Assessing the size and uncertainty of remaining carbon budgets

The remaining carbon budget (RCB), the net amount of CO₂ humans can still emit without exceeding a chosen global warming limit, is often used to evaluate political action against the goals of the Paris Agreement. RCB estimates for 1.5 °C are small, and minor changes in their calculation can therefore result in large relative adjustments. Here we evaluate recent RCB assessments by the IPCC and present more recent data, calculation refinements and robustness checks that increase confidence in them. We conclude that the RCB for a 50% chance of keeping warming to 1.5 °C is around 250 GtCO₂ as of January 2023, equal to around six years of current CO₂ emissions. For a 50% chance of 2 °C the RCB is around 1,200 GtCO₂. Key uncertainties affecting RCB estimates are the contribution of non-CO₂ emissions, which depends on socioeconomic projections as much as on geophysical uncertainty, and potential warming after net zero CO₂

Assessing the size and uncertainty of remaining carbon budgets

The remaining carbon budget (RCB), the net amount of CO2 humans can still emit without exceeding a chosen global warming limit, is often used to evaluate political action against the goals of the Paris Agreement. RCB estimates for 1.5 °C are small, and minor changes in their calculation can therefore result in large relative adjustments. Here we evaluate recent RCB assessments by the IPCC and present more recent data, calculation refinements and robustness checks that increase confidence in them. We conclude that the RCB for a 50% chance of keeping warming to 1.5 °C is around 250 GtCO2 as of January 2023, equal to around six years of current CO2 emissions. For a 50% chance of 2 °C the RCB is around 1,200 GtCO2. Key uncertainties affecting RCB estimates are the contribution of non-CO2 emissions, which depends on socioeconomic projections as much as on geophysical uncertainty, and potential warming after net zero CO2

Modifying emissions scenario projections to account for the effects of COVID-19: protocol for CovidMIP

Lockdowns to avoid the spread of COVID-19 have created an unprecedented reduction in human emissions. While the country-level scale of emissions changes can be estimated in near real time, the more detailed, gridded emissions estimates that are required to run general circulation models (GCMs) of the climate will take longer to collect. In this paper we use recorded and projected country-and-sector activity levels to modify gridded predictions from the MESSAGE-GLOBIOM SSP2-4.5 scenario. We provide updated projections for concentrations of greenhouse gases, emissions fields for aerosols, and precursors and the ozone and optical properties that result from this. The code base to perform similar modifications to other scenarios is also provided. We outline the means by which these results may be used in a model intercomparison project (CovidMIP) to investigate the impact of national lockdown measures on climate, including regional temperature, precipitation, and circulation changes. This includes three strands: an assessment of short-term effects (5-year period) and of longer-term effects (30 years) and an investigation into the separate effects of changes in emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols. This last strand supports the possible attribution of observed changes in the climate system; hence these simulations will also form part of the Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP)

Adjusting 1.5 degree C climate change mitigation pathways in light of adverse new information

Understanding how 1.5 °C pathways could adjust in light of new adverse information, such as a reduced 1.5 °C carbon budget, or slower-than-expected low-carbon technology deployment, is critical for planning resilient pathways. We use an integrated assessment model to explore potential pathway adjustments starting in 2025 and 2030, following the arrival of new information. The 1.5 °C target remains achievable in the model, in light of some adverse information, provided a broad portfolio of technologies and measures is still available. If multiple pieces of adverse information arrive simultaneously, average annual emissions reductions near 3 GtCO2/yr for the first five years following the pathway adjustment, compared to 2 GtCO2/yr in 2020 when the Covid-19 pandemic began. Moreover, in these scenarios of multiple simultaneous adverse information, by 2050 mitigation costs are 4-5 times as high as a no adverse information scenario, highlighting the criticality of developing a wide range of mitigation options, including energy demand reduction options

Credibility gap in net-zero climate targets leaves world at high risk

Global climate policy is undergoing a rite of passage. What used to be a conversation about ambitious target setting now focuses increasingly on implementation and interventions to achieve these targets. This liminal transition from ambition to implementation is complex and presents deep ambiguities that are challenging for scientists to communicate and decision-makers to fathom. A critical question is whether we can believe that countries will deliver on the commitments they have made. By evaluating policy characteristics of countries’ net-zero targets, we can assign the targets credibility ratings, then estimate how greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and temperature are differentiated by our confidence in the targets. When we consider the credibility of current climate pledges, our assessment shows that the world remains far from delivering a safe climate future

The Climate Response to Emissions Reductions Due to COVID‐19: Initial Results From CovidMIP

Many nations responded to the corona virus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic by restricting travel and other activities during 2020, resulting in temporarily reduced emissions of CO2, other greenhouse gases and ozone and aerosol precursors. We present the initial results from a coordinated Intercomparison, CovidMIP, of Earth system model simulations which assess the impact on climate of these emissions reductions. 12 models performed multiple initial-condition ensembles to produce over 300 simulations spanning both initial condition and model structural uncertainty. We find model consensus on reduced aerosol amounts (particularly over southern and eastern Asia) and associated increases in surface shortwave radiation levels. However, any impact on near-surface temperature or rainfall during 2020–2024 is extremely small and is not detectable in this initial analysis. Regional analyses on a finer scale, and closer attention to extremes (especially linked to changes in atmospheric composition and air quality) are required to test the impact of COVID-19-related emission reductions on near-term climate. © 2021. Crown Copyright. © 2021. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. This article is published with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada. This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA

A multimodel analysis of post-Glasgow climate targets and feasibility challenges

The COP26 Glasgow process resulted in many countries strengthening their 2030 emissions reduction targets and announcing net-zero pledges for 2050–2070 but it is not clear how this would impact future warming. Here, we use four diverse integrated assessment models (IAMs) to assess CO2 emission trajectories in the near- and long-term on the basis of national policies and pledges, combined with a non-CO2 infilling model and a simple climate model to assess the temperature implications. We also consider the feasibility of national long-term pledges towards net-zero. While near-term pledges alone lead to warming above 2 °C, the addition of long-term pledges leads to emissions trajectories compatible with a future well below 2 °C, across all four IAMs. However, while IAM heterogeneity translates to diverse decarbonization pathways towards long-term targets, all modelled pathways indicate several feasibility concerns, relating to the cost of mitigation and the rates and scales of deployed technologies and measures