Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Figure 10. (a) Effect of the NL-2% emissions limitation proposal on global mean temperature (°C) for different values of the climate sensitivity (AT). We consider the "no-limitation" case, where Annex I and non-Annex I country CO2 emissions follow the IS92e scenario, and "limitation" case, where non-Annex I country emissions follow IS92e and Annex I emissions follow NL-2%. (b) As for (a), but for global mean sea level (cm). The 1.5, 2.5 and 4.5°C climate sensitivities are combined with low, mid and high ice-melt parameters, respectively.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Figure 11. (a) Relationship between global fossil CO2 emissions in the year 2020 (GtC/yr) and global mean temperature change (°C) over 1990-2020. Results are given for different values of the climate sensitivity (AT2x). The dots represent individual case values as given in Figures 8-10, while the straight lines give the least-squares linear fit between these data points. The straight lines may be used to interpolate results for 2020 emissions levels other than those specifically analysed in this Paper. (b) As for (a) but for global mean sea level change (cm). The 1.5, 2.5 and 4.5°C climate sensitivities are combined with low, mid and high ice-melt parameters, respectively.

23

REFERENCES

Acosta Moreno, R., R. Baron, P. Bohm, W. Chandler, V. Cole, O. Davidson, G. Dutt, E. Haites, H. Ishitani, D. Kruger, M. Levine, L. Zhong, L. Michaelis, W. Moomaw, J. R. Moreira, A. Mosier, R. Moss, N. Nakicenovic, L. Price, N. H. Ravindranath, H.-H. Rogner, J. Sathaye, P. Shukla, L. Van Wie McGrory and T. Williams, 1996: Technologies, policies and measures for mitigating climate change. IPCC Technical Paper 1. R. T. Watson, M. C. Zinyowera and R. H. Moss (eds.), IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 84pp.

[blocks in formation]

climate. In: Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, J. T. Houghton, L. G. Meira Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg and K. Maskell (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 285–357.

Leggett, J. A., W. J. Pepper and R. J. Swart, 1992: Emissions scenarios for IPCC: An update. In: Climate Change, 1992. The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment, J. T. Houghton, B. A. Callander and S. K. Varney (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 69–95.

Marland, G. and T. A. Boden, 1991: CO2 emissions-modern record, global. In: Trends '91: A Compendium of Data on Global Change, T. A. Boden, R. J. Sepanski and F. W. Stoss (eds.), ORNL/CDIAC-46, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, pp. 386–389.

Marland, G., R. J. Andres and T. A. Boden, 1994: Global, regional, and national, CO2 emissions 1950-1991. In: Trends '93: A Compendium of Data on Global Change, T. A. Boden, D. P. Kaiser, R.J. Sepanski and F. W. Stoss (eds.). ORNL/CDIAC-65, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, pp. 505-581.

Nakicenovic, N., A. Grübler, H. Ishitani, T. Johansson, G. Marland, R. Moreira and H-H. Rogner, 1996: Energy primer. In: Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses, Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, R. T. Watson, M. C. Zinyowera and R. H. Moss (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 75–92.

Pepper, W. J., J. A. Leggett, R. J. Swart, J. Wasson, J. Edmonds and I. Mintzer, 1992: Emissions Scenarios for the IPCC — An Update: Assumptions, Methodology, and Results, 115pp.

Raper, S. C. B., T. M. L. Wigley and R. A. Warrick, 1996: Global sea level rise: Past and future. In: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Subsidence: Causes, Consequences and Strategies, J. D. Milliman and B. U. Haq (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 11-45.

Schimel, D. S., I. G. Enting, M. Heimann, T. M. L. Wigley, D. Raynaud, D. Alves and U. Siegenthaler, 1995: CO2 and the carbon cycle. In: Climate Change 1994: Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and an Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Emissions Scenarios, J. T. Houghton, L. G. Meira Filho, J. Bruce, Hoesung Lee, B. A. Callander, E. Haites, N. Harris and K. Maskell (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 35-71.

Schimel, D. S., D. Alves, I. G. Enting, M. Heimann, F. Joos, D. Raynaud, and T. M. L. Wigley, 1996: CO2 and the carbon

[blocks in formation]

Appendix 1

RECENT EMISSIONS LIMITATION PROPOSALS

As noted in the main text, a new set of emissions limitation proposals and withdrawals was put forward by the AGBM in the negotiating text (FCCC/AGBM/1997/3/Add.1 dated 22 April 1997) after the initial draft of this Technical Paper had been prepared. This negotiating text did not include the names of Parties making proposals; however we have added them here for clarity (Table A1). With one exception, where these proposals are expressed in specific quantitative terms, they all lie within the range of possibilities already considered. Currently, no proposal has been adopted, so any set of analyses of the implications of proposed emissions limitations can only be considered as a guide to the range of possible implications. We have shown in Section 7 how new situations may easily be quantified using the results already presented. Our judgment is,

therefore, that no new calculations using the newer proposals are necessary, except for Proposal 13 (Philippines) (which, strictly speaking, is also unnecessary since its implications can easily be derived by extrapolation from the earlier presented material). It should be noted that some of these proposals relate to principles for constructing emissions limitation proposals rather than providing specific quantitative suggestions. In some of these cases, it is necessary to indicate unspecified targets and dates: we do this here using P1, P2, etc. for percentage changes for Annex I countries and [2000 + x], [2000 + y) and (2000 + z] for dates, where x, y and z are numbers of years. In the original document (FCCC/AGBM/1997/3/Add.1, dated 22 April 1997) many of the suggestions provide much more detail than given here.

[blocks in formation]

Emissions limitation proposals (FCCC/AGBM/1997/3/Add.1)

Reduce CO2 emissions by 20 per cent by 2005 relative to 1990
emissions and adopt specific targets and timetables for
other ghg.

The target for ghg emissions for individual countries in the year
2010 should lie between -30 and +40 per cent of the 1990 level.
Achieve significant reductions in ghg emissions below
1990 level within specified time-frames after 2000.
Reduce emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O together (weighted
total, using GWP with a 100 year time horizon), by at least
7.5 per cent20 by 2005 and by 15 per cent by 2010 (reference
year 1990). HFC, PFC AND SF6 should be added no later than
2000 to the basket of gases for the above reduction objectives.

19

18 Annex A lists the Parties currently listed in Annex I to the Convention but it is opened for other Parties, such as those joining the OECD. Annex X includes the Parties currently listed in Annex I to the Convention plus Croatia, Czech Republic, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Slovak Republic and Slovenia. Additions of developed countries or countries with economies in transition could be made. Note that Czechoslovakia is listed in Annex I to the Convention as one country.

20 This reduction target of “at least 7.5 per cent" was agreed in the Council Conclusions of 19 June 1997.

Table A1. Emissions limitations proposals put forward after the initial draft of this Technical Paper (FCCC/AGBM/1997/3/Add. 1.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Emissions limitation proposals
(FCCC/AGBM/1997/3/Add.1)

(a) Net emissions of ghg over [2000 + x,] to [2000 + x2]
should be P, per cent lower than the level in year 1990 + zĮ
(or the average over some equivalent period);
(b) Net emissions of ghg over the later period (2000+ y,] to
[2000 + y2] should be P2 per cent lower than the level in

year 1990 + z2 (or the average over some equivalent period). "Norway has, under the conditions of differentiation, comprehensiveness, flexibility and harmonization, proposed a common emission target of 10-15 per cent reduction of ghg emissions for Annex I Parties by 2010"21

Each Party may select one of the two specifications:
(a) Per capita CO2 emissions over (2000 + x] to [2000 + x+
[5]] should be at or below some specified level;
(b) CO2 emissions over [2000 + x) to [2000 + x + [5]] should
be at or below P per cent below the 1990 level.

Maintain an average ghg emissions level over 2000-2010 at
1990 levels or at the level of some other agreed base year.
Emissions should be reduced after 2010.

As a first step a 10 per cent reduction of the total ghg emissions by 2010 relative to 1990.

For n intervals each of y years, beginning in (2000 + x), ghg
emission limitation commitments shall be established.

(a) Return ghg emissions to 1990 levels by 2000,
(b) Reduce CO2 emissions by 2005 by 15 per cent relative to
1990, and establish realistic 2005 targets for other ghg; and
(c) Reduce ghg emissions by an additional 15-20 per cent of
the 1990 levels by 2010.

(This proposal also includes emissions reduction penalty clauses
for Parties that fail to meet targets).

(a) Each Annex A and B Party would be allocated a net ghg multiyear target referred to as an emissions budget;

(b) The emissions budget of each Annex A Party would equal a fixed percentage of its 1990 emission times the number of years in the budget period;

(c) The emissions budget of each Annex B Party would be proposed by that Party and agreed in a consultative process with existing Annex A and B Parties;

(d) The emissions budget can be augmented through emissions trading, joint implementation for credit and banking.

21 Norwegian statement in AGBM's sixth session (Bonn, 3-7 March 1997).

22 Annex [*] shall be the list of Annex I Parties to the Convention and other Parties that may assume legally binding emission limitation commitments under the Protocol.

23 For the USA proposal, Annex A would include those Parties listed in Annex I to the Convention, plus those that join subsequently pursuant

to Article 2.

24 Annex B would include those Parties not included in Annex A that indicate before adoption of the Protocol that they want to be included in this Annex, plus those that join subsequently pursuant to Article 2.

« PreviousContinue »