2℃和1.5℃目标下全球碳预算及排放路径

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (45)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (761 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

By collecting up-to-date global emissions scenario results, we analyzed the range of global carbon budget of 2℃ and 1.5℃ target set by the Paris Agreement, and compared mitigation requirements of key time points, time of emission peaking and carbon neutral, and scales of negative emissions technologies application, of different emissions pathways. Compared to 2℃ target, global remaining carbon budget will be halved, more rapid mitigation will be required from 2020 onwards, and negative emissions technologies will be more heavily relied on. Delaying near-term mitigation action will strongly reduce future carbon budget, thus require deeper mitigation in mid and long term. Annual reduction rate will be required to increase by 1.2%, and net-zero emissions need to be reached 20years earlier; global carbon budget could be allocated to countries through different effort-sharing schemes. Regional distribution of global carbon budget is closely related to the chosen effort-sharing schemes. Resource-sharing schemes are more favourable for the United States and Europe, while burden-sharing ones are more favourable for China and India.

Key words： 2℃ and 1.5℃ target global carbon budget emissions pathway effort-sharing scheme

Received: 19 April 2017

PACS:

X24

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	CUI Xue-qin
	WANG Ke
	FU Sha
	ZOU Ji

Cite this article:

CUI Xue-qin,WANG Ke,FU Sha等. Global carbon budget and emissions pathway of 2℃ and 1.5℃ target[J]. CHINA ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCECE, 2017, 37(11): 4353-4362.

URL:

http://www.zghjkx.com.cn/EN/ OR http://www.zghjkx.com.cn/EN/Y2017/V37/I11/4353

[1]	UNFCCC. Decision 1/CP.21:Adoption of the Paris Agreement[EB/OL]. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/10a01.pdf.
[2]	Meinshausen M, Meinshausen N, Hare W, et al. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2℃[J]. Nature, 2009,458(7242):1158-1162.
[3]	Matthews H D, Gillett N P, Stott P A, et al. The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions[J]. Nature, 2009,459(7248):829-832.
[4]	Myles R A, Frame D J, Huntingford C, et al. Warning caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tone[J]. Nature, 2009,458:1163-1166.
[5]	IPCC. Climate Change 2014:Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, Ⅱ and Ⅲ to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[6]	Höhne N, den Elzen M, Escalante D. Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing:a comparison of studies[J]. Climate Policy, 2014,14(1):122-147.
[7]	Raupach M R, Davis S J, Peters G P, et al. Sharing a quota on cumulative carbon emissions[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2014, 4(10):873-879.
[8]	Meyer A. Contraction & convergence:the global solution to climate change[M]. Green Books, 2000.
[9]	Baer P, Athanasiou T, Kartha S, et al. Greenhouse development rights:A proposal for a fair global climate treaty[J]. Ethics Place and Environment, 2009,12(3):267-281.
[10]	Winkler H, Letete T, Marquard A. Equitable access to sustainable development:operationalizing key criteria[J]. Climate Policy, 2013,13(4):411-432.
[11]	den Elzen M, Höhne N. Sharing the reduction effort to limit global warming to 2℃[J]. Climate Policy, 2010,10(3):247-260.
[12]	王慧慧,刘恒辰,何霄嘉,等.基于代际公平的碳排放权分配研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 2016,36(6):1895-1904.
[13]	潘家华,陈迎.碳预算方案:一个公平,可持续的国际气候制度框架[J]. 中国社会科学, 2009,5:84-99.
[14]	刘世锦,张永生.全球温室气体减排:理论框架和解决方案[J]. 经济研究, 2009,3:4-13.
[15]	丁仲礼,段晓男,葛全胜,等.2050年大气CO2浓度控制:各国排放权计算[J]. 中国科学:D辑, 2009,39(8):1009-1027.
[16]	陈文颖,吴宗鑫,何建坤.全球未来碳排放权"两个趋同"的分配方法[J]. 清华大学学报:自然科学版, 2005,45(6):850-853.
[17]	IPCC. Climate change 2014:mitigation of climate change, Working Group Ⅲ Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[18]	Rogelj J, den Elzen M, Höhne N. et al,Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2℃[J]. Nature, 2016,534(7609):631-639.
[19]	UNFCCC. FCCC/CP/2015/7:Synthesis report on the aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions[EB/OL]. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/07.pdf.
[20]	UNEP. The Emissions Gap Report 2016[R]. Nairobi:United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2016.
[21]	Rogelj J, Luderer G, Pietzcker R C, et al. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5℃[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2015,5(6):519-527.
[22]	Luderer G, Pietzcker R C, Bertram C, et al. Economic mitigation challenges:how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2013,8(3):034033.
[23]	Rogelj J, McCollum D L, Reisinger A, et al. Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation[J]. Nature, 2013,493(7430):79-83.
[24]	Rogelj J, McCollum D L, O'Neill B C, et al. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to below 2℃[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2013,3(4):405-412.
[25]	Ranger N, Gohar L K, Lowe J A, et al. Is it possible to limit global warming to no more than 1.5℃?[J]. Climatic Change, 2012,111(3/4):973-981.
[26]	Hof A F, den Elzen M G J, Admiraal A, et al. Global and regional abatement costs of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and of enhanced action to levels well below 2℃ and 1.5℃[J]. Environmental Science & Policy, 2017,71:30-40.
[27]	IPCC. AR5Scenario Database[EB/OL]. https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/AR5DB.2016-04-06/2016-08-06.
[28]	Meinshausen M, Wigley T M L, Raper S C B. Emulating atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6-Part 2:Applications[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2011,11(4):1457-1471.
[29]	UNFCCC. Decision 1/CP.16:The Cancun Agreements:Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention[EB/OL]. https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf.
[30]	崔学勤,王克,邹骥.美欧中印"国家自主贡献"目标的力度和公平性评估[J]. 中国环境科学, 2016,36(12):3831-3840.
[31]	Bosetti V, Carraro C, Galeotti M, et al. WITCH-A world induced technical change hybrid model[R]. University Ca'Foscari of Venice Economic Research Paper, 2006.
[32]	Bosetti V, Tavoni M, De Cian E, et al. The 2008 WITCH Model:New Model Features and Baseline[R]. FEEM Working Paper, 2009.
[33]	O'Neill B C, Kriegler E, Riahi K, et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research:the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways[J]. Climatic Change, 2014,122(3):387-400.
[34]	Samir K C, Lutz W. The human core of the shared socioeconomic pathways:Population scenarios by age, sex and level of education for all countries to 2100[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2017, 42:181-192.
[35]	Cuaresma J C. Income projections for climate change research:A framework based on human capital dynamics[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2017,42:226-236.
[36]	den Elzen M G J, Olivier J G J, Höhne N, et al. Countries' contributions to climate change:effect of accounting for all greenhouse gases, recent trends, basic needs and technological progress[J]. Climatic Change, 2013,121(2):397-412.
[37]	Höhne N, Blum H, Fuglestvedt J, et al. Contributions of individual countries' emissions to climate change and their uncertainty[J]. Climatic Change, 2011,106(3):359-391.
[38]	World Resources Institute. Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT)[EB/OL]. http://cait.wri.org.
[39]	IPCC. Climate Change 2013:The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[40]	Anderson K, Peters G. The trouble with negative emissions[J]. Science, 2016,354(6309):182-183.
[41]	Fuss S, Canadell J G, Peters G P, et al. Betting on negative emissions[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2014,4(10):850-853.
[42]	Kartha S, Dooley K. The risks of relying on tomorrow's "negative emissions" to guide today's mitigation action[R]. Stockholm Environment Institute Working Paper, 2016.
[43]	Matthews H D. Quantifying historical carbon and climate debts among nations[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2015,6(9):60-65.
[44]	United States. Mid-Century Strategy for Deep Decarbonization[EB/OL]. http://unfccc.int/files/focus/long-term_strategies/application/pdf/mid_century_strategy_report-final_red.pdf.
[45]	European Union. Intended Nationally Determined Contribution of the EU and its Member States[EB/OL]. http://www4.unfccc.int/Submissions/INDC/Published%20Documents/Latvia/1/LV-03-06-EU%20INDC.pdf.