North America
Asia
Felix Preston and Shane Tomlinson

The joint announcement on climate change contributions by the United States and China marks a step-change in diplomacy in the run up to a potential global deal in Paris next year.

The timing of the announcement will inject momentum into the international negotiations, coming at an important moment before the next round in Lima in early December, and ahead of all countries submitting their intended contributions in the first quarter of 2015. Other countries, especially developed and emerging economies like Australia, Canada, Japan, India, Brazil and South Africa, will be recalibrating their offers in light of the US-China statement.

In the statement, the United States says it intends to achieve economy-wide targets of reducing emissions by 26-28% below the 2005 level in 2025; while China intends to achieve a peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030 and to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by 2030. This builds on the recent deal in October by the European Union to reduce its emissions by at least 40% in 2030 from a 1990 baseline.

This is the first time that China has put a date on peak emissions, and it is highly symbolic that it made the pledge alongside the United States. China deserves credit from the international community for stepping up to the plate and showing leadership on this issue. It is equally important that President Obama has signaled continuing commitment to act on climate change. Indeed, whether Obama is able to make this deal stick despite resistance from the new Republican-controlled Congress is now a critical question for his legacy, as well as for future US-China cooperation.

The substance of both countries' announcements falls short of what scientists say is needed to avoid dangerous climate change. The US goal of 26-28% in 2025 is less than what US legislation proposed at the time of the Copenhagen Summit in 2009 was supposed to achieve - this implied a 30% reduction in 2025. To put this in context, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that current efforts put us on a pathway for 3.7 to 4.8 degrees celsius of global warming – far above the 2 degrees target that governments have agreed to work towards.

The level of ambition in the Chinese offer is not yet clear, because the volume of peak CO2 has not been announced and there is some flexibility on the peak year -'around 2030’ but as soon as possible. Some experts had hoped for an earlier peak in 2025, but a near-2030 peak is not necessarily incompatible with a global pathway to 2 degrees this century. The 'shape of the emissions curve' – when emissions start to plateau, and how sharply they fall after the peak – is just as important.

For the complete article, please see Chatham House.

Adaptation & Resilience
Climate Change
Climate Diplomacy
Development
Global Issues
Jocelyn Timperley, Carbon Brief

Time is running short for countries to decide the practical details of how the Paris Agreement will be brought to life, known as the Paris “rulebook”.

Adaptation & Resilience
Civil Society
Climate Change
Development
Finance
Sustainable Transformation
Global Issues
UN News

The world risks crossing the point of no return on climate change, with disastrous consequences for people across the planet and the natural systems that sustain them, the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned on Monday, calling for more leadership and greater ambition for climate action, to reverse course.

Biodiversity & Livelihoods
Development
Energy
Technology & Innovation
Water
Global Issues
Asia
10 September, 2018

The risks of a global supergrid

Eugene Simonov, The Third Pole

China’s vision of a global energy system overemphasises the benefits of connectivity. Planners and investors also have to consider the potential impacts on biodiversity and local community livelihoods from different power generation methods and find ways to prevent them.

Conflict Transformation
Land & Food
Minerals & Mining
Private Sector
Security
Water
Global Issues
Clare Church, IISD

A new report analyses how the transition to a low-carbon economy – and the minerals and metals required to make that shift – could affect fragility, conflict, and violence dynamics in mineral-rich states.