This is a climate deal? Double emissions, 3 degrees C of warming?

Published Friday, 4th December 2009

The carbon reduction pledges being made ahead of next week’s climate talks in Copenhagen are worse than just so much hot air … they’re putting the world on track to double its emissions over the next 30 years.

That’s according to a new assessment by the “Climate Action Tracker,” a joint project of energy consultancy Ecofys and the non-profit Climate Analytics. The tracker concludes that, based on current pledges by both industrialised and developing countries, we’re on a path toward carbon dioxide concentrations of more than 650 parts per million by 2100, with total greenhouse gas levels (GHG) likely to be nearly 800 parts per million of carbon dioxide-equivalent.

Those levels translate to global warming of well over 3 degrees C by century’s end.

“From these numbers, there is at least a one in four chance of exceeding a warming of 4 degrees C,” said Bill Hare of Climate Analytics and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

“The pledges on the table will not halt emissions growth before 2040, let alone by 2015 as indicated by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and are far from halving emissions by 2050, as has been called for by the G8,” said Niklas Höhne of Ecofys. “Instead, global emissions are likely to be nearly double 1990 levels by 2040 based on present pledges.”

The Climate Action Tracker assessment projects that total annual greenhouse gas emissions will be around 55 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent in 2020 based on current pledges. That’s just 3 billion tonnes less than would be expected under a business-as-usual scenario.

“In ten years from now global emissions will already have to be well below current levels of about 46 billion tonnes (in 2008) to have much chance of meeting temperature goals such as 2 degrees C, as called for by the major emitters globally, or below 1.5 degress C as put forward by the Small Island States and Least Developed Countries as essential for their survival,” Hare said.

“After accounting for the new position of Russia, the announcement of President Obama of a US emission reduction pledge for Copenhagen, the developed country emission reductions as a whole are currently projected to be 13 to 19 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020,” said Michiel Schaeffer of Climate Analytics. “However the proposed forest credits these countries want would degrade this by about 5 per cent with the effective reductions in industrial GHG emissions being 8 to 14 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.”

According to IPCC calculations, industrialised countries would need to reduce emissions by 25 to 40 per cent by 2020, compared to 1990 levels, to have a meaningful impact.

“Recent announcements such as the Chinese carbon intensity reduction target for 2020, and the Korean emission goals for 2020 and 2050, are very important and useful,” said Ecofys’ Höhne. “However, the overall effect on greenhouse gas emissions (excluding deforestation) is disappointing; with overall developing country emissions projected to be close to, or significantly above, the IPCC range for 2020.”

The Climate Action Tracker reveals major differences between the ambition levels of countries when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

In the lead are the Maldives and Costa Rica, which have proposed to become climate-neutral by around 2020. At the high end of the scale are Norway, Japan and Brazil, which are proposing to reduce their emissions significantly. In the “medium” range are developing countries such as India, Indonesia, Mexico and South Korea, who propose to reduce the growth of their emissions by the 2020s.

The EU is a special case, in that its unconditional commitment is rated “inadequate.” However, if its 30-per cent reduction target were to be adopted, the EU would move into the “medium” range and very close to “sufficient.”

China has moved down a category, because its recently announced target falls short of the ambition level that had been expected from the implementation of the current national policies. Between the middle and the bottom of the scale is the United States, whose recently proposed actions are deemed “inadequate,” as they don’t fall within the range needed to keep global warming within lower limits.

At the very bottom end of the scale are countries that have yet to propose substantial action beyond “business as usual.” These include Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.

Bookmark and share: