1 MATCH paper 1: contributions to climate change SB-23 17 May 2006 Niklas Höhne
Mar 27, 2015
1
MATCH paper 1: contributions to climate change
SB-23 17 May 2006Niklas Höhne
2
MATCH paper #1Analysing countries’ contribution to climate
change: Scientific uncertainties and methodological choices
– Michel den Elzen (RIVM, Netherlands)– Jan Fuglestvedt (CICERO, Norway)– Niklas Höhne (Ecofys, Germany)– Cathy Trudinger (CSIRO, Australia)– Jason Lowe (Hadley, UK)– Ben Matthews (UCL, Belgium)– Bård Romstad (CICERO, Norway)– Christiano Pires de Campos (Brazil)– Natalia Andronova (UIUC, USA)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
M. den Elzen, J. Fuglestvedt, N. Höhne, C. Trudinger, J. Lowe, B. Matthews, B. Romstad, C. Pires de Campos, N. Andronova, 2005: “Analysing countries’ contribution to climate change: Scientific uncertainties and methodological choices”, Environmental Science and Policy, 8 (2005) 614–636
3
Cause-effect chainEmissionsRegion A
EmissionsRegion B
EmissionsRegion C
EmissionsRegion D
Concentrations
Radiative forcing
Global average temperature
change
Impact in Region A
Impact inRegion B
Impact inRegion C
Impact inRegion D
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
4
Temperature increase
Unattributed
Attribution start date,e.g. 1900
Region A
Region B
Region C
Region D
Time
Attribution period
Total temperature increase
Attributed temperature increase
Attributed effects
Today
5
Choices• Policy choices (values can not be based on objective ‘scientific’ arguments) :
– Indicator (e.g. temperature increase, radiative forcing, …)– Timeframes– Mixture of greenhouse gases– Attribution method
• Scientific choices– Choice of the dataset on historical emissions– Choice of the representation of the climate system (different
models)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
6
Main objective of paper #1• Summarise the studies and results so far (i.e. the contributions
to the UNFCCC initiated process)
• Present new attribution calculations with non-linear carbon cycle and climate models using non-linear attribution methodologies and updated historical emissions datasets
• Investigate the effect of a range of scientific, methodological and policy-related choices on the attribution, but not the full range by all uncertainties.
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
7
Models used
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
1
Model Carbon cycle (CO2)
Atmospheric chemistry (non-CO2)
Sulphate aerosols
Radiative forcing
Temperature and sea level rise
ACCC (default): ECOFYS-ACCC IVIG-ACCC UIUC-ACCC
IRF (Bern) fixed lifetimes Hadley IPCC-TAR IRFs (Hadley)
CSIRO-ACCC ACCC* ACCC No ACCC ACCC
RIVM-ACCC ACCC ACCC or IPCC-TAR ACCC ACCC ACCC or IRFs
UCL-ACCC ACCC ACCC ACCC ACCC UDEBv
CICERO-SCM Non-linear v IPCC-TAR IPCC-TAR ACCC EBC/UDO model
UCL-JCM Bern non-linear IPCC-TAR IPCC-TAR ACCC UDEBv
2
8
Model show similar outcomes
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
temperature increase
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
°C
JCM-JCM (1)
Hadley (2)
CICERO-SCM (3)
CSIRO-ACCC (4)
RIVM-ACCC (5)
ECOFYS-ACCC (6)
UCL-ACCC (7)
IVIG-ACCC (8)
UIUC-ACCC (9)
123,4
5678,9
9
Models used
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Policy choices Indicators Radiative forcing, GWP-weighted cumulative emissions, weighted
concentrations, temperature increase, integrated temperature, sea level rise Attribution start dates 1765, 1890, 1950 and 1990 Timeframes Attribution end dates 1990, 2000, 2050 and 2100
Evaluation dates 2000, 2050, 2100, 2500 Attribution methods Normalised marginal, residual, time-sliced Attributed greenhouse gases (GHGs)
Fossil CO2, CO2, [CO2, CH4, N2O], Kyoto-gases (including F-gases, i.e. HFCs, PFCs and SF6), Kyoto gases and ozone precursors
Scientific choices Historical emissions CDIAC database (fossil CO2
a, land-use CO2b), EDGAR (Kyoto-gases and
ozone precursors) c, IVIGd
Representation of the climate system
See table 2
1
10
Model show similar outcomes
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
39.3 38.3 40.5 39.5 41.2 39.5 37.8 39.6
14.8 15.3 13.2 14.7 14.9 14.3 14.4 14.3
23.5 23.8 24.9 23.5 21.0 23.8 25.8 23.7
22.4 22.7 21.5 22.4 22.8 22.4 22.0 22.4
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
EC
OF
YS
-AC
CC
IVIG
-AC
CC
UIU
C-A
CC
C
CS
IRO
-AC
CC
RIV
M-A
CC
C
UC
L-A
CC
C
CIC
ER
O-S
CM
UC
L-S
CM
ALM
ASIA
EEUR&FSU
OECD90
11
Policy choices
1. Indicator
2. Timeframes
3. Attribution method
4. Mixture of Greenhouse gases
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
12
1. Indicators
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: Ecofys-ACCC
Historical emissions
Time
ACB
Time
Time
Present
D
Emissions
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
E
Time
FSea level rise
Time
Concentrations
Attribution end date
Evaluation date
Incr
easi
ng c
erta
inty
Incr
easi
ng r
elev
ance
Historical emissions
Time
ACB
Time
Time
Present
D
Emissions
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
E
Time
FSea level rise
Time
Concentrations
Attribution end date
Evaluation date
Incr
easi
ng c
erta
inty
Incr
easi
ng r
elev
ance
Time
AACB
Time
Time
Present
D
Emissions
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
E
Time
FSea level rise
Time
Concentrations
Attribution end date
Evaluation date
Incr
easi
ng c
erta
inty
Incr
easi
ng r
elev
ance
Time
E
Time
Time
Time
Present
Emission pulse Historical emissions
Emissions
Concentrations
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
Historical emissions
Time
ACB
Time
Time
Present
D
Emissions
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
E
Time
FSea level rise
Time
Concentrations
Attribution end date
Evaluation date
Incr
easi
ng c
erta
inty
Incr
easi
ng r
elev
ance
Historical emissions
Time
ACB
Time
Time
Present
D
Emissions
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
E
Time
FSea level rise
Time
Concentrations
Attribution end date
Evaluation date
Incr
easi
ng c
erta
inty
Incr
easi
ng r
elev
ance
Time
AACB
Time
Time
Present
D
Emissions
Radiative forcing
Temperature change
E
Time
FSea level rise
Time
Concentrations
Attribution end date
Evaluation date
Incr
easi
ng c
erta
inty
Incr
easi
ng r
elev
ance
13
1. Indicators
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Name of indicator Backward discounting
Forward looking
A Radiative forcing X -+
B GWP-weighted cumulative emissions - X
C Weighted concentrations X X
D Temperature increase X* -
+
E Integrated temperature increase
X X
F Sea level rise X* -+ *: Also discounting most recent emissions
+: Can be made forward looking, when evaluating at a date after attributed emissions end. In such case also a time horizon is required
14
1. Indicators
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Fossil CO2 Forestry CO2 CH4 N2O
%
Radiative Forcing (100%=2.00 W/m2)GWP w eighted cummulative emissions (100%=160)Weighted concentrations (100%=67)Temperature increase (100%=1.19°C)Integrated Temperature increase (100%=84°Cy)Ocean Heat Content (100%=3.8E+9 J/m2)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Relative contributions using different indicators
05
101520
2530354045
OECD90 EEUR&FSU ASIA ALM
%
Radiative Forcing (100%=2.00 W/m2)GWP w eighted cummulative emissions (100%=160)Weighted concentrations (100%=67)Temperature increase (100%=1.19°C)Integrated Temperature increase (100%=84°Cy)Ocean Heat Content (100%=3.8E+9 J/m2)
Source: Ecofys-ACCC
15
1. Indicators
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Conclusions• Two main factors:
• Whether a source emitted ‘early’ versus ‘late’• The share of emissions of short-lived / long-lived gases.
• Choosing the right indicator is ultimately a policy choice that also depends on the purpose of use of the results.
• Temperate increase: use evaluation date after the attribution end date
• ‘Backward discounting’ and ‘forward looking’: ‘weighted concentrations’ or ‘integrated temperatures’
• Not ‘backward discounting’: GWP-weighted cumulative emissions could be an option, which is simple and approximately represents the integrated impact on temperature.
16
2. Timeframe• Start date emissions 1890,
1950 and 1990
• End date emissions 1990, 2000, 2050 and 2100
• Evaluation date of attribution 2000, 2050, 2100, 2500
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Temperature increase
Unattributed
Attribution start date,e.g. 1900
Region A
Region B
Region C
Region D
Time
Attribution period
Total temperature increase
Attributed temperature increase
Today
17
Start-date
• Choosing a shorter time horizon (e.g. 1950 or 1990 instead of 1890) reduces the contributions of OECD90 countries ('early emitters') to
temperature increase.
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
OECD90 EEUR&FSU ASIA ALM
%
1765 (100% = 1.13)1850 (100% = 1.04)1890 (100% = 0.99)1950 (100% = 0.78)1990 (100% = 0.21)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: RIVM-ACCC
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
18
End-date
• A late end-date increases non-Annex-I contributions, because it gives more weight to their larger future emissions.
• Impact of emissions scenarios (error bars) can be large
Contribution to temperature increase in 2100
05
1015
202530
3540
4550
OECD90 EEUR&FSU ASIA ALM
%
1990 (100% = 0.43°C)2000 (100% = 0.53°C)2050 (100% = 1.54°C)2100 (100% = 4.00°C)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: RIVM-ACCC
Contribution to temperature increase in 2100
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
19
Evaluation-date
• A later evaluation-date raises OECD contributions due to: (1) their large share in historical CO2 emissions (long residence time) (2) and their small share of methane emissions (short residence time)
Contribution to temperature increase in:(end date 2000)
05
101520253035404550
OECD90 EEUR&FSU ASIA ALM
%
2000 (100% = 0.99°C)2050 (100% = 0.68°C)2100 (100% = 0.53°C)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: RIVM-ACCC
Contribution to temperature increase in:(end date 2000)
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
20
3. Attribution methods
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
• Normalised marginal method - Attributes responsibility using total sensitivities determined "at the margin".
• Residual (all-but-one) method - Attributes responsibility by leaving out the emissions of each region in turn.
• Time-sliced - determines the effect of emissions from each time as if there were no subsequent emissions.
21
3. Attribution methods
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
• The Residual method, although simple to implement and explain, can be rejected on scientific grounds (not additive).
• The Normalised marginal and Time-sliced methods are harder to implement and explain. These methods differ in how they treat early vs. late emissions.
22
3. Attribution methods
• The differences between methods are fairly small compared to the effects of many of the other choices already considered.
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: CSIRO-SCM
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
OECD90 EEUR & FSU Asia ALM
% Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
N. Marg (100% = 1.24°C)T. Sliced (100% = 1.24°C)N. Resid (100% = 1.24°C)
23
3. Attribution methods
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Contribution to temperature increase in 2100
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
OECD90 EEUR & FSU Asia ALM
% Contribution to temperature increase in 2100
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
N. Marg (100% = 4.04°C)T. Sliced (100% = 4.04°C)N. Resid (100% = 4.04°C)
• Differences between methods are greater for later evaluation date (2100)• In general, the results of the different methods vary most for regions with emissions that differ
most from the average in terms of early versus late emissions, i.e. India and EU.
Source: CSIRO-SCM
24
4. Greenhouse gas mixtureWhich gases are attributed to the regions?
1. Fossil CO2
2. All anthropogenic CO2
3. CO2, CH4, N2O
4. Kyoto basket (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6)
5. Kyoto basket + more O3 precursors (NOx, CO and VOC)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
25
4. Greenhouse gas mixture
• Two main effects i) Going from fossil fuel CO2 emissions only to total anthropogenic CO2 emissions, ii) Inclusion of CH4 and N2O.
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
OECD90 EEUR & FSU ASIA ALM
Fossil CO2 (100% = 0.58°C)Anthropogenic CO2 (100% = 0.74°C)CO2, CH4 and N2O (100% = 1.06°C)Kyoto gases (100% = 1.07°C)Kyoto gases & precursors (100% = 1.07°C)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: CICERO-SCM
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
26
4. Greenhouse gas mixture
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: CICERO-SCM
Contribution to temperature increase in 2100
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
OECD90 EEUR&FSU ASIA ALM
Fossil CO2 (100% = 3.11°C)Anthropogenic CO2 (100% = 3.26°C)CO2, CH4 and N2O (100% = 4.39°C)Kyoto gases (100% = 4.4°C)Kyoto gases & precursors (100% = 4.65°C)
• The effect is less pronounced on longer time scales (except for the shift from fossil CO2 to total CO2).
27
Scientific uncertainties1. Choice of the dataset on historical emissions
2. Choice of the representation of the climate system: carbon cycle and climate model and feedbacks
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
28
1. Historical datasets
• Fossil CO2 emissions: small differences in relative attribution• CO2 emissions from land-use changes: differences in estimates leading to large differences.
Data sets need to be compared and improved.• CH4 and N2O: Only one dataset is available (EDGAR)• IVIG Dataset estimate is outside IPCC range; almost zero for DCs in 1980s!
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
05
10152025
3035404550
OECD90 EEUR & FSU Asia ALM
%
FF+LUC:EDGAR (ref ) (100% = 0.68°C)FF:CDIAC; LUC:EDGAR (100% =0.62°C)FF:EDGAR; LUC:Houg (100% =0.74°C)FF:EDGAR; LUC:IVIG (100% =0.69°C)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Source: RIVM-ACCC
Contribution to temperature increase in 2000
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
29
2. Other scientific uncertainties
• The influence of other climate model parameters (e.g. IRFs), based on simulation experiments with nine GCMs and climate models is limited
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Contribution to temperature increase in 2050
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
OECD90 EEUR & FSU Asia ALM
%Hadley (ref ) (100% = 2.30°C)CSIRO (100% = 2.04°C)ECHAM (100% = 1.68°C)GFDL (100% = 2.36°C)
Contribution to temperature increase in 2050
02468
10
1214161820
USA LatinAmer
Africa OECDEurope
FSU SouthAsia
EastAsia
%
Source: RIVM-ACCC
30
2. Other scientific uncertaintiesContribution to temperature increase in 2100
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
OECD90 EEUR & FSU Asia ALM
%
1: UCL-ACCC (linear carbon cycle) (100% = 3.8°C)2: 1 + non-linear carbon fertilisation (100% = 3.9°C)3: 2 + nonlinear oceanic chem is try (100% = 4.3°C)4: 3 + clim ate feedback ocean chem is try (100% = 4.4°C)5: UCL-JCM (= 4 + atm ospheric chem is try) (100% = 4.4°C)
6: 5 + soil respiration feedback (100% = 4.8°C)7: 6 + high clim ate sens itivity (100% = 6.7°C)8: 3 + high clim ate sens itivity (no feedbacks) (100% = 5.7°C)9: 6 excl. F-gas , trop.O3, solar&volcano (100% = 4.9°C)10 =4 + high carbon fertilisation (100% = 4.2°C)11 =4 + fas t ocean diffus ivity (100% = 4.4°C)
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Contribution to temperature increase in 2100
0
5
10
15
20
25
USA Latin Amer Africa OECD Europe FSU South Asia East Asia
% Source: UCL-SCM
31
Deviation f rom default calculations
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
OECD EEUR&FSU ASIA ALM
perc
enta
ge p
oint
s
GWP w eighted cummulative emissionsOcean Heat ContentAttribution start date 1990Only fossil fuel CO2All Kyoto gases and precursorsAll Kyoto gases and SO2Other LUCF data: Houghton
Overall conclusions• Policy choices (values can not be based on
objective ‘scientific’ arguments) :– Indicator important– Timeframes important– Mixture of GHG important– Attribution method less
important
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
• Scientific choices– Choice of the dataset on historical emissions important– Choice of the representation of the climate system
(different models) less important for relative contr.
32
Overall conclusions• First summary of the work undertaken so to date
• Not a full assessment of the uncertainty range, but an evaluation of the influence of different policy-related and scientific choices
• The influence of scientific choices is notable. Therefore research is ongoing (see paper #2)
• However, the current work suggests, that the impact of policy choices, such as time horizon of emissions, climate change indicator and greenhouse-gas mix is larger than the impact of scientific uncertainties
• Impact of uncertainties on the relative contributions is smaller than impact of uncertainties on the absolute changes in temperature.
• Research needs: Historical emission datasets
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
33
Backup slides
34
Policy choices
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Indicators Radiative forcing, GWP-weighted cumulative emissions, weighted concentrations,temperature increase, integrated temperature, sea level riseAttribution startdates
1890, 1950 and 1990Timeframes
Attribution end dates 1990, 2000, 2050 and 2100Evaluation dates 2000, 2050, 2100, 2500
Attributionmethods
Normalized marginal, residual, time-sliced
Attributedgreenhousegases (GHGs)
Fossil CO2, CO2, CO2, CH4, N2O, Kyoto-GHGs (including F-gases), all GHGs(including the other halocarbons (CFCs))
Data Historical emissions CDIAC database (fossil CO2, land-use CO2), EDGAR (allKP-GHGs), IEA (fossil CO2)
Future emissions IPCC SRES B1, A2 and A1F emission scenario
Regions Four regions (Nakicenovic et al. 2000): OECD90; Eastern Europe and Former SovietUnion (REF); Asia (ASIA); Africa and Latin America (ALM), and 13 world regions:Canada, USA, Latin America, Africa, OECD Europe, Eastern Europe, FormerUSSR (FSU), Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, South East Asia, Oceania andJapan
35
Models are calibrated
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
36
1900 1950 2000 20500
5
10x 10
4
Gg
P uls e emis s ions of 1E5 Gg CO2 - proportional
1900 1950 2000 20500
0.01
0.02
ppm
1900 1950 2000 20500
2
4x 10
-4W
/m2
1900 1950 2000 20500
0.5
1x 10
-4
°C
Years
1900 1950 2000 20500
5
10x 10
4
Gg
P uls e emis s ions of 1E5 Gg CO2 - res idual
1900 1950 2000 20500
0.01
0.02
ppm
1900 1950 2000 20500
2
4x 10
-4
W/m
2
1900 1950 2000 20500
0.5
1x 10
-4
°C
Years
1900 1950 2000 20500
5
10x 10
4
Gg
Pulse emissions of 1E5 Gg CO2 - proportional
1900 1950 2000 20500
0.01
0.02
ppm
1900 1950 2000 20500
2
4x 10
-4
W/m
2
1900 1950 2000 20500
0.5
1x 10
-4
°C
Years
=1
=0.6
37
Table 3
No. Name of the indicator 1900 1950 1990 2000 CO2 0.29 0.36 0.56 1* CH4 0.015 1.0 28 64* A Radiative forcing due to increased
concentrations N2O 81 126 180 196* CO2 1 1 1 1+ CH4 20 20 20 20+ B GWP-weighted cumulative
emissions N2O 323 323 323 323+ CO2 0.29 0.36 0.56 1 CH4 0.005 0.31 8.6 20 C Weighted concentrations N2O 134 208 296 323 Max year CO2 3.44 3.92 4.45 1 1983 CH4 9 33 262 64 1991 D Temperature increase N2O 927 1290 1220 196 1976 CO2 0.90 0.93 1.03 1 1993 CH4 2.2 3.3 16 22 2000 E Integrated temperature N2O 189 260 327 324 1994 CO2 To be completed CH4 F Sea level rise N2O
*: Represent instantaneous GWPs. +: Represent GWPs. Values slightly different to those of IPCC-TAR due to use of different parameters.
38
Contribution to radiative forcing
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
39
Aerosol forcing
• Inclusion of SO2 emissions reduces the contributions from ASIA and REF, but the effect disappear when there is a gap between attribution end date and evaluation date.
• Again effect is less less pronounced on longer time scales
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Attributing SO2, attribution period 1890-2000
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
OECD90 REF ASIA ALM
KP3 2000 (dT=1.06)
KP6_SO2 2000 (dT=0.51)
Attributing SO2, attribution period 1890-2000
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Canad
aUSA
Japa
n
OECD E
urop
e
Oce
ania CIS
Easte
rn E
urop
e
China
regio
n
East A
sia
South
Asia
Africa
Latin
Am
erica
Mid
dle E
ast
KP3 2000 (dT=1.06)
KP6_SO2 2000 (dT=0.51)
Source: CICERO-SCM
40
Overall conclusions
Modelling and assessment of contributions to climate change
Region Def
ault
(te
mp
erat
ure
incr
ease
)
GW
P w
eigh
ted
cum
mul
ativ
e em
issi
ons
Wei
ghte
d co
ncen
trat
ions
Inte
grat
ed T
empe
ratu
re in
crea
se
Oce
an H
eat C
onte
nt
Def
ual
t: A
ttri
bu
tio
n s
tart
dat
e 18
90
Attr
ibut
ion
star
t dat
e 19
90
Eva
luat
ion
date
210
0
Dea
fult
: N
orm
aliz
ed m
arg
inal
Tim
e sl
iced
Dea
fult
: al
l CO
2, C
H4,
N2O
Onl
y fo
ssil
CO
2
Def
ault
with
con
stan
t CH
4 lif
etim
e
All
Kyo
to g
ases
and
pre
curs
ors
Def
ault
(al
l GH
Gs:
ED
GA
R)
Oth
er L
UC
F d
ata:
Hou
ghto
n
Def
ault
: E
DG
AR
IRF
: GF
DL
Def
ault
: A
CC
C s
imp
lest
Var
iant
7 (
sect
. 3.3
.3):
UC
L-JC
M
Canada 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 2.2 1.6 1.8 1.6 2.2 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6USA 19.8 20.5 20.4 20.9 21.1 20.8 17.5 21.8 19.7 19.9 19.1 29.6 19.9 18.4 19.4 17.7 20.8 21.1 19.8 20.0Latin America 13.7 13.7 13.3 14.2 15.4 14.5 10.0 14.8 13.7 13.9 13.2 3.7 13.7 13.2 13.8 11.0 14.5 15.0 13.7 14.0Africa 6.5 6.3 6.2 6.2 6.6 6.3 6.5 6.0 6.6 6.6 6.8 2.4 6.6 7.9 6.7 5.6 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6OECD Europe 13.8 14.7 14.5 14.9 15.2 14.7 11.0 15.8 13.9 14.0 13.2 21.3 14.1 12.8 13.6 13.2 14.7 14.9 13.9 14.2East Europe 4.1 3.9 4.0 4.1 3.6 4.2 3.4 4.2 4.0 4.0 3.9 5.8 4.0 3.7 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.0 3.9FSU 10.8 9.6 10.3 10.1 7.9 10.7 12.5 9.9 10.7 10.5 10.5 13.7 10.3 10.2 11.0 11.7 10.7 10.3 10.3 9.9Middle East 2.1 1.9 2.4 2.1 1.2 2.0 3.7 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.4 2.1 2.4 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.9South Asia (incl. India) 7.0 7.3 5.8 5.6 8.7 5.5 7.4 4.5 7.1 7.1 8.5 3.3 7.2 8.2 7.3 6.3 5.5 5.6 7.2 7.6East Asia (incl. China) 10.2 10.1 10.7 9.7 8.9 9.3 15.2 8.8 10.1 10.0 11.0 8.9 10.1 11.0 10.2 15.1 9.3 8.8 10.3 9.9South-East Asia 6.3 6.2 6.0 6.1 6.6 6.2 6.0 6.0 6.2 6.3 6.3 1.2 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.3 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.3Oceania 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.8 1.3 1.2 1.7 1.7Japan 2.6 2.6 3.0 2.9 1.9 2.9 3.5 3.1 2.5 2.5 2.3 4.3 2.5 2.3 2.5 2.8 2.9 2.7 2.5 2.4Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
OECD 39.3 40.9 41.3 41.8 41.1 41.2 35.3 43.6 39.5 39.6 37.8 58.6 39.8 37.0 38.6 37.7 41.2 41.6 39.5 39.9EEUR&FSU 14.8 13.5 14.4 14.2 11.6 14.9 15.9 14.1 14.7 14.5 14.4 19.5 14.3 13.9 15.1 15.7 14.9 14.5 14.3 13.8ASIA 23.5 23.6 22.5 21.4 24.2 21.0 28.6 19.4 23.5 23.3 25.8 13.4 23.6 25.6 23.8 27.6 21.0 20.7 23.8 23.9ALM 22.4 21.9 21.9 22.5 23.2 22.8 20.1 22.9 22.4 22.5 22.0 8.5 22.3 23.5 22.5 19.0 22.8 23.2 22.4 22.5Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
100% = ... °C 1.2 160.4 67.4 84°Cy 3.8E+09 0.99 0.21 0.53 1.06 0.58 1.04 1.07 0.99 1.00 0.52 1.12
= More than 10% higher than default= More than 10% lower than default
RIVM -ACCC JCM-SCMECOFYS-ACCC CSIRO - ACCCRIVM - ACCC CICERO -SCM IVIG-ACCC