Uncertainty in an emissions-constrained world

Abstract

Our study focuses on uncertainty in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from anthropogenic sources, including land use and land-use change activities. We aim to understand the relevance of diagnostic (retrospective) and prognostic (prospective) uncertainty in an emissions-temperature setting that seeks to constrain global warming and to link uncertainty consistently across temporal scales. We discuss diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty in a systems setting that allows any country to understand its national and near-term mitigation and adaptation efforts in a globally consistent and long-term context. Cumulative emissions are not only constrained and globally binding but exhibit quantitative uncertainty; and whether or not compliance with an agreed temperature target will be achieved is also uncertain. To facilitate discussions, we focus on two countries, the USA and China. While our study addresses whether or not future increase in global temperature can be kept below 2, 3, or 4 °C targets, its primary aim is to use those targets to demonstrate the relevance of both diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty. We show how to combine diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty to take more educated (precautionary) decisions for reducing emissions toward an agreed temperature target; and how to perceive combined diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty-related risk. Diagnostic uncertainty is the uncertainty contained in inventoried emission estimates and relates to the risk that true GHG emissions are greater than inventoried emission estimates reported in a specified year; prognostic uncertainty refers to cumulative emissions between a start year and a future target year, and relates to the risk that an agreed temperature target is exceeded.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    The four parameters in WBGU’s “historical responsibility” approach are (i) 1990, (ii) 2050, (iii) 25 %, and (iv) 1990; and (i) 2010, (ii) 2050, (iii) 33 %, and (iv) 2010 in its “future responsibility” approach. In both approaches, the probability of exceeding the 2  ºC temperature target refers to cumulative emission constraints for 2000–2049.

  2. 2.

    IIASA’s World Population Program reports 7.8 and 9.9 for the 10th and 90th percentiles.

  3. 3.

    Note that applying the 2 °C Check Tool as described in Section 2.3 but to a cumulative emissions constraint for 2000–2050 of 1800, instead of 1500 Pg CO2-eq, does not encounter any limitations, which is why the risk interval is minimal for maximal uncertainty in p/c emissions and consists of a single value only.

  4. 4.

    Ito (2011) provides a historical meta-analysis of global NPP (1860s–2000s) which allows Haberl and Erb’s HANPP concept with reference to 2000 to be put into a long-term temporal perspective.

  5. 5.

    Haberl et al. (2007: Tab. 1) estimate total HANPP in 2000 to be 57.2 Pg CO2 (including human-induced fires), of which about 6.2 Pg CO2 is internationally transferred (net transfer) according to Erb et al. (2009b: Tab. 2) (about 7.2 Pg CO2 according to the data communicated to us).

  6. 6.

    See http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/parties/annex_i/items/2774.php for Annex I countries to the UNFCCC.

  7. 7.

    Respectively, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbon, sulfur hexafluoride, perfluorocarbon

  8. 8.

    We employ a total uncertainty in relative terms of 7.5 % (representing the median of the relative uncertainty class 5–10 %) for reporting the emissions of the six Kyoto GHGs excluding emissions from land use and land-use change in both reference and target year; and 0.75 for the correlation in these uncertainties (Jonas et al. 2010b).

  9. 9.

    Respectively, Global Trade and Environment Model; Integrated Model to Assess the Greenhouse Effect; Prospective Outlook on Long-term Energy Systems (model)

References

  1. Allen MR et al (2009) Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions toward the trillionth tonne. Nature 458(7242):1163–1166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Canadell JG et al (2007) Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks. PNAS 104(47):18866–18870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. EC (2011) 2011 literature review archives – policy/mitigation. Environment Canada, Gatineau, http://www.ec.gc.ca/sc-cs/default.asp?lang=En&n=ACF3648C-1 (accessed 25 January 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Erb K-H et al (2009a) Analyzing the global human appropriation of net primary production – processes, trajectories, implications. An introduction. Ecol Econ 69(2):250–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Erb K-H et al (2009b) Embodied HANPP: mapping the spatial disconnect between global biomass production and consumption. Ecol Econ 69(2):328–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher BS, Nakicenovic N (lead authors) (2007) Issues related to mitigation in the long-term context. In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change. Metz B et al. (eds). Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom, 169–250

  7. GCI (2012) Contraction and convergence: climate justice without vengeance. Global Commons Institute (GCI), United Kingdom, http://www.gci.org.uk (accessed 14 March 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Haberl H et al (2007) Quantifying and mapping the human apprpriation of net primary production in earth’s terrestrial ecosystems. PNAS 104(31):12942–12947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Haberl H et al (2009) Using embodied HANPP to analyze teleconnections in the global land system: conceptual considerations. Geogr Tidsskr-Dan J Geogr 109(2):119–130, http://rdgs.dk/djg/pdfs/109/2/Pp_119-130_109_2.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Houghton RA (2008) Carbon flux to the atmosphere from land-use changes: 1850–2005. In TRENDS: a compendium of data on global change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, United States of America. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/houghton/houghton.html (accessed 09 January 2012)

  11. IIASA (2007) Uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories. IIASA Policy Brief, #01, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/policy-briefs/pb01-web.pdf

  12. Ito A (2011) A historical meta-analysis of global terrestrial net primary productivity: are estimates converging? Glob Change Biol 17(10):3161–3175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jonas M et al (2010a) Benefits of dealing with uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories: introduction. Clim Change 103(1–2):3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jonas M et al (2010b) Comparison of preparatory signal analysis techniques for consideration in the (post-) Kyoto policy process. Clim Change 103(1–2):175–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jonas M et al (2010c) Dealing with uncertainty in GHG inventories: how to go about it? In: Marti K, Ermoliev Y, Makowski M (eds) Coping with uncertainty: robust solutions. Springer, Berlin, pp 229–245

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jonas M et al (2011) Lessons to be learned from uncertainty treatment: conclusions regarding greenhouse gas inventories. In: White T et al (eds) Greenhouse gas inventories: dealing with uncertainty. Springer, Netherlands, pp 339–343

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lieberman D et al. (eds.) (2007) Accounting for climate change. Uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Netherlands

  18. Matthews HD et al (2009) The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions. Nature 459(7248):829–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Meinshausen M (2005) Emission & concentration implications of long-term climate targets. Dissertation, DISS. ETH NO. 15946, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Switzerland. http://www.up.ethz.ch/publications/documents/Meinshausen_2005_dissertation.pdf (accessed 30 September 2011)

  20. Meinshausen M et al (2009) Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458(7242):1158–1162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pan Y et al (2011) A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333(6045):988–993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Peters GP et al (2011a) Rapid growth in CO2 emissions after the 2008–2009 global financial crisis. Nat Clim Change 2:2–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Peters GP et al (2011b) Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990–2008. PNAS 108(21):8903–8908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Raupach MR et al (2011) The relationship between peak warming and cumulative CO2 emissions, and its use to quantify vulnerabilities in the carbon-climate-human system. Tellus 63B(2):145–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rogelj J et al (2011) Emission pathways consistent with a 2 °C global temperature limit. Nat Clim Change 1:413–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Salk C, Jonas M, Marland G (2013) Strict accounting with flexible implementation: the first order of business in the next climate treaty. Carbon Manag 4(3):253–256

    Google Scholar 

  27. Victor DG (2009) Global warming: why the 2 °C goal is a polticial delusion. Nature 459(7249):909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. WBGU (1995) Scenario for the derivation of global CO2 reduction targets and implementation strategies. Statement at UNFCCC COP1 in Berlin. Special Report, German Advisory Council on Global Change. http://www.wbgu.de/fileadmin/templates/dateien/veroeffentlichungen/sondergutachten/sn1995/wbgu_sn1995_engl.pdf (accessed 17 November 2011)

  29. WBGU (2009) Solving the climate dilemma: the budget approach. Special Report, German Advisory Council on Global Change. http://www.wbgu.de/fileadmin/templates/dateien/veroeffentlichungen/sondergutachten/sn2009/wbgu_sn2009_en.pdf (accessed 28 September 2011)

  30. White T et al (eds) (2011) Greenhouse gas inventories: dealing with uncertainty. Springer, Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  31. WRI (2011) CAIT: Greenhouse gas sources & methods. Document accompanying the Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT), v.9.0. World Resources Institute, Washington DC. http://cait.wri.org/downloads/cait_ghgs.pdf (accessed 17 January 2012)

  32. Zickfeld K et al (2009) Setting cumulative emissions targets to reduce the risk of dangerous climate change. PNAS 106(38):16129–16134

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This study was financially supported by the Austrian Climate Research Programme (B068706).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Jonas.

Additional information

This article is part of a Special Issue on “Third International Workshop on Uncertainty in Greenhouse Gas Inventories” edited by Jean Ometto and Rostyslav Bun.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 402 kb)

ESM 2

(XLSX 6363 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jonas, M., Marland, G., Krey, V. et al. Uncertainty in an emissions-constrained world. Climatic Change 124, 459–476 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1103-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Diagnostic Uncertainty
  • Cumulative Emission
  • Terrestrial Biosphere
  • Target Path
  • Cumulative Constraint