Dr. Johannes Gütschow

Johannes Gütschow is a senior scientist in the working group “Event based modeling of the economic impact of climate change” in the Research Department “Transformation Pathways”. His main focus is on historical greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions data and future emissions scenarios. He is the lead author of the PRIMAP-hist national historical GHG emissions dataset and has published several other open access emissions data products. He has developed a methodology to extend NDC based emissions scenarios until the end of the century in line with databases of IAM scenarios which is used to calculate end of century temperatures and associated impacts for research papers and the Climate Action Tracker.

PRIMAP emission module and climate module

See also www.pik-potsdam.org/paris-reality-check.

Historical Emissions dataset PRIMAP-hist

Emissions dataset covering the period from 1850 to 2018 for all world countries and all Kyoto greenhouse gases. Updated yearly. Available online at www.pik-potsdam.org/paris-reality-check/primap-hist

PRIMAP2 open source climate policy analysis suite

The successor of the PRIMAP software is currently under development. See this GitHub repository.

Downscaled RCP-SSP scenarios

RCP-SSP scenarios downscaled to country level. Description paper available from ESSD and data from Zenodo.

Old projects

Climate Action Tracker (CAT)

Global pathway aggregation and probabilistic temperature prediction. For more information see www.climateactiontracker.org

2021

[38] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, A. Günther, M.Meinshausen
Country-resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) and Shared Socio-Economic Pathway (SSP) scenarios
ESSD, March 2021, [ESSD] [Article DOI: 10.5194/essd-13-1005-2021 ] [Data DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3638137 ]

Climate policy analysis needs reference scenarios to assess emission targets and current trends. When presenting their national climate policies, countries often showcase their target trajectories against fictitious so-called baselines. These counterfactual scenarios are meant to present future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the absence of climate policy. These so-called baselines presented by countries are often of limited use, as they can be exaggerated and as the methodology used to derive them is usually not transparent. Scenarios created by independent modeling groups using integrated assessment models (IAMs) can provide different interpretations of several socio-economic storylines and can provide a more realistic backdrop against which the projected target emission trajectory can be assessed. However, the IAMs are limited in regional resolution. This resolution is further reduced in intercomparison studies, as data for a common set of regions are produced by aggregating the underlying smaller regions. Thus, the data are not readily available for country-specific policy analysis. This gap is closed by downscaling regional IAM scenarios to the country level. The last of such efforts has been performed for the SRES (“Special Report on Emissions Scenarios”) scenarios, which are over a decade old by now. CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6) scenarios have been downscaled to a grid; however they cover only a few combinations of forcing levels and SSP storylines with only a single model per combination. Here, we provide up-to-date country scenarios, downscaled from the full RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) and SSP (Shared Socio-Economic Pathway) scenario databases, using results from the SSP GDP (gross domestic product) country model results as drivers for the downscaling process.

[37] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, A. Günther
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series v2.2 (1850-2018)
Zenodo, February 2021, [Paris Reality Check] [DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4479172 ]

The PRIMAP-hist dataset combines several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of greenhouse gas emission pathways for every country and Kyoto gas, covering the years 1850 to 2018, and all UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) member states as well as most non-UNFCCC territories. The data resolves the main IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 2006 categories. For CO2 , CH4 , and N2O subsector data for Energy, Industrial Processes and Product Use (IPPU), and Agriculture is available. Due to data availability and methodological issues, version 2.2 of the PRIMAP-hist dataset does not include emissions from Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF)

[36] A.Günther, J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery
NDCmitiQ v1.0.0: a tool to quantify and analyse GHG mitigation targets
GMDD, January 2021, [DOI: 10.5194/gmd-2020-392 ]

Parties to the Paris Agreement (PA, 2015) outline their planned contributions towards achieving the PA temperature goal to hold [...] the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C (Article 2.1.a, PA) in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Most NDCs include targets to mitigate national greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which need quantifications to assess, i.a., whether the current NDCs collectively put us on track to reach the PA temperature goals or the gap in ambition to do so. We implemented the new open-source tool NDCmitiQ to quantify GHG mitigation targets defined in the NDCs for all countries with quantifiable targets on a disaggregated level, and to create corresponding national and global emissions pathways. In light of the five-year update cycle of NDCs and the global stocktake, the quantification of NDCs is an ongoing task for which NDCmitiQ can be used, as calculations can easily be updated upon submission of new NDCs. In this paper, we describe the methodologies behind NDCmitiQ and quantification challenges we encountered by addressing a wide range of aspects, including: target types and the input data from within NDCs; external time series of national emissions, population, and GDP; uniform approach vs. country specifics; share of national emissions covered by NDCs; how to deal with the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) component and the conditionality of pledges; establishing pathways from single year targets. For use in NDCmitiQ, we furthermore construct an emissions data set from the baseline emissions provided in the NDCs. Example use cases show how the tool can help to analyse targets on a national, regional, or global scale, and to quantify uncertainties caused by a lack of clarity in the NDCs. Results confirm that the conditionality of targets and assumptions on economic growth dominate uncertainty in mitigated emissions on a global scale, which are estimated as 49.2–55.7 Gt CO2 eq AR4 for 2030 (10th/90th percentiles, median: 52.4 Gt CO2 eq AR4; excl. LULUCF and bunker fuels). We estimate that 77 % of global 2017 emissions were emitted from sectors and gases covered by current NDCs (excl. the USA).

2020

[35] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, A. Günther
PRIMAP-crf: UNFCCC CRF data in IPCC categories (PRIMAP-crf-2020-v1)
Zenodo, December 2020, [DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4320857 ]

PRIMAP-crf is a processed version of data reported by countries to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the Common Reporting Format (CRF). The processing has three key aspects: 1) Data from individual countries and years are combined into one file. 2) Data is reorganised to follow the IPCC 2006 hierarchical categorisation. 3) 'Baskets' of gases are calculated according to different global warming potential estimates from each of the three most recent IPCC reports.

[34] M.Pflüger, J. Gütschow
UNFCCC country-submitted greenhouse gas emissions data until 2020-10-25
Zenodo, November 2020, [DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4199622 ]

Dataset containing all greenhouse gas emissions data submitted by countries under climate change convention (CRF data) as published by the UNFCCC secretariat at 2020-10-25.

[33] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, A. Günther, M. Meinshausen
Country resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the RCP and SSP scenarios
ESSDD, June 2020, [Data DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3638137 ][DOI: 10.5194/essd-2020-101 ]

Climate policy analysis needs reference scenarios to assess emissions targets and current trends. When presenting their national climate policies, countries often showcase their target trajectories against fictitious so-called baselines. These counterfactual scenarios are meant to present future Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions in the absence of climate policy. These so-called baselines presented by countries are often of limited use as they can be exaggerated and the methodology used to derive them is usually not transparent. Scenarios created by independent modeling groups using integrated assessment models (IAMs) can provide different interpretations of several socio-economic storylines and can provide a more realistic backdrop against which the projected target emission trajectory can be assessed. However, the IAMs are limited in regional resolution. This resolution is further reduced in intercomparison studies as data for a common set of regions are produced by aggregating the underlying smaller regions. Thus, the data are not readily available for country-specific policy analysis. This gap is closed by downscaling regional IAM scenarios to country-level. The last of such efforts has been performed for the SRES scenarios (Special Report on Emissions Scenarios), which are over a decade old by now. CMIP6 scenarios have been downscaled to a grid, however they cover only a few combinations of forcing levels and SSP storylines with only a single model per combination. Here, we provide up to date country scenarios, downscaled from the full RCP (Representative Concentration Pathways) and SSP (Shared Socio-Economic Pathways) scenario databases, using results from the SSP GDP (Gross Domestic Product) country model results as drivers for the downscaling process.

[32] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, A. Günther
PRIMAP-crf: UNFCCC CRF data in IPCC categories (PRIMAP-crf-2019-v2)
Zenodo, April 2020, [DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3775575 ]

PRIMAP-crf is a processed version of data reported by countries to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the Common Reporting Format (CRF). The processing has three key aspects: 1) Data from individual countries and years are combined into one file. 2) Data is re-organised to follow the IPCC 2006 hierarchical categorisation. 3) 'Baskets' of gases are calculated according to different global warming potential estimates from each of the three most recent IPCC reports.

[31] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, A. Günther, M.Meinshausen
Country resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the RCP and SSP scenarios
Zenodo, February 2020, [DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3638137 ]

This dataset provides country scenarios, downscaled from the RCP (Representative Concentration Pathways) and SSP (Shared Socio-Economic Pathways) scenario databases, using results from the SSP GDP (Gross Domestic Product) country model results as drivers for the downscaling process harmonized to and combined with up to date historical data.

2019

[30] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, A. Günther
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series (1850 - 2017) V2.1
GFZ Data Services, November 2019, [Paris Reality Check] [DOI: 10.5880/PIK.2019.018 ]

The PRIMAP-hist dataset combines several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of greenhouse gas emission pathways for every country and Kyoto gas covering the years 1850 to 2017, and all UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) member states, as well as most non-UNFCCC territories. The data resolves the main IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 2006 categories. For CO2 , CH4 , and N2O subsector data for Energy, Industrial Processes and Product Use, and Agriculture is available. Due to data availability and methodological issues version 2.1 of the PRIMAP-hist dataset does not include emissions from land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF).

[29] A. Nauels, J. Gütschow, M. Mengel, M. Meinshausen, P. U. Clark, and C.-F. Schleussner
Attributing long-term sea-level rise to Paris Agreement emission pledges
PNAS 116(47), November 2019, [DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1907461116 ]

The main contributors to sea-level rise (oceans, glaciers, and ice sheets) respond to climate change on timescales ranging from decades to millennia. A focus on the 21st century thus fails to provide a complete picture of the consequences of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions on future sea-level rise and its long-term impacts. Here we identify the committed global mean sea-level rise until 2300 from historical emissions since 1750 and the currently pledged National Determined Contributions (NDC) under the Paris Agreement until 2030. Our results indicate that greenhouse gas emissions over this 280-y period result in about 1 m of committed global mean sea-level rise by 2300, with the NDC emissions from 2016 to 2030 corresponding to around 20 cm or 1/5 of that commitment. We also find that 26 cm (12 cm) of the projected sea-level-rise commitment in 2300 can be attributed to emissions from the top 5 emitting countries (China, United States of America, European Union, India, and Russia) over the 1991–2030 (2016–2030) period. Our findings demonstrate that global and individual country emissions over the first decades of the 21st century alone will cause substantial long-term sea-level rise.

[28] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series (1850 - 2016) V2.0
GFZ Data Services, January 2019, [Paris Reality Check] [DOI: 10.5880/PIK.2019.001 ]

The PRIMAP-hist dataset combines several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of greenhouse gas emission pathways for every country and Kyoto gas covering the years 1850 to 2016, and all UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) member states, as well as most non-UNFCCC territories. The data resolves the main IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 2006 categories. For CO2, CH4, and N2O subsector data for Energy, Industrial Processes and Agriculture is available. Version 2.0 of the PRIMAP-hist dataset does not include emissions from Land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF).

2018

[27] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel
Extending Near‐Term Emissions Scenarios to Assess Warming Implications of Paris Agreement NDCs
Earth's Future 6, September 2018, [EF] [DOI: 10.1002/2017EF000781]

In the Paris Agreement countries have agreed to act together to hold global warming well below 2°C over preindustrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. To assess if the world is on track to meet this long‐term temperature goal, countries' pledged emissions reductions (Nationally Determined Contributions, NDCs) need to be analyzed for their implied warming. Several research groups and nongovernmental organizations have estimated this warming and arrived at very different results but have invariably concluded that the current pledges are inadequate to hold warming below 2°C, let alone 1.5°C. In this paper we analyze different methods to estimate 2100 global mean temperature rise implied by countries' NDCs, which often only specify commitments until 2030. We present different methods to extend near‐term emissions pathways that have been developed by the authors or used by different research groups and nongovernmental organizations to estimate 21st century warming consequences of Paris Agreement commitments. The abilities of these methods to project both low and high warming scenarios in line with the scenario literature is assessed. We find that the simpler methods are not suitable for temperature projections while more complex methods can produce results consistent with the energy and economic scenario literature. We further find that some methods can have a strong high or low temperature bias depending on parameter choices. The choice of methods to evaluate the consistency of aggregated NDC commitments is very important for reviewing progress toward the Paris Agreement's long‐term temperature goal.

[26] M. L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, M. R. Rocha, R. Gieseke
Measuring success: improving assessments of aggregate GHG emissions reduction goals
Earth's Future 6(7242), September 2018, [EF] [DOI: 10.1029/2018EF000865]

All Annex I Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are required to report domestic emissions on an annual basis in a "Common Reporting Format" (CRF). In 2015, the CRF data reporting was updated to follow the more recent 2006 guidelines from the IPCC and the structure of the reporting tables was modified accordingly. However, the hierarchical categorisation of data in the IPCC 2006 guidelines is not readily extracted from the reporting tables. In this paper, we present the PRIMAP-crf data as a re-constructed hierarchical dataset according to the IPCC 2006 guidelines. Furthermore, the data are organised in a series of tables containing all available countries and years for each individual gas and category reported. It is therefore readily usable for climate policy assessment, such as the quantification of emissions reduction targets. In addition to single gases, the Kyoto basket of greenhouse gases (CO2, N2O, CH4, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3) is provided according to multiple global warming potentials. The dataset was produced using the PRIMAP emissions module. Key processing steps include extracting data from submitted CRF Excel spreadsheets, mapping CRF categories to IPCC 2006 categories, constructing missing categories from available data, and aggregating single gases to gas baskets. Finally, we describe key aspects of the data with relevance for climate policy: the contribution of NF3 to national totals, changes in data reported over subsequent years, and issues or difficulties encountered when processing currently available data. The processed data are available under an Open Data CC BY 4.0 license, and are available at https://doi.org/10.5880/pik.2018.001.

[25] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel
PRIMAP-crf: UNFCCC CRF data in IPCC 2006 categories
Earth System Science Data 10(3):1427-1438, August 2018, [ESSD] [DOI:10.5194/essd-10-1427-2018]

All Annex I Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are required to report domestic emissions on an annual basis in a "Common Reporting Format" (CRF). In 2015, the CRF data reporting was updated to follow the more recent 2006 guidelines from the IPCC and the structure of the reporting tables was modified accordingly. However, the hierarchical categorisation of data in the IPCC 2006 guidelines is not readily extracted from the reporting tables. In this paper, we present the PRIMAP-crf data as a re-constructed hierarchical dataset according to the IPCC 2006 guidelines. Furthermore, the data are organised in a series of tables containing all available countries and years for each individual gas and category reported. It is therefore readily usable for climate policy assessment, such as the quantification of emissions reduction targets. In addition to single gases, the Kyoto basket of greenhouse gases (CO2, N2O, CH4, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3) is provided according to multiple global warming potentials. The dataset was produced using the PRIMAP emissions module. Key processing steps include extracting data from submitted CRF Excel spreadsheets, mapping CRF categories to IPCC 2006 categories, constructing missing categories from available data, and aggregating single gases to gas baskets. Finally, we describe key aspects of the data with relevance for climate policy: the contribution of NF3 to national totals, changes in data reported over subsequent years, and issues or difficulties encountered when processing currently available data. The processed data are available under an Open Data CC BY 4.0 license, and are available at https://doi.org/10.5880/pik.2018.001.

[24] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series (1850 - 2015) V1.2
GFZ Data Services, February 2018, [Paris Reality Check] [DOI: 10.5880/PIK.2018.003]

This dataset combines several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of greenhouse gas emission pathways for every country and Kyoto gas covering the years 1850 to 2015 and all UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) member states as well as most non-UNFCCC territories. The data resolves the main IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 1996 categories. For CO2‚‚ from energy and industry time series for subsectors are available.

[23] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel
PRIMAP-crf: UNFCCC CRF data in IPCC 2006 categories
GFZ Data Services, January 2018, [Paris Reality Check] [DOI: 10.5880/PIK.2018.001]

All Annex I Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are required to report domestic emissions on an annual basis in a 'Common Reporting Format' (CRF). In 2015, the CRF data reporting was updated to follow the more recent 2006 guidelines from the IPCC and the structure of the reporting tables was modified accordingly. However, the hierarchical categorisation of data in the IPCC 2006 guidelines is not readily extracted from the reporting tables. We present the PRIMAP-crf data as a re-constructed hierarchical dataset according to the IPCC 2006 guidelines. Furthermore, the data is organised in a series of tables containing all available countries and years for each GHG individual gas and category reported. In addition to single gases, the Kyoto basket of greenhouse gases (CO2, N2O, CH4, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3) is provided according to multiple global warming potentials. The dataset was produced using the PRIMAP emissions module. Key processing steps include; extracting data from submitted CRF excel spreadsheets, mapping CRF categories to IPCC 2006 categories, constructing missing categories from available data, and aggregating single gases to gas baskets. The processed data is available under an Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 License.

2017

[22] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series (1850 - 2014) V1.1
GFZ Data Services, March 2017, [Paris Reality Check] [DOI: 10.5880/PIK.2017.001]

This dataset combines several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of greenhouse gas emission pathways for every country and Kyoto gas covering the years 1850 to 2014 and all UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) member states as well as most non-UNFCCC territories. The data resolves the main IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 1996 categories. For CO₂ from energy and industry time series for subsectors are available.

[21] Y. R. du Pont, M. L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, J. Rogelj, P. Christoff, and M. Meinshausen
Equitable mitigation to achieve the Paris Agreement goals
Nature Climate Change, 7, 38-43, 2017, [NCC] [DOI: 10.1038/nclimate3186]

Benchmarks to guide countries in ratcheting-up ambition, climate finance, and support in an equitable manner are critical but not yet determined in the context of the Paris Agreement1. We identify global cost-optimal mitigation scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement goals and allocate their emissions dynamically to countries according to five equity approaches. At the national level, China's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) is weaker than any of the five equity approaches, India's and the USA's NDC are aligned with two, and the EU's with three. Most developing countries’ conditional (Intended) NDCs (INDCs) are more ambitious than the average of the five equity approaches under the 2 °C goal. If the G8 and China adopt the average of the five approaches, the gap between conditional INDCs and 2 °C-consistent pathways could be closed. For an equitable, cost-optimal achievement of the 1.5 °C target, emissions in 2030 are 21% lower (relative to 2010) than for 2 °C for the G8 and China combined, and 39% lower for remaining countries. Equitably limiting warming to 1.5 °C rather than 2 °C requires that individual countries achieve mitigation milestones, such as peaking or reaching net-zero emissions, around a decade earlier.

2016

[20] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel, D. Stevens, M. Krapp, and M. Rocha
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series
Earth System Science Data, 8, 571-603, 2016, [ESSD] [DOI: 10.5194/essd-8-571-2016]

To assess the history of greenhouse gas emissions and individual countries' contributions to emissions and climate change, detailed historical data are needed. We combine several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of emissions pathways for each country and Kyoto gas, covering the years 1850 to 2014 with yearly values, for all UNFCCC member states and most non-UNFCCC territories. The sectoral resolution is that of the main IPCC 1996 categories. Additional time series of CO₂ are available for energy and industry subsectors. Country-resolved data are combined from different sources and supplemented using year-to-year growth rates from regionally resolved sources and numerical extrapolations to complete the dataset. Regional deforestation emissions are downscaled to country level using estimates of the deforested area obtained from potential vegetation and simulations of agricultural land. In this paper, we discuss the data sources and methods used and present the resulting dataset, including its limitations and uncertainties. The dataset is available from doi:10.5880/PIK.2016.003 and can be viewed on the website accompanying this paper (http://www.pik-potsdam.de/primap-live/primap-hist/)

[19] J. Gütschow, M. L. Jeffery, R. Gieseke, R. Gebel, D. Stevens, M. Krapp, M. Rocha
The PRIMAP-hist national historical emissions time series (1850 - 2014)
GFZ Data Services, April 2016, [PRIMAP-live] [DOI: 10.5880/PIK.2016.003]

This dataset combines several published datasets to create a comprehensive set of greenhouse gas emission pathways for every country and Kyoto gas covering the years 1850 to 2014 and all UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) member states as well as most non-UNFCCC territories. The data resolves the main IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 1996 categories. For CO₂ from energy and industry time series for subsectors are available.

[18] Y. R. du Pont, M. L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, P. Christoff, M. Meinshausen
National contributions for decarbonizing the world economy in line with the G7 agreement
Environmental Research Letters, 11(2016):054005, April 2016, [DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054005]

In June 2015, the G7 agreed to two global mitigation goals: ‘a decarbonization of the global economy over the course of this century’ and ‘the upper end of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommendation of40%–70%reductions by 2050 compared to 2010’. These IPCC recommendations aim to preserve a likely (>66%) chance of limiting global warming to 2°C but are not necessarily consistent with the stronger ambition of the subsequent Paris Agreement of ‘holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels’. The G7 did not specify global or national emissions scenarios consistent with its own agreement. Here we identify global cost-optimal emissions scenarios from Integrated Assessment Models that match the G7 agreement. These scenarios have global 2030 emissions targets of 11%–43% below 2010, global net negative CO2 emissions starting between 2056 and 2080, and some exhibit net negative greenhouse gas emissions from 2080 onwards. We allocate emissions from these global scenarios to countries according to five equity approaches representative of the five equity categories presented in the Fifth Assessment Report of theIPCC(IPCCAR5): ‘capability’, ‘equality’, ‘responsibility-capability-need’, ‘equal cumulative per capita’ and ‘staged approaches’. Our results show that G7 members’ Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDCs) mitigation targets are in line with a grandfathering approach but lack ambition to meet various visions of climate justice. The INDCs of China and Russia fall short of meeting the requirements of any allocation approach. Depending on how their INDCs are evaluated, the INDCs of India and Brazil can match some equity approaches evaluated in this study.

2015

[17] L. Jeffery, C. Fyson, R. Alexander, J. Gütschow, M. Rocha, J. Cantzler, M. Schaeffer, B. Hare, M. Hagemann, N. Höhne, P. van Breevoort, K. Blok
2.7°C is not enough – we can get lower
Climate Action Tracker update, December 2015, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

[16] M. Meinshausen, L. Jeffery, J. Guetschow, Y. R. du Pont, J. Rogelj, M. Schaeffer, N. Höhne, M. den Elzen, S. Oberthür, N. Meinshausen
National post-2020 greenhouse gas targets and diversity-aware leadership
Nature Climate Change, 5(2015):1098-1106, October 2015, [Nature] [DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2826]

Achieving the collective goal of limiting warming to below 2 ◦ C or 1.5 ◦ C compared to pre-industrial levels requires a transition towards a fully decarbonized world. Annual greenhouse gas emissions on such a path in 2025 or 2030 can be allocated to individual countries using a variety of allocation schemes.We reanalyse the IPCC literature allocation database and provide country-level details for three approaches.At this stage, however, it seems utopian to assume that the international community will agree on a single allocation scheme. Here, we investigate an approach that involves a major-economy country taking the lead. In a bottom-up manner, other countries then determine what they consider a fair comparable target, for example, either a ‘per-capita convergence’ or ‘equal cumulative per-capita’ approach. For example, we find that a 2030 target of 67% below 1990 for the EU28, a 2025 target of 54% below 2005 for the USA or a 2030 target of 32% below 2010 for China could secure a likely chance of meeting the 2°C target in our illustrative default case. Comparing those targets to post-2020 mitigation targets reveals a large gap. No major emitter can at present claim to show the necessary leadership in the concerted effort of avoiding warming of 2°C in a diverse global context.

[15] J. Gütschow, L. Jeffery, R. Alexander, B. Hare, M. Schaeffer, M. Rocha, N. Höhne, H. Fekete, P. van Breevoort, K. Blok
INDCs lower projected warming to 2.7˚C : significant progress but still above 2°C
Climate Action Tracker update, October 2015, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

[14] N. Höhne, H. Fekete, M. Hagemann, B. Hare, M. Schaeffer, M. Rocha, F. Sferra, L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, K. Blok, P. van Breevoort, Y. Deng
Has the EU Commission weakened its climate proposal? Possibly
Climate Action Tracker policy brief, February 2015, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

2014

[13] B. Hare, M. Rocha, M. Schaeffer, F. Sferra, C. Baxter, T. Aboumahboub, N. Höhne, H. Fekete, M. Hagemann, L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, K. Blok, Y. Deng, K. Wouters, L. Wong
China, US and EU post-2020 plans reduce projected warming
Climate Action Tracker policy brief, December 2014, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

[12] B. Hare, M. Schaeffer, F. Sferra, M. Lindberg, J. Gütschow, N. Höhne, H. Louise, F. Jeffery, M. Rocha, C. Baxter, K. Wouters
Rapid phase out of coal essential, but not enough to hold warming below 2°C
Climate Action Tracker policy brief, September 2014, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

[11] B. Hare, M. Schaeffer, M. Lindberg, N. Höhne, H. Fekete, L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, F. Sferra, M. Rocha
Below 2°C or 1.5°C depends on rapid action from both Annex I and non-Annex I countries
Climate Action Tracker policy brief, June 2014, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

2013

[10] B. Hare, M. Rocha, L. Jeffery, J. Gütschow, J. Rogelj, M. Schaeffer, L. Warszawski, M. Vieweg, C. Baxter, N. Höhne
Warsaw unpacked: A race to the bottom?
Climate Action Tracker Update, November 2013, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the summary see the linked pdf file.

[9] H. Fekete, M. Vieweg, M. Rocha, N. Braun, M. Lindberg, J. Gütschow, L. Jeffery, N. Höhne, B. Hare, M. Schaeffer, K. Macey, J. Larkin
Analysis of current greenhouse gas emission trends
Climate Action Tracker Report, November 2013, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

This report has no abstract, for the executive summary see the linked pdf file.

[8] C. Chen, J. Gütschow, M. Schaeffer, M. Vieweg, K. Macey
Influence of rules governing surplus emission allowances on developed country emissions
Climatic Change, 120(4):845-857, 2013, [Springerlink] [DOI: 10.1007/s10584-013-0841-1], preprint available at [www.primap.org]

The outcome from the December 2012 climate negotiations in Doha has clarified the rules regarding surplus units for the Kyoto Protocol. We summarize these new rules and estimate the resulting effective emissions during the second commitment period using our unit trade model. Other options to deal with surplus emission allowances are employed as benchmarks to assess the Doha outcome. The effective emissions for developed countries as a group under the Doha outcome could be 10–11%below 1990 levels or 4–5%points below business-as-usual levels for the second commitment period if we assume that non-Kyoto Protocol countries domestically achieve their targets. However, if mechanisms exist where non-Kyoto Protocol countries can trade units, their emissions could increase and effective emis- sions for developed countries could be 7–8%below 1990 levels. In this low-ambition situation we find the main impact of theDoha surplus rules to be the introduction of the historical cap on emissions allowances. Without the effect of the cap, the Doha outcome allows the Parties to the second commitment period to emit at business- as-usual levels until 2020, while still leaving surplus units at the end of the second commitment period.

[7] M. Vieweg, B. Hare, N. Höhne, M. Schaeffer, M. Rocha, J. Larkin, H. Fekete, J. Gütschow, L. Jeffery
Climate Shuffle
Climate Action Tracker Update, June 2013, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

National action on climate change mitigation appears to be joining the international climate negotiations in the new and ever popular “climate shuffle” dance. It involves maximum effort and motion while staying in the same spot…or even, in some cases, going backwards. Recent emissions trends and estimates of the effects of those policies in place and proposed lead to a new estimate that warming is likely to approach 4°C by 2100, significantly above the warming that would result from full implementation of the pledges (3.3°C). The continuous global fossil-fuel intensive development of the past decade suggests that high warming levels of 4°C are more plausible than assuming full implementation of current pledges. Evidence is ever increasing that existing and planned policies are not sufficient for countries to meet these pledges. Emissions

2012

[6] M. Vieweg , M. Schaeffer , C. Chen , J. Gütschow , B. Hare, and M. Rocha
Hot topic: AAU surplus - Political implications of the long-term effect of surplus from the first and second Kyoto period
Climate Analytics working paper, November 2012, [Climate Analytics]
not peer-reviewed

This paper has no abstract, for the executive summary see the linked pdf file.

[5] M. Vieweg, B. Hare, N. Höhne, M. Schaeffer, M. Rocha, J. Larkin, H. Fekete, K. Macey, and J. Gütschow
Governments still set on 3°C warming track, some progress, but many playing with numbers
Climate Action Tracker briefing paper, September 2012, [CAT]
not peer-reviewed

Governments are still set to send global temperatures above 3°C by 2100, even though their agreed warming limit of 2°C is still technically possible, scientists said today. In this update we discuss the 2°C and 1.5°C limits, the future of the Kyoto Protocol and recent clarifications of Parties’ conditionality to move to their higher ambition pledges. In the second part we take a look at developments at the national level that are interesting for the international climate negotiations.

[4] J. Gütschow, V. Nesme, and R. F. Werner
Self-similarity of cellular automata on Abelian groups
Journal of Cellular Automata, 7(2):83-113, March 2012, [JCA]
Extended version of [3]

It is well known that the spacetime diagrams of some cellular automata have a self-similar fractal structure: for instance Wolfram’s rule 90 generates a Sierpinski triangle. Explaining the self-similarity of the spacetime diagrams of cellular automata is a well-explored topic, but virtually all of the results revolve around a special class of automata, whose typical features include irreversibility, an alphabet with a ring structure, a global evolution that is a ring homomorphism, and a property known as (weakly) p-Fermat. The class of automata that we study in this article has none of these properties. Their cell structure is weaker, as it does not come with a multiplication, and they are far from being p-Fermat, even weakly. However, they do produce self-similar spacetime diagrams, and we explain why and how.

older publications

[3] J. Gütschow, V. Nesme, and R. F. Werner
The fractal structure of cellular automata on abelian groups.
[arXiv:1011.0313]

It is well-known that the spacetime diagrams of some cellular automata have a fractal structure: for instance Pascal's triangle modulo 2 generates a Sierpinski triangle. Explaining the fractal structure of the spacetime diagrams of cellular automata is a much explored topic, but virtually all of the results revolve around a special class of automata, whose typical features include irreversibility, an alphabet with a ring structure, a global evolution that is a ring homomorphism, and a property known as (weakly) p-Fermat. The class of automata that we study in this article has none of these properties. Their cell structure is weaker, as it does not come with a multiplication, and they are far from being p-Fermat, even weakly. However, they do produce fractal spacetime diagrams, and we explain why and how.

[2] J. Gütschow
Entanglement generation of Clifford quantum cellular automata.
Applied Physics B 98(2010) 623-633 [arXiv:1001.1062] [DOI] [Springerlink]

Clifford quantum cellular automata (CQCAs) are a special kind of quantum cellular automata (QCAs) that incorporate Clifford group operations for the time evolution. Despite being classically simulable, they can be used as basic building blocks for universal quantum computation. This is due to the connection to translation-invariant stabilizer states and their entanglement properties. We will give a self-contained introduction to CQCAs and investigate the generation of entanglement under CQCA action. Furthermore, we will discuss finite configurations and applications of CQCAs.

[1] J. Gütschow, S. Uphoff, R. F. Werner, and Z. Zimborás
Time asymptotics and entanglement generation of Clifford quantum celluar automata.
Journal of Mathematical Physics 51(2010) Selected as JMP research highlight in Feb. 2010. Selected for the Virtual Journal of Quantum Information Volume 10, Issue 2 (Feb 2010). [arXiv:0906.3195] [DOI] [scitation.aip.org]

We consider Clifford Quantum Cellular Automata (CQCAs) and their time evolution. CQCAs are an especially simple type of Quantum Cellular Automata, yet they show complex asymptotics and can even be a basic ingredient for universal quantum computation. In this work we study the time evolution of different classes of CQCAs. We distinguish between periodic CQCAs, fractal CQCAs and CQCAs with gliders. We then identify invariant states and study convergence properties of classes of states, like quasifree and stabilizer states. Finally we consider the generation of entanglement analytically and numerically for stabilizer and quasifree states.

Country resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the RCP and SSP scenarios

Editorial board member for Scientific Data