The 3C initiative

The 3C initiative makes an urgent request to the global community and all its representatives
http://www.combatclimatechange.org/www/ccc_org/ccc_org/224546home/720282thex3/index .p

There are clear indications of an ongoing global climate change. The root cause seems to be the emission of greenhouse gases due to human activity. A change in the climate could potentially alter the conditions that govern human life and lead to major costs. Therefore, we believe that the global community should aim at reducing the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to acceptable levels as rapidly as possible, as well as providing secure and affordable energy for a stable, global development.

The goal is to underline the need for urgent action by the global community and to influence the post-Kyoto process by demanding a global framework supporting a market based solution to the climate change issue. This can be achieved by getting as many companies as possible aboard and by getting our common platform well known and well understood.

Coordination and ownership
Swedish power company Vattenfall is responsible for coordinating the 3C initiative. Other companies are invited to take part. The initiative stems from Vattenfall’s proposal for a low carbon emitting society “Curbing Climate Change”. www.vattenfall.com

Relations to other initiatives and organizations
Many of the participants in the 3C initiative also take part in other activities on climate change such as the World Economic Forum's G8 Climate Change Roundtable, US Climate Action Partnership and various Trade Association initiatives.

Our commitment - Drawing a roadmap to a low-emitting society: The 3C Initiative is committed to 9 overall principles
1. A switch-over to a low emitting economy is a necessity
The provision of secure, reliable and affordable energy supplies for customers and society is and will remain a key priority for each of our companies. However, we are well aware that all forms of energy provision have environmental consequences and that the long-term impact has to be compatible with a sustainable society, consequently a long-term switch-over to substantially lower emissions of greenhouse gases is a necessity.
2. A global solution is needed
Curbing climate change is first and foremost a question of minimizing the influence of man-made carbon dioxide in the natural environment. However, other greenhouse gases cannot be neglected. The greenhouse effect is global, a global solution is needed – in the end all human activity in all countries has to be addressed. We urgently need to develop a worldwide policy framework to replace the Kyoto Protocol from 2013 and onwards. While respecting different contexts, harmonization among national rules is needed in order to avoid market distortions and protectionism.
3. A common, global goal limiting climate changes is needed
The emission scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that the global average surface temperature will increase by 1.4 to 5.8 degrees centigrade between 1990 and 2100. The priority should be to focus on a common, global goal of limiting global warming. Limiting emissions over time can and has to be done following an appropriate path towards 2100. According to present knowledge, the goal should be to stabilize the carbon dioxide equivalent concentration at a level below 550 parts per million (volume) in order to stabilize the temperature increase at an acceptable level. There are signals indicating that the acceptable concentration level may have to be even lower in the future. The long-term goal must be based on sound scientific and economic analyses. An assessment process should be designed to monitor the progress.
4. Greenhouse gas emissions must have a global price
In order to minimize the cost of staying below the cap it is necessary to establish a global price for the emission of greenhouse gases. To limit negative effects on global wealth, a global system facilitating emissions trading should be established. We recognize that gaining control of the carbon cycle will demand resources and will certainly influence transport and energy prices. Consequently, it is important to ensure that impacts on competitiveness and comparative advantages and disadvantages are minimized. Emission reductions should be achieved at the lowest possible cost. The predictability and stability of price trends are important factors.
5. A well laid-out combination of short- and long-term actions is needed
Any solution to the problem must work in both the short and long-term. This means that the world shall neither in the short nor long-term, in fact never, experience any unacceptable consequences from the global warming problem. Many of the actions required are by nature long term. For example, an investment in a new power plant has a time horizon of 40 – 50 years. To commercialize new technology, 20 – 30 years or more is usually required. The simple conclusion is that a focus only on short-term objectives and programs is totally inadequate. On the other hand, we cannot neglect the short-term, it should always be possible to apply the best available technologies. We have to act today and apply a 100-year perspective, that is, take responsibility for our actions from now until 2100.
6. No options should be excluded
The efficient use of resources and strong incentives for research and development are crucial. Diversification is essential to guarantee security of supply. Choice cannot be limited to the alternatives available today. Governments, producers and customers must be open to new solutions and technological developments.
7. A global emissions market is needed
A stable framework must be established for the investments that will be essential to reach the long-term goal. The regime shall be robust, but at the same time adaptive. As new knowledge is accumulated, parameters may change, but not the basic principles. Curbing greenhouse gas emissions is particularly well suited to emissions trading. From an environmental point of view, the location of the emissions is unimportant. There are strong reasons for believing that the costs for reducing greenhouse gas emissions vary widely among sources and countries and the cost savings will thus be larger the wider the trading scheme.
8. The developed countries must lead the way and the developing countries should follow as soon as they are able
Global trade requires a clear division of roles between the political sphere and the market, as well as mutual understanding. The developed economies must lead the way. In the long run it must be more attractive to be part of the system than to remain outside. Putting a price tag on emissions and creating the correct incentives will create resources that can be used to tackle the problem. Price setting must reflect supply and demand. The expansion of a global trading scheme must be built on mutual trust and avoidance of improper use.
9. Fair and sustainable global burden-sharing must be reached
All countries should commit to participate from the start. No poor country shall be denied its right to economic development. Richer countries shall pull a larger weight, but no country shall be forced to disruptive change. Fair effects on competitiveness shall be achieved.

To help reach a low-emitting, sustainable economy quickly and cost-effectively, 3C now follows its call to action with recommendations on policy priorities for the world’s politicians. These recommendations are based on a thorough analysis of how to reduce emissions cost-effectively throughout the global economy.

-
Scientists in the IPCC and other bodies suggest that to avoid severe environmental and human impacts (see figure 1), the rise in mean surface temperature by the end of this century should be kept to less than 2°C (3.6°F) above pre-industrial levels. This will require a switch to a low-emitting global economy and is a challenging, though achievable, goal. To reach it the world must define global emission reduction targets (see figure 2) – and associated national commitments – for 2030 and 2050 and gradually reduce emissions to meet those targets.



The opportunities for cutting emissions are widespread (see figure 3), and many are available at very low, or even negative, cost (see figure 4). With global commitment, we firmly believe the world can reduce emissions to a level that will keep warming below 2°C without halting development. Given enabling policy frameworks, the most effective, efficient, and dynamic solutions to climate change will be driven by business.



The policy solution need not be a mystery.
The potential to reduce emissions can be broken down by industry, sector and region (see figure 3), and tools for unlocking that potential can be divided on the basis of potential reduction and cost (see figure 4). Such an analysis reveals that 4 kinds of policy will have the biggest impact:

Market based solutions based on a global price for CO2e
Business will adopt technologies and practices that reduce emissions if it sees economic value in them. That value becomes clearest when carbon has a credible price based on a mechanism that is stable over the long term (see figure 5). To minimize competitive distortion, the price should ultimately be global. Trading with emission rights is well suited to give such a price signal, because it creates minimal distortion in the market, facilitates inclusion of multiple countries and is easy to link to a target emission cap. The sooner governments and businesses establish a global emissions trading system the better, but, realistically, any international system will have to be introduced stepwise.

Minimum requirements for energy and resource efficiency
A carbon price will not achieve all abatements, because market imperfections may distort the price signal. Many efficiency measures remain untaken as a result of market imperfections (see figure 4), such as misaligned incentives or information gaps among end-users (see figure 6). This is most apparent in the building and transport sectors, but applies to some extent in power and industry too. To overcome this, governments should complement the carbon price by establishing minimum requirements for energy and CO2e efficiency for areas not well served by the market. Requirements should be designed to stimulate growing efficiency over time.


Effective mechanisms to reduce emissions from forestry and agriculture
Forestry and agriculture account for large shares of the global abatement potential (see figure 3) but pose special challenges (see figure 7). In forestry, tropical deforestation is exacerbated by weak landowner rights, and sustainable forestry is complicated by the difficulty of measurement and monitoring. In agriculture, implementing CO2e-efficient cultivation techniques is a challenge. National and international policymakers must devise special mechanisms, primarily based on market principles, to make forest management and sustainable agriculture economically attractive and to overcome obstacles and capture the full abatement potential of these sectors.



Technology push
Existing technology can provide significant abatement in the short term, but new technology will play an important role in reducing costs and facilitating economic growth in the future. Long-term credible emission markets are the main requirement for businesses to invest in developing technology, but additional support can accelerate investment. Such support could be either financial or non-financial and will be of different kinds in different development phases (see figure 8); but it will always aim at making the way from development to commercialization as quick and cost efficient as possible. 3C has identified a number of technologies with high abatement potential that need public support to cross the threshold to the market. Those include, but are not limited to, carbon capture and storage, offshore wind, solar photovoltaic and second-generation biofuels.




The international climate effort aims to limit climate change, but some change is inevitable. The impact of this will be most severe in the least developed countries (see figure 9 and 10), those least able to tackle the challenge. This will be a global problem and all nations must be committed to provide their share of the resources required for adaptation.





The participation of the biggest economies in the world is decisive. As the G8+5 countries account for more than half of the world’s emissions and population, and 71 percent of GDP (see figure 11), their commitments to emission reduction will have substantial impact. The G8+5 countries also have an important role to play as role models and pioneers laying out the infrastructure to reduce risks for other countries. We therefore urge them to show strong, coordinated leadership in the ongoing process on how to limit climate change.



A transparent policy framework is a prerequisite for businesses to work efficiently to reduce emissions. There are several ways the 3C companies can contribute to establishing such a framework and can start taking action to reduce emissions.
First of all, we will share our deep understanding of the industries we work in. We can point to the measures with most impact and to what is needed to gain their full effect. The multinational reach of our companies will also help ensure global impact.
Within our respective sectors, we will work to influence our business colleagues and to push the development of efficient technology.
We will work hard to reduce emissions in our own businesses and to act as role models for other organizations.
We will also contribute our share to minimizing market failures by being transparent and by helping our customers make informed choices






ABB
More information


AIG
More information



Alcan
More information


Alstom
More information



Areva
More information


Bayer
More information



BP
More information


British Sky
More information



Centrica
More information


CEZ Group
More information



China National Offshore Oil Corp.
More information


Citigroup
More information



Deutsche Bahn AG
More information


Deutsche Post World Net
More information



DONG Energy
More information


Dow Chemical
More information



Duke Energy
More information


Endesa
More information



EnBW
More information


Enel
More information



E.ON
More information


Eskom
More information



Fortum
More information


GE
More information



Hitachi
More information


Iberdrola
More information



Lufthansa
More information


MAN
More information



Munich Re Group
More information


MVM Zrt.
More information



Norske Skog
More information


NRG Energy
More information



Nuon
More information


Otto Group
More information



PG&E Corporation
More information


PNM Resources
More information



RAO UES of Russia
More information


Reuters
More information



SAP AG
More information


SAS Group
More information



Siemens
More information


Suez
More information



The Tata Power Company Ltd
More information


Veolia
More information



Wallenius Lines
More information


Vattenfall
More information


-

Supporting organizations
World Business Council for Sustainable Development

] 3C Participants
As of today the following companies participate in the 3C Initiative:
ABB, AIG, Alcan, Alstom, Areva, Bayer, BP, British Sky Broadcasting, Centrica, CEZ Group, China National Offshore Oil Corp, Citigroup, Deutsche Bahn, Deutsche Post, DONG Energy, Dow Chemical, Duke Energy, EnBW, Endesa, Enel, E.ON, Eskom, Fortum, General Electric, Hitachi, Iberdrola, Lufthansa, MAN, Munich Re Group, MVM, Norske Skog, NRG Energy, Nuon, Otto Group, PG & E, PNM Resources, RAO UES Russia, Reuters, SAP, SAS, Siemens, SUEZ, The Tata Power Company, Vattenfall, Veolia, Wallenius Lines

3C Quick facts •46 companies (2/3 Fortune 500)•4.5 million employees•EUR 1250 billion turnover (10 times EU)•Active in 220 countries and territories•HQ in 11 of the G8+5 nations•15% of global electricity generation•Across industry sectors (including industrial, energy, financial, insurance, power, transportation and media)

The 3C Initiative is a global opinion group consisting of business leaders demanding integration of climate issues in markets and trade.
Today we comprise business leaders from 46 large companies from 11 of the G8+5 countries and from a broad range of industries. We want to support political leaders in taking action on climate change, to give input to the policy debate so that the transition to a low-emitting economy is as fast and cost-effective as possible, and to take our responsibility by acting to cut emissions.
The 3C Initiative was launched on January 11, 2007 by a statement appealing to the global community and all its representatives to join forces with business leaders around a common vision of a low-emitting, sustainable society and to cooperate to create a roadmap that leads to its realization.
The recommendations presented in the 3C Roadmap have been developed out of 3C’s founding statement, through a six-month process of open consultation with many of the initiative’s participating companies.

Corporate Leaders Publish Roadmap for Action on Climate Change
Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:11 pm (PST)
Corporate Leaders Publish Roadmap for Action on Climate ChangeGreenBiz.com, 13 November 2007 - Combat Climate Change (3C), a new coalition of 46 international companies, is pushing global governments to join together for immediate action to address climate change. The group released its roadmap and call for action at a seminar in Washington, D.C., aimed at the leaders of the G8+5 countries -- Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the U.K. and the U.S., as well as Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa -- along with a statement saying that a low-carbon economy is well within reach, and the time to act is now. The companies involved work in sectors ranging from finance, insurance and media to energy, transportation, energy and chemicals. The roadmap was timed to lead off the discussions in advance of next month's summit on climate change in Bali, Indonesia. "Industry can and should be an ally, not an obstacle, to addressing the very real climate problem," Lars Josefsson, the initiative's founder and president and CEO of Swedish energy group Vattenfall, said in announcing the partnership. "But the initiative must be taken not by one industry, but by all of us working together: the global challenge of combating climate change requires a global solution." Among the goals of the 3C roadmap are the creation of a global goal to dictate the maximum amount world leaders will allow global temperatures to increase and setting emissions targets to meet this goal. The group also aims to create a global emissions-trading market and set requirements for energy efficiency and resource-use, especially in the transportation and building sectors, create similar solutions for forestry and agriculture, and spurring the development of alternative energy technologies. While saying that governments themselves must shoulder some of the burden of addressing climate change, the 3C members also committed to working together across sectors as well as within their own operations to maximize efficiency and reduce emissions from within, while also working toward a comprehensive joint solution. Combat Climate Change's six-step roadmap, as well as a list of all 46 member companies, is available on the group's website, CombatClimateChange .org.This article is reproduced with kind permission of GreenBiz.com.

Alternative fuels may boost pollution: reportAFP, 13 November 2007 - Some alternative vehicle fuels such as liquid coal can cause more harmful greenhouse gas emissions than polluters such as petrol or diesel, scientists warned in a US study released Tuesday."Liquid coal, for example, can produce 80 percent more global warming pollution than gasoline," said the Union of Concerned Scientists, a non-profit environmental group, in a statement introducing its study.Liquid coal is viewed as a potential replacement to the oil on which countries rely heavily to fuel vehicles."Corn ethanol, conversely, could be either more polluting or less than gasoline depending on how the corn is grown and the ethanol is produced," the report said.The analysis was based on replacing a fifth of all gasoline consumed in the United States with alternative fuels by 2030.If most of these alternatives consist of liquid coal, the change could pump pollution into the atmosphere equivalent to 34 million more cars on the road. Favoring cleaner "advanced biofuels," on the other hand, could cut harmful gases by a similar amount.The cleanest alternative, the report said, is cellulosic ethanol, made from grass or wood chips -- it could cut emissions by more than 85 percent."We need to wean ourselves off oil, but we should replace it with the cleanest alternatives possible," said the author of the study, Patricia Monahan, in the report. "Let's not trade one bad habit for another."This article is reproduced with kind permission of Agence France-Presse (AFP)