Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuel Burning Rise into High-Risk Zone

Record emissions of carbon dioxide mean atmospheric concentrations have reached levels that lead to the highest temperature increases

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The world's carbon dioxide output hit a new record high last year and is poised to break that record in 2012, according to a new study.

Global CO2 emissions grew 3 percent last year, and scientists with the Global Carbon Project estimate they will grow another 2.6 percent this year, to an estimated 35.6 billion metric tons. They expect the amount of CO2 emitted this year by burning fossil fuels to grow to 58 percent above the 1990 emissions level.

CO2 emissions grew sharply this year in China, by 9.9 percent, and in India, which recorded a 7.5 percent gain. Emissions from the United States fell by 1.8 percent, and from the European Union by 2.8 percent.


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.


But global CO2 emissions are still on track to meet or exceed the most extreme emissions scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2007 report, and by the scenarios the panel will use in the report it will release next year, scientists with the Global Carbon Project said.

"We find that current emission trends continue to track scenarios that lead to the highest temperature increases," they wrote in an analysis published yesterday in the journal Nature Climate Change. "Further delay in global mitigation makes it increasingly difficult to stay below 2 degrees Celsius."

The lead author of the study, Corinne Le Quéré of the University of East Anglia, offered her own blunt assessment. "I am worried that the risks of dangerous climate change are too high on our current emissions trajectory," she said in a statement. "We need a radical plan."

Many governments believe that holding the average global temperature rise caused by man-made warming to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels gives the world the best chance to avoid dangerous climate change.

But the new analysis, as well as a report released last week by the United Nations, concludes that the difficulty of meeting that goal is growing along with the world's fossil fuel output.

'Significant' reductions needed
The U.N. Environment Programme's "Emissions Gap 2012" report cautions that even if nations meet their strictest pledges, the world will not be able to cut its output of greenhouse gases in time to prevent runaway global warming (ClimateWire, Nov. 21).

The Global Carbon Project's analysis, which compares the world's actual CO2 output with four generations of emissions scenarios used by the IPCC, concludes that "significant emission reductions are needed by 2020 to keep 2 degrees Celsius as a feasible goal," echoing the recent U.N. assessment.

But that does mean such cuts are impossible, said the international team of scientists.

Some countries have been able to reduce their emissions steadily over a 10-year period, often by a combination of government policies and market reaction to the availability of fossil fuels and other natural resources.

Belgium, France and Sweden put new energy policies in place, increasing efficiency and introducing more nuclear power into their energy mix, in response to the oil crisis of 1973, the new study notes. As a result, CO2 emissions from those countries fell by 4 to 5 percent per year for a decade or more.

And in the United States, increasing use of natural gas in recent years has cut the country's CO2 emissions an estimated 1.4 percent per year since 2005, the study says.

In addition to the analysis published in Nature Climate Change, the scientists working under the Global Carbon Project umbrella published a more detailed technical analysis of the world's CO2 emissions yesterday in the journal Earth System Science Data Discussions.

Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. www.eenews.net, 202-628-6500

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