t
'
t

American Pelroleum lnstilule
2101 L Street, Northwest

fSlT;:'4
March 18, 1980

To:
'

AO-9 Task Force

Attached please find a copy of the minutes of the February 9,
L980 AQ-9 Task Force meeting. Please inforrn ne of any errors
or omissions.

Cordially,

Attachnent--minutes
/mL

An egual opportunity employar

co2

AND CLTMATE TASK FORCE (AO-9)

Minutes of Meeting

9:15 a.m.
Friday, February 29,

Manhatten Room
LaGuardia Airport

1980

New

York Cityr New York

MEMBERS PRESENT

K" Blower, Chairman
B. Bailey
H. Shaw

SOHIO

Texaco

Exxon

R&E

OTHERS PRESENT

,J" Laurman

Consultant

J. Nelson
C. Showers

APIIEAD
SOHIO

OPENTNG REMARKS

K. Blower, Chairman, opened the meeting by listing the following
goals of this meeting:
1. Increase industry's understanding of the CO, and
climate problem
2. Determine if there are feasibile and valuable research
projects that could be accomplished by API.
3" Establish a mechanism to prepare any needed issue papers.
B, Bailey added the following items for consideration:
L. This Task Force should be the focal point and establish
a basis for providing API comments on CO, and. climate
matters

2. An overall goal of the Task Force should be to heJ-p
develop ground rules for energy release of fuels and
the cleanup of fuels as they relate to CO, creation.
CONSULTANT REPORT

Dr. J. A. Laurman, a consultant and a recognized expert in the
field of Co2 and climatermade a presentation to the Task Force
' entitled,
"fhe CO2 Probl6mi
Research Agenda Oevelofment.n,
,Addrlssing

-2-

,'.

An outline is included as Attachment A'

In addition, a complete technical discussion, led by Dr" Laurman
identified. the problem, discussed the scientific basis and techi
nical evidence of CO2 buildup, impact on society, methods of
modeling and their c5nsequences, uncertainties, poiicy implicationsrand
conclusions that can be drawn from present knowledge. A series
of summary charts are attached as Attachment B.
API

RESEARCH NEEDS

of possible APf research was identified: Preparatory
research to be able to answer questions dealing with the CO2
problem and synthetic fuels"
One area

COMIVTENTS

ON DOE TECHNICAL PAPER

K. Blower and Bruce Bailey will modify the diaft API letter back
to DOE concerning an article submitted. to the Task Force for
cornment. When the Task Force has approved the letter, it will
be coord.inated within API staff .
.OTHER BUSINESS

The Task Force should set up a rationale and system for review
of technical articles and responses to inquiries

potential area for R&D was discussed by the Task_ Force:
of Introducing
"Invlstigate the Market Penetration Requirements
include the
would
This
Wide
Use."
World
A New Energry Source into
research
changeover,
source
technical Lirplications of energy
timing and reguirements.
The meeting was adjourned at 4225 p.m.
One

Prepared by:

=.-?{_?L*)
Jimmie J. Nelson

Attt c r{hgJi
;

A

THE

CO

PROBLE}T;

ADDRESSING RESEARCH AGENM

DEW

difficulties of dealing with the pragrnatic questions related
to the co2/fossil fuel problem all relate to certain general- features,
A) high irnpact cost' B) large uncertainty, and betng c)
these having
far distant and D) global. The problern is interdiscipLinary in Lts scientific
aspects and it has ramifications in nany economic sectors and in most nations'
Therefore, not only is addressing it difficult Ln anLytic terms' but the
rnulif{olicity of possible interest grouPs that can be affected means that
on the user'
choice of what constitute the criticaL research issues depends
In the most general terms l.Ie can subdivlde the notl'vational aspect lnto those
The

who see

or to

the need as to
A) better understand the Co2/climate system, resulting in an
ability to Predict a) short range and b) long range effects.
B) assess the present day importance of the future imPacb, as vJ-ewed
i) from a world viewPoj-nt
ii) by national enti-ties
iii) by specific industrial sec'tors or interest grouPs

Highestpriorityinvestigationsdependonwhichofthesegroupsis
lnvolved. In particular, a highly relevant asPect for a1-1- of these groups
is the infl-uence of present and future information on pubLic Perception and
governmental attitudes regarding the problem and the resultant effecL on energy
poLicy.

Instead of attempting to research all aspects of the C0, problem
that bear on the concern of any particular group, we may seLect a feature
that appears to be particularl-y important to that sector - for exampLe,
nucl-ear energy proponents might wish to address the probl-em of narket
penetration time lags as the most critical for uraking their case.

A) S.educing uncertainty in projecti.ons
CO2

input

a) deforestation, past present and future.
b) effect of various energy use poricies - coal, oiL shale, nuclear,
biomass, solar, synthetlcs,

2

\

c) turn-around scenarios for

non-carbon based

fuel use,

Lmpact

calculatLons.
d) rernedial measures: biomass, scrubbing, bacterial enzymesr fertilLzing
oceans.

Carbon cycle

a) CO2 growth and photosynthesl.s
b) urissing COZ since - detritus,

humus, regrowth of deforested-'argas,
oceans, non-stationary biosphere.
validity of box-model projections in short (50 yr)'range.

c)
d) organic material in oceans (detritus, dissolutionn nutriant
limitations)
e) estuarian regions
f) ground water
g) carbonate distributi,on
h) use of tracers
i) cataloguing on the biosphere
j) clirnatic change feedback effects - ocean temperature, pl-ant growth.

Cl-imate modeling

a) ocean dynamics
b) simpl-ifying models
c) feedback effects : cloudsl s€tr ice, vegitatLon
d) reglonal cl-lmatic change

B) Impact of climatLc

ehange(albedo).

change

Socio-economie

I) General probl-ems:
a) how to make estimates of costs of Large perEurbatf,ons, even
assuming climatic changes are known?
b) how do we discount the future?
c) gmpolitical problems, either from climatl.c ehange or from
remediation measures

'F'

d)buildinginresilience.Canseveritybeversedintermsofcrl'tical
ratesofchangeofforcingofthesocietalsystelB?Isageneric
non-specif ic formulation possible?
II)Imnediatepolicyquestions.Thephyslcalfactsagreeonthe
probability of large effects 50 years away' but wl'th large
probableerror.Sourceoftheuncertaintyarisesfromdeforestatlon'
(energy
poor climate mode].s and uncertainty in co, inpuc
proJectLons). the first may be settled in a yeag or two; the
uhich
second wll]- not. llence we have to treat an unsure situation'
maybepossibleviadecisionanalysisl'ferrordistributioncan
bequantified.Thishasnotbeendoneforimpactcosts,sofirst
a)canitbe?Ifyes,therestillremaintwomaJordifficulties:
b)whataremarketpenetrationtl.mesforne\ilenergysources?and
c)whatfuture(socia].)discountingrateshouldbeused?
Iffossilfueluseratesarereducedto2T"p.a.orunder,it
(but
looks as if the lmmediate problem is conslderabLy easecl
needs checking) ' So another question is
d) what ls the 50 year future of fossil fueJ' use?
Of more Parochial interest is
e) what roles do the different catagories of fossil or syntheti'c

fuel PlaY in future Projections?
The Natural BiosPhere

The Managed BiosPhere

-r

js.

REASONS FOR INCREASBD CONCBRN

\'
.

lrrrs

TBB

cO

z

PRoBLEI{

DEVBLOPTIENT OF RBLIABLE ATI'TOSPBERIC COZ GROI{TE RATE UEASURBUENTS

. ITS

coz EurssroNs, tlosTLY

CORRELATION WITN GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL

FROU

rossrl

FUEL COI.IBUSTION

.

SCIBNTIFIC CONSBNSUS ON TBE POTENTIAL FOR LARGE FUTURE CLI}TATIC RESPONSE.TO
TNCREASED CO2 LEVELS

.

BEALIZATION TEAT BEI{EDXAL ACTIONS I{OULD IAKE A LONG

IIUE TO BECOUE

EFTECTIVE
:l

c
(1

)
d

tr
a

\

OBSERVATX,ONAL'

EVIDENCE

uuz DATAr
GOOD Coz
Gouu
03
OB
YEARS
TWENTY

c0z

pREsENt ATMos?IlERrc
(1860)
cuRRENr

4'?%

cQ2t

- . a+All

n'"1 or

-o
t

3J)

rROM ONE

I,s
AtuosPtlERIc RETENTI.N

SOURCE

PPs

i;: :::

TN.REA'E

:::.:r.r-r.

RELEA'E

RrsB to::::"BY'ANrllL

rllAr
EvTDENCE
.fossrl FUEL BURNTNG
MATNLY FRou

rcAL
sTRoNc Elt?rR

oF

CONCLUSlONS

ot*Frr
ESSI
BUT'r F'sSENTIALLY

coNcENtRATroN

r*"-t*ousTRrAl

cRo,orlr RA'E ='l

-

No EFFE'IS
AssU}lING
567., oE RDLBA'E,

FROM DETOBBSTATI'ON

$

PROJECTIONS
ENERGY USE

AVERAGE GROWTI{

RATE 3-47'P'8'

FOR NEXT

-

CONCLUSIONS

fIfTY YEARS'

PAST
IH LONG TEBM

FUEL
fNSSIL
I.OSSIL fUEL

TREND

ro rNrE'-i;:l
cENTuRY;
,.ilrr:;;;-s*,pRo?oRr11*o"
;tt-2lst
io 37n e'a'u*""

ct,osE

ABOUT

t

L7'

P'4'

SUEL DEPLETION
FOSSIL
OF
EFFECT

UINOR IN

SLIGITTLY LESS
!

suBJ

IEL OUTPUT)

;:':ll# r'

YEARS
NEXT FIFTY

CARBON CYCLE

coNcLusx0NS

.

.

POSSTBLE

c0r

FRoM DEFORESTATToN'
RELEASE coNtRrBuTroN

rOSSI; EUEL

.

ALL

.

.

SOURCE

ttlluu

uoDELS
GARBON CYCLE'
LEVELS
ATUOSPBERTC co2

.. TIENCE GIVE THE

SA}18 PROJECTED

LINEA!ILY

UP

ATMOSPIIERIC

gfrnct

oN PRoJEqTToNS

ERROR

IN

TBI,S BSTIMATE

IS

S}TALL

COMPARED

PRE-INDUSTRIAL

co2 LEvELs FOR TBE

oNLY SIGNI,FICANT

AT A 37' P'4'
INGil DATE IS 203'8

.

TO 3-4 TIMES

EFFECTS S}MLL
FOSSIL TUEL DEPLBTI'ON
DEFoREstATToN

PERIIAPS RTVALLTNG

GROWT}I

03

.1I IT

rN?uT

BECOMES .DEPLETED

AT}TOSPHERIC

OF
WITH OTIIER SOURCES

RELEASE RATE
EBROR

ffi
rt

.a

't

br.rulrs uoDELrNc

.

"l

coNcr.usrons

8Y 2038 AT
CLOBAL AVBRACBD 2,5o C RISE EXPECTBD
RATE OE AtuosPEERrc coz coNcENTRAlroN '

A 37 p'8r

A'tl

GRo$ITE

J

.LARGEFBRoRII{TltlsESTIuATElINloctlANcE.oFTHISCFANGBBl2005
-..^rtad

.N0REGIoNALCLIuAIEcttANGEBsTIuATEsYBTPoSSIBLE.

'

LIKBLY IIIPACTS

3

.loc RrsE (2005)r

EARELY NoTTcEABLE

slBoNG
RIsB (2038)t-!l{98' EcoNo}tlc coNsEqUENcEs'
r :-:::;^"-;;;iNniilics'
2,5oc
zt

ngCfONnL

DBPENDENCB

5oc BlsE (2067)

r

GLoBALLY cATAsrBoPBrc

..

EFFBcrs

.

r

I

:

.':..

i

UNCERTAINTY

1)
2.)

CARBON CYCLE MODELING

-

IN

ESTIMATES

MINOR

rs LARGE @ DEPLETToN SETS :t
ABOUT o'5o C IN 50 YEARS
3) NATURAL CLIMATE VARIABILITY SMALL'
MAJoR IF
TITAN CO2t BUT POTENTIALLY
LESS
souRCES
4) OTITER ANTITROPOGENIC
CONSIDERED IN TOTO
DEFORESTATToN MAJOR EFFECT ONLY

rF

RATE

5)

EFFECToFAtLT.VARIATIoNINFossILTUELGRoI{TIIRATERELATIVELYMINoR

6)

LARGE; ALLOWANCE
CLIMATE MODELING ERROR VERY

IN POLICY ANALYSIS

ESSENTIAL

\ffi
a

'

POLICY II{PLICATIONS

GtoBAL PROBLEM' BOTII

IN

SOURCE AND FOR REMEDTES

TIMEscALEFoRSIGNIFICANTIuPAcT'VERYRoUGHLY50YRs
ttIGI{RIsK'IIIGIIuNCERTAINTYsITUATIoN,RELATIVELYTARAWAY
TIMEFoRAcTIoN?MARKETPENETRATIoNTIuETIIEoRYSAYS
TI{ERE

IS

NO LEEI{AY

.--t
CONCLUSIONS

a

AT A 3Z pER ANNUtt cRoI{Tlt RATE oF Co2t A 2.5oc RIsE BRINcs
WORLD ECONOITIC GROI{TI{ TO A HALT IN ABOUT . 2025.

Evgn 1f thts estl.nate is grosely ltrong tt ts etlll

probable that

TIIERE ARE GROUNDS FOR IilMEDIATE RESPONSE TO TNE THREAI
DEPENDS ON THE VALIDITY OT THE LONC IfARKET PENETRATION TIUE

WTTETHER

CONCEPT.

IF tHE LATTER IS

APPLICABLE, PRESENT DAY SIGNIFTCANCE
IHE II{PACT DEPENDS STRONGLY ON CITOICE OF A FUTURE

EVEN

DISCOUNTING FACTOR

.

NEED FOR I!.!IIEDIATE POLICY ACTION HINGES ON THESE LAST
FEATURES.

TWO

OF