4.8 Article

Setting cumulative emissions targets to reduce the risk of dangerous climate change

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0805800106

Keywords

climate carbon cycle feedbacks; cumulative emissions budget; dangerous anthropogenic interference; uncertainty analysis; 2 degrees C target

Funding

  1. Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Polar Climate Stability Research Network
  2. Climate Decision Making Centre
  3. National Science Foundation [SES-0345798]
  4. Carnegie Mellon University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system'' requires stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and substantial reductions in anthropogenic emissions. Here, we present an inverse approach to coupled climate-carbon cycle modeling, which allows us to estimate the probability that any given level of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will exceed specified long-term global mean temperature targets for dangerous anthropogenic interference,'' taking into consideration uncertainties in climate sensitivity and the carbon cycle response to climate change. We show that to stabilize global mean temperature increase at 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels with a probability of at least 0.66, cumulative CO2 emissions from 2000 to 2500 must not exceed a median estimate of 590 petagrams of carbon (PgC) (range, 200 to 950 PgC). If the 2 degrees C temperature stabilization target is to be met with a probability of at least 0.9, median total allowable CO2 emissions are 170 PgC ( range, -220 to 700 PgC). Furthermore, these estimates of cumulative CO2 emissions, compatible with a specified temperature stabilization target, are independent of the path taken to stabilization. Our analysis therefore supports an international policy framework aimed at avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference formulated on the basis of total allowable greenhouse gas emissions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available