Double Counting and the Paris Agreement Rulebook

Lambert Schneider,Maosheng Duan,Robert Stavins,Kelley Kizzier,Derik Broekhoff,Frank Jotzo,Harald Winkler,Michael Lazarus,Andrew Howard,Christina Hood

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay8750

IF: 56.9

2019-01-01

Science

Abstract:Poor emissions accounting could undermine carbon markets

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Double Counting of Emission Reductions Undermines the Credibility of Corporate Mitigation Claims

Guosong Ma,Maosheng Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c03792

IF: 11.4

2024-06-22

Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract:Companies are increasingly relying on emission reductions attributable to their adoption of renewable electricity to achieve net-zero emission targets. However, there is a risk of double counting of emission reductions threatening the credibility of corporate climate actions due to defective accounting rules of GHG emissions related to electricity consumption and the overlap between different market-based instruments, including carbon credit markets, renewable power purchase agreements, and...

environmental sciences,engineering, environmental
Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement

Lambert Schneider,Stephanie La Hoz Theuer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1521332

2018-09-21

Climate Policy

Abstract:The Paris Agreement establishes provisions for using international carbon market mechanisms to achieve climate mitigation contributions. Environmental integrity is a key principle for using such mechanisms under the Agreement. This paper systematically identifies and categorizes issues and options to achieve environmental integrity, including how it could be defined, what influences it, and what approaches could mitigate environmental integrity risks. Here, environmental integrity is assumed to be ensured if the engagement in international transfers of carbon market units leads to the same or lower aggregated global emissions. Four factors are identified that influence environmental integrity: the accounting for international transfers; the quality of units generated, i.e. whether the mechanism ensures that the issuance or transfer of units leads to emission reductions in the transferring country; the ambition and scope of the mitigation target of the transferring country; and incentives or disincentives for future mitigation action, such as possible disincentives for transferring countries to define future mitigation targets less ambitiously or more narrowly in order to sell more units. It is recommended that policy-makers combine several approaches to address the significant risks to environmental integrity. Key policy insights Robust accounting is a key prerequisite for ensuring environmental integrity. The diversity of nationally determined contributions is an important challenge, in particular for avoiding double counting and for ensuring that the accounting for international transfers is representative for the mitigation efforts by Parties over time.Unit quality can, in theory, be ensured through appropriate design of carbon market mechanisms; in practice, existing mechanisms face considerable challenges in ensuring unit quality. Unit quality could be promoted through guidance under Paris Agreement Article 6, and reporting and review under Article 13.The ambition and scope of mitigation targets is key for the incentive for transferring countries to ensure unit quality because countries with ambitious and economy-wide targets would have to compensate for any transfer of units that lack quality. Encouraging countries to adopt ambitious and economy-wide NDC targets would therefore facilitate achieving environmental integrity.Restricting transfers in instances of high environmental integrity risk – through eligibility criteria or limits – could complement these approaches. Robust accounting is a key prerequisite for ensuring environmental integrity. The diversity of nationally determined contributions is an important challenge, in particular for avoiding double counting and for ensuring that the accounting for international transfers is representative for the mitigation efforts by Parties over time. Unit quality can, in theory, be ensured through appropriate design of carbon market mechanisms; in practice, existing mechanisms face considerable challenges in ensuring unit quality. Unit quality could be promoted through guidance under Paris Agreement Article 6, and reporting and review under Article 13. The ambition and scope of mitigation targets is key for the incentive for transferring countries to ensure unit quality because countries with ambitious and economy-wide targets would have to compensate for any transfer of units that lack quality. Encouraging countries to adopt ambitious and economy-wide NDC targets would therefore facilitate achieving environmental integrity. Restricting transfers in instances of high environmental integrity risk – through eligibility criteria or limits – could complement these approaches.

environmental studies,public administration
Construction, Implementation and Risks of the Carbon Market Mechanisms Under the Paris Agreement

Maosheng Duan,Yujie Tao,Mengyu Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7738-1_7

2023-01-01

Abstract:To assist Parties with their mitigation targets under NDCs, and continuously enhance ambition of mitigation action, the Article 6 of the Paris Agreement offers Parties two market mechanisms: voluntary cooperative approaches and a sustainable development mechanism. Due to the diversity in NDCs and uncertainty of future mitigation actions, designing and implementing the market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement is faced with huge risks and challenges. This paper analyzes and identifies major potential risk factors in the designing of the market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement, and analyzes sources and possible impacts of those risks from the perspective of robust accounting, additionality assessment and enhancement of Parties’ mitigation ambition. To reduce negative impacts caused by risks in the design and implementation of the market mechanisms on global mitigation actions, this paper suggests that we should build a robust accounting system, consider NDC commitments in additionality assessment, and ensure that the market mechanisms can contribute to enhancing Parties’ mitigation ambition by setting market access requirements.
On cascading biases against poorer countries in Robiou du Pont et al.. Correspondence to Nature Climate Change

Sivan Kartha,Tom Athanasiou,Simon Caney,Elizabeth Cripps,Kate Dooley,Navroz K. Dubash,Teng Fei,Paul G. Harris,Christian Holz,Darrel Moellendorf,Bård Lahn,Benito Müller,J. Timmons Roberts,Ambuj Sagar,Henry Shue,Peter Singer,Harald Winkler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3022357

2017-01-01

Abstract:The recent article by Robiou du Pont et al makes counter-intuitive claims about the degree to which different countries’ pledged mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement are “equitable”, i.e., whether they meet benchmarks associate with various equity approaches. The analysis is flawed however, in three ways, with a cascading and systematic bias against poorer and lower-emitting countries. Firstly, the methodology is heavily driven by “grandfathering” as an allocation approach, despite the absence of any ethical justification. Second, it omits “Responsibility” as a basis, without explanation, even though it is included in the set of categories (taken from the IPCC AR5) within which the authors claim to be working. And third, the IPCC raised several other ethical considerations not covered by the authors’ particular choice of categories. Each of these three analytical shortcomings biases the results in favor of the wealthier and higher-emitting countries.
Is the Paris Rulebook Sufficient for Effective Implementation of Paris Agreement?

Ruo-Shui Sun,Xiang Gao,Liang-Chun Deng,Can Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2022.05.003

IF: 4.746

2022-01-01

Advances in Climate Change Research

Abstract:Glasgow Climate Conference concluded the negotiation on implementing rules for Paris Agreement and adopted the Glasgow Climate Pact.Based on practices under the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol,Paris Agreement enhanced global climate change governance.Paris Agreement established a system centered around'nationally determined contributions'(NDCs)of Parties,with a transparency framework to ensure in-formation flow running the system,meanwhile facilitating implementation by Parties through the mechanism on facilitation and compliance,as well as urging Parties to enhance ambition both at individual level and aggregate level through the mechanism on Global Stocktake.By doing so,it is logical that the system would lead to the achievement of the goal set by Paris Agreement.However,the system still faces significant deficiency,such as lack of information timeliness,intransparency of some necessary information,hypothesis-based but not solution-based decision-making,and lack of effective assurance for developing countries to get finance and technology support.It is concluded that this system is beneficial to long-term climate change policy decision and tracking progress of actions,while for short-term decision-making,more comprehensive consideration is needed than only based on the mechanisms of and outcomes from the system.International society should pay more attention to the progress of implementation,as well as ambition of various support provided to developing countries,than only the ambition of mitigation target numbers.
Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways

Nicole J. van den Berg,Heleen L. van Soest,Andries F. Hof,Michel G. J. den Elzen,Detlef P. van Vuuren,Wenying Chen,Laurent Drouet,Johannes Emmerling,Shinichiro Fujimori,Niklas Höhne,Alexandre C. Kõberle,David McCollum,Roberto Schaeffer,Swapnil Shekhar,Saritha Sudharmma Vishwanathan,Zoi Vrontisi,Kornelis Blok

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02368-y

2019-02-14

Climatic Change

Abstract:Abstract The bottom-up approach of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in the Paris Agreement has led countries to self-determine their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets. The planned ‘ratcheting-up’ process, which aims to ensure that the NDCs comply with the overall goal of limiting global average temperature increase to well below 2 °C or even 1.5 °C, will most likely include some evaluation of ‘fairness’ of these reduction targets. In the literature, fairness has been discussed around equity principles, for which many different effort-sharing approaches have been proposed. In this research, we analysed how country-level emission targets and carbon budgets can be derived based on such criteria. We apply novel methods directly based on the global carbon budget, and, for comparison, more commonly used methods using GHG mitigation pathways. For both, we studied the following approaches: equal cumulative per capita emissions, contraction and convergence, grandfathering, greenhouse development rights and ability to pay. As the results critically depend on parameter settings, we used the wide authorship from a range of countries included in this paper to determine default settings and sensitivity analyses. Results show that effort-sharing approaches that (i) calculate required reduction targets in carbon budgets (relative to baseline budgets) and/or (ii) take into account historical emissions when determining carbon budgets can lead to (large) negative remaining carbon budgets for developed countries. This is the case for the equal cumulative per capita approach and especially the greenhouse development rights approach. Furthermore, for developed countries, all effort-sharing approaches except grandfathering lead to more stringent budgets than cost-optimal budgets, indicating that cost-optimal approaches do not lead to outcomes that can be regarded as fair according to most effort-sharing approaches.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
Efforts-sharing to Achieve the Paris Goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and Taking Full Advantage of International Carbon Market

Mengyu Li,Maosheng Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115864

IF: 11.2

2020-01-01

Applied Energy

Abstract:Aggregated mitigation efforts represented by current Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) fall far short of meeting the 2 degrees C and 1.5 degrees C Paris goals, and Parties should enhance their mitigation targets through a ratcheting-up mechanism to close the large gap. The paper first assesses the stringency of major emitters' NDCs based on a comparison with the seven equity allocations. Then, it proposes a novel ratcheting-up scheme which distributes the mitigation gap between aggregated NDCs and the Paris goals based on key equity criteria and calculates the additional emission reduction rates for countries with insufficient ambitions. To fully consider different ambition levels of NDCs and also avoid overambitious outcomes, lower and upper limits are set for individual country's reduction rate, thus improving the equity and feasibility of the scheme. The results indicate that most countries should strengthen current efforts. By 2030, countries with insufficient NDCs need to reduce their aggregated emissions by 23% and 36% respectively to achieve the 2 degrees C and 1.5 degrees C goals. Most developed countries should undertake reduction rates which are above the global average level. Under the 1.5 degrees C pathway, many developed countries need to reduce their NDC emissions by about 50% in 2030. The mitigation costs of achieving the Paris goals as well as the benefits of international emissions trading have been evaluated. The results show that global GDP losses in 2030 for achieving 2 ?C and 1.5 degrees C could decrease by 69% and 50% respectively through permits trading, and regional GDP losses would also be reduced, highlighting the importance of an effective global carbon market for meeting the Paris goals.
Uncompensated claims to fair emission space risk putting Paris Agreement goals out of reach

Gaurav Ganti,Matthew J Gidden,Christopher J Smith,Claire Fyson,Alexander Nauels,Keywan Riahi,Carl-Friedrich Schleußner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acb502

IF: 6.7

2023-02-08

Environmental Research Letters

Abstract:Addressing questions of equitable contributions to emission reductions is important to facilitate ambitious global action on climate change within the ambit of the Paris Agreement. Several large developing regions with low historical contributions to global warming have a strong moral claim to a large proportion of the remaining carbon budget (RCB). However, this claim needs to be assessed in a context where the RCB consistent with the long-term temperature goal (LTTG) of the Paris Agreement is rapidly diminishing. Here we assess the potential tension between the moral claim to the remaining carbon space by large developing regions with low per capita emissions, and the collective obligation to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. Based on scenarios underlying the IPCC's 6th Assessment Report, we construct a suite of scenarios that combine the following elements: (a) two quantifications of a moral claim to the remaining carbon space by South Asia, and Africa, (b) a 'highest possible emission reduction' effort by developed regions (DRs), and (c) a corresponding range for other developing regions (ODR). We find that even the best effort by DRs cannot compensate for a unilateral claim to the remaining carbon space by South Asia and Africa. This would put the LTTG firmly out of reach unless ODRs cede their moral claim to emissions space and, like DRs, pursue highest possible emission reductions, which would also constitute an inequitable outcome. Furthermore, regions such as Latin America would need to provide large-scale negative emissions with potential risks and negative side effects. Our findings raise important questions of perspectives on equity in the context of the Paris Agreement including on the critical importance of climate finance. A failure to provide adequate levels of financial support to compensate large developing regions to emit less than their moral claim will put the Paris Agreement at risk.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
We must re-evaluate assumptions about carbon trading for effective climate change mitigation

Alyssa R. Pfadt-Trilling,Marie-Odile P. Fortier

2024-11-07

Abstract:Effective climate action depends on dismantling the assumptions and oversimplifications that have become the basis of climate policy. The assumption that greenhouse gases (GHG) are fungible and the use of single-point values in normalizing GHG species to CO2-equivalents can propagate inaccuracies in carbon accounting and have already led to failures of carbon offset systems. Separate emission reduction targets and tracking by GHG species are recommended to achieve long-term climate stabilization.

General Economics,Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics,Applications
Back in the Driver's Seat: How New EU Greenhouse-Gas Reporting Schemes Challenge Corporate Accounting

Julian Baehr,Florian Zenglein,Guido Sonnemann,Markus Lederer,Liselotte Schebek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093693

IF: 3.9

2024-04-29

Sustainability

Abstract:Greenhouse-gas (GHG) reporting schemes for companies are increasingly part of climate-mitigation policies worldwide. Notably, the European Green Deal (2019) boosts new public regulations that oblige companies to compile GHG emission inventories, i.e., account for their emissions in a given system boundary. Along with this boost, the workload for companies increases; at the same time, the quality of reporting is questioned. Given the overarching goal to improve companies' climate-mitigation performance, the quality of reporting is inseparably connected to the quality of the respective accounting. However, the literature discusses carbon accounting as a universal umbrella term focusing on managerial issues, thus disregarding the crucial role of accounting methodologies in the sense of calculation approaches. In this publication, we apply an analytical approach introducing a clear differentiation between the task of quantitatively accounting for GHG inventories and the task of reporting results from calculated inventories in response to stakeholder or policy expectations. We use this approach to investigate European GHG reporting schemes and related GHG accounting methodologies in detail. Our findings indicate that the current phase of the European Green Deal depicts a quantitative growth in reporting schemes and a significant qualitative change by shifting from formerly voluntary to mandatory reporting schemes, along with the application of accounting methodologies originally not intended for politically compulsory purposes. We analyze the consequences of this shift, which poses new challenges for companies and policymakers, i.e., data-management concepts and refined methodological frameworks.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Global Actions under the Paris Agreement: Tracing the Carbon Leakage Flow and Pursuing Countermeasures

Libo Wu,Ying Zhou,Haoqi Qian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105804

IF: 12.8

2022-01-01

Energy Economics

Abstract:Carbon leakage could potentially occur if one group of countries implemented emission reduction policies while others did not. This paper integrates a counterfactual simulation study using a GTAP-E based CGE model with a carbon flow decomposition analysis, thus enabling us to trace the complex paths of carbon leakage numerically. Under the NDC scenarios, the leakage ratios for production-based emission and consumption-based emission is 12.58% and 9.66% respectively. Further decomposing the cross-border carbon flow through forward and backward industrial linkage, this paper finds that even though the net import and export of embodied emissions do not change much with the implementation of Paris Agreement in most developed economies, EU and Asian developed countries do achieve great emission reductions regarding their domestic territorial production-based emissions or consumption-based emissions, and oppositely, United States increase its both emissions under the NDC scenario comparing with BAU scenario. EU, Asian developed counties together with China contribute to the production-based emission reductions mainly by reducing the emissions in producing domestic final goods, and partially by reducing intermediate goods input for producing foreign products. Their consumption-based emission reduction depends on the reduction in meeting final demand by domestic production and also the alleviated reliance on international inflow. India, Russia and rest of the world are the primary contributors to carbon leakage either in terms of the production-base emission or consumption-based emissions. Measures tacking the carbon leakage cannot remove the leakage completely, import tariff would reduce the production-based carbon leakage ratio to 10.25%, while export rebates would even increase the leakage ratio to 13.71%.
The consequences of non-participation in the Paris Agreement

Mario Larch,Joschka Wanner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2024.104699

IF: 2.445

2024-02-18

European Economic Review

Abstract:International cooperation is at the core of multilateral climate policy. How is its effectiveness harmed by individual countries not participating in the global mitigation effort? We use a multi-sector structural trade model with carbon emissions from production and a constant elasticity of fossil fuel supply function to simulate the consequences of unilateral non-participation in the Paris Agreement. Taking into account both direct and leakage effects, we find that non-participation of the US would eliminate more than a third of the world emissions reduction (31.8% direct effect and 6.4% leakage effect), while a potential non-participation of China lowers the world emission reduction by 24.1% (11.9% direct effect and 12.2% leakage effect). The substantial leakage is primarily driven by technique effects induced by falling international fossil fuel prices. In terms of welfare, the overwhelming majority of countries gain from the implementation of the Paris Agreement and most countries have only very little to gain from unilaterally deciding not to participate.

economics
Taking stock of national climate policies to evaluate implementation of the Paris Agreement

Mark Roelfsema,Heleen L. van Soest,Mathijs Harmsen,Detlef P. van Vuuren,Christoph Bertram,Michel den Elzen,Niklas Höhne,Gabriela Iacobuta,Volker Krey,Elmar Kriegler,Gunnar Luderer,Keywan Riahi,Falko Ueckerdt,Jacques Després,Laurent Drouet,Johannes Emmerling,Stefan Frank,Oliver Fricko,Matthew Gidden,Florian Humpenöder,Daniel Huppmann,Shinichiro Fujimori,Kostas Fragkiadakis,Keii Gi,Kimon Keramidas,Alexandre C. Köberle,Lara Aleluia Reis,Pedro Rochedo,Roberto Schaeffer,Ken Oshiro,Zoi Vrontisi,Wenying Chen,Gokul C. Iyer,Jae Edmonds,Maria Kannavou,Kejun Jiang,Ritu Mathur,George Safonov,Saritha Sudharmma Vishwanathan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15414-6

IF: 16.6

2020-04-29

Nature Communications

Abstract:Abstract Many countries have implemented national climate policies to accomplish pledged Nationally Determined Contributions and to contribute to the temperature objectives of the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2023, the global stocktake will assess the combined effort of countries. Here, based on a public policy database and a multi-model scenario analysis, we show that implementation of current policies leaves a median emission gap of 22.4 to 28.2 GtCO 2 eq by 2030 with the optimal pathways to implement the well below 2 °C and 1.5 °C Paris goals. If Nationally Determined Contributions would be fully implemented, this gap would be reduced by a third. Interestingly, the countries evaluated were found to not achieve their pledged contributions with implemented policies (implementation gap), or to have an ambition gap with optimal pathways towards well below 2 °C. This shows that all countries would need to accelerate the implementation of policies for renewable technologies, while efficiency improvements are especially important in emerging countries and fossil-fuel-dependent countries.

multidisciplinary sciences
Electricity accounting in life cycle assessment: the challenge of double counting

Peter Holzapfel,Vanessa Bach,Matthias Finkbeiner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02158-w

2023-04-27

Abstract:In grid electricity consumption models, the location-based method uses regional average emission factors to account for environmental impacts. The market-based method is based on contractual agreements, verifying the exclusive claim on electricity from specific energy sources. An inconsistent application of these methods in life cycle assessment (LCA) and GHG accounting can lead to double counting. Especially, double counting electricity associated with rather low environmental impacts, such as renewable energy, might lead to impact underestimations. The aim of this paper is to identify, describe and propose solutions to double counting challenges.

environmental sciences,engineering, environmental
The international climate finance accounting muddle: is there hope on the horizon?

Romain Weikmans,J. Timmons Roberts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2017.1410087

2017-12-03

Climate and Development

Abstract:The sources and governance of climate finance have been widely debated since the 2009 climate change summit in Copenhagen, when rich countries promised to provide US$ 30 billion in additional climate finance by 2012 and to mobilize US$ 100 billion a year by 2020 to address the mitigation and adaptation needs of developing countries. Have developed countries respected their financial commitments? Which countries have been the main beneficiaries of international climate money? As simple as these questions may seem, answers to them have proved to be highly controversial and have contributed to a continuous erosion of trust between Parties in international climate negotiations. This article explores the controversies around international climate finance figures. It examines how the lack of internationally agreed modalities to account for climate finance has given rise to a plethora of accounting and reporting practices that leads to widely contrasting statements on climate finance. We show that, despite some gaps, the Paris Agreement’s “enhanced transparency framework” could lead to marked improvements in the way climate finance is accounted and reported.

environmental studies,development studies
Abominable greenhouse gas bookkeeping casts serious doubts on climate intentions of oil and gas companies

Sergio Garcia-Vega,Andreas G. F. Hoepner,Joeri Rogelj,Frank Schiemann

2023-05-17

Abstract:The Paris Agreement aims to reach net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the second half of the 21st century, and the Oil & Gas sector plays a key role in achieving this transition. Understanding progress in emission reductions in the private sector relies on the disclosure of corporate climate-related data, and the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) is considered a leader in this area. Companies report voluntarily to CDP, providing total emissions and breakdowns into categories. How reliable are these accounts? Here, we show that their reliability is likely very poor. A significant proportion of Oil & Gas companies' emission reports between 2010 and 2019 fail a 'simple summation' mathematical test that identifies if the breakdowns add up to the totals. Companies' reports reflect unbalanced internal bookkeeping in 38.9% of cases, which suggests worryingly low quality standards for data guiding the private sector's contribution to halting climate change.

Physics and Society,Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics
Regional Emission Pathways, Energy Transition Paths and Cost Analysis under Various Effort-Sharing Approaches for Meeting Paris Agreement Goals

Xiaotong Chen,Fang Yang,Shining Zhang,Behnam Zakeri,Xing Chen,Changyi Liu,Fangxin Hou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121024

IF: 9

2021-01-01

Energy

Abstract:International climate policy debate has been struggling to define an agreeable principle for just distribution of the burdens of reducing greenhouse gases. By the integrated assessment modeling, we investigate climate change mitigation pathways compatible with the Paris Agreement goals under different carbon budget allocation principles, namely, cost-effectiveness, equality, and grandfathering for 11 world regions. The results indicate that regional carbon quotas remain similar under equality and grandfathering principles, except for regions with a high population projection, i.e., Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, or regions with a high level of current emissions, such as North America. Irrespective of the burden-sharing principles, most world regions must reach carbon neutrality before 2070 to meet the 2 degrees C climate targets. Moreover, carbon emissions reduced by carbon capture and storage applications are found to peak around 2050. In general, the share of fossil fuels in primary energy is larger under the larger carbon quota, which will also increase carbon capture and storage applications in fossil fuels. The average global investment needs for mitigating climate change are the lowest under the costeffectiveness principle, and the marginal abatement cost is the same for all regions. For each region, as the carbon quota decreases the marginal abatement cost increases, while the energy investment changes independently from the carbon quota. These insights can inform global climate change negotiations and help policymakers formulate timelines for carbon neutrality, energy transition, and technology deployment and investment portfolios. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Global roll-out of comprehensive policy measures may aid in bridging emissions gap

Heleen L van Soest,Lara Aleluia Reis,Luiz Bernardo Baptista,Christoph Bertram,Jacques Després,Laurent Drouet,Michel den Elzen,Panagiotis Fragkos,Oliver Fricko,Shinichiro Fujimori,Neil Grant,Mathijs Harmsen,Gokul Iyer,Kimon Keramidas,Alexandre C Köberle,Elmar Kriegler,Aman Malik,Shivika Mittal,Ken Oshiro,Keywan Riahi,Mark Roelfsema,Bas van Ruijven,Roberto Schaeffer,Diego Silva Herran,Massimo Tavoni,Gamze Unlu,Toon Vandyck,Detlef P van Vuuren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26595-z

2021-11-05

Abstract:Closing the emissions gap between Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the global emissions levels needed to achieve the Paris Agreement's climate goals will require a comprehensive package of policy measures. National and sectoral policies can help fill the gap, but success stories in one country cannot be automatically replicated in other countries. They need to be adapted to the local context. Here, we develop a new Bridge scenario based on nationally relevant, short-term measures informed by interactions with country experts. These good practice policies are rolled out globally between now and 2030 and combined with carbon pricing thereafter. We implement this scenario with an ensemble of global integrated assessment models. We show that the Bridge scenario closes two-thirds of the emissions gap between NDC and 2 °C scenarios by 2030 and enables a pathway in line with the 2 °C goal when combined with the necessary long-term changes, i.e. more comprehensive pricing measures after 2030. The Bridge scenario leads to a scale-up of renewable energy (reaching 52%-88% of global electricity supply by 2050), electrification of end-uses, efficiency improvements in energy demand sectors, and enhanced afforestation and reforestation. Our analysis suggests that early action via good-practice policies is less costly than a delay in global climate cooperation.
Carbon quota price and CDM potentials after Marrakesh

Wenying Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00122-2

IF: 9

2003-01-01

Energy Policy

Abstract:The Kyoto Protocol sets quantified GHG emission reduction commitments for Annex I Parties. But their emission reduction requirements related to BAU projections, one of the key factors to effect on future carbon market, are uncertain. Both the decisions made in Bonn and Marrakesh would have further consequences for how the future carbon market will take shape. This paper, with application of the carbon emission reduction trading model, evaluates future carbon quota price and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) potentials under different BAU projections, and does sensitivity analysis on carry-over of AAUs, CERs and ERUs, implementation rate, transaction cost, holding of CERs in Non-Annex I Parties, etc. to assess the impacts of relevant decisions of COP6-bis and COP7 on the carbon market.
The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics

ROBERT FALKNER

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12708

IF: 4.985

2016-08-31

International Affairs

Abstract:This article reviews and assesses the outcome of the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP‐21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), held in Paris in December 2015. It argues that the Paris Agreement breaks new ground in international climate policy, by acknowledging the primacy of domestic politics in climate change and allowing countries to set their own level of ambition for climate change mitigation. It creates a framework for making voluntary pledges that can be compared and reviewed internationally, in the hope that global ambition can be increased through a process of ‘naming and shaming’. By sidestepping distributional conflicts, the Paris Agreement manages to remove one of the biggest barriers to international climate cooperation. It recognizes that none of the major powers can be forced into drastic emissions cuts. However, instead of leaving mitigation efforts to an entirely bottom‐up logic, it embeds country pledges in an international system of climate accountability and a ‘ratchet mechanism’, thus offering the chance of more durable international cooperation. At the same time, it is far from clear whether the treaty can actually deliver on the urgent need to de‐carbonize the global economy. The past record of climate policies suggests that governments have a tendency to express lofty aspirations but avoid tough decisions. For the Paris Agreement to make a difference, the new logic of ‘pledge and review’ will need to mobilize international and domestic pressure and generate political momentum behind more substantial climate policies worldwide. It matters, therefore, whether the Paris Agreement's new approach can be made to work.

international relations

Double Counting and the Paris Agreement Rulebook

Double Counting of Emission Reductions Undermines the Credibility of Corporate Mitigation Claims

Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement

Construction, Implementation and Risks of the Carbon Market Mechanisms Under the Paris Agreement

On cascading biases against poorer countries in Robiou du Pont et al.. Correspondence to Nature Climate Change

Is the Paris Rulebook Sufficient for Effective Implementation of Paris Agreement?

Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways

Efforts-sharing to Achieve the Paris Goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and Taking Full Advantage of International Carbon Market

Uncompensated claims to fair emission space risk putting Paris Agreement goals out of reach

We must re-evaluate assumptions about carbon trading for effective climate change mitigation

Back in the Driver's Seat: How New EU Greenhouse-Gas Reporting Schemes Challenge Corporate Accounting

Global Actions under the Paris Agreement: Tracing the Carbon Leakage Flow and Pursuing Countermeasures

The consequences of non-participation in the Paris Agreement

Taking stock of national climate policies to evaluate implementation of the Paris Agreement

Electricity accounting in life cycle assessment: the challenge of double counting

The international climate finance accounting muddle: is there hope on the horizon?

Abominable greenhouse gas bookkeeping casts serious doubts on climate intentions of oil and gas companies

Regional Emission Pathways, Energy Transition Paths and Cost Analysis under Various Effort-Sharing Approaches for Meeting Paris Agreement Goals

Global roll-out of comprehensive policy measures may aid in bridging emissions gap

Carbon quota price and CDM potentials after Marrakesh

The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics