GHG emission estimates for road transport in national GHG inventories

The annual reporting procedures of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have now produced greenhouse gas (GHG) emission inventories from 40 so-called Annex I countries for 18 years. This article analyses a subset of these data: emissions from road transport. The article compares the reported data with the technical guidance on GHG emission inventories provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The analysis suggests that some countries use the IPCC's default emission factors, whereas other countries use country-specific values. In the case of diesel-fuelled road transport, the estimated emissions appear to be generally comparable between all countries for all years. For CO₂ emissions from gasoline-fuelled road transport, the picture is less clear. The results suggest that the default emission factor for CO₂ from motor gasoline as provided by the IPCC is about 3–5% too low. Countries that seem to apply this default value might therefore underestimate their emissions by the same percentage. The effect of this possible underestimate on trends is, however, very small. Despite the possible problem with the default emission factor, the quantification of the trend in emissions is only slightly influenced by this.     

The improvement of greenhouse gas inventory as a tool for reduction emission uncertainties for operations with oil in the Russian Federation

The high quality inventory is an important step to greenhouse gas emission mitigation. The inventory quality is estimated by means of the uncertainty analysis. The level of uncertainty depends upon the reliability of activity data and the parameters used. An attempt has been made to improve the accuracy of the estimates through a shift from production-based method (IPCC Tier 1) (IPCC 2000) to enhanced combination of production-based and mass balance methods (IPCC Tier 2) (IPCC 2006) in the estimation of emissions from operations with oil that are key in the national greenhouse gas inventory of the Russian Federation. The IPCC Tier 2 (IPCC 2006) was adapted for the national conditions. The greenhouse gas emissions were calculated for 1990 to 2009 with the use of both methods. The quantitative uncertainty assessment of the calculations was performed, and the outcomes were compared. The comparison showed that the estimates made with the use of higher tier method resulted in higher accuracy and lower uncertainties (26 % respectively compared to previously derived 54 %).     

Direct Nitrous Oxide Emissions Related to Fertilizer-Nitrogen,Precipitation, and Soil Clay Fraction: Empirical Models

Direct nitrous oxide(N2O) emissions(DNEs) from croplands are required in national inventories of greenhouse gases. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) guidelines provide an approach using direct emission factors(EFds) to estimate DNEs, which are constants for large regions. The goal of this paper is to establish empirical models to account for the temporal and spatial variations of EFds, which, apart from the nitrogen addition rate, also vary with a range of environmental factors, so as to enhance the accuracy of regional/national DNE estimates. Therefore, the seasonal/annual DNEs(n = 71) from upland croplands, which are the differences in N2 O emissions between fields with and without fertilizer-nitrogen addition, were used to statistically relate DNEs to regulating factors including the fertilizer-nitrogen addition rate(FN), and environmental(climate and soil) factors. The multivariate stepwise linear regression results showed positive combined effects of FN and clay fraction on DNEs(R2 = 0.61, p 0.001). Furthermore, the nonlinear regression of FN, precipitation, and clay fraction was also adopted for prediction(R2 = 0.50, p 0.001). Validation with an independent dataset(n = 31) suggested that both models were better predictors of DNEs than the IPCC model, which only depends on FN. These empirical models may provide simple but reliable approaches for compiling regional/national, and even global inventories of DNEs from croplands. However, both models were restricted to a limited sample size. Understandably, more field observations are still required to further validate the global applicability of these simple approaches.     

Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries

A fair, effective, flexible and inclusive climate regime beyond 2012 will need several political balances. Mitigation and funding will be at the heart of the agreement. The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report indicates that absolute reductions will be needed in Annex I (AI) countries and substantial deviation from baseline in some non-Annex I (NAI) regions by 2020. Although the latter was not explicitly quantified by the IPCC, the EU subsequently proposed a range for developing countries. Sharing the burden for mitigation is essentially zero-sum: if one does less, the other has to do more. We critically examine the implicit assumption that NAI countries would pick up the remainder of the required global effort minus the AI contribution. We suggest that greater levels of ambition can be achieved by turning the formula around politically, starting from the achievable ‘deviation below baseline’ given NAI's national programmes and appropriate international support. AI countries may have to exceed the IPCC ranges or pay for the remainder. For notional levels of NAI mitigation action, Annex I has to reduce by between ?52% and ?69% below 1990 by 2020, only dropping to a domestic ?35% with commitments to offset payments through the carbon market. Given the large mitigation gap, a political agreement on the question of ‘who pays’ is fundamental. The carbon market will provide some investment, but it mainly serves to reduce costs, particularly in developed countries, rather than adding to the overall effort. Market-linked levies and Annex I public funding will therefore be crucial to bridge the gap.     

国际气候谈判背景下的国家温室气体排放清单编制

基于"共同但有区别的责任"原则,《联合国气候变化框架公约》对附件I和非附件I缔约方提交国家温室气体排放清单的要求不尽相同。2007年以来,发展中国家自主减缓行动透明度、以国家温室气候排放清单为核心的国家信息通报提交频率及其磋商分析问题成为气候谈判争论的焦点之一,发展中国家承担的相关义务有不断增加的趋势。通过阐述该公约对发达国家和发展中国家排放清单编制的不同要求,特别是通过对目前发达国家所接受的清单审评制度和我国国家温室气体排放清单编制情况的分析论述,明确我国国家清单编制所面临的挑战,并提出相应的对策建议。     

国家温室气体清单时间序列一致性和2005年清单重算研究

《巴黎协定》透明度后续实施细则对发展中国家温室气体清单时间序列一致性方面的要求显著增强。文中基于IPCC清单指南中对温室气体清单重算的要求,对作为我国国家自主贡献基年的2005年温室气体清单进行重算。由于增加了新的排放源或吸收汇、更新部分活动水平或排放因子数据以及采用了更新的方法学,重算后的2005年国家温室气体清单排放量（以CO₂当量计,下同）为80.15亿t（不包括土地利用、土地利用变化和林业,即LULUCF),相比重算前增加了6.6%。能源领域对重算后总排放量上升影响最大,增加了4.26亿t,其中CO₂增长主要来自第三次全国经济普查（三经普）对2005年化石燃料消费量的修订,甲烷（CH₄）和氧化亚氮（N₂O）排放上升主要原因是新增加了排放源。未来我国将更频繁地对以往清单年份开展重算,建议结合《巴黎协定》实施细则要求加强对我国温室气体清单时间序列一致性问题的研究,以更好地支撑国内应对气候变化决策分析,以及满足未来《巴黎协定》下的履约要求。     

Comparison of preparatory signal analysis techniques for consideration in the (post-)Kyoto policy process

Our study is a preparatory exercise. We focus on the analysis of uncertainty in greenhouse gas emission inventories. Inventory uncertainty is monitored, but not regulated, under the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Under the Convention, countries publish annual or periodic national inventories of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Policymakers use these inventories to develop strategies and policies for emission reductions and to track the progress of these policies. However, greenhouse gas inventories contain uncertainty for a variety of reasons, and these uncertainties have important scientific and policy implications. For most countries, the emission changes agreed under the Protocol are of the same order of magnitude as the uncertainty that underlies their combined (carbon dioxide equivalent) emissions estimates. Here we apply and compare six available techniques to analyze the uncertainty in the emission changes that countries agreed to realize by the end of the Protocol’s first commitment period 2008–2012. Any such technique, if implemented, could “make or break” claims of compliance, especially in cases where countries claim fulfillment of their commitments to reduce or limit emissions. The techniques all perform differently and can thus have a different impact on the design and execution of emission control policies. A thorough comparison of the techniques has not yet been made but is needed when expanding the discussion on how to go about dealing with uncertainty under the Kyoto Protocol and its successor.     

Burden sharing and cohesion countries in European climate policy: the Portuguese example

Global climate change has emerged as a major policy issue in the last decade. The EU has fiercely advocated domestic action, but it is finding it hard to cope with its commitments. This is due to the stronger impact of interest groups on the national level when it comes to implementation. It is shown that Portugal and other cohesion countries may be incapable of complying with their commitments within the internal burden sharing agreement unless they manage to improve energy efficiencies. Fast growth in Portuguese emissions is expected in the face of a non-existent national plan and deteriorating energy efficiencies, unless additional measures and policies are implemented. Institutional and scientific deficiency supplemented by rapid economic development seem to be impeding the Portuguese policy goal. Moreover, the proposed formula to limit the use of flexible instruments places cohesion countries at a disadvantage. Several lessons for international and European environmental policy are taken from this case study. To reach the Kyoto target, the EU will have to develop credible mechanisms to enforce the targets of its Member States. If that is not feasible, it will have to revert to central acquisition of emission permits from abroad to make up internal shortfalls.     

Verification of compliance with GHG emission targets: annex B countries

The focus of this study is on the preparatory detection of uncertain greenhouse gas (GHG) emission changes (also termed emission signals) under the Kyoto Protocol. Preparatory signal detection is a measure that should be taken prior to/during negotiation of the Protocol. It allows the ranking of countries under the Protocol according to their realized versus their agreed emission changes and in terms of both certainty and credibility. Controlling GHGs is affected by uncertainty and may be costly. Thus, knowing whether each nation is doing its part is in the public interest. At present, however, countries to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are obliged to include in the reporting of their annual inventories direct or alternative estimates of the uncertainty associated with these, consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) good practice guidance reports. As a consequence, inventory uncertainty is monitored, but not regulated, under the Kyoto Protocol. Although uncertainties are becoming increasingly available, monitored emissions and uncertainties are still dealt with separately. In our study we analyze estimates of both emission changes and uncertainties to advance the evaluation of countries and their performance under the Protocol. Our analysis allows supply and demand of emissions credits to be examined in consideration of uncertainty. For the purpose of our exercise, we make use of the Undershooting and Verification Time concept described by Jonas et al. (Clim Change doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9914-6, 2010).     

The use of PPP or MER in the construction of emission scenarios is more than a question of ‘metrics’

Abstract

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES, IPCC, 2000) has been a matter of debate since Ian Castles and David Henderson claimed that the scenarios were based on unsound economics, giving rise to improbably high emission growth. A main point in their critique was that the scenario-makers converted national gross domestic product (GDP) data to a common measure using market exchange rates (MER) rather than purchasing power parity (PPP) rates. The IPCC responded to the critique by claiming that the use of PPP- or MER-based measures is just a question of ‘metrics’, as important as the ‘switch from degrees Celsius to Fahrenheit’. This paper addresses both the critique from Castles and Henderson and the response from the IPCC. It builds on our earlier argument that the use of MER-based measures, although misleading in some respects, probably has not given rise to seriously exaggerated emission forecasts because comparing regional income levels by the use of MER has two types of implications that draw in different directions and effectively neutralize one another. Nevertheless, we argue that the choice between MER and PPP in the construction of emission scenarios is far more than just a question of metrics. Finally, we discuss whether the SRES scenario with the lowest cumulative emissions is a reasonable lower limit with respect to global emission growth.     

Regulating knowledge monopolies: the case of the IPCC

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has a monopoly on the provision of climate policy advice at the international level and a strong market position in national policy advice. This may have been the intention of the founders of the IPCC. I argue that the IPCC has a natural monopoly, as a new entrant would have to invest time and effort over a longer period to perhaps match the reputation, trust, goodwill, and network of the IPCC. The IPCC is a not-for-profit organization, and it is run by nominal volunteers. It therefore cannot engage in the price-gouging that is typical of monopolies. However, the IPCC has certainly taken up tasks outside its mandate. The IPCC has been accused of haughtiness. Innovation is slow. Quality may have declined. And the IPCC may have used its power to hinder competitors. There are all things that monopolies tend to do, against the public interest. The IPCC would perform better if it were regulated by an independent body which audits the IPCC procedures and assesses its performance; if outside organizations would be allowed to bid for the production of reports and the provision of services under the IPCC brand; and if policy makers would encourage potential competitors to the IPCC.     

中国省级土地利用变化和林业温室气体清单编制方法

省级土地利用变化和林业（LUCF）温室气体清单主要评估“森林和其他木质生物质生物量碳储量的变化”和“森林转化温室气体排放”两类主要温室气体的排放源或吸收汇。省级LUCF温室气体清单编制方法以政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）有关国家温室气体清单指南为基础,结合中国LUCF活动的实际情况,特别是在考虑核心关键数据的可获得性与可靠性的基础上制订完成。同时还建立了适用于不同省的关键排放因子和参数数据库,旨在为科学合理地编制中国省级LUCF温室气体清单提供方法学依据。     

Environmental and resource footprints in a global context: Europe’s structural deficit in resource endowments

The European Union (EU) has proposed in its Resource-efficiency roadmap a ‘dashboard of indicators’ consisting of four headline indicators for carbon, water, land and materials. The EU recognizes the need to use a consumption-based (or ‘footprint’) perspective to capture the global dimension of resources and their impacts. In this paper, we analyse how the EU’s footprints compare to those of other nations, to what extent the EU and other major economies of the world rely on embodied resource imports, and what the implications are for policy making based on this comparison. This study is the first comprehensive multi-indicator comparison of all four policy relevant indicators, and uses a single consistent global Multi-Regional Input Output (MRIO) database with a unique and high level of product detail across countries. We find that Europe is the only region in the world that relies on net embodied imports for all indicators considered. We further find that the powerful economies of China and others in the Asia-Pacific already dominate global resource consumption from a footprint perspective, while they still haven’t reached the prosperity of developed countries. Competition for resources is hence likely to increase, making Europe even more vulnerable. A hot spot analysis suggests that final consumption of food, transport and housing are priorities for reduction efforts along the life cycle. Further, countries with a similar Human Development Index can have very different footprints, pointing at societal organisation at macro-level as option for improvement. This points at options for countries for lowering their footprint, becoming less dependent on embodied imports, while maintaining a high quality of life.     

Analysing the interaction between emission trading and renewable electricity support in TIMES

As the number of instruments applied in the area of energy and climate policy is rising, the issue of policy interaction needs to be explored further. This article analyses the interdependencies between the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and the German feed-in tariffs (FITs) for renewable electricity in a quantitative manner using a bottom-up energy system model. Flexible modelling approaches are presented for both instruments, with which all impacts on the energy system can be evaluated endogenously. It is shown that national climate policy measures can have an effect on the supranational emissions trading system by increasing emission reduction in the German electricity sector by up to 79 MtCO₂ in 2030. As a result, emission certificate prices decline by between 1.9 €/tCO₂ and 6.1 €/tCO₂ and the burden sharing between participating countries changes, but no additional emission reduction is achieved at the European level. This also implies, however, that the cost efficiency of such a cap-and-trade system is distorted, with additional costs of the FIT system of up to €320 billion compared with lower costs for ETS emission certificates of between €44 billion and €57 billion (cumulated over the period 2013–2020).

Policy relevance

In order to fulfil ambitious emission reduction targets a large variety of climate policy instruments are being implemented in Europe. While some, like the EU ETS, directly address CO₂ emissions, others aim to promote specific low-carbon technologies. The quantitative analysis of the interactions between the EU ETS and the German FIT scheme for renewable sources in electricity generation presented in this article helps to understand the importance of such interaction effects. Even though justifications can be found for the implementation of both types of instrument, the impact of the widespread use of support mechanisms for renewable electricity in Europe needs to be taken into account when fixing the reduction targets for the EU ETS in order to ensure a credible long-term investment signal.     

Structural and Process History of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

In the nine years since its establishment in 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has attempted to walk the tightrope of being scientifically sound and politically acceptable. This paper investigates how the IPCC has evolved over two assessment cycles. It provides an in-depth examination of important characteristics of the IPCC process including the peer review mechanism, participation of developing countries, and its interactions with the intergovernmental negotiation process on climate change.     

Implementing Europe's climate targets at the regional level

Having agreed upon a binding emissions reduction path by 2020, the EU plays a leading role in international climate policy. The EU currently pursues a dual approach through an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) at the EU level and also via national targets in sectors not covered by the ETS. The latter include the buildings sector, transportation, agriculture, and waste. Emissions from these sectors are mainly subject to policies at provincial and local levels. A method is presented for elaborating and implementing a long-term climate policy process up to 2030 for the regional (provincial) level. Building on regional GHG inventory data, a set of indicators for each sector is developed in order to arrive at a target path consistent with the deduced regional GHG reduction requirement. Policy measures and their implementation are then settled subsequent to this process. Quantitative regional targets are found to be a prerequisite for the formation of regional climate policy as they increase participant responsibility and commitment. A five-step process of stakeholder participation ensures effective implementation of regional climate action plans. Insights from an exemplary European region are drawn upon, and policy issues are discussed in both quantitative and institutional terms.     

Achievability of the Paris Agreement targets in the EU: demand-side reduction potentials in a carbon budget perspective

Limiting global warming to ‘well below’ 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5°C is an integral part of the 2015 Paris Agreement. To achieve these aims, cumulative global carbon emissions after 2016 should not exceed 940 – 390?Gt of CO₂ (for the 2°C target) and 167 – ?48?Gt of CO₂ (for the 1.5°C target) by the end of the century. This paper analyses the EU’s cumulative carbon emissions in different models and scenarios (global models, EU-focused models and national carbon mitigation scenarios). Due to the higher reductions in energy use and carbon intensity of the end-use sectors in the national scenarios, we identify an additional mitigation potential of 26–37 Gt cumulative CO₂ emissions up to 2050 compared to what is currently included in global or EU scenarios. These additional reductions could help to both reduce the need for carbon dioxide removals and bring cumulative emissions in global and EU scenarios in line with a fairness-based domestic EU budget for a 2°C target, while still remaining way above the budget for 1.5°C.

Key policy insights

• Models used for policy advice such as global integrated assessment models or EU models fail to consider certain mitigation potential available at the level of sectors.

• Global and EU models assume significant levels of CO₂ emission reductions from carbon capture and storage to reach the 1.5°C target but also to reach the 2°C target.

• Global and EU model scenarios are not compatible with a fair domestic EU share in the global carbon budget either for 2°C or for 1.5°C.

• Integrating additional sectoral mitigation potential from detailed national models can help bring down cumulative emissions in global and EU models to a level comparable to a fairness-based domestic EU share compatible with the 2°C target, but not the 1.5°C aspiration.

     

气候变化影响和适应认知的演进及对气候政策的影响

通过分析IPCC第二工作组的5次评估报告对气候变化影响、适应的主要结论和方法的演进、原因以及对国际适应谈判和国家适应政策的影响,指出由于文献的迅速增加,影响评估方法和适应技术手段的不断成熟,以及思维的转变和意识的逐渐增强,IPCC进一步确认了气候变化已经并将继续对自然生态系统和人类社会产生广泛而深刻的影响;未来社会经济发展路径、适应和减缓行动以及风险治理将影响气候变化带来的风险。IPCC报告极大地推动了国际和各国适应气候变化科学研究和政策实践的进程。尽管中国各级各部门已逐渐将适应融入到相关政策中,但仍然存在认识、能力、体制机制等问题,需要进一步推进国家和各地的适应工作。     

IPCC AR6报告解读:强化技术和管理创新的交通运输部门减碳路径北大核心CSCD

IPCC第六次评估报告第三工作组报告交通运输章评估了该行业温室气体的减缓措施和转型路径。1990年以来,全球交通运输部门温室气体排放量一直增长,2019年已经成为全球第四大排放源,仅次于电力、工业以及农业、林业和其他土地利用(AFOLU)部门,其增长速度超过其他最终用途行业。报告强调了交通减排的重要性,主要的减排措施包括三方面:首先是减少需求,其次是对陆路交通部门进行脱碳,再次是对重型的水运和航空运输等进行脱碳。评估的多种燃料和动力技术处于不同的商业化水平,它们未来应用时间节点和规模各有不同。对于陆路交通来说,需要继续推进电气化;对于水运和航空来说需要进一步应用低碳技术,并优化国际管理机制;从中长期来看,所有部门都需要强调运输服务需求管理和运输效率的提升。情景相关的文献评述分析表明,全球温升目标要求全经济部门采取减排措施,特别是交通电气化的减排潜力在很大程度上取决于电力部门的脱碳。如果不采取减缓措施,交通运输部门排放在2050年可能增长65%(相对2010年);如果成功实施减缓战略,该部门的排放量将减少68%,这也与全球1.5℃温升目标要求相一致。关于这些减缓措施的分析和判断,对我国交通运输部门实现碳中和与碳达峰具有重要的参考意义。