Global Carbon Emissions Rise to New Record in 2013

Global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels will rise to a record 36 billion metric tons (39.683 billion tons) this year, a report by 49 researchers from 10 countries said, showing the failure of governments to rein in the main greenhouse gas blamed for global warming.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

LONDON (Reuters) - Global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels will rise to a record 36 billion metric tons (39.683 billion tons) this year, a report by 49 researchers from 10 countries said, showing the failure of governments to rein in the main greenhouse gas blamed for global warming.

The report by the Global Carbon Project, which compiles data from research institutes worldwide each year, was published in the journal Earth Systems Data Discussions on Tuesday.

Its 2013 estimate represents a 2.1 percent gain versus 2012 and a 61 percent increase since 1990, the baseline year for the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol, the only global agreement that places binding limits on national CO2 emission levels.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The report was published as officials from almost 200 nations are gathered in Warsaw, Poland, tasked with advancing U.N. negotiations on a new pact to curb emissions from all nations due to take effect from 2020.

"Governments ... need to agree how to reverse this trend. Emissions must fall substantially and rapidly if we are to limit global climate change to below 2 degrees Celsius," said the report's lead author, Corinne Le Quere of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at Britain's University of East Anglia, in a statement.

She was referring to a rise in the average global temperature from levels prior to the Industrial Revolution. U.N.-backed scientists have warned that a gain above 2 degrees will trigger extreme floods, droughts and storms.

The report shows that the rate of growth in global CO2 emissions is down slightly on the previous year's 2.2 percent increase but is only slightly lower than the average growth of 2.7 percent a year in the last 10 years.

Emissions are increasing because strong growth in coal consumption has outweighed any reductions from the rapid growth in renewable energy in recent years, according to Glen Peters, an author of the report based at CICERO, a climate research institute in Norway.

"While society is seeing many positive developments in renewable energy, this increased production capacity is not simply displacing coal consumption," Peters said in a separate statement. (www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget)

(Reporting by Ben Garside; editing by Jane Baird)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe