Global CO2 emissions begin to plateau

From Domainfax:

Global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry have stabilised for a third year in a row, in a shift that will reduce the risks of dangerous climate change if the trend continues, researchers say.

CO2 emissions from the two sources last year were steady at about 36.4 gigatonnes, slowing from a pace that had reached as much as 3 per cent a year during the past decade, according to the Global Carbon Project.


“It’s really remarkable,” said Pep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project at the CSIRO. “We’re moving from an era of super-fast growth in emissions that we saw in the 2000s.”

The recent plateau in fossil fuel-related emissions, though, wasn’t enough to prevent an acceleration of atmospheric levels of CO2 last year. And while the pause is welcomed, its longevity may be shortlived as pollution from nations such as India increases.




Houses and Holes


  1. If only we could convince Brazillians to have fewer kids, and depopulate, we could grow back the Amazon, and then we might be able to get ahead of this climate change thingy.

  2. That’s emissions.

    Meanwhile C02e in the air will continue upwards, maybe unlocked CH4 in permafrost.

  3. Right on track for peak industrial output per capita, from Limits to Growth BAU scenario. It’s getting eerie how well we’re tracking that; and it doesn’t bode well for what the next 10-20 years might have in store.

  4. That second chart readily demonstrates why we shouldn’t be too eager about accepting our new Chinese overlords. Who wants to live in a thick choking cloud of smoke from the steel mills and power plants?

    It’d be interesting to see Australia’s contribution on that graph too.

  5. This is just silliness as per normal with anything to do with Global warming reporting.. The greenhouse gas effect is caused by the total level of CO2 in the atmosphere in a logarithmic function, where every doubling of the total concentration is projected to cause additional warming. The likely scenario is about 1 – 1.2 degrees C for every doubling of Co2 without additional forcing from other feedback mechanisms.

    So if for three years there is no annual increase but the amount is albeit at high levels that is still 3 more years of CO2 in the atmosphere which will be pushing up the overall atmospehric concentration more towards the next level of doubling. But here the commentary implies the annual amount itself is driving the climate and because it is stabilized now the risk is reduced. If the theory is driven by total concentrations, then a stabilizing at a high level achieves nothing, this logic is terribly erroneous based on the theory itself.

    Could be it be that pronouncements like these try to square away the reality that climate is hardly changing but every year we keep pouring lots and lots more Co2 into the atmosphere ? The evidence actually is the whole theory is collapsing at worst or even at best there is certainly no evidence that feedbacks will take us much past 1.2 degrees C, in which case Matt Ridley and other point out higher levels are better for the overall level of earth fertility.

    • interested party

      I’ll do you a deal.
      You take your ideas and convince the 97% of scientists that they are mistaken…… and I ( for one ) will then agree that yes, Paul is correct. I would expect that many here at MB would line up beside me.

      So best get busy dude. Get on your way… time is ticking…….

    • I must say I struggle with this kind of stupidity. Paul is most likely a rabid conspiracy theorist, WTC7, vaccinations, moon landings. Seems to come with the territory of denialism.

      • interested party

        My parents taught me that it takes all types to make a world.

        What confounds me is the ratio of morons.

    • The likely scenario is about 1 – 1.2 degrees C for every doubling of Co2 without additional forcing from other feedback mechanisms.

      But we’ve already had 1 – 1.2 degrees C of warming with HALF a doubling of CO2 so that additional forcing from other feedbacks is pretty substantial.

      there is certainly no evidence that feedbacks will take us much past 1.2 degrees C

      People who claim certainty when they don’t have it are pretty dumb and arrogant.

  6. The brilliant systems analyst Jesse Ausubel has been studying and writing about “the de-carbonisation of the global economy” for decades. He says it always was on track to be effectively de-carbonised by 2100.

    But Prins, Rayner et al find that Kyoto etc has slowed down this beneficial process from its natural trajectory by driving industry away from efficient developed nations, to still-inefficient developing nations.

    Classic Hayekian unintended consequences.