Peter Erickson
Staff Scientist
Seattle, WA
pete.erickson@sei-us.org
skype: pugetgold
+1 (206) 547-4000 x3#
Peter is a Staff Scientist in the Climate and Energy program in SEI's Seattle office. His research focuses on climate change policy, with particular interests in the role of offsets in cap-and-trade programs, contribution of consumption and behavior change to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, industrial policy, and cities.
Current or recent projects include the development of a greenhouse gas tracking framework for a major U.S. metropolitan area (Seattle); a study on the quality and quantity of potential greenhouse gas offsets in the United States; a study on the role of international offsets in global climate mitigation; and a long-term emission reduction scenario for sustainable consumption and production in the United States.
Peter joined SEI in 2008 after 8 years consulting on environmental issues for cities and states throughout the United States. He received a B.A. from Carleton College in 1998, with a major in geology and extensive studies in mathematics.
Recent Publications by Peter Erickson
|
Comparison of Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 pledges under the Cancun Agreements (Policy Brief)SEI Policy Brief Author(s): Kartha, S. ; Erickson, P.Year: 2011 Research Area(s): Climate Equity ; Climate Mitigation Policy Description: This policy brief, which summarizes SEI Working Paper No. 2011-06, of the same title, examines four recent detailed studies of countries' mitigation pledges under the Cancún Agreements, for the purpose of comparing developed (Annex 1) country pledges to developing (non-Annex 1) country pledges. It finds that there is broad agreement that developing country pledges amount to more mitigation than developed country pledges. That conclusion applies across all four studies and across all their various cases, despite the diversity of assumptions and methodologies employed and the substantial differences in their quantification of the pledges. The studies also find that the Annex 1 pledges could be significantly diminished by several factors, such as lenient accounting rules on the use of surplus allowances, double-counting of offsets, and loose accounting methodologies for land use, land-use change, and forestry, and they note that the mitigation pledged globally is consistent with a global temperature rise of greater than 2°C – and possibly as much as 5°C.More information Download PDF |
|
|
Consumption-based Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory for OregonReport commissioned by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Author(s): Erickson, P. ; Lazarus, M. ; Stanton, E.A. ; Ackerman, F.Year: 2011 Research Area(s): Climate Mitigation Policy ; Climate Economics Description: Consumers and businesses contribute to greenhouse gas emissions in many ways. For many years, the State of Oregon has conducted an inventory of emissions, focusing on emissions produced within the state. But that focus only tells part of the story of how Oregon contributes to climate change: As a result of purchasing goods and services, Oregonians contribute to emissions around the world. Until now, the contribution of Oregonians to these out-of-state emissions has not been well understood. This study by SEI, the first application of our Consumption Based Emissions Inventory (CBEI) model, aims to complete the picture, estimating the emissions &ndash both in-state and elsewhere – associated with consumption by Oregon residents, businesses and governments. More than half of these consumption-based emissions, it finds, occur in other states or nations.This report is part of a package that also includes a CBEI-Oregon Technical Report. More information Download PDF External Link |
|
|
|
Consumption-Based Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory for Oregon – 2005: Technical ReportReport commissioned by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Author(s): Stanton, E.A. ; Bueno, R. ; Ackerman, F. ; Erickson, P. ; Cegan, J. ; Hammerschlag, R.Year: 2011 Research Area(s): Climate Economics ; Climate Mitigation Policy Description: Oregon's Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory estimates the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the purchase of goods and services (including fuels and electricity) by Oregon consumers in 2005. CBEI follows the commodities (goods and services) purchased by Oregon consumers and assigns to these commodities their total life-cycle emissions, from cradle (the production phase) to grave (the post-consumer disposal phase). For example, the cookies consumed by an Oregon resident may be produced in California or in Canada, but – when considered on a consumption basis – Oregon has a responsibility for these emissions. A consumption-based inventory takes the purchase of a final good or service as the act that defines whether a commodity's life-cycle emissions should be in or out of the inventory; in CBEI the life-cycle emissions of anything consumed (or in economic terms, "demanded") in Oregon belong to Oregon.This report is part of a package that also includes a CBEI-Oregon Summary Report. Download PDF External Link |
|
|
Importance of programme design for potential U.S. domestic GHG offset supply and qualityClimate Policy, published online Author(s): Erickson, P. ; Lazarus, M. ; Kelly, A.Year: 2011 Research Area(s): Emissions Trading & Offsets Description:Greenhouse gas (GHG) offsets are a central feature of most regional and national cap-and-trade systems. This analysis considers how the design of GHG offset protocols for the United States – and the corresponding rules for eligibility, measuring, verifying and awarding offsets – might impact actual offset crediting and the realization of GHG mitigation potential. Findings indicate that although lenient offset rules and protocols may bring several times more credits to market than a conservative approach, they could also undermine the cap-and-trade system's effectiveness at reducing overall GHG emissions. In particular, lenient rules and protocols could conceivably lead U.S. emissions to exceed legislative targets by as much as 500 million tons CO2e in 2020.
|
|
|
Comparison of Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 pledges under the Cancun AgreementsSEI Working Paper 2011-06 Author(s): Kartha, S. ; Erickson, P.Year: 2011 Research Area(s): Climate Equity ; Climate Mitigation Policy Description: This report, based on an analysis conducted for Oxfam International, examines four recent detailed studies of countries' mitigation pledges under the Cancun Agreements, for the purpose of comparing developed (Annex 1) country pledges to developing (non-Annex 1) country pledges. It finds that there is broad agreement that developing country pledges amount to more mitigation than developed country pledges. The studies further note that the mitigation pledged globally is consistent with a global temperature rise of greater than 2°C – and possibly as much as 5°C. Avoiding this much warming would require developed countries to raise their pledges and fulfill them through actual mitigation.Note: This paper was originally published in June 2011 as SEI-US Working Paper WP-US-1107. For a summary of the key findings, download this policy brief. More information Download PDF |