Peters, M.D., Ruddell, A. & Halliday, J.
(2004) Fuel Cells for a Sustainable Future?
Tyndall Centre Working Paper 50
Agnolucci, P., Barker, T. & Ekins, P. (2004)
Hysteresis and energy demand: the
Announcement Effects and the effects of the
UK Climate Change Levy Tyndall Centre Working
Paper 51

Agnolucci, P. (2004) Ex post evaluations of CO2

–based taxes: a survey Tyndall Centre Working
Paper 52

Agnolucci, P. & Ekins, P. (2004) The

Announcement Effect and environmental
taxation Tyndall Centre Working Paper 53

Turnpenny, J., Carney, S., Haxeltine, A., &

O’Riordan, T. (2004) Developing regional and
local scenarios for climate change mitigation
and adaptation Part 1: A framing of the East of
England Tyndall Centre Working Paper 54