Saturday round-up: Copenhagen pledges miss 2°C mark

The range of temperatures likely through to 2100 with the greenhouse gas emissions levels agreed in Copenhagen, with the pessimistic (red) and optimistic scenarios (blue) from the emissions graph below. The lighter shaded areas are represent broader temperature ranges that the researchers can be more confident the temperature rise will be in, the darker colours are narrower ranges that it's less certain the temperature will be in. Credit: Nature/Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research

The range of temperatures likely through to 2100 with the greenhouse gas emissions levels agreed in Copenhagen, with the pessimistic (red) and optimistic scenarios (blue) from the emissions graph below. The lighter shaded areas are represent broader temperature ranges that the researchers can be more confident the temperature rise will be in, the darker colours are narrower ranges that it's less certain the temperature will be in. Credit: Nature/Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research

German researchers this week dismissed the greenhouse gas emissions cuts agreed by the summit of world leaders in December as “paltry”. Joeri Rogelj, Malte Meinshausen and colleagues predict that the Copenhagen Accord will in fact lead to a 10-20% overall increase in emissions by 2020. Writing in the prestigious journal Nature on Thursday, the Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research scientists also point out two loopholes that could allow higher emissions. “The Copenhagen Accord has a stated aim of keeping global warming to below 2°C, and reviewing a 1.5°C goal by 2015,” Rogelj and Meinshausen write. “Unfortunately, the national emissions-reduction pledges accompanying this document are insufficient to meet this objective.”

They note that the Copenhagen Accord contained tables of national pledges that were supposed to be filled in by 1 February, however around 20% of global emissions are yet to be entered. Those commitments actually made by nearly all developed countries bar Japan and Norway show a similar lack of urgency. “It is amazing how unambitious these pledges are,” the scientists write.

In their most optimistic scenario, Rogelj and Meinshausen’s team estimate that the present pledges are likely to lead to global emissions equivalent to 47.9 billion tonnes of CO2 per year by 2020. However the loopholes that they see allow countries to save up emissions allowances and record the amount of CO2 removed through land management – such as planting forests – as credits for later use. If these are exploited, emissions by 2020 could rise to 53.6 billion tonnes.

While some researchers say that 48 billion tonnes is on the right track, the Potsdam scientists argue that this level would require “extremely ambitious rates of emissions reductions” after 2020. “Such pathways lull decision-makers into a false sense of security that emissions trends can continue upwards for the next decade without any ramifications,” they write. “The only way to achieve the 2 °C limit without betting on extreme reduction rates is to increase cuts before and by 2020.” This is especially important, because goals on long-term emissions cuts were removed from the final draft of the Copenhagen Accord. Consequently Rogelj and Meinshausen say that it’s vital that countries agree more serious cuts either during this year’s negotiations in Mexico, or in further meetings next year at the latest. “It is imperative that they do so,” the scientists write. “The prospects for limiting global warming to 2 °C are in dire peril.”

The range of greenhouse gas emissions the Potsdam researchers predict. The pessimistic scenario assumes that nations meet only their lowest stated ambitions, and use all surplus allowances and land-use credits. The optimistic scenario assumes that nations meet their highest stated ambitions, and do not use surplus allowances or land-use credits. The long-term target is to halve emissions from 1990 levels by 2050. A gigatonne equals a billion tonnes. Credit: Nature/Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research

The range of greenhouse gas emissions the Potsdam researchers predict. The pessimistic scenario assumes that nations meet only their lowest stated ambitions, and use all surplus allowances and land-use credits. The optimistic scenario assumes that nations meet their highest stated ambitions, and do not use surplus allowances or land-use credits. The long-term target is to halve emissions from 1990 levels by 2050. A gigatonne equals a billion tonnes. Credit: Nature/Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research

Meanwhile, also on Thursday, the US National Research Council warned that increasing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are changing ocean chemistry at an unprecedented rate. At the request of Congress, it gathered together 33 leading experts on the subject to summarise what’s happening in our seas chemically, and even more scientists to review that summary. “The ocean absorbs a significant portion of CO2 emissions from human activities, equivalent to about one-third of the total emissions for the past 200 years from fossil fuel combustion, cement production and land use change,” the report explains.

The CO2 taken up by the ocean makes it more acidic, and the extent of acidification seen since the industrial revolution is basically unmatched. “The rate of this change exceeds any known change in ocean chemistry for at least 800,000 years,” the report explains. “While the ultimate consequences are still unknown, there is a risk of ecosystem changes that threaten coral reefs, fisheries, protected species, and other natural resources of value to society.” You can read the full report for free and get the same quality of explanation Congress is getting here.

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Saturday round-up: Copenhagen pledges miss 2°C mark”

  1. Climate action needs “basis of trust” « Simple Climate Says:

    […] the Copenhagen Accord negotiated in December is set to fail in its stated intention to keep the world’s temperature from rising by less than 2ºC […]

  2. Saturday round-up: Melting ice speeds Arctic warming « Simple Climate Says:

    […] role the Copenhagen Accord can play in achieving this.” After Joeri Rogelj and his colleagues pointed out how unsatisfactory the outcome of Copenhagen was on Simple Climate this week, the need for […]

  3. Faulty power brakes to prevent emergency CO2 stop « Simple Climate Says:

    […] around 430 ppm. This is below the 450 ppm level that’s widely accepted will cause a dangerous 2°C temperature increase from pre-industrial averages. Davis and colleagues predict the average global temperature rise in this scenario would be about […]

  4. A picture of climate change is worth 1,000 words « Simple Climate Says:

    […] above image was first published on this blog in this entry. I’ve also published graphs illustrating emissions from power sources and transport, how […]

  5. Climate controls must cover gases other than CO2 « Simple Climate Says:

    […] a 2°C global average temperature increase, which is why limiting climate change to this amount was a stated aim of the Copenhagen Accord. To prevent this by limiting CO2 alone could require annual emissions in 2050 to be just one-fifth […]

  6. Hope from a surprising source that consumption can be controlled « Simple Climate Says:

    […] have made little progress since then. Then, at Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2009 world leaders agree to weak targets that wouldn’t see emissions begin to fall until […]

  7. Society must respond 50 times faster to meet leaders’ climate promises « Simple Climate Says:

    […] scientists also wanted to see what it would take to stay within the 2°C temperature rise from pre-industialisation target agreed by world leaders. To do this they looked at what would happen when risk and damage from […]

  8. Delays raise emission halt urgency « Simple Climate Says:

    […] rings alarm bells, as one of the few climate agreements our governments have been able to make is to keep warming below that limit. CO2 levels in the air exceeded 500 ppm in 2042, up from 394 ppm today, and reached 567 ppm in […]

  9. With climate change, uncertainty is no-one’s friend | Simple Climate Says:

    […] means projections see it as more likely that steps to cut emissions won’t keep the world below warming levels governments have agreed we must avoid. So, if we are unsure whether we can slow the climate juggernaut down before we smash into the […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: