Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

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

Parties that return ghg emissions to 1990 level by 2000 would reduce ghg emissions by 10 per cent relative to 1990 by 2005; reduce ghg emissions by 15 per cent relative to 1990 by 2010, and reduce ghg emissions by 20 per cent relative to 1990 by

2020.

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

(a) Return ghg emissions to 1990 levels by 2000;

(b) Reduce ghg emissions by P, per cent relative to 1990 by 2005; and

(c) Further reduce ghg emissions by P2 per cent relative to 1990 by 2010.

(a) Return ghg emissions to 1990 levels by 2000;

(b) Reduce ghg emissions by 20 per cent relative to 1990 by 2005; and

(c) Further reduce ghg emissions by 20 per cent relative to

1990 by 2010.

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

(a) Reduce emissions of CO2, CH, and N2O together
(weighted total, using GWP with a 100 year time horizon)
to 1990 level, or lower by 2005 (reduction percentage is
announced upon ratification);

(b) Beyond 2005, control and/or reduce emissions of CO2,
CH4 and N2O.

Reduce emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O (aggregated, using
GWP with 100 year time horizon) by 5 per cent relative to 1990
by 2005 and by 15 per cent relative to 1990 by 2010.
Reductions before 2000 be used to implement the target.

Baseline ghg emissions levels should be established as the aver-
age over some agreed set of years. Targets should be specified
(presumably relative to the baseline) in terms of averages over
agreed future periods.

Note that Brazil has put forward a target of a 30 per cent reduction of CO2, CH, and N2O by 2020 subsequent to this negotiating text. The original proposal is contained in FCCC/AGBM/1997/MISC.1/Add.3 and was included as Alternative I (para. 11) in FCCC/AGBM/1997/INF.1.

Appendix 2

QUANTIFICATION OF FRENCH (FR) AND NETHERLANDS (NL) EMISSIONS LIMITATION PROPOSALS

The objective of this Appendix is to quantify the French (FR) and Netherlands (NL) emissions limitation proposals in order to put them into a perspective relative to the proposals put forward by other countries (see Table 3 in the main text) and the IPCC IS92 scenarios. We begin by considering the proposals themselves in terms of Annex I country emissions. We then extend these results to the global scale by incorporating non-Annex I country emissions. As noted in the main text, non-Annex I country emissions are based on the assumption of no emissions limitations for these countries. Note also that, although the proposals refer to reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, we take these to apply to fossil CO2 emissions alone.

The FR and NL proposals provide a useful comparison because they are based on quite different emissions criteria, per capita emissions in the former and absolute emissions in the latter. The use of per capita emissions introduces an additional element of uncertainty, future population, which makes the calculation of absolute emissions quite complex. While per capita emissions can provide a useful unifying concept for comparisons between different countries (and between Annex I and non-Annex I countries in particular), the complexity of the calculations given below would make any emissions limitations proposal worded in this way more difficult to implement.

Annex I Country Emissions

For the NL proposal, delineation of future fossil CO2 emissions for Annex I countries is straightforward. For these countries, IPCC92 (Leggett, et al., 1992) and Pepper, et al. (1992) may be used to give a value of 4.59 GtC/yr for fossil CO2 emissions in 1990 (further information is given in Appendix 3). We assume (see main text) that emissions of Annex I countries remain at 1990 levels to 2000. Therefore, the suggested decline by 1-2 per cent (compound) per year (main text, Table 1) must be assumed to begin in 2000 (as given in Table 2 in the main text). We consider two separate cases: a decline from 2000 at 1 per cent compound per year (NL-1%) and a decline from 2000 at 2 per cent compound per year (NL-2%).

The FR proposal is more complicated. Again, our analysis of this proposal includes the assumption of constant 1990-level Annex I country emissions over 1990-2000. Over 2000-2010, emissions changes are specified as a drop of 7-10 per cent in emissions per capita. To calculate the implied absolute emissions values, we need to know the projected value of emissions per capita in the year 2000. IPCC documents may be used to estimate this value, but as a range of possibilities

dependent on the scenario for future population (see Table 4 in the main text).

For the IS92 scenarios, three population projections were employed, the UN Medium-Low case (used in IS92c and d), a central World Bank case (used in IS92a, b and e), and the UN Medium-High case (used in IS92f). Estimated population values for 2000 in these projections for Annex I countries are 1.286 bn, 1.313 bn and 1.354 bn, linearly interpolated from Table 4. These values, together with a total emissions value of 4.59 GtC/yr, give per capita annual emissions of 3.57 tC/yr. 3.50 tc/yr and 3.39 tC/yr, respectively in 2000, compared with a 1990 value of 3.63 tC/yr. Since the range is relatively small, and the 2000 value is, in any event, uncertain, we take the average of the three values (3.485 tC/yr if the figures are not rounded) as a single, representative value for annual per capita emissions in 2000 (some 4 per cent below the 1990 level).

Applying the specified 7-10 per cent reduction in per capita emissions over 2000-2010 to this value for the year 2000 gives an annual emissions per capita range in the year 2010 of 3.14-3.24 tC/yr. To convert this range to actual emissions we multiply by the population value. In doing so we must again account for uncertainties in population growth: the IPCC range for 2010 population linearly interpolated from Table 4 is 1.307-1.444 bn for the UN scenarios and 1.363 bn for the World Bank scenario. The extreme-high emissions value for 2010 (high population, high per capita emissions) is, therefore, 4.68 GtC/yr. The extreme-low value (low population, low per capita emissions) is 4.10 GtC/yr. Central values range from 4.27 GtC/yr (mid population, low per capita emissions) to 4.41 GtC/yr (mid population, high per capita emissions), with a mean of 4.34 GtC/yr. This set of 2010 emissions values is illustrated in Figure B1. Numerical details are given in Table B1.

For 2100, the FR proposal gives an absolute range of emissions per capita values for Annex I countries of 1.6-2.2 tC/yr. To convert these to total emissions, we must continue to account for population growth uncertainties, as specified by IPCC and given in Table 4 of the main text. To give a high range of emissions values in 2100, we use the high emissions per capita value (2.2 tC/yr); for low, mid and high population levels this gives 1.85, 3.12 and 4.87 GtC/yr (see Table B1). Similarly, a low range, using 1.6 tC/yr per capita emissions, is 1.34, 2.27 and 3.54 GtC/yr (see Table B1).

The complete Annex I emissions limitation scenarios are obtained by combining the set of emissions values in 2010 with those for 2100, which we do simply by assuming a linear

46-495-28

[blocks in formation]

Table B1. Fossil CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) for Annex I countries under the French (FR) emissions limitation proposal. For population projections, low, mid and high refer to the UN Medium-Low, World Bank and UN Medium-High projections used in IPCC92 (Leggett, et al., 1992) (see Table 4 of main text). 1990 and 2000 emissions are taken as 4.59 GtC/yr (see text). Subheadings under the 2010 column are per capita emissions and the percentage changes in per capita emissions from the 2000 value (i.e., from 3.485 tC/yr) used to derive them. Subheadings under the 2100 column are absolute annual per capita emissions values. The emissions values used to define extreme-low, central, and extreme-high cases for further analysis are indicated in the Table by the letters FR-low, FR-mid and FR-high respectively. For the central case used in the main text, the emissions values used are the averages of the indicated mid population projection values, viz. 4.34 GtC/yr in 2010 and 2.69 GtC/yr in 2100.

[blocks in formation]

The 2010 value is the average of low and high 2000-2010 per capita emissions decline values for the mid population case (i.e., (4.27 +4.41)/2).

2 The 2100 value is the average of low and high 2100 per capita emissions values for the mid population case (i.e., (2.27 + 3.12)/2).

Table B2. Fossil CO2 emissions changes (GtC/yr) for Annex I countries over 2010-2100 based on the French (FR) emissions limitation proposal, together with the assumptions on which they are based. The "FR-Central" case is the average of the FR-mid (HIGH) and FR-mid (LOW) cases.

2% (1 per cent per year and 2 per cent per year compound emissions reductions from 2000, in accordance with the NL proposal); see Figure B2.

change with time over the 90-year interval. There are other
ways in which one could interpolate between 2010 and 2100
(e.g., linearly interpolating emissions per capita rather than total
emissions). However, since the aim here is to provide simple
limitation scenarios that are consistent with the original
proposal, the choice of interpolation method is unimportant. Global Emissions
There are still a number of ways in which the various results
may be combined; the full range of possibilities is spanned by
the combinations listed in Table B2, and illustrated in Figure
Bl. For the calculations in the main text we use only the
FR-Low, FR-Central and FR-High cases.

To summarize, five proposed emissions limitation scenarios for Annex I countries have been devised to span the range of possibilities consistent with the FR and NL proposals. These are designated FR-Low, FR-Central and FR-High (low, central and high cases based on the French proposal) and NL-1% and NL

To determine global emissions, we combine these cases for Annex I country emissions with non-Annex I country emissions given by the IS92 emissions scenarios (see Figure 2 in the main text)26. It should be noted that the three FR Annex I cases (FRLow, FR-Central and FR-High) correspond to low, mid and

26 Note that these scenarios do not include emissions from combustion of bunker fuels. The global emissions value we use in 1990 does include the bunker fuel source. In 1990, this amounted to about 0.1 GtC/vr.

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

Figure B1. Fossil CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) for Annex I countries under the French (FR) emissions limitation proposal. The words high, mid and low refer to the UN Medium-Low, World Bank and UN Medium-High population projections used, while the appended designators "HIGH", "LOW" or no designator refer to the use of high, low or mid values of per capita emissions. Changes over 2000–2010 correspond to 7-10 per cent reductions in per capita emissions accounting for uncertainties in future populations. Values in 2100 correspond to per capita emissions of 1.6 tC/yr or 2.2 tC/yr again accounting for population projection uncertainties.

high population estimates. Thus, when used in conjunction with emissions for non-Annex I countries under the IS92 scenarios, only scenarios with the same population assumptions should be considered together. In the calculations in the main text, we consider only the IS92a, c and e scenarios for non-Annex I countries, which span the full range of emissions possibilities considered by IPCC. The only fully consistent combinations involving the FR emissions limitation proposals for Annex I countries and IS92a, cor e emissions for non-Annex I countries are therefore FR-Low with IS92c, FR-Central with IS92a, and FR-Central with IS92e.

The high population scenario is used only in IS92f, which, because of other assumptions made in developing this scenario (see IPCC92-Leggett, et al., 1992) has lower emissions than the mid-population-based IS92e case. Since we need here to span the full range of possibilities, we combine the FR-High and IS92e

[ocr errors]

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2000 2100

Year

Figure B2. Fossil CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) for Annex I countries under the French (FR) and Netherlands (NL) emissions limitation proposals. FR-High, FR-Central and FR-Low are as shown in Figure B1. NL-1% and NL-2% correspond to 1 per cent and 2 per cent per year compound emissions reductions from the 2000 level.

cases rather than FR-Central and IS92e. This maximizes nonAnnex I country emissions in the absence of any limitations, while minimizing the reduction in emissions by Annex I countries. This, in turn, leads to the highest possible total for global emissions under any proposed emissions limitation scenario and, hence, the highest projected CO2 concentration values.

For the NL emissions limitation proposals, the Annex I country emissions cases (NL-1% and NL-2%) are independent of and may. therefore, be combined with non-Annex I country emissions for each of IS92a, c and e. The full set of global emissions scenarios is therefore (non-Annex I case first): IS92a with FR-Central, NL-1% and NL-2% (Figure B3a); IS92c with FR-Low, NL-1% and NL2% (Figure B3b); and IS92e with FR-High, NL-1% and NL-2% (Figure B3c). In the main text, these are illustrated together in Figure 4. Here we give the a, cand e results separately for greater clarity.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

L-2%

2040 2050 2080 2070 2080 2000 2100 Your

Figure B3. (a) Global fossil CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) for the IS924 scenario compared with emissions where Annex I countries follow emissions limitation proposals NL-1%. NL-2% or FR-Central and non-Annex I countries follow IS92a. (b) Global fossil CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) for the IS92c scenario compared with emissions where Annex I countries follow emissions limitation proposals NL-1%, NL-2% or FR-Low and non-Annex I countries follow IS92c. (c) Global fossil CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) for the IS92e scenario compared with emissions where Annex I countries follow emissions limitation proposals NL-1%, NL-2% or FR-High and non-Annex I countries follow IS92e.

33

« PreviousContinue »