Search

Emissions of CO2 from the EU can be estimated using different system boundaries, depending on the policy question. We analyze and compare the trends in territorial emissions (1990–2016) and consumption-based emissions and emissions embodied in trade (1990–2014). We find the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008 was an important turning point. Territorial emissions were roughly stable in the years before the GFC but have since declined. Consumption-based emissions rose from 2000 to the GFC but then declined in concert with territorial emissions. A Kaya identity decomposition suggests that the main factor pushing the EU’s territorial emissions up before the GFC was a growth in GDP, balanced by constant improvements in energy and carbon intensity. The large increase in consumption-based emissions up to the GFC was mainly due to emissions from the production of imported manufactured goods, particularly from China. After the GFC, the Kaya identity decomposition suggests that lower GDP growth facilitated a sustained decrease in territorial emissions. The decline in consumption-based emissions since the GFC was partly due to decreasing territorial emissions but accelerated due to a decrease in the emissions from the production of imported products from China. Preliminary data indicates that EU CO2 emissions have increased from 2014 to 2017, with the Kaya identity decomposition suggesting the increase is due to a return to stronger GDP growth.

Climate policy is generally concerned with the mitigation of well-mixed greenhouse gases, allocated to the country where the emissions occur, and with different emissions weighted together with the Global Warming Potential (GWP) using a 100 year time horizon. This perspective is not unique. Recent research has considered the inclusion of Short-Lived Climate Forcers (SCLFs), allocated emissions to the consumption of goods and services, and used alternative emissions metrics. Here, for the first time, we combine these alternative perspectives to explore the potential policy implications of three alternative framings: 1) using the Global Temperature change Potential (GTP) to directly link current emissions to temperature change, 2) including SLCFs that have both warming and cooling effects on climate, and 3) allocating emissions to consuming sectors and regions. Collectively, we use these three aspects to allocate the future temperature response to the consumption of goods and services in a given year. We show, in order of importance, that the method of allocating emissions to economic sectors is the most important, followed by the emission metric (including time-horizon), and then the mix of short-lived and well-mixed climate forcers. The consumption perspective reallocates emissions from electricity and manufacturing to service sectors, which suggests different policy options for demand and supply. The net effect of multiple pollutants and GTP significantly change the importance of the sectors compared to when only considering CO2 or when using the GWP. We argue that a focus on only one accounting system and framing in climate policy can potentially limit consideration of mitigation options to a reduced set of activities, and thereby missing significant opportunities for mitigation in other aspects.

Brazil’s economic development has been underpinned by a diverse and – in a global comparison – unusual set of energy carriers, notably hydroelectricity and ethanol from sugar cane. Its energy mix makes Brazil one of the least energy-related carbon-intensive economies worldwide. Given that the country is fast becoming one of the world’s economic powerhouses, decision-makers need to understand the drivers underlying past and current carbon dioxide emissions trends. We therefore investigate a) which key long-term drivers have led to Brazil’s unique emissions profile, and b) the implications of these drivers for Brazil’s national policies. We show that Brazil’s emissions are growing mainly due to increasing individual standards of living, exports and population size, and that this growth is so far unchallenged by technological and structural improvements toward lower emissions intensities and more efficient production structures. As these trends are likely to continue amidst growing international pressure on key economies to reduce their carbon emissions, a decoupling of drivers from emissions is needed to simultaneously meet development and environmental goals.