From the European Commission Joint Research Centre
Steep increase in global CO2 emissions despite reductions by industrialized countries
Global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) – the main cause of global warming – increased by 45 % between 1990 and 2010, and reached an all-time high of 33 billion tonnes in 2010. Increased energy efficiency, nuclear energy and the growing contribution of renewable energy are not compensating for the globally increasing demand for power and transport, which is strongest in developing countries.
This increase took place despite emission reductions in industrialised countries during the same period. Even though different countries show widely variable emission trends, industrialised countries are likely to meet the collective Kyoto target of a 5.2 % reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 as a group, partly thanks to large emission reductions from economies in transition in the early nineties and more recent reductions due to the 2008-2009 recession. These figures were published today in the report “Long-term trend in global CO2 emissions,” prepared by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre and PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
The report, which is based on recent results from the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) and latest statistics for energy use and other activities, shows large national differences between industrialised countries. Over the period 1990-2010, in the EU-27 and Russia CO2 emissions decreased by 7% and 28% respectively, while the USA’s emissions increased by 5% and the Japanese emissions remained more or less constant. The industrialised countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol (so called ‘ratifying Annex 1 countries’) and the USA, in 1990 caused about two-thirds of global CO2 emissions. Their share of global emissions has now fallen to less than half the global total.
Continued growth in the developing countries and emerging economies and economic recovery by the industrialised countries are the main reasons for a record breaking 5.8% increase in global CO2 emissions between 2009 and 2010. Most major economies contributed to this increase, led by China, USA, India and EU-27 with increases of 10%, 4%, 9% and 3% respectively. The increase is significant even when compared to 2008, when global CO2 emissions were at their highest before the global financial crisis. It can be noted that in EU-27, CO2 emissions remain lower in absolute terms than they were before the crisis (4.0 billion tonnes in 2010 as compared to 4.2 billion tonnes in 2007).
At present, the USA emits 16.9 tonnes CO2 per capita per year, over twice as much as the EU-27 with 8.1 tonnes. By comparison, Chinese per capita CO2 emissions of 6.8 tonnes are still below the EU-27 average, but now equal those of Italy. It should be noted that the average figures for China and EU-27 hide significant regional differences.
Long term global growth in CO2 emissions continues to be driven by power generation and road transport, both in industrial and developing countries. Globally, they account for about 40% and 15% respectively of the current total and both have consistent long-term annual growth rates of between 2.5% and 5%.
Throughout the Kyoto Protocol period, industrialised countries have made efforts to change their energy sources mix. Between 1990 and 2010 they reduced their dependence on coal (from 25% to 20% of total energy production) and oil (from 38% to 36.5%), and shifted towards natural gas (which increased from 23% to 27 %), nuclear energy (from 8% to 9%) and renewable energy (from 6.5% to 8%). In addition they made progress in energy savings, for example by insulation of buildings, more energy-efficient end-use devices and higher fuel efficiencies.
The report shows that the current efforts to change the mix of energy sources cannot yet compensate for the ever increasing global demand for power and transport. This needs to be considered in future years in all efforts to mitigate the growth of global greenhouse gas emissions, as desired by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Bali Action Plan and the Cancún agreements.
The full report can be downloaded from: http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/index.php or http://www.pbl.nl/en
About the Joint Research Centre (JRC):
The Joint Research Centre (JRC) is the European Commission’s in-house science service. Its mission is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of European Union policies.
The Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) project uses the latest scientific information and data from international statistics on energy production and consumption, industrial manufacturing, agricultural production, waste treatment/disposal and the burning of biomass in order to model emissions for all countries of the world in a comparable and consistent manner. EDGAR is also unique in its provision of historical emission data for 20 years prior to 1990, the reference year for the Kyoto protocol.
PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency:
PBL is the national institute for strategic policy analysis in the field of environment, nature and spatial planning in The Netherlands and contributes to improving the quality of political and administrative decision-making by conducting outlook studies, analyses and evaluations in which an integrated approach is considered paramount. Policy relevance is the prime concern in PBL studies, for which independent and sound research is conducted.
The Kyoto Protocol: Annex I Parties:
The industrialised countries listed in this annex to the Convention committed to return their greenhouse-gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. They have also accepted emissions targets for the period 2008-12. They include the 24 original OECD members, the European Union, and 14 countries with economies in transition.
Non-Annex I Parties:
Refers to countries that have ratified or acceded to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that are not included in Annex I of the Convention.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

“CO2 – the main cause of global warming….”.
Proof, please.
Not to mention, what global warming?
“the main cause of global warming”
So, when did you stop beating your wife?
“Global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) – the main cause of global warming – …”
I’m getting just a bit bored with assertions like this being rammed down our throats.
I think a good YouTube video on the failure of CO2 reductions is this one:
Dr, Muller shows how all of our cuts in CO2 are pointless, because China will increase their output even more.
I for one am glad–GLAD, I tell you, that Kyoto has failed.
I for one am glad–GLAD, I tell you, that CO2 is on the rise. (My plant friends are happy, too!)
I for one am glad–GLAD, I tell you, that there may be just an itsy bitsy ray of hope in averting the next Ice Age–but it probably will have nothing to do with CO2.
OMG we’re all gonna die. I love how the climate reality project has triggered a trotting-out of dismal forecasts, all in lockstep with a separate reality. They didn’t really think that China was going to stop growing to satisfy their little target, did they?
Only and idiot or someone living in a fantasy world (is there any difference?) could have expected anything different.
Certainly, at least for anyone who was paying even the slightests attention, the evidence of what was going on in India and China should have warned them that the Kyoto targets were not based on any realistic evaluation of the potential numbers.
Gore added that the world had a choice – it could go back to carbon based fuels or put people to work to make the transition back to a low carbon economy. But one step was needed to make this happen – a price had to be put on carbon.
“India and China have just announced a CO2 tax.”
Did I miss something ? When did India and China announce a CO2 tax ?
I don’t believe China. How are these numbers verified?
“India and China have just announced a CO2 tax.”
I guess this is another example of “emotional truth” then
Love the ‘per-capita’ tag on the map. I suppose if the USA had over a billion citizens it would be green and happy just like Communist China and India.
Dont worry there is no Infra red at 4.8 microns below 6000 meters above sea level coming from the sun. (Wikipedia) told me. Therefor it can’t be scattered by CO2.
Where did the radiation come from that the earth emits to space? It has no absorbtion bands.
Does this mean Gates will start saying 45% now, instead of 40%……..
..45% of nothing is still nothing
The whole ‘per-capita’ nonsense is just a tool to bludgeon the Australia voters into its carbon tax. Just a meaninless statistic. Per GDP would be better if you must use a comparator.
Well at least all that extra weight of CO2 has weighed down the oceans, which has allowed Obama to fulfill one of his many promises. See Climate Depot for details
Latitude says: September 21, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Latitude: Gates hasn’t said anything yet (today anyway). Why not wait until he says it before piling on?
Now which figures am i going to believe, Switzerland announcing that its energy creation/consumption went up 9% last year due to the cold or that he quotes a 12.5% INCREASE in nuclear capacity (“from 8 to 9 percent ) in the industrialised world, that doesnt include England does it ? or Germany, or CH or USA or … so maybe its france thats expanded by some 100% or so. trust EDGAR !!!!!!!!!
I did my bit by installing a really big wood burning stove to help, we are told its “CO2 neutral” hence excluded from the figures so its a super CO2 reduction (isnt it ?)
I need an Asprin.
Amazing to say, but the scientific brilliance of the European Commission is matched by its economic brilliance, as individual freedom has been identified as the cause of the financial crisis.
“Most major economies contributed to this increase, led by China, USA, India and EU-27 with increases of 10%, 4%, 9% and 3% respectively. The increase is significant even when compared to 2008, when global CO2 emissions were at their highest before the global financial crisis. It can be noted that in EU-27, CO2 emissions remain lower in absolute terms than they were before the crisis (4.0 billion tonnes in 2010 as compared to 4.2 billion tonnes in 2007).”
Check out page 13 figure 3.2:
http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/C02%20Mondiaal_%20webdef_19sept.pdf
So, they are talking about million tonnes/person, okay so lets compare some numbers:
United States – (million tonnes/person)
1990 – 19.7
2000 – 20.8
2010 – 16.9
[Hmmm 16.9 used to be lower than 19.7….]
EU-27 – (million tonnes/person)
1990 – 9.2
2000 – 8.5
2010 – 8.1
China – (million tonnes/person)
1990 – 2.2
2000 – 2.9
2010 – 6.8
South Korea – (million tonnes/person)
1990 – 5.9
2000 – 9.7
2010 – 12
These numbers make no sense to the Conclusion/Analysis. According to the “numbers” it looks as though the United States and the EU-27 made their 10-10 goals (without the US trying). South Korea really missed their goal (really wasn’t trying), oh yeah, who is the Secretary-General of the UN? What country is he from? Let’s review the head man of the IPCC’s country:
India – (million tonnes/person)
1990 – 0.8
2000 – 1.0
2010 – 1.5
Does anyone have a clue of what these “goals” were supposed to be (other than the obvious wealth redistribution)? I got similar results using Oakridge data.
Warmist trolls, anyone???
led by China, USA, India and EU-27 with increases of 10%, 4%, 9% and 3% respectively. —– let me move this around a bit……
China 10%, India 9%, U.S.A. 4%, EU-27 3%…….
I can’t figure this out, we’re recovering? I showed a couple of brief comparisonsshowing unemployment and CO2 emissions for the U.S.
If the U.S. and the EU-27 wish to really recover, we need to start pumping energy. 4% won’t cut it.
So dumb question here; but when they measure these ’emissions’ how do they tell the volcanic contributions from the human ones?
the main cause?
The observed warming is clearly mostly due to natural processes
e.g. see
http://www.letterdash.com/HenryP/more-carbon-dioxide-is-ok-ok
and some additional warming (on top of the natural warming) is caused by increased vegetation
Limiting CO2 (a natural non-poisonous gas) in the atmosphere is stupid
Robert E. Phelan says:
September 21, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Latitude: Gates hasn’t said anything yet (today anyway). Why not wait until he says it before piling on?
==================================================
Piling on??
…so how long have you been humor challenged Robert?
Gates is a big boy, he’s perfectly capable of laughing on his own and doesn’t need your permission.
It has already been mentioned, but how can it be determined how much is from human activity and how much from natural sources?
[REPLY: There is actually quite an extensive discussion of that issue invovling CO2 isotope ratios. A google search might prove enlightening. -REP, mod]
Neo says:
September 21, 2011 at 12:55 pm
‘“India and China have just announced a CO2 tax.”
Did I miss something ? When did India and China announce a CO2 tax ?’
That’s not the part that catches my eye.
“Gore added that the world had a choice.., [inane B/S] …put people to work …”
I couldn’t expect less from this lazy fat [expletive deleted] slob.