Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Emission metrics under the 2 °C climate stabilization target

  • Letter
  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In multi-gas climate policies such as the Kyoto Protocol one has to decide how to compare the emissions of different greenhouse gases. The choice of metric could have significant implications for mitigation priorities considered under the prospective negotiations for climate mitigation agreements. Several metrics have been proposed for this task with the Global Warming Potential (GWP) being the most common. However, these metrics have not been systematically compared to each other in the context of the 2 °C climate stabilization target. Based on a single unified modeling framework, we demonstrate that metric values span a wide range, depending on the metric structure and the treatment of the time dimension. Our finding confirms the basic salient point that metrics designed to represent different aspects of the climate and socio-economic system behave differently. Our result also reflects a complex interface between science and policy surrounding metrics. Thus, it is important to select or design a metric suitable for climate stabilization based on an interaction among practitioners, policymakers, and scientists.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The link between metrics and stabilization targets may either be direct in the sense that the target is taken into account in the construction of the metric, indirect in that the path towards stabilization is used in calculating the values of the metric, or both.

  2. The trend of the CH4 metrics is predominantly due to the effect of the shortening time horizon. In the case of N2O, it is a combined effect of several factors including the shortening time horizon, background concentrations, radiative efficiencies, and atmospheric adjustment times.

References

  • Aaheim A, Fuglestvedt JS, Godal O (2006) Costs savings of a flexible multi-gas climate policy. Energy J, 27(S13):485–502

    Google Scholar 

  • Azar C, Johansson DJA (2012) On the relationship between metrics to compare greenhouse gases—the case of IGTP, GWP and SGTP. Earth Syst Dynam Discuss 3:113–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berntsen T, Tanaka K, Fuglestvedt J (2010) Does black carbon abatement hamper CO2 abatement? Clim Chang 103:627–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fankhauser S (1994) The social costs of greenhouse gas emissions: an expected value approach. Energy J 15:157–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuglestvedt JS, Berntsen TK, Godal O, Sausen R, Shine KP, Skodvin T (2003) Metrics of climate change: assessing radiative forcing and emission indices. Clim Chang 58:267–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuglestvedt JS, Shine KP, Berntsen T, Cook J, Lee DS, Stenke A, Skeie RB, Velders GJM, Waitz IA (2010) Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: Metrics. Atmos Environ 44:4648–4677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillett NP, Matthews HD (2010) Accounting for carbon cycle feedbacks in a comparison of the global warming effects of greenhouse gases. Environ Res Lett 5:034011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2001) Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. In: Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, p 881

  • IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, p 996

  • IPCC (2009) IPCC Expert Meeting on the Science of Alternative Metrics: Meeting Report. In: Plattner G-K, Stocker T, Midgley P, Tignor M (eds) IPCC Working Group I Technical Support Unit, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, p 75

  • Johansson D (2011) Temperature stabilization, ocean heat uptake and radiative forcing overshoot profiles. Clim Chang 108:107–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson D (2012) Economics- and physical-based metrics for comparing greenhouse gases. Clim Chang 110:123–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson D, Persson U, Azar C (2006) The cost of using Global Warming potentials: analysing the trade off between CO2, CH4 and N2O. Clim Chang 77:291–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joos F, Roth R, Fuglestvedt JS, Peters GP, Enting IG, von Bloh W, Brovkin V, Burke EJ, Eby M, Edwards NR, Friedrich T, Frölicher TL, Halloran PR, Holden PB, Jones C, Kleinen T, Mackenzie FT, Matsumoto K, Meinshausen M, Plattner G-K, Reisinger A, Segschneider J, Shaffer G, Steinacher M, Strassmann K, Tanaka K, Timmermann A, Weaver AJ (2012) Carbon dioxide and climate impulse response functions for the computation of greenhouse gas metrics: a multi-model analysis. Atmos Chem Phys Discuss 12:19799–19869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lashof DA, Ahuja DR (1990) Relative contributions of greenhouse gas emissions to Global Warming. Nature 344:529–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manne AS, Richels RG (2001) An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases. Nature 410:675–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning M, Reisinger A (2011) Broader perspectives for comparing different greenhouse gases. Phil Trans R Soc A 369:1891–1905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marten AL, Newbold SC (2012) Estimating the social cost of non-CO2 GHG emissions: Methane and nitrous oxide. Energy Policy 51:957–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meinshausen M, Meinshausen N, Hare W, Raper SCB, Frieler K, Knutti R, Frame DJ, Allen MR (2009) Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458:1158–1162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill BC (2000) The Jury is still out on Global Warming potentials. Clim Chang 44:427–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill BC (2003) Economics, natural science, and the costs of Global Warming potentials. Clim Chang 58:251–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters GP, Aamaas B, Lund MT, Solli C, Fuglestvedt JS (2011) Alternative “global warming” metrics in life cycle assessment: a case study with existing transportation data. Environ Sci Technol 45:8633–8641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisinger A, Meinshausen M, Manning M (2011) Future changes in global warming potentials under representative concentration pathways. Environ Res Lett 6:024020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisinger A, Havlik P, Riahi K, Vliet O, Obersteiner M, Herrero M (2012) Implications of alternative metrics for global mitigation costs and greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Clim Chang, 1–14. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0593-3

  • Riahi K, Grübler A, Nakicenovic N (2007) Scenarios of long-term socio-economic and environmental development under climate stabilization. Technol Forecast SocChang 74:887–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogelj J, Hare W, Lowe J, van Vuuren DP, Riahi K, Matthews B, Hanaoka T, Jiang K, Meinshausen M (2011) Emission pathways consistent with a 2 °C global temperature limit. Nature Clim Change 1:413–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shine K (2009) The global warming potential—the need for an interdisciplinary retrial. Clim Chang 96:467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shine KP, Fuglestvedt JS, Hailemariam K, Stuber N (2005) Alternatives to the Global Warming Potential for comparing climate impacts of emissions of greenhouse gases. Clim Chang 68:281–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shine KP, Berntsen TK, Fuglestvedt JS, Skeie RB, Stuber N (2007) Comparing the climate effect of emissions of short- and long-lived climate agents. Phil Trans R Soc A 365:1903–1914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith SJ, Wigley ML (2000) Global Warming potentials: 1. Climatic implications of emissions reductions. Clim Chang 44:445–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith S, Karas J, Edmonds J, Eom J, Mizrahi A (2012) Sensitivity of multi-gas climate policy to emission metrics. Clim Chang, 1–13. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0565-7

  • Tanaka K, Kriegler E, Bruckner T, Hooss G, Knorr W, Raddatz T (2007) Aggregated Carbon Cycle, Atmospheric Chemistry, and Climate Model (ACC2) – description of the forward and inverse modes, Reports on Earth System Science. Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, p. 188. http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/item/escidoc:994422:1

  • Tanaka K, O’Neill BC, Rokityanskiy D, Obersteiner M, Tol R (2009a) Evaluating Global Warming potentials with historical temperature. Clim Chang 96:443–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka K, Raddatz T, O’Neill BC, Reick CH (2009b) Insufficient forcing uncertainty underestimates the risk of high climate sensitivity. Geophys Res Lett 36:L16709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka K, Peters GP, Fuglestvedt JS (2010) Policy Update: multicomponent climate policy: why do emission metrics matter? Carbon Manag 1:191–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tol RSJ, Berntsen TK, O’Neill BC, Fuglestvedt JS, Shine KP (2012) A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions. Environ Res Lett 7:044006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNFCCC (2012) Report on the workshop on common metrics to calculate the carbon dioxide equivalence of greenhouse gases. UNFCCC, Bonn, Germany, p 14

  • Wigley TML (1998) The Kyoto Protocol: CO2, CH4, and climate implications. Geophys Res Lett 25:2285–2288

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was presented at the Sixth International Symposium on Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases (NCGG-6), Amsterdam, The Netherlands. November 2–4, 2011. This project is supported by Norwegian Research Council under the project “Climate feedback uncertainty and its policy implications (ClimUP)” (Project number: 203807). K. Tanaka is funded by a Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship within the 7th European Community Framework Programme (Proposal N° 255568 under FP7-PEOPLE-2009-IEF). Contributions by J. S. Fuglestvedt are supported by Norwegian Research Council under the project “Climate and health impacts of Short-Lived Atmospheric Components (SLAC)” (Project number: 208277). Contributions by D. J. A. Johansson are supported by the Swedish Energy Agency.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology), Zurich, Switzerland

    Katsumasa Tanaka

  2. CICERO (Center for International Climate and Environmental Research – Oslo), Oslo, Norway

    Katsumasa Tanaka & Jan S. Fuglestvedt

  3. Division of Physical Resource Theory, Department of Energy and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Daniel J. A. Johansson

  4. NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research), Boulder, CO, USA

    Brian C. O’Neill

Authors
  1. Katsumasa Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel J. A. Johansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian C. O’Neill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan S. Fuglestvedt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katsumasa Tanaka.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(PDF 746 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tanaka, K., Johansson, D.J.A., O’Neill, B.C. et al. Emission metrics under the 2 °C climate stabilization target. Climatic Change 117, 933–941 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0693-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0693-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation