Are the Copenhagen Accord pledges sufficient to limit global warming to 2 or 1.5 degrees C? As governments prepare for the UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun, Mexico, from November 29 to December 10, 2010, a new report spells out what the pledges of the past 12 months by governments might actually mean in terms of putting the world on track to limit global temperature rises. The report, coordinated by UNEP, is an unprecedented partnership between over 30 leading researchers at climate modeling centers and institutes in Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America. Analysis by the World Resources Institute (WRI) is included in the report. The assessment spotlights worst case and best case scenarios up to 2020 while estimating the emissions gaps likely under various outcomes that will need to be bridged in order to avoid ‘dangerous’ climate change. World Resources Institute Senior Associate Kelly Levin was a contributor to the report.

1. The Emissions Gap Report
Are the Copenhagen Accord pledges sufficient to
limit global warming to 2 C or 1.5 C?
November 23, 2010
Washington DC Launch
World Resources Institute
Kelly Levin, Senior Associate, WRI

2. What are we aiming for? Findings from Chapter 2
Global emissions, GtCO2e
Range of emission pathways consistent
Annual emissions
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
with a “likely” chance of limiting
today of ~48 GtCO2e warming to 2 degrees
Median estimate of 44 GtCO2e in
20201
1 The 2020 emissions consistent with the 20th to 80th percentile range of emission pathways with a “likely” chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees is 39 to 44
1
GtCO2e, the median estimate is 44 GtCO2e
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010

3. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
Under business-as-usual projections, emissions
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
could reach 56 GtCO2e in 20201
2
1 This is the median estimate of the 11 studies assessed, estimates range from 54-60 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010

4. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
53 GtCO2e in the least ambitious pledge case1
– Unconditional pledges
– “Lenient” rules2
1 This is the median estimate of modelling groups, estimates range from 52-57 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
3
2 This relates to rules surrounding the use of surplus emission units (particularly those carried over from this commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol) and LULUCF accounting
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010

5. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
49 GtCO2e in the most ambitious pledge case1
– Conditional pledges
– “Strict” rules
4
1 This is the median estimate of modelling groups, estimates range from 47-51 GtCO2e (20th to 80th percentile)
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010

6. What is the “gap”? Findings from Chapter 4
Global emissions, GtCO2e
There is a gap of
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
between 5 and 9
depending on how
GtCO2e1
the pledges are
implemented
1 Note that, given the range in estimates from different modelling groups, and range of potential emission pathways that are consistent with the 2
5
degree limit, the gap can be between 2 and 21 GtCO2e depending on which estimates are compared.
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010

7. How to reduce the size of the gap? Findings from Chapter 4
• Moving from unconditional (lower-ambition) pledges to
– Ambitious action from other countries 2-3 GtCO2e
conditional (higher-ambition)
– Provision of climate finance
– Passing of domestic legislation
6

8. How to reduce the size of the gap? Findings from Chapter 4
• Moving from unconditional (lower ambition) pledges to
– Ambitious action from other countries 2-3 GtCO2e
conditional (higher ambition)
– Provision of climate finance
– Passing of domestic legislation
• Ensuring ‘strict’ rules surrounding:
– LULUCF accounting 1-2 GtCO2e
– Surplus emissions units
– Offset ‘double-counting’
7

9. How to reduce the size of the gap? Findings from Chapter 4
• Moving from unconditional (lower ambition) pledges to
– Ambitious action from other countries 2-3 GtCO2e
conditional (higher ambition)
– Provision of climate finance
– Passing of domestic legislation
• Ensuring ‘strict’ rules surrounding:
– LULUCF accounting 1-2 GtCO2e
– Surplus emissions units
– Offset ‘double-counting’
• This would still leave a gap of ~5 GtCO2e
• It is feasible to close the gap
– More ambitious actions
– Climate finance
8

10. Temperature Implications of the Pledges
9

11. Where are we heading? Findings from Chapter 3
Global emissions, GtCO2e
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
reduction
7 GtCO2e
possible as a
result of the
pledges
10
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010

12. What about 1.5 degrees? Findings from Chapter 2
Global emissions, GtCO2e PRELIMINARY RESULTS – FEW STUDIES
AVAILABLE
Range of “stylized” emission
UNEP thanks Joeri Rogelj (ETHZ) and the European Climate Foundation for graphics
pathways consistent with a
“likely” chance of limiting
warming to 1.5 degrees1
1 Specifically, this shows the 20-80th percentile range of the “stylized” pathways that have a “likely” (>66%) chance of limiting temperature increase to 1.5 C by
11
2100
Source: Adapted from The Emissions Gap report, UNEP, 2010