A Human Development Framework for CO2 Reductions

Although developing countries are called to participate in CO2 emission reduction efforts to avoid dangerous climate change, the implications of proposed reduction schemes in human development standards of developing countries remain a matter of debate. We show the existence of a positive and time-dependent correlation between the Human Development Index (HDI) and per capita CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Employing this empirical relation, extrapolating the HDI, and using three population scenarios, the cumulative CO2 emissions necessary for developing countries to achieve particular HDI thresholds are assessed following a Development As Usual approach (DAU). If current demographic and development trends are maintained, we estimate that by 2050 around 85% of the world's population will live in countries with high HDI (above 0.8). In particular, 300Gt of cumulative CO2 emissions between 2000 and 2050 are estimated to be necessary for the development of 104 developing countries in the year 2000. This value represents between 20% to 30% of previously calculated CO2 budgets limiting global warming to 2{\deg}C. These constraints and results are incorporated into a CO2 reduction framework involving four domains of climate action for individual countries. The framework reserves a fair emission path for developing countries to proceed with their development by indexing country-dependent reduction rates proportional to the HDI in order to preserve the 2{\deg}C target after a particular development threshold is reached. Under this approach, global cumulative emissions by 2050 are estimated to range from 850 up to 1100Gt of CO2. These values are within the uncertainty range of emissions to limit global temperatures to 2{\deg}C.Comment: 14 pages, 7 figures, 1 tabl

New use of global warming potentials to compare cumulative and short-lived climate pollutants

Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have requested guidance on common greenhouse gas metrics in accounting for Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to emission reductions1. Metric choice can affect the relative emphasis placed on reductions of ‘cumulative climate pollutants’ such as carbon dioxide versus ‘short-lived climate pollutants’ (SLCPs), including methane and black carbon2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Here we show that the widely used 100-year global warming potential (GWP100) effectively measures the relative impact of both cumulative pollutants and SLCPs on realized warming 20–40 years after the time of emission. If the overall goal of climate policy is to limit peak warming, GWP100 therefore overstates the importance of current SLCP emissions unless stringent and immediate reductions of all climate pollutants result in temperatures nearing their peak soon after mid-century7, 8, 9, 10, which may be necessary to limit warming to “well below 2 °C” (ref. 1). The GWP100 can be used to approximately equate a one-off pulse emission of a cumulative pollutant and an indefinitely sustained change in the rate of emission of an SLCP11, 12, 13. The climate implications of traditional CO2-equivalent targets are ambiguous unless contributions from cumulative pollutants and SLCPs are specified separately

A solution to the misrepresentations of CO2-equivalent emissions of short-lived climate pollutants under ambitious mitigation

While cumulative carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions dominate anthropogenic warming over centuries, temperatures over the coming decades are also strongly affected by short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs), complicating the estimation of cumulative emission budgets for ambitious mitigation goals. Using conventional Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) to convert SLCPs to “CO2-equivalent” emissions misrepresents their impact on global temperature. Here we show that peak warming under a range of mitigation scenarios is determined by a linear combination of cumulative CO2 emissions to the time of peak warming and non-CO2 radiative forcing immediately prior to that time. This may be understood by expressing aggregate non-CO2 forcing as cumulative CO2 forcing-equivalent (CO2-fe) emissions. We show further that contributions to CO2-fe emissions are well approximated by a new usage of GWP, denoted GWP*, which relates cumulative CO2 emissions to date with the current rate of emission of SLCPs. GWP* accurately indicates the impact of emissions of both long-lived and short-lived pollutants on radiative forcing and temperatures over a wide range of timescales, including under ambitious mitigation when conventional GWPs fail. Measured by GWP*,implementing the Paris Agreement would reduce the expected rate of warming in 2030 by 28% relative to a No Policy scenario. Expressing mitigation efforts in terms of their impact on future cumulative emissions aggregated using GWP* would relate them directly to contributions to future warming, better informing both burden-sharing discussions and long-term policies and measures in pursuit of ambitious global temperature goals

The many possible climates from the Paris Agreement’s aim of 1.5 °C warming

The United Nations’ Paris Agreement includes the aim of pursuing efforts to limit global warming to only 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. However, it is not clear what the resulting climate would look like across the globe and over time. Here we show that trajectories towards a ‘1.5 °C warmer world’ may result in vastly different outcomes at regional scales, owing to variations in the pace and location of climate change and their interactions with society’s mitigation, adaptation and vulnerabilities to climate change. Pursuing policies that are considered to be consistent with the 1.5 °C aim will not completely remove the risk of global temperatures being much higher or of some regional extremes reaching dangerous levels for ecosystems and societies over the coming decades

Impact of delay in reducing carbon dioxide emissions

Recent downward revisions in the climate response to rising CO2 levels, and opportunities for reducing non-CO2 climate warming, have both been cited as evidence that the case for reducing CO2 emissions is less urgent than previously thought. Evaluating the impact of delay is complicated by the fact that CO2 emissions accumulate over time, so what happens after they peak is as relevant for long-term warming as the size and timing of the peak itself. Previous discussions have focused on how the rate of reduction required to meet any given temperature target rises asymptotically the later the emissions peak. Here we focus on a complementary question: how fast is peak CO2-induced warming increasing while mitigation is delayed, assuming no increase in rates of reduction after the emissions peak? We show that this peak-committed warming is increasing at the same rate as cumulative CO2 emissions, about 2% per year, much faster than observed warming, independent of the climate response

The role of short-lived climate pollutants in meeting temperature goals

Some recent high-profile publications have suggested that immediately reducing emissions of methane, black carbon and other short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) may contribute substantially towards the goal of limiting global warming to 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. Although this literature acknowledges that action on long-lived climate pollutants (LLCPs) such as CO2 is also required, it is not always appreciated that SLCP emissions in any given decade only have a significant impact on peak temperature under circumstances in which CO2 emissions are falling. Immediate action on SLCPs might potentially ‘buy time’ for adaptation by reducing near-term warming; however early SLCP reductions, compared with reductions in a future decade, do not buy time to delay reductions in CO2

Linearity between temperature peak and bioenergy CO2 emission rates

International audienceMany future energy and emission scenarios envisage an increase of bioenergy in the global primary energy mix(1-4). In most climate impact assessment models and policies, bioenergy systems are assumed to be carbon neutral, thus ignoring the time lag between CO2 emissions from biomass combustion and CO2 uptake by vegetation(5). Here, we show that the temperature peak caused by CO2 emissions from bioenergy is proportional to the maximum rate at which emissions occur and is almost insensitive to cumulative emissions. Whereas the carbon-climate response (CCR; ref. 6) to fossil fuel emissions is approximately constant, the CCR to bioenergy emissions depends on time, biomass turnover times, and emission scenarios. The linearity between temperature peak and bioenergy CO2 emission rates resembles the characteristic of the temperature response to short-lived climate forcers. As for the latter(7-9), the timing of CO2 emissions from bioenergy matters. Under the international agreement to limit global warming to 2 degrees C by 2100(3), early emissions from bioenergy thus have smaller contributions on the targeted temperature than emissions postponed later into the future, especially when bioenergy is sourced from biomass with medium(50-60 years) or long turnover times (100 years)