the emissions gap report · the emissions gap report cancun, 2 december 2010 are the copenhagen...
TRANSCRIPT
The Emissions Gap Report
Cancun, 2 December 2010
Are the Copenhagen Accord
pledges sufficient to limit global
warming to 2C or 1.5C?
www.unep.org/publications/ebooks/emissionsgapreport
Overview of side event
First hour - Overview of the technical analysis
Second hour - Policy implications
Joseph Alcamo UNEP Overview
Joeri Rogelj ETH Zurich Chapter 2 (emissions pathways)
Chris Taylor Grantham Institute Chapter 3 (pledges)
Michel den Elzen PBL Chapter 4 (the gap)
Bill Hare PIK Chapter 5 (temperature)
Suzana Kahn Ribeiro Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
Artur Runge Metzger European Commission
Leon Charles AOSIS
Adrian Fernandez INE-Semarnat
+ Q&A
+ Q&A
The Emissions Gap Report
Cancun, 2 December 2010
Are the Copenhagen Accord
pledges sufficient to limit global
warming to 2C or 1.5C?
www.unep.org/publications/ebooks/emissionsgapreport
Overview
3
The Copenhagen Accord
A goal Staying below an increase of 2 degrees Celsius (1.50 C)
A means to get there Country pledges to control emissions (pegged to 2020)
Is there a gap between What we are aiming for Where we are heading ?
Copenhagen December, 2009
Photo: http://gogreenindia.co.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/official-white-house-photo-at-cop15-copenhagen-usa-india-
brazil-south-africa-china.jpg
4
The Emissions GapPreliminary Assessment
UNEP with ECF and National Institute of Ecology
33 scientists, 25 institutions, 15 countries
Range of estimates majority of results (median with 20th to 80th
percentile) robust results
Photo: http://gogreenindia.co.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/official-white-house-photo-at-cop15-copenhagen-usa-india-
brazil-south-africa-china.jpg
5
1. What are we aiming for? Findings from Chapter 2
1. Meeting a temperature target
depends largely on
cumulative emissions
2. Different pathways correspond
to same cumulative emissions
6
1 Specifically, this shows the 20-80th percentile range of the integrated assessment model pathways that have a likely (>66%) chance of limiting
temperature increase to 2C by 2100
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
Range of emissions pathways
consistent with a likely chance of
limiting warming to 2 degrees1
Median estimate of 44 GtCO2e in 2020
1. What are we aiming for? Findings from Chapter 2
Global emissions, GtCO2e
Annual emissions today
of ~48 GtCO2e
7
1 Specifically, this shows the 20-80th percentile range of the integrated assessment model pathways that have a likely (>66%) chance of limiting
average near surface temperature increase to 2C by 2100
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
Green line shows the range of emission
pathways consistent with a likely
chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees1
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
Annual emissions today
of ~48 GtCO2e
1. What are we aiming for? Findings from Chapter 2
Peak before 2020
Rapid reductions afterwards (~3 %/year)
8
1 This is the median estimate of the 11 studies assessed, estimates range from 54-60 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
Median estimate of 44 GtCO2e
Green line shows the range of emission
pathways consistent with a likely
chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees
39-44
1. What are we aiming for? Findings from Chapter 2
9
Under business-as-usual projections, emissions could reach 56 GtCO2e
1
1 This is the median estimate of the 11 studies assessed, estimates range from 54-60 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
Median estimate of 44 GtCO2e
10
1 This is the median estimate of modelling groups, estimates range from 52-57 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
2 This relates to rules surrounding the use of surplus emission units (particularly those carried over from this commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol) and LULUCF
accountingSource: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
53 GtCO2e in the least ambitious pledge case1
Unconditional pledges
Lenient rules2
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
Median estimate of 44 GtCO2e
11
1 This is the median estimate of modelling groups, estimates range from 47-51 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
49 GtCO2e in the most ambitious pledge case1
Conditional pledges
Strict rules
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
Median estimate of 44 GtCO2e
12Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
7 GtCO2e reduction possible as a result of the pledges
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
56
49
13Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
7 GtCO2e reduction possible as a result of the pledges
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
56
49
44To stay within two degree limit
14Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
7 GtCO2e reduction possible as a result of the pledges
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
56
49
44To stay within two degree limit
Almost 60% of the way to closing the gap
15Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
7 GtCO2e reduction possible as a result of the pledges
2. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e56
49
44To stay within two degree limit
Almost 60% of the way to closing the gap
5 GtCO2e remaining gap
16
1 This is the median estimate of modelling groups, estimates range from 52-57 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
2 This relates to rules surrounding the use of surplus emission units (particularly those carried over from this commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol) and LULUCF
accountingSource: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
sWhat about 1.5 degrees? Findings from Chapter 2
Consistent with 2.0 degrees
17
1 Specifically, this shows the 20-80th percentile range of the stylized pathways that have a likely (>66%) chance of limiting temperature increase to 1.5C by 2100
2 Specifically, energy and industry CO2 reduction rates of 3-5% per year compared with 2-3% for a likely chance of 2 degreesSource: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
What about 1.5 degrees? Findings from Chapter 2
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UN
EP
thanks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
PRELIMINARY RESULTS FEW STUDIES AVAILABLE
Consistent with 2.0 degrees
Consistent with 1.5 degrees
18
1 Specifically, this shows the 20-80th percentile range of the stylized pathways that have a likely (>66%) chance of limiting temperature increase to 1.5C by 2100
2 Specifically, energy and industry CO2 reduction rates of 3-5% per year compared with 2-3% for a likely chance of 2 degreesSource: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010
Similar 2020 emission levels1
What about 1.5 degrees? Findings from Chapter 2U
NE
P th
anks J
oeri
Rogelj
(ET
HZ
) and th
e E
uro
pean C
limate
Foundatio
n fo
r gra
phic
s
PRELIMINARY RESULTS FEW STUDIES AVAILABLE
...but steeper emission reduction rates after 20202
...and greater reliance on negative emissions in second half of the century
Global emissions, GtCO2e
19
- 2 to -3 GtCO2e
Move from business-as-usual to unconditional pledges (lower ambition)
Remaining gap of ~5 GtCORemaining gap of ~5 GtCO22e e
It is feasible to close the gapIt is feasible to close the gap
More ambitious actions More ambitious actions COCO22 & non& non--COCO22
Climate financeClimate finance
- 1 to -2 Gt CO2e
3. How to reduce the gap? (To 2 degree target)
- 3 Gt CO2e
Total reduction approx. -7 Gt CO2e
Moving from unconditional (lower ambition) pledges to conditional (higher ambition) Ambitious action from other countries Provision of climate finance Passing of domestic legislation
Ensuring strict rules surrounding: Land use/forest accounting Surplus emissions units
Gap without action (business-as-usual) 12 Gt CO2e
20
Key Messages
The glass is half empty
Without action a huge gap between temperature targets and expected emissions in 2020
The glass is half full
The negotiations can reduce the gap substantially
Feasible to close the remaining gap with higher ambition
Photo: http://gogreenindia.co.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/official-white-house-photo-at-cop15-copenhagen-usa-india-
brazil-south-africa-china.jpg
The Emissions Gap Report
Cancun, 2 December 2010
Are the Copenhagen Accord
pledges sufficient to limit global
warming to 2C or 1.5C?
www.unep.org/publications/ebooks/emissionsgapreport
Overview
22
23
What did we do?
IAM multi-gas emission pathways from literature
Kyoto-basket: CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Chapter 3 What are the expected global
emissions in 2020?
Lead authors: Niklas Hhne (Ecofys), Chris Taylor (Grantham)
Contributing authors: Claudine Chen (PIK), Rob Dellink (OECD), Michel den Elzen (PBL), Jrgen Fenhann (UNEP Risoe), Claudio
Gesteira (COPPE), Kelly Levin (WRI), Emanuele Massetti (FEEM), Caspar Olausson (Danish Energy Agency), Murray Ward (Global
Climate Change Consultants), Zhao Xiusheng (Tsinghua)
What did we do?
Estimates from:
AVOID Programme
Climate Action Tracker
Climate Interactive
Climate Strategies
FEEM
Grantham Institute
Houser
IIASA (GAINS)
OECD
PBL
Project Catalyst
UNEP Risoe
WRI
Completed datasets for:All countries
All sectors
Disentangled the low-high range of estimates
Consistent assumptions on which
country pledges are conditional / unconditional
Stripped out most important accounting issues
LULUCF accounting (up to 0.8
GtCO2e)
Surplus emission units (up to 2.3
GtCO2e)
Harmonised to consistent historic emission levels (2005 levels)
Results from four pledge cases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005
56
52
60
45
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
Results from four pledge cases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005
56
52
60
5351
57
45
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
Unconditional pledgesLenient accounting rules
Results from four pledge cases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005
56
52
60
5351
57
5250
55
45
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
Unconditional pledgesStrict accounting rules
Results from four pledge cases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005
56
52
60
5351
57
5250
55
5149
53
45
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
Conditional pledgesLenient accounting rules
Results from four pledge cases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005
56
52
60
5351
57
5250
55
5149
53
4947
51
45
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
Conditional pledgesStrict accounting rules
Other factors that affect emissions
Double counting of offsets
Partial delivery
Climate finance
Ambitious policy / over delivery
1.3 GtCO2e1.3 GtCO2e
~2 GtCO2e
2.5 GtCO2e
1.5 GtCO2e
Maximum expected impact
Lead authors: Michel den Elzen (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency)Keywan Riahi (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis)
Contributing authors: William Hare (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research), Niklas Hhne (Ecofys), Mikiko Kainuma (National Institute for EnvironmentalStudies), Jiang Kejun (Energy Research Institute), Chris Taylor (GranthamResearch Institute, LSE), Zhao Xiusheng (Tsinghua University)
Chapter 4 What is the emissions gap?
Chapter 4. What is the emissions gap?
There is a potential emissions gap between the expected emissions based on the country pledges and emission levels in 2020 consistent with a 1.5 and 2C limits
The size of the gap depends on the likelihood of a particular temperature limit, and how the pledges are implemented
As a reference point: Emissions for business-as-usual projection: 56 GtCO2e [54-60] Emissions for meeting 2C limit with likely chance: 44 GtCO2e [39-44]=> Global emissions gap: 12 GtCO2e [10-21]
Results from four pledge cases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
56
52
60
5351
57
5250
55
5149
53
4947
51
45
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
Comparison with the 2020 emissions consistent with a likely chance of limiting warming to 2C
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
56
52
60
5351
57
5250
55
5149
53
4947
51
44
39
4445
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
2020 projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
What is the gap?
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
56
52
60
44
39
44
Global emissions, GtCO2e
12
2020 projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
What is the gap?
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
56
52
60
44
39
44
Global emissions, GtCO2e
10
2020 projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
What is the gap?
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
56
52
60
44
39
44
Global emissions, GtCO2e
21
2020 projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
What is the gap?
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
56
52
60
44
39
44
Global emissions, GtCO2e
12 10-21
2020 projections
What is the gap?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
5351
57
44
39
4445
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
9 8-18
2020 projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
What is the gap?
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
5250
55
44
39
4445
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
8 6-16
2020 projections
What is the gap?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
5149
53
44
39
4445
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
7 5-14
2020 projections
What is the gap?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
4321BAU1990 2005 2C
4947
51
44
39
4445
38
Global emissions, GtCO2e
53-12
2020 projections
Pledge case
Business as usual
2020 emissions: 56 [54-60])12 [10-21] 11 [8-18]
Unconditional pledge, Lenient rules
(2020 emissions: 53 [52-57])9 [8-18] 8 [6-15]
Unconditional pledge, Strict rules
(2020 emissions: 52 [50-55])8 [6-16] 7 [4-13]
Conditional pledge, Lenient rules
(2020 emissions: 51 [49-53])7 [5-14] 6 [3-11]
Conditional pledge, Strict rules
(2020 emissions: 49 [47-51])5 [3-12] 4 [1-9]
(2020 emissions: 44 [39-44]) (2020 emissions: 45 [42-46])
"Likely" chance (>66%) to
stay below 2C
"Medium" chance (50 to
66%) to stay below 2C
The global gap between expected emissions in 2020 with emission levels for meeting 2oC
1
2
3
4
Key messages
There is a gap of between 5 and 9 GtCO2e to levels consistent with a likely chance of limit global warming to 2C, depending on how the pledges are implemented
To have a medium rather than a likely chance of staying within the 2C limit, global emissions in 2020 can be about 1 GtCO2e higher and the gap also narrows by about 1 GtCO2e
There are considerable uncertainties around the estimates of thegap. The range around median estimates is not symmetric; the lower bound extends about 1 to 2 GtCO2e below the median, whereas the upper bound rises 7 to 9 GtCO2e above it. Therefore, the gap may turn out to be higher rather than the median.
Reaching 1.5C with a median probability of about 30 per cent leaves a similar emissions gap in 2020 as the one for a likely chance for 2C
54
55
56
57
The Emissions Gap Report
Cancun, 2 December 2010
Are the Copenhagen Accord
pledges sufficient to limit global
warming to 2C or 1.5C?
www.unep.org/publications/ebooks/emissionsgapreport