As set forth by the Paris Climate Agreement, global greenhouse gas, or GHG, emission must be cut by 50 percent within the next 10 years in order to meet the ambitious goal of keeping global warming below 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels.
The Paris Agreement is just that, an agreement made by nearly 200 states to actively and effectively lower global GHG emissions. However, according to a recently published paper titled The Truth Behind Climate Pledges, climate scientists say that some countries aren't holding up their end of the bargain. In fact, out of the 184 climate pledges, only 19 percent are considered sufficient and a whopping 65 percent were deemed insufficient, according to the authors.
As these pledges are primarily voluntary, certain unforeseeable problems have hindered some states from being able to reach their respective goals. Loopholes, technicalities and unfavorable conditions seem to be negatively effecting the decisiveness required to reduce emissions and subsequently slow global warming.
The authors continue to explain that even though all countries need to reduce emissions, not all countries share the same level of responsibility. This is due to the "principle of differentiated responsibility," writes the authors, certain key factors, such as historical emissions, per person emissions, and the need to develop, are considered when establishing a nation's level of responsibility.
Outlined in the paper are the world's top four GHG emitting countries that when combined account for 56 percent of all global emissions: China at nearly 27%; the United States at more than 13%; The European Union and its 28 Member States at nine percent; and India who accounts for only seven percent of the world's GHG emissions.
The authors continue with a brief analysis of each of the four's pledges and whether or not they are likely to meet their goals.
China
As the largest emitter in the world, China seems to be on track to meet the pledge of "reducing its carbon intensity by 60 to 65 percent from 2005 levels by 2030."
However, the nation's CO2 emissions saw an increase of 80 percent thanks to economic growth in the 13 years following the pledge and is expected to continue to grow along with their economy.
The United States of America
The U.S. government made the pledge of reducing "GHG emissions by 26 to 28 percent from 2005 levels
by 2025". Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has recently withdrawn from the international agreement, and federal funding meant to help curb emissions have been cut.
However, state and local governments are continuing to make efforts through renewable energy sourcing, as well as technological advances in vehicular emissions and revised emissions standards in hopes of reaching the nation's target.
The European Union and Its 28 Member States
The EU is on track to not only meet its commitment but to surpass its original goal of reducing emissions by "at least 40 percent from 1990 level" by 2030. They are currently on pace to cut emissions by an estimated 58 percent by 2030.
India
The commitment made by India is likely to be met even though their emissions are growing rapidly. The nation's pledge was to cut emissions of all GHG by "30 to 35 percent from 2005 level by 2030".
However, like China, their emissions have also seen a large spike. The country's emissions increased 76 percent from 2005 to 2017, and the rise is also expected to continue as their economy continues to grow.
The Russian Federation, the world's fifth-largest emitter, has yet to submit any plans for the reduction of GHG emissions.
"Countries need to double and triple their 2030 reduction commitments to be aligned with the Paris target," says Sir Robert Watson, former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and co-author of the report.
The authors also explain the importance of international support, stating that "126 pledges are partially or totally dependent on international finance, technology and capacity building for their implementation. A portion of these commitments may not be implemented because little international support has been materialized."
