… and then, as I’m sure you’re aware, there is also the contraction and 
convergence approach to working out remaining carbon space to keep below 450 
ppm allocated on a per capita basis. Graphics, documents etc can be found at: 
http://www.gci.org.uk/

Best wishes

Peter


Professor Peter Newell
Department of International Relations
School of Global Studies
University of Sussex
Brighton
East Sussex
BN1 9SN
UK
T: (0044) 1273 873159
E: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

My latest book, Globalization and the Environment, is now available from 
Polity: http://www.politybooks.com/book.asp?ref=0745647227



From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Susanne Moser
Sent: 06 August 2012 14:50
Cc: Gep-Ed ([email protected])
Subject: Re: [gep-ed] IPCC question

Stacy -
Yes, it depends on the temp target, but in the real world (ie not politics) it 
also depends on the sensitivity of the climate, and for all intents and 
purposes everything seems to happen faster and sooner indicating that the 
climate system may be more sensitive than we thought.

Another approach to this, ultimately to be turned into percentages if you wish, 
is that propagated in the America's Climate Choices (Limiting/Mitigation) 
report (NRC, 2012). They essentially took an emissions/carbon budget approach, 
saying that if we want to stay under x temperature, then we have a carbon 
budget of y, and at the current rate of emissions, we will have used that 
remaining budget up by year z. To stay within that budget we have to reduce 
some percent per year starting... well, yesterday. It gives you a simple math 
approach to seeing that 2 degrees C is all but an economically (well, o.k. back 
to THAT real world... i.e. politically) infeasible goal.

Hope that helps (even if just for the US and not global, but similar papers 
have been written for global carbon budgets),
Susi
On 8/5/2012 6:25 PM, Soledad Aguilar wrote:



I use this one also from AR4 which includes sea level rise, which I find 
interesting to discuss with students living near coastlines as it gives them 
something they can easily relate to.





Soledad Aguilar

Investigadora Principal

FLACSO Argentina

Programa en Desarrollo, Innovación y Sociedad

Síguenos en el Foro de Cambio Climático y Comercio

http://www.ambienteycomercio.org<http://www.ambienteycomercio.org/><http://www.ambienteycomercio.org/>









On Aug 5, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Avery Cohn wrote:



Actually, the 450ppm target is for 2050, not for 2020. The 25-40% reduction for 
Annex I countries (from 1990 levels) is an intermediate target-- sort of a way 
station. Annex I countries would need to continue to reduce emissions at a 
similar rate until 2050. Ultimately the Annex I cuts would need to be much 
deeper to hit 450ppm.



Though I find the Annex I responsibilities a useful way to measure our lack of 
progress (even in commitments) in the near term (see 
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/3/034013/fulltext/), they are a confusing 
way to think about global emissions reductions.



I think it is more straightforward to think of it this way. According to the 
fourth assessment report, by 2050, GLOBAL emissions would need to fall 50-85% 
from 2000 levels in order to stabilize warming at 2-2.4 degrees Celsius over 
the pre-industrial equilibrium 
(http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/spmsspm-d.html see chart 
SPM.5 ) .



Best,



Avery





On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Radoslav Dimitrov 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
 wrote:

Depends on the temperature target: To keep global temperature rise below 2 
degrees C, carbon-equivalent atmospheric concentrations must be kept below 450 
ppm - which can be achieved by reducing emissions by 25-40% by 2020. The latter 
range is in the 2007 IPCC report and was the policy target advocated officially 
by the European Unionat the Bali conference. This was a subject of intense 
negotiations. No one else in the industrialized camp supported the EU on this. 
As a result, the Bali text only contains a footnote that indirectly refers to 
the IPCC-endorsed target, without actually containing the 25-40 numbers.



Radoslav S. Dimitrov, Ph.D.

Associate Professor

Department of Political Science

University of Western Ontario

Social Science Centre

London, Ontario

Canada N6A 5C2

Tel. +1(519) 661-2111 ext. 85023<tel:%2B1%28519%29%20661-2111%20ext.%2085023>

Fax +1(519) 661-3904<tel:%2B1%28519%29%20661-3904>

Email: 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>



On 2012-08-05, at 1:27 PM, VanDeveer, Stacy wrote:



Hi all,

I got a question from a summer school student, and I am trying to find the 
‘consensus’ answer in IPCC documents and I seem to be finding different 
numbers.  So here is the question:  The IPCC estimates that global emissions 
must fall by how much, to stabilize the climate systems during this century.   
Are the best estimates from the 2007 report (which gives quite large ranges for 
each of four warming scenarios)??























Stacy D. VanDeveer

Associate Professor



University of New Hampshire

Dept. of Political Science

Horton SSC

Durham, NH 03824 USA



[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>



tel:

fax:

mobile:

Skype ID:



(+1) 603-862-0167 
<http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?lang=en&src=jj_signature&To=%28%2B1%29+603%2D862%2D0167&[email protected]><http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?lang=en&src=jj_signature&To=%28%2B1%29+603%2D862%2D0167&[email protected]>

(+1) 603-862-0178<tel:%28%2B1%29%20603-862-0178>

(+1) 781-321-5880 
<http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?lang=en&src=jj_signature&To=%28%2B1%29+781%2D321%2D5880&[email protected]><http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?lang=en&src=jj_signature&To=%28%2B1%29+781%2D321%2D5880&[email protected]>

stacy.d.vandeveer















Want to always have my latest 
info?<https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=51539758810&src=client_sig_212_1_banner_join&invite=1&lang=en><https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=51539758810&src=client_sig_212_1_banner_join&invite=1&lang=en>



Want a signature like 
this?<http://www.plaxo.com/signature?src=client_sig_212_1_banner_sig&lang=en><http://www.plaxo.com/signature?src=client_sig_212_1_banner_sig&lang=en>













<image001.jpg>















--

Avery Simon Cohn | Ph.D. Candidate | Environmental Science, Policy & Management 
| UC Berkeley | skype: avery.cohn | +1 (510) 410-3731 US







Reply via email to