Verdens CO2-utslipp er ventet å stige med 0,6 prosent i 2019 grunnet en kraftig økning i bruken av naturgass og olje, og til tross for en nedgang i kullforbruket. Naturgass har siden 2012 vært hovedårsaken til økningen i globale CO2-utslipp.
Verdens karbonutslipp ligger an til å øke med rundt 2 prosent i 2018 sammenlignet med året før som en følge av fortsatt økning i bruk av kull, olje og gass, viser beregninger fra The Global Carbon Project.
Shell has just released a new scenario, Sky, which meets the goals of the Paris Agreement. How does it compare with other low carbon pathways?
Here is the answer according to the IEA "Global energy and CO₂ status report"
COMMENTARY: A new estimate of the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) means that the carbon budget to stay below 2°C could be much larger.
COMMENTARY: The carbon intensity is a useful indicator, but also fraught with difficulties. Depending on the data choices, the policy implications could be quite different.
COMMENTARY: What sparked my interest in 2017, and what will raise my eyebrow in 2018?
Commentary: The International Energy Agency (IEA) is often critiqued for being pro fossil fuel and anti-renewables, but are their scenarios so different to those developed by the broader researcher community?
Globale karbondioksidutslepp har flata ut i ei treårsperiode (2014-2016), noko som vekte til live ein sårt trengd klimaoptimisme, men i 2017 ventar forskarar at utsleppa aukar att.
Commentary: We tend to remember the way things were, not the way things are.
Most climate policy discussions seem to focus on decarbonisation of the electricity sector, but industry, transport, and buildings also play an important role.
COMMENTARY: No one doubts that oil production will go down in a 2°C world, but whether there is place for new oil fields is a far more nuanced discussion.
COMMENTARY: The large-scale carbon dioxide removal in emission scenarios is becoming better known, but is it just a consequence of high discount rates?
Commentary: DNV GL has added a new addition to the energy outlook literature, one that builds a forecast of the ‘most likely’ future leading to around 2.5°C in 2100.
Commentary: Yes, but only in a model. We have essentially emitted too much carbon dioxide already, and the most feasible pathways to stay “well below” two degrees all require removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at an unprecedented scale.
COMMENTARY: A new paper suggests a rather significant upward revision of the carbon budget for 1.5°C. This is a potential game changer, but it is too early to reformulate mitigation plans.
COMMENTARY: Solar and wind are the flavour of the decade, and carbon capture and storage is having an identity crisis. But, love it or hate it, we need carbon capture and storage to keep below 2°C.
COMMENTARY: Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry flattened in the last few years, and many argue we are now decoupling emissions from economic growth. Is this a success story or an unfortunate use of the concept?
COMMENTARY: The mitigation challenge to keep below 2°C warming is immense, yet policy makers show no sign of incentivising business to research, develop and deploy the required technologies.
COMMENTARY: Many have reported that CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry are flat, but we have had a record increase in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. Yes, this is exactly what is expected!
COMMENTARY: The annual release of the BP Statistical Review of World Energy gives a first assessment of how the Global Carbon Budget’s 2016 emission projection fared. In short, it did well.
COMMENTARY: Global coal consumption may have peaked, solar and wind have had explosive growth, yet global emissions remain flat. We have a way to go!
COMMENTARY: Keeping global warming below 2°C is hard, but 2.5°C is a walk in the park!
COMMENTARY: We have had three years with virtually no growth in carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry. What has caused the slowdown and does this put us on a path to “well below 2°C”?
COMMENTARY: The Paris Agreement calls to hold the increase in the global average temperature to “well below 2°C”. What on earth does that mean?
COMMENTARY: No, Carbon Capture and Storage and Carbon Dioxide Removal allow the continued use of fossil fuels. But for how long? And what are the risks?
COMMENTARY: There are different ways to define carbon budgets, and a particularly important distinction is between the two concepts of avoiding a temperature target and exceeding a temperature target. Understanding the difference between these two concepts goes a long way to explaining different types of budgets.
COMMENTARY: In rich countries, the environmental footprint is growing while domestic environmental pressures are declining, most studies find. Should policy focus on consumption instead of production?
COMMENTARY: An old debate is back in the news. Yes, bioenergy. It will either save the planet or destroy the planet, but seemingly, never anything in between. Should we use bioenergy, or should we ban it?
COMMENTARY: Despite the complexity of the climate system, there is a rather simple relationship between the long-term temperature increase and the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted. Why, then, is there no clear answer to how much we can emit?