Steep increase in global CO2 emissions despite reductions by industrialized countries

Sep 21, 2011

Global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) – the main cause of global warming – increased by 45 % between 1990 and 2010, and reached an all-time high of 33 billion tonnes in 2010. Increased energy efficiency, nuclear energy and the growing contribution of renewable energy are not compensating for the globally increasing demand for power and transport, which is strongest in developing countries.

This increase took place despite emission reductions in industrialised countries during the same period. Even though different countries show widely variable emission trends, industrialised countries are likely to meet the collective Kyoto target of a 5.2 % reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 as a group, partly thanks to large emission reductions from economies in transition in the early nineties and more recent reductions due to the 2008-2009 recession. These figures were published today in the report "Long-term trend in global CO2 emissions," prepared by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre and PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.

The report, which is based on recent results from the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) and latest statistics for use and other activities, shows large national differences between industrialised countries. Over the period 1990-2010, in the EU-27 and Russia CO2 emissions decreased by 7% and 28% respectively, while the USA's emissions increased by 5% and the Japanese emissions remained more or less constant. The industrialised countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol (so called 'ratifying Annex 1 countries') and the USA, in 1990 caused about two-thirds of global CO2 emissions. Their share of has now fallen to less than half the global total.

Continued growth in the and emerging economies and economic recovery by the industrialised countries are the main reasons for a record breaking 5.8% increase in global CO2 emissions between 2009 and 2010. Most major economies contributed to this increase, led by China, USA, India and EU-27 with increases of 10%, 4%, 9% and 3% respectively. The increase is significant even when compared to 2008, when global CO2 emissions were at their highest before the global financial crisis. It can be noted that in EU-27, CO2 emissions remain lower in absolute terms than they were before the crisis (4.0 billion tonnes in 2010 as compared to 4.2 billion tonnes in 2007).

At present, the USA emits 16.9 tonnes CO2 per capita per year, over twice as much as the EU-27 with 8.1 tonnes. By comparison, Chinese per capita CO2 emissions of 6.8 tonnes are still below the EU-27 average, but now equal those of Italy. It should be noted that the average figures for China and EU-27 hide significant regional differences.

Long term global growth in CO2 emissions continues to be driven by power generation and road transport, both in industrial and developing countries. Globally, they account for about 40% and 15% respectively of the current total and both have consistent long-term annual growth rates of between 2.5% and 5%.

Throughout the Kyoto Protocol period, industrialised countries have made efforts to change their energy sources mix. Between 1990 and 2010 they reduced their dependence on coal (from 25% to 20% of total energy production) and oil (from 38% to 36.5%), and shifted towards natural gas (which increased from 23% to 27 %), nuclear energy (from 8% to 9%) and renewable energy (from 6.5% to 8%). In addition they made progress in energy savings, for example by insulation of buildings, more energy-efficient end-use devices and higher fuel efficiencies.

The report shows that the current efforts to change the mix of energy sources cannot yet compensate for the ever increasing global demand for power and transport. This needs to be considered in future years in all efforts to mitigate the growth of global greenhouse gas , as desired by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Bali Action Plan and the Cancún agreements.

Explore further: Conservation scientists asking wrong questions on climate change impacts on wildlife

More information: The full report can be downloaded from: edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/index.php or www.pbl.nl/en

Provided by European Commission Joint Research Centre

4 /5 (4 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

EU carbon emissions 'plummeted in 2009'

May 31, 2011

Greenhouse-gas emissions by the 27 members of the European Union fell by 7.1 percent in 2009 over 2008, driven by economic recession but also a switch to renewable energy, the European Environment Agency (EAA) ...

CO2 emissions booming, shifting east, researchers report

Sep 24, 2008

Despite widespread concern about climate change, annual carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels and manufacturing cement have grown 38 percent since 1992, from 6.1 billion tons of carbon to 8.5 billion tons in ...

China to surpass U.S. emissions levels

Nov 07, 2006

The International Energy Agency says China will surpass the United States in carbon dioxide emissions by 2009, about a decade ahead of previous predictions.

Nuclear power vital to cutting CO2 emissions: report

Jun 16, 2010

Roughly a quarter of global electricity could be generated by nuclear power by 2050, requiring a tripling in nuclear generating capacity but making a major contribution to reduced CO2 emissions, a report said ...

Global CO2 emissions back on the rise in 2010: study

Nov 21, 2010

Global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions – the main contributor to global warming – show no sign of abating and may reach record levels in 2010, according to a study led by the University of Exeter (UK).

Alarming acceleration in CO2 emissions worldwide

May 21, 2007

Between 2000 and 2004, worldwide CO2 emissions increased at a rate that is over three times the rate during the 1990s—the rate increased from 1.1 % per year during the 1990s to 3.1% per year in the early 2000s.

Recommended for you

Big data confirms climate extremes are here to stay

14 hours ago

In a paper published online today in the journal Scientific Reports, published by Nature, Northeastern researchers Evan Kodra and Auroop Ganguly found that while global temperature is indeed increasing, so too is the variab ...

Peru's carbon quantified: Economic and conservation boon

14 hours ago

Today scientists unveiled the first high-resolution map of the carbon stocks stored on land throughout the entire country of Perú. The new and improved methodology used to make the map marks a sea change ...

How might climate change affect our food supply?

15 hours ago

It's no easy question to answer, but prudence demands that we try. Thus, Microsoft and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) have teamed up to tackle "food resilience," one of several themes ...

Groundwater is safe in potential N.Y. fracking area

15 hours ago

Two Cornell hydrologists have completed a thorough groundwater examination of drinking water in a potential hydraulic fracturing area in New York's Southern Tier. They determined that drinking water in potable ...

User comments : 4

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

omatumr
1 / 5 (5) Sep 23, 2011
Thanks for posting the story.

CO2 emitted by an industry is not reduced by moving the industry to another country.

Although CO2 does not, in fact, control Earth's climate, decisions by the EPA drove US industries to relocate overseas.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel

Ethelred
5 / 5 (1) Sep 24, 2011
US industries moved overseas so they could fire Americans and replace them with labor that cost a dollar an hour or less.

Ethelred
omatumr
1 / 5 (4) Sep 24, 2011
Political leaders and government scientists:

1. Declared CO2 a dangerous air pollutant, and

2. Claimed "Green jobs" would revitalize the economy!

Hey - USA, NAS, and RS Presidents - how is that working?

The public seems ready to prepare a cup of tea to settle your nerves.

What a sad day for science!
Oliver K. Manuel
http://myprofile....anuelo09
Ethelred
5 / 5 (2) Sep 25, 2011
What a sad day for science!
Indeed Oliver's constant spamming to support his disproved ideas are a sad thing.

Ethelred