Burning of fossil fuels added a record 36 billion tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere in 2013, locking in even more heating of the planet.<\/p>\n
Global CO2 emissions are projected to rise 2.1 percent higher than 2012, the previous record high, according to a new report released Tuesday [19 Nov 2013] by the Global Carbon Project<\/a>.<\/p>\n “Going beyond two degrees C is very risky, it’s completely unknown territory.” — Corinne Le Que\u0301re\u0301<\/p>\n This increase is slightly less than the 2000-2013 average of 3.1 percent, said lead author Corinne Le Que\u0301re\u0301 of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in the UK.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is the second year in a row of below average emissions. Perhaps this represents cautious progress,\u201d Le Que\u0301re\u0301 told IPS.<\/p>\n Still, these hard numbers demonstrate that the U.N. climate talks have failed to curb the growth in emissions. And there is little optimism that the latest talks known as COP19<\/a> here in Warsaw will change the situation even with the arrival of high-level ministers Wednesday.<\/p>\n Global emissions continue to be within the highest scenario of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), she said.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is a five-degree C trajectory. It\u2019s absolutely tragic for humanity to be on this pathway,\u201d Le Que\u0301re\u0301 said.<\/p>\n This year\u2019s 36 billion tonnes of CO2 will raise the planet\u2019s temperature about 0.04 degrees C for thousands of years. Every tonne emitted adds more warming, she said. (If one tonne of CO2 was a second, 36 billion seconds equals about 1,200 years.)<\/p>\n CO2 levels in the atmosphere have risen about 40 percent in the last century. The oceans have absorbed 97 percent of the additional heat from those emissions, which is the only reason global temperatures have not risen much faster. However, the oceans will not continue to soak up all the extra heat forever.<\/p>\n Who is most responsible for the 2013 emissions?<\/p>\n In total volume it\u2019s China, with 27 percent of the total. But Australia\u2019s emissions per person are nearly three times higher than China\u2019s. The other big emitters are the United States at 14 percent, the European Union at 10 percent, and India at six percent, the Global Carbon Project report says. The Project is co-led by researchers from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of East Anglia.<\/p>\n While emissions grew year on year in China and India, U.S. emissions declined 3.7 percent. This reflects the switch from coal to gas as a result of the boom in natural gas production. Gas contains less CO2 than coal. However, U.S. coal exports soared.<\/p>\n \u201cThe shale gas boom in the U.S. is making more fossil fuels available, resulting in greater overall emissions,\u201d said Le Que\u0301re\u0301.<\/p>\n A new tool anyone can use to explore where emissions are coming is also being released Tuesday.\u00a0 The Global Carbon Atlas<\/a> is an online platform that allows anyone to see what their country\u2019s emissions are and compare them with neighbouring countries \u2013 past, present, and future. It shows the biggest carbon emitters of 2012, what is driving the growth in China\u2019s emissions, and where the UK is outsourcing its emissions.<\/p>\n The Atlas clearly shows that coal is the biggest source of emissions in 2013. It is the \u201cdirtiest\u201d fossil fuel by far for the climate. This is true even with the most modern, efficient coal power plant.<\/p>\n Poland generates 86 percent of its energy from coal and hopes to grow this industry even though it is hosting the U.N. climate talks. In a shock to many, it is also hosting the World Coal Summit this week.<\/p>\n \u201cOur people are suffering because of climate change. I can\u2019t believe the Polish government is ignoring this by hosting that summit,\u201d said Robert Chimambo of the Zambia chapter of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA).<\/p>\n \u201cMillions and millions of people are going to die in future just so coal companies can gain profits,\u201d Chimambo told IPS.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is no such thing as clean coal. Energy companies should never get a social license to build another coal plant,\u201d said Samantha Smith, head of the global climate and energy initiative at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).<\/p>\n Although the coal industry talks about carbon capture and storage (CCS), it is too expensive and there are not enough places to store the captured CO2, Smith told IPS.<\/p>\n For developing countries, renewable energy is faster, cheaper, more decentralised and has the benefit of not polluting the air, water or land, she said.<\/p>\n The narrowing carbon budget is another reason to pursue green energy. To have a reasonable chance of staying below two degrees C in coming decades, cumulative emissions must not exceed 2,900 billion tonnes of CO2, the IPCC says, and 69 percent of that is already in the atmosphere. It bears repeating that even two degrees C is not safe given the increases in extreme weather, ocean acidification, melting of Arctic sea ice and other impacts already seen with the 0.8C of current heating.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have exhausted about 70 percent of the cumulative emissions that keep global climate change likely below two degrees,\u201d said Pierre Friedlingstein at the University of Exeter in UK.<\/p>\n This knowledge doesn\u2019t seem to make a difference to most political leaders or delegates at the U.N. climate talks. Some like Canada and Japan either don\u2019t care or fail to realise their responsibility, said Le Que\u0301re\u0301.<\/p>\n \u201cMy message to delegates in Warsaw is for every country to make the most stringent cuts they can now. If we wait till after 2020 it will far more difficult and expensive,\u201d she said. \u201cWe have the solutions. Going beyond two degrees C is very risky, it\u2019s completely unknown territory.\u201d<\/p>\n Related IPS Articles<\/b><\/p>\n _____________________<\/p>\n Stephen Leahy is the lead international science and environment correspondent at IPS, where he writes about climate change, energy, water, biodiversity, development and native peoples. Based in Uxbridge, Canada, near Toronto, Steve has covered environmental issues for nearly two decades for publications around the world. He is a professional member of the International Federation of Journalists, the Society of Environmental Journalists and the International League of Conservation Writers. He also pioneered Community Supported Environmental Journalism to ensure important environmental issues continue to be covered.<\/i><\/p>\n\n