search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
10


EMISSIONS GAP REPORT 2018 – TRENDS AND PROGRESS TOWARDS THE CANCUN PLEDGES, NDC TARGETS AND PEAKING OF EMISSIONS


To assess whether the changes in emission-related indicators as a result of NDCs are both ambitious and fair (in line with the long-term goal of the Paris Agreement) would require a thorough evaluation of normative indicators of burden-sharing indicators, which is beyond the scope of this report. However, a number of recent peer-reviewed studies attempt this task, based on various effort-sharing considerations (Höhne et al., 2014; Pan et al., 2017; Robiou du Pont et al., 2017; CAT, 2018a; Holz et al., 2018).


Figure 2.4 provides a detailed comparison of estimated emissions under current policies and the full implementation of NDCs for all G20 members, mapping these against 1990 and 2010 emissions. For each of the G20 members, median GHG emission projections have been calculated for current policies and full implementation of the NDC, using information from a recently published study (den Elzen et al., forthcoming), which updates and expands the data sources covered in the 2017 Emissions Gap Report (UNEP, 2017), using the


most up-to-date data from countries’ recently published National Communications, 3rd


biennial reports of 7


G20 members, and several other new national studies for policies and NDC projections. The estimates draw on official country data and independent sources (see den Elzen et al. 2018 for further details). GHG emission projections under current policies from independent analyses presented in this chapter cover main energy and climate policies implemented by a recent cut-off date and do not consider prospective policies that are being debated or planned. Similarly, current policy and NDC estimates only partially cover commitments and actions made by non-state and subnational actors to date and do not fully reflect the implications of recent significant declines in the cost of renewable energy sources. The role and potential of non-state and subnational actors is assessed in chapter 5, while chapter 7 discusses the role of innovation policy and market creation.


Figure 2.4: Greenhouse gas emissions (all gases and sectors) of the G20 and its individual members by 2030 under different scenarios and compared with historical emissions.


Figure 2.4a. 16


12


1990 2010 Current policies (official data) Current policies (all studies) Unconditional NDC (all studies) Conditional NDC (all studies)


8


4


4 GtCO2e


0 China


Notes: For reporting reasons, the emission projections for China, the EU, India and the USA are shown in figure 2.4a with and the other countries shown in figure 2.4b, using 2 different vertical axes. As a conservative assumption, South Africa is not considered as having a firm commitment to peak, since there is no guarantee that the conditions upon which they made the pledge will be met. * For the USA, the unconditional NDC is for 2025.


1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0


EU-28 India USA (2025)* 4 GtCO2e


1990 2010 Current policies (official data) Current policies (all studies) Unconditional NDC (all studies) Conditional NDC (all studies)


Emissions (GtCO2e/yr) Emissions (GtCO2e/yr)


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112