Media
Coverage

The Carbon Brief summary of the first day of the 1.5°C conference in Oxford, focusing on what evidence the scientific community will need to produce to feed into a special report on 1.5C, requested by the United Nations after Paris and due for publication in 2018. Climate Analytics' Carl Schleussner presented work on the differences in climate impacts between 1.5°C and 2°C levels of warming.  
The last gasoline-powered car will have to be sold by about 2035 to put the world on track to limit global warming to the most stringent goal set by world leaders last year, according to a Climate Action Tracker report.  
As the world endures a third straight year of record-breaking heat, a new study has given fresh insight into what global warming is likely to mean for Australians if it is not curbed. Researchers at Climate Analytics found the difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming – the two goals included in the Paris climate deal – would be much greater in terms of extreme events and disasters than previously believed.  
Limiting global warming to 1.5C rather than 2C would potentially double the cost of action but provide significant benefits, according to The Climate Institute. A Climate Analytics report commissioned by the Australian think-tank says where 1.5C warming is the upper end of present climate variability, 2C would signal “a new climatic regime of ­temperature and water-related extremes”.  
The Paris climate agreement will become international law by the end of 2016 if countries stick to the promises they have made. According to Climate Analytics, 57 countries have now indicated they will ratify or have already ratified the agreement by year’s end. They account for 59.88% of global emissions.  
Science underpinning the global treaty aiming to stop average temperatures rising more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels needs more research. Climate News Network's Alex Kirby in Climate Home on our latest research around the 1.5˚C long term temperature limit.  
Climate Analytics' Bill Hare on Brexit: "If the UK completely separates from EU climate policies in every sense, there will be consequences. But if the EU and UK remain entangled in a constructive way, going forward with policies like the emissions trading system, then the differences may not be so extreme.”  
There can be no doubt that the window of opportunity to limit global warming to below 1.5℃, a key target of the 2015 Paris agreement, is closing fast. But there are encouraging signs around the world that this can still be done, even if there is still a very long way to go. Climate Analytics' Andrzej Ancygier and Bill Hare discuss three of the most positive developments that will help the world reach its target.  
How much difference could that half-degree of wiggle room (or 0.9 degree on the Fahrenheit scale) possibly make in the real world? Quite a bit, it appears. A feature article outlining the findings of a recent study by Climate Analytics' Dr Carl Schleussner on the differences in climate impacts between 1.5°C and 2°C warming.  
Brexit unlikely to slow momentum towards global climate deal coming into force, with EU left to tackle complex negotiations with UK. Under a scenario published by Climate Analytics, a global network of policy specialists, 50 countries covering 53.28% of global emissions are likely to sign off the UN pact by the end of 2016.  
The Paris climate conference set the ambitious goal of finding ways to limit global warming to 1.5C, rather than the previous threshold of 2C. But what would be the difference? And how realistic is such a target? Article quoting research by Climate Analytics' Michiel Schaeffer and Carl-Friedrich Schleussner.  
15 countries accounting for 0.04% of emissions ratified the Paris Agreement during the UN signing ceremony in New York. Another 23 nations accounting for 51% of emissions have declared their intention to follow by the end of 2016, according to a tracker by Climate Analytics. It brings the double threshold tantalisingly close. So what would it take to get over the finish line?  
More than 150 countries are expected to sign the Paris Agreement, an accord reached last December designed to keep global warming “well below” 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century, with some nations arguing that the world should rally around a more stringent threshold of 1.5 C. And the difference between the two goals might be significant: A new study shows that the world would look substantially different if mean global temperatures rise by 2 C, rather than 1.5 C.  
As over 150 nations assemble to sign the Paris climate agreement in New York on Friday, reams of new analysis are pouring out from the planet’s vital number-crunchers, who look at the fundamental relationship between how much carbon we put in the air and how much the planet’s temperature increases as a result. And it’s adding up to a somber verdict: We seem closer to must-avoid climate thresholds than we thought — and crossing them may have bigger consequences than we recognize.  
Analysis of difference between 1.5C and 2C of warming finds extra 0.5C would mean longer heatwaves, greater droughts and threats to crops and coral reefs. A new study by Climate Analytics' Dr. Carl-Friedrich Schleussner identifies significant differences in climate impacts between 1.5°C and 2°C global warming levels.  
A study presented in Vienna today at the European Geophysical Union’s (EGU's) annual meeting backs up those concerns, providing new evidence that such warming could still lead to catastrophic droughts and sea level rise. But reducing the threshold by just half a degree, to 1.5°C, the scientists say, would make a world of difference.  
Even as more than 150 countries prepare to sign the Paris Agreement, research published in journal Earth System Dynamics has shown that a global warming of 2°C will be substantially more devastating for the planet’s climate than 1.5°C by 2100. Researchers have found significant differences in impacts of 2°C and 1.5°C on water availability, agricultural yields, sea levels, extreme weather events and coral reefs.  
A jump in global temperature of two degrees Celsius would double the severity of crop failures, water shortages and heatwaves in many regions compared to a rise of 1.5 C, according to a study released on April 21, 2016  
The Paris Agreement has a double threshold of 55 countries and 55% of global emissions that must both be met before it enters into force and becomes legally binding. It opens for signature on 22 April 2016. We will be tracking the progress of ratification on this page and you will find more details regarding signature and entry into force.  
Drilling oil in the Great Australian Bight could create the world’s next carbon bomb, according to a report released today by Climate Analytics. Commissioned by The Wilderness Society, the report’s release coincides with BP’s Annual General Meeting. Protests at BP’s Melbourne headquarters today are calling on BP to rethink their plans for the area to protect the pristine environment.  
Government budgets and green funds provided at least US$26 million to help ill-equipped ministries deliver carbon-cutting pledges towards last year’s Paris Agreement. The findings highlight the scale of assistance offered to ensure a maximum amount of intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs), which formed the backbone of the UN deal.  
In freezing President Barack Obama's plan to tackle carbon emissions, the US Supreme Court delivered a blow to a global climate deal - but experts say that US commitments to the deal will survive. Bill Hare: "The Paris Agreement will ride through this. There are many challenges ahead and I am more concerned about countries like Japan pressing ahead with coal than this action by the US Supreme Court."  
Opinion piece about the US Supreme Court decision against President Obama's Clean Power Plan, quoting Climate Analytics Head of Policy Dr. Marcia Rocha who finds that without this policy, it would become virtually impossible for the U.S. to achieve reductions consistent with holding warming well below 2 degrees Celsius.  
The international agreement to limit CO2 in the atmosphere means that governments can no longer commit public funds or, for that matter facilitate private sector funding for carbon-intensive projects. Beyond funding issues there is a growing risk that these investments will create “stranded assets” as economies shift towards renewables. Laetitia De Marez, senior climate policy analyst at Climate Analytics Inc. in New York: “COP 21 was a clear signal to business that any investment in infrastructure has to be low carbon.”  
Bill Hare: "The weak carbon intensity target as stated in China's climate pledges appears inadequate, GHG Emissions have to peak before 2025 in China to limit global warming well below two degrees, five years earlier than proposed by Beijing."  
World leaders may have vowed to wean the world from fossil fuels, but prices for oil, coal and natural gas are at their lowest in years. So is that bad news for people hoping to switch the world to cleaner fuels? “Many analysts would take the classical view that a long period of low oil prices would prompt higher demand,” said Bill Hare, chief executive officer at Climate Analytics, a Berlin-based research group. “It depends very much on what governments do to counteract that.”  
The actions outlined in the Paris pledges would be expected to lead to global warming of around 3°C. Given that there has already been about 1°C of warming, the measures required to stay below 1.5°C would be beyond heroic. Work by Joeri Rogelj and colleagues suggests that it would mean net emissions having to fall to zero in at most 40 years.  
Countries in Southeast Asia are among the most vulnerable to global warming. Now that a landmark global climate deal has been reached, DW examines how this may impact both the environment and the regional economy. The main threat facing the region is sea-level rise and the increased intensity of tropical cyclones. The combination of these two could have detrimental economic and development costs, said Bill Hare, Director of Germany-based Climate Analytics, a non-profit climate science institute.  
The desire for a more ambitious goal has been kept in the agreement - with the promise to "endeavour to limit" global temperatures even more, to 1.5C. Dr Bill Hare, CEO of Climate Analytics, says the objective is "remarkable". "It is a victory for the most vulnerable countries, the small islands, the least developed countries and all those with the most to lose, who came to Paris and said they didn't want sympathy, they wanted action."  
Michiel Schaeffer, a researcher with Climate Analytics, said the only difference between achieving 1.5C and 2C was the speed at which carbon-reducing technologies such as energy efficiency and carbon capture and storage had to be deployed: "If you want to get to 1.5 degrees, you need to deploy them five, 10 or 20 years sooner."  
The growing momentum behind 1.5 degrees is a story of fast-breaking science, savvy politics and a change in tone in the climate debate — one that has focused increasing attention on the needs of the most vulnerable countries. Article quoting Climate Analytics CEO Bill Hare and Science Director Michiel Schaeffer.  
Bill Hare, a physicist and climate scientist, has become a scientific adviser for some of the nations on the front lines of climate change—poor countries with limited resources to adapt. His Berlin-based nonprofit, Climate Analytics, was established in 2008, with funding from the German government, to help provide scientific and technical advice about climate change to the poorest and most vulnerable developing countries.  
At its latest meeting 2-5 November in Livingstone, Zambia the Green Climate Fund Board strengthened the Fund’s accreditation framework by agreeing on a policy to review every five years to what extent the GCF’s implementing partners’ overall portfolio of activities – beyond those funded by the GCF – have evolved in the direction of the Fund’s goal to promote a paradigm shift. Partners that continue to heavily invest into coal and other fossil fuels are now at risk of loosing their accreditation after their initial accreditation period ends.  
So far, about 150 nations have promised the UN to curb (NB: Not cut) CO2 emissions, but analysts say the pledges are not enough. One think-tank, Climate Analytics, estimates promises so far will lead to a global temperature rise of about 2.7C - well over the 2C "safety threshold". At the Morocco meeting of 36 nations, governments will judge the pledges for themselves.  
More than 140 countries have set out how they propose to cut their carbon emissions. The plans are being published ahead of December's climate talks in Paris. An analysis by four research organisations called Climate Action Tracker suggests that if they met their promises temperatures would rise 2.7 degrees above pre-industrial levels, much higher than the 2 degrees that is considered safe. Nick Nuttall is spokesperson for the United Nations body overseeing Paris climate talks. Bill Hare is from Climate analytics one of the groups involved in Climate Action Tracker.  
Around 140 countries have submitted plans to reduce their emission of greenhouse gases in order to help curb the effects of climate change on the environment. However, many experts believe this month is not enough to produce any considerable impact on the warming of the planet, which is expected to increase global temperatures by two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to conditions during pre-industrial times.  
Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott is set to be confronted by leaders of several Pacific Island nations who seek to take the leader to task for his stance on emissions reduction, according to Monday reports. Abbott has been accused of ignoring calls to push stronger emissions reduction targets from Pacific Island leaders, including the Prime Minister of Tuvalu, Enele Sosene Sopoaga, the President of Kiribati, Anote Tong, and Fiji's Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, who warned that climate change caused by global rising temperatures could threaten their existence.  
Twenty-six countries which include Australia, Mexico and South Korea, have volunteered new carbon-slashing pledges to a global warming pact since the last round of yearly talks in December 2014. But their collective effort in reining in climate change has been negligible, said a sobering report on Wednesday by Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a collective of research institutes.  
Inadequate national targets for curbing climate-altering greenhouse gases meant emissions would be "far above" the level required to stave off disastrous global warming, analysts warned Wednesday. Instead of the UN-targeted ceiling of two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) of average warming over pre-Industrial Revolution levels, the world was on track for 2.9-3.1 C by 2100, according to the Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a tool developed by a consortium of four research organisations.  
Pledges from dozens of nations to rein in carbon emissions aren’t enough so far to avoid catastrophic climate change, according to four European research centers. Plans submitted by China, the U.S., the European Union and other top polluters won’t limit global warming to the 2-degree Celsius (3.6-degree Fahrenheit) threshold that scientists have recommended, the Climate Action Tracker coalition said in a report Wednesday.  
Climate trackers have warned delegates drafting December's Paris climate accord that the emission cuts targeted by countries will not ensure the UN's targeted 2-degree limit - saying the real figure will be higher.  
On August 11th, Australia submitted its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the Paris Climate Agreement of greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2030 of 26-28% from 2005 levels. However, Climate Action Tracker have determined that this target is “inadequate,” and falls in the bottom half of the range of industrialized nations.  
Australia will not meet its emissions reduction targets of 26-28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, according to research group the Climate Action Tracker. Australia announced the target ahead of the Paris talks in December. The unfavourable review rated Australia’s proposal as inadequate, and said the government’s policies would mean the target set by Australia would not be met.  
Three months out from the Paris climate conference, new analysis has highlighted just how “pathetically inadequate” the Abbott government’s current suite of climate policies is, both in terms of pulling Australia’s weight on global warming, and of meeting its own low-ball 2030 emissions reduction target.  
Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions are likely to rise in the next 15 years, missing by a wide margin a target proposed for United Nations talks on global warming, a team of researchers said. Without further policies to stem pollution from fossil fuels, emissions will be 27 percent above 2005 levels by 2030, the researchers at Climate Action Tracker said in a report Friday. The findings cast doubt on a pledge by Prime Minister Tony Abbott to lower emissions by at least 26 percent over the same time period.  
Australia’s U-turn on climate laws mean it will generate three years worth of extra national emissions by 2030, according to analysts. Prime minister Tony Abbott ditched a carbon tax and toned down renewable targets after winning office in 2013.With this strategy, the country’s emissions are set to increase 27% on 2005 levels, Climate Action Tracker (CAT) revealed on Thursday.  
Australia is behind other industrialised nations in having policies in place that can meet its promised 2030 target to cut greenhouse gases, a new assessment of its international climate change pledge has found. The analysis by the global project, Climate Action Tracker, says with only the Abbott government's direct action scheme and the renewable energy target installed at the national level, Australia is on track to fall short of its 2030 pledge and will in fact see emissions rise by the end of the next decade.  
The US’s plan to reduce power sector emissions by 30% by 2030 on 2005 levels is the jewel in the crown of US mitigation policies. Under current proposals economy-wide cuts in total emissions will be much less than 30%; Climate Action Tracker (CAT) estimates emissions will be just 10% below their 2005 level.  
Though small and developing, Costa Rica is a great example of what it takes to execute a pledge of carbon neutrality. According to Climate Action Tracker, Costa Rica is one of only three countries—along with Bhutan and Morocco—doing its fair share to keep temperature increases from climate change below 2 degrees Celsius, a threshold scientists see as the upper limit to avoid catastrophic impacts.  
At the UN climate change talks later this year, a new protocol called COP21 is set to be adopted at the meeting, to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that is due to expire. The protocol requires countries to reduce greenhouse emissions as global-warming in increasing due to human-made carbon-dioxide emissions. Scientists say that in order to prevent the 2 degree warming, the Earth should completely stop carbon-dioxide emissions. With the current state of pollution, the planet could face 2.9 to 3.1 degree warming, according to Climate Action Tracker.  
Current pollution reduction pledges for the Paris agreement put the world on a much more dangerous path, one leading to an expected 2.9 to 3.1 degrees Celsius of warming, according to the Climate Action Tracker, which measures the impact of the Paris pledges. (Without those pledges, the situation would be much worse, with global temperatures expected to rise 3.6 to 4.2 degrees, the tracker shows). In the United States, President Barack Obama recently announced the Clean Power Plan, which aims to use the U.S. government's regulatory authority to curb pollution from coal-fired power plants. "It really bends the curve" in global emissions, said Bill Hare, founder and CEO of Climate Analytics, a nonprofit that tracks pollution reduction pledges against the 2 degrees goal. "That is new."  
Last November, China pledged to halt the growth in its emissions by 2030. That target has been "applauded by the international community given China's emissions have been growing at rates of 5% to 8% over the past decade and a half," says Canadell, who is also executive director of the Global Carbon Project, an international consortium of scientists studying the global carbon cycle. Not all climate scientists agree, however; the Climate Action Tracker, an alliance of four European research groups, rates the targets "inadequate."  
On 11 August 2015, the Australian Government submitted its long awaited Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat (UNFCCC Secretariat). Australia’s submission brings the total of INDCs received by the UNFCCC Secretariat to 26 comprised of 53 countries. INDCs are indications of each country’s post-2020 emissions reduction targets and actions that the country intends to take, having regard to its own domestic priorities, circumstances and capabilities. Climate Action Tracker is also assessing the INDCs as they are submitted, which can be viewed here.  
Developed nations are on track to cut their greenhouse emissions by almost 30 percent by 2030, Reuters calculations show, falling far short of a halving suggested by a U.N. panel of scientists as a fair share to limit climate change. Last year the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said rich nations that were members of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development in 1990 should halve emissions by 2030 from 2010 to limit warming. A Climate Action Tracker [...] estimates that current pledges put global temperatures on track to rise by 3.1 Celsius by 2100, threatening ever more droughts, floods, heat waves and rising sea levels.  
Interactive map: Australia has set a target to reduce its carbon emissions by at least 26 per cent of 2005 levels by 2030. See how Australia's emissions and its new reduction target compare among the world's top 15 emitters. Sources: Climate Institute, Climate Action Tracker, Climate Change Authority, Global Carbon Atlas  
President Barack Obama’s plan to reduce carbon pollution -- acclaimed by supporters, reviled by opponents -- won’t be enough to save the planet. The latest and toughest version of Obama’s Clean Power Plan and measures already announced by other world leaders aren’t sufficient to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius this century. “The change is too small in comparison to global emissions,” Fekete said by telephone. “There are also many other countries driving this.” Yet Fekete isn’t despairing. Her organization is one of four European research centers that run Climate Action Tracker, which studies global-warming policies, including Obama’s power-plant rules, as well as pledges by Europe, China, Russia and others.  
President Obama announced on Monday, 3 August 2015, the final version of the clean power plan that is to reduce emissions from power plants significantly. While it is an update of the plan already announced in 2014, it still has a significant effect. The CAT can now put the US CPP into part of its “current policies” scenario, which calculates emissions from policies in place, rather than planned or pledged.  
President Barack Obama's plan to slash electricity-generated CO2 emissions was welcomed today as a courageous step towards a lower-carbon future, but not yet enough to brake dangerous planet warming. "This is definitely a step change... from what has been happening so far in the power sector in the US," climate policy analyst Niklas Hoehne of the New Climate Institute, a research body, told AFP. A measure dubbed the Climate Action Tracker, to which Hoehne contributes, says the US target has "medium" ambition -- as did those of the other top three emitters: the EU and China.  
The government’s new carbon agenda announced last month with a higher reduction goal has drawn heavy protests from the corporate sector as well as opposition from environmentalists. Under the plan, Seoul will work to reduce 37 percent of estimated greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 - an increase from earlier proposals that included cuts between 14.7 and 31.3 percent. The Climate Action Tracker ranks Korea’s climate action plan “inadequate” in its contribution to the universal ultimate goal of containing global warming below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).  
PANOS Caribbean, together with Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), will today launch a two-day climate change workshop geared at helping to advance the interests of Caribbean small-island developing states.The workshop, which is to see the participation of some 12 journalists and eight artistes from the region, is being held in St Lucia, ahead of this year's international climate talks set for Paris, France in December. The workshop - done with co-financing from Climate Analytics, the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre - forms a part of a larger Panos project for which they continue to fundraise.  
Japan, the world's sixth biggest greenhouse gas polluter, has pledged to cut emissions 26 percent from 2013 levels by 2030, a target observers judged inadequate to avert calamitous global warming. The Climate Action Tracker, a science-based tool to analyse countries' climate efforts, has described the 26-percent target as inadequate and said Japan could reach it almost without taking any further action.  
Opinion: Is the government's feeble climate change target the product of putting a trade negotiator in charge of climate change policy? Or is it proof that for all the blue-green blather, this Government is unwilling to risk its green-averse support based by pursuing not only a more honourable, but a more credible, approach to New Zealand's contribution to the 21st century's most pressing issue? "While most other governments intend cutting emissions, New Zealand appears to be increasing emissions, and hiding this through creative accounting," said Dr Bill Hare, chief executive at Climate Analytics, one of the four organisations comprising CAT.  
New Zealand’s emission reduction targets are under global scrutiny, with many climate change lobbies and environmental experts urging for more action. The analysis by four global NGOs also indicates proclaimed self-set target as inadequate at the global stage. "While most other governments intend cutting emissions, New Zealand is increasing emissions," according to Climate Analytics chief executive Bill Hare. The analysis by Climate Action Tracker, which is a consortium of four European research organizations, also warns that if most countries are going to emulate New Zealand's approach in emission reduction, then global warming may exceed 3-4 degree Celsius and will upset the international goal of restraining temperature hike below 2C.  
A international group of scientists based in Europe says New Zealand is not doing its fair share to combat climate change. The comments follow the Government's pledge last week to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 30 percent below the level of 2005 by the year 2030. The Government says this is a significant increase on current targets but it is still only 11 percent below 1990 levels, which is a more commonly used date for calibration.  
European researchers say New Zealand isn't doing its fair share when it comes to curbing greenhouse gas emissions. The allegation's being made by Climate Action Tracker, which has undertaken analysis via four independent European research organisations. They've rated New Zealand's emissions reduction targets as inadequate and say if other nations followed our approach then global warming would end up exceeding three to four degrees.  
New Zealand isn't doing its fair share to fight climate change, according to a new report, which says the greenhouse gas emissions reduction target for the 2020s the Government intends to pledge is inadequate. Climate Action Tracker says the target falls short of its share of the international effort required. It is a grouping of four independent European research organisations: Climate Analytics, Ecofys, New Climate Institute and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.  
New analysis from an international research group has condemned New Zealand’s weak climate target said WWF today. “This analysis from Climate Action Tracker shows that New Zealand’s target is well below what is needed to stop dangerous climate change, said Peter Hardstaff, WWF Head of Campaigns.  
The government's new emissions reduction target amounts to little more than creative accounting, a group of climate change agencies say. Analysis undertaken by four NGOs indicates the self-set target is inadequate and "far from doing its fair share" on the global stage. "While most other governments intend cutting emissions, New Zealand appears to be increasing emissions, and hiding this through creative accounting," Climate Analytics chief executive Bill Hare said. "It may not have to take any action at all to meet either its 2020 or 2030 targets." The Climate Action Tracker analysis, undertaken by four European research organisations, reveals if most countries followed New Zealand's lead global warming would exceed 3-4C - double the international goal of temperatures rising no more than 2C.  
New analyses are giving mixed grades to the most recent greenhouse gas emissions targets submitted to the United Nations, with particularly low marks for the pledge from South Korea. A new study by the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) -- a consortium of scientists and energy modelers -- declared South Korea's pledge to cut emissions 37 percent below business-as-usual levels by 2030 "inadequate." That target ultimately was more ambitious than ones the Korean government initially considered, but CAT analysts said it is still consistent with a global temperature rise between 3 to 4 degrees Celsius by 2100.  
The Republic of Korea (South Korea) is one of the 44 countries that have submitted emissions pledges to the official United Nations INDC list. South Korea is one of the fastest growing emitters in the developed world. Although Ban Ki-Moon, the UN Secretary-General, and US Secretary of State John Kerry have both endorsed (and praised) the South Korea INDC, others are unconvinced it will be very effective.  
Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a Europe-based organization that assesses and analyzes climate policy, rated the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) that the South Korean government submitted to the UN on as June 30 as being “inadequate.” This is the lowest grade on a four-point scale that includes “role model,” “sufficient,” “medium,” and “inadequate.” Since this is the first time that a major climate policy assessment and analysis organization has assessed South Korea’s INDC, it is likely to affect the assessment that will take place during future climate change negotiations in the international community.  
The Republic of Korea (South Korea) is one of the 44 countries that have submitted emissions pledges to the official United Nations INDC list. [...] critics find the plan wanting for the same reason the deeply researched Climate Action Tracker ranks it “inadequate.” South Korea’s proposed target is not in line with an approach considered fair to all in order for the world to reach a 2°C threshold.  
Ethiopia has submitted its INDC (Intended National Determined Contribution) on the 10th of June. It contains the goal to limit greenhouse net gas emissions including emissions or removals from land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) to 145 MtCO2e by 2030. This represents a reduction of at least 64% below the Ethiopian business-as-usual (BAU) scenario by 2030, where net emissions are projected to reach 400 MtCO2e. The corresponding GHG emission target for 2030 excluding LULUCF is -40% below BAU, or 185 MtCO2e, which is the level used to rate the emission reduction target. The INDC implementation is conditional to support in terms of finance, technology transfer and capacity building. We rate this mitigation target “Sufficient”.  
The two largest emitters of greenhouse gases, China and the US, are among the countries that have unveiled climate change plans in recent days. The growing number of commitments to tackle the issue suggests that a global climate change agreement can be reached at a UN summit later this year. South Korea also announced its intention to cut emissions by 37% by 2030, a stronger target than was expected. The Climate Action Tracker, previously labelled South Korea’s four options for climate change as “inadequate”. It argued that all the proposed options were less ambitious than South Korea’s 2020 pledge and would allow emissions to increases after the end of the decade.  
2015 is a critical year for the Green Climate Fund as the Fund is set to finally start running its operations, bringing to life the mechanisms that the Board has been designing over the past three years. In light of this, Climate Analytics' Felix Fallasch and Bianka Kretschmer comment on the GCF's policies on coal.  
South Korea has announced it aims to slash greenhouse gas emissions 37% from business as usual by 2030, a tightening of previously discussed targets. These were all rated as inadequate by the Climate Action Tracker, which said they were equal to 98–146% above 1990 levels, not counting land-use change.  
China, the world’s biggest greenhouse gas polluter, pledged on Tuesday to wean its economy away from reliance on fossil fuels as it grows, and to try to bring the rise in its carbon emissions to an earlier end. The proposals “may reflect a desire by the Chinese government to have a ‘safe’ international goal,” said Bill Hare, a senior scientist with Climate Analytics.  
Climate Analytics is ranked 36th out of 100 climate and environmental think tanks. The Think Tank Map, a project of the International Center for Climate Governance, ranks organisations on the basis of a series of indicators such as scientific output, verified through the number and quality of articles it has published in peer-reviewed journals, proceedings and books and participation in the 5th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  
In the face of mounting pressure from the public, the Australian government is expected to announce new carbon reduction targets in advance of December’s World Climate Summit 2015 in Paris. On June 23, 2015, as part of its “Climate for Change” series of articles, Australia’s Fairfax Media reported that the government was looking at American and Canadian carbon targets as possible templates. [...] International organizations that have slammed Canada for its weak target include the Natural Resources Defense Council, the World Resources Institute, Climate Action Tracker, and the 2015 Africa Progress Panel, led by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.  
Three Dutch judges sent a shock wave around the world on Wednesday when they ordered the government of the Netherlands to act on climate change by making deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. With oil, gas, and coal companies still among the world’s most richly valued assets, that may seem hard to imagine. But the Dutch court case is a clear signal “to people who are investing in the 20th century instead of the 21st that the legal risks of investing in fossil fuels are only going to increase,” Moffett said. His words echoed another expert’s statement; Bill Hare of Climate Analytics told The New York Times that the ruling “has the potential to become a precedent whose effect will ultimately flow through to undermining the markets for coal, oil, and gas.”  
A Dutch court ordered the government Wednesday to slash greenhouse gas emissions to help fight global warming, a landmark ruling in a case brought by hundreds of concerned citizens that could pave the way for similar legal battles around the world. Greenpeace called the Dutch ruling "a game-changer in the fight against climate change." Bill Hare, senior scientist at Climate Analytics, a nonprofit organization based in Berlin, said the Dutch ruling's impact could be massive.  
In a sweeping victory for Dutch environmental activists that could have global repercussions, a court ordered the government Wednesday to cut the country's greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25 percent by 2020. Bill Hare, senior scientist at Climate Analytics, a nonprofit organization based in Berlin, said the Dutch ruling's impact could be massive. "(This) has the potential to become a precedent whose effect will ultimately flow through to undermining the markets for coal, oil and gas," he said.  
[...] the news today is the success of a class-action suit aimed at making the Dutch government cut global warming emissions faster than previously planned. “This historic ruling will have far reaching consequences in the Netherlands, Europe and the rest of the world,” said Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, a Dutch member of the European Parliament in the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. “This could be the first judicial warning shot to governments around the world,” said Bill Hare of Climate Analytics.  
A district court ordered the Dutch government on Wednesday to cut greenhouse gas emissions faster than currently planned in a rare use of the legal system to curb global warming. "The parties agree that the severity and scope of the climate problem make it necessary to take measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," the summary said. Some saw the ruling as a landmark, if it ends up being binding. "This could be the first judicial warning shot to governments around the world," said Bill Hare, of independent research group Climate Analytics.  
Governments around the world face “a wave of climate litigation” and businesses will come under new pressure to reduce their emissions, following a ruling by a Dutch court yesterday that the Netherlands must cut its greenhouse gases by at least 25 per cent by 2020. Dr Bill Hare, senior scientist at Climate Analytics, a non-profit consultancy based in Berlin, agreed the impact of the ruling could be “massive”, saying it had “the potential to become a precedent that will ultimately flow through to undermining the markets for coal, oil and gas.” Based on current government policy, the Netherlands will achieve a reduction of 17 per cent at most by 2020 – well below the norm of 25 per cent to 40 per cent deemed necessary for developed countries by climate science and international climate policy.  
In a sweeping victory for Dutch environmental activists that could have global repercussions, a court ordered the government on Wednesday to cut the country's greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% by 2020 to help fight global warming. Bill Hare, senior scientist at Climate Analytics, a non-profit organisation based in Berlin, said the Dutch ruling's impact could be massive. "[The ruling] has the potential to become a precedent whose effect will ultimately flow through to undermining the markets for coal, oil and gas."  
G7 leaders have made an historic announcement that signals the end of the fossil fuel age. This is an important mile stone on the road to a new climate deal in Paris. An overview of the aspects of the announcement, as well as reactions are outlined in this article.  
The June 10-11 bi-annual summit in Brussels between the European Union and the Community of Latin America and the Caribbean States (CELAC) could be decisive. Efforts by Europe and Latin America and the Caribbean have set the groundwork for the world’s strongest bi-regional partnership on climate change. Leaders in both regions have declared their commitment to holding the rise in global temperature to below 2º Celsius and to achieving legally binding outcomes in Paris.  
A video explaining the impacts of climate change in the Caribbean, such as sea level rise, coastal erosion and coral bleaching, accompanied by music from the region.  
The Paris meeting is aimed at finding an agreement between all countries to come up with an unified plan to combat climate change and cap global temperature rise to 2C. While several governments have already submitted their pledges for emission reductions, called Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) in UN jargon, many big emitters like China, India, and Brazil have not yet announced their reduction goals, dampening efforts to analyze if current pledges are any good. Nevertheless, several initial analyses have already found they may prove to be inadequate, including a recent prediction by the non-profit Climate Analytics that said current pledges will only delay reaching a 2C rise by two years.  
Pledges made by countries to cut their carbon emissions ahead of a crunch climate summit in Paris later this year will delay the world passing the threshold for dangerous global warming by just two years, according to a new analysis. The analysis for the Guardian by the non-profit Climate Analytics comes as climate negotiators from nearly 200 countries meet in Bonn and academics warned the agreement hoped for in Paris would not keep temperatures to UN's target of holding temperature rises below 2C above pre-industrial levels.  
Ethiopia's submission of its plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which came during climate talks in Bonn, means that U.N. now has targets covering 39 countries well in advance of the Paris summit. However, early analyses by climate researchers and environmental groups show the combined impact falls short of the sharp cuts in emissions that scientists say are required to keep global warming in check.  
Japan is well off course to meeting the pledge it made with fellow G7 countries to target a low carbon energy system by 2050, according to an analysis of its climate goals. Based on current policies the country will only draw around 42-45% of its energy from low carbon sources by 2030, says the team at Climate Action Tracker.  
Dr. h.c. Bill Hare and Dr. Marcia Rocha of Climate Analytics, and Dr. Niklas Höhne of NewClimate Institute introduce the results of the latest Climate Action Tracker study which analyses the climate plans of the G7 and EU countries in regards to the 2°C goal.  
In a joint declaration from the G7 summit, leaders of the world’s richest countries called for a global phase-out of fossil fuels for the first time on Monday. That sounds great, but unfortunately, they’re talking about a lax timescale—“over the course of this century.” According to the independent Climate Action Tracker, the world’s current policies will result in global warming of 3.6 to 4.2 degrees Celsius by 2100.  
Global climate talks received a symbolic boost today, as the G7 group of rich nations threw their weight behind a long-term goal of decarbonising the global economy over the course of this century. The 40-70% reduction on 2010 levels by 2050 is the range for 2C set out by research organisation Climate Analytics earlier this year. It also just about reaches the 70-95% range of emissions reduction by 2050 that would be consistent with limiting warming to 1.5C. A review of whether to adopt this tougher temperature target is expected to conclude at UN climate talks in Bonn this week.  
Some of the world’s richest countries are not preparing to do anything like enough to limit their greenhouse gas emissions, according to new analysis. The report by Climate Action Tracker (CAT) says that all the G7 countries and the member states of the European Union have so far agreed is to keep their emissions at around their present levels for the next 15 years, instead of cutting them fast.  
The "Let Them Eat Coal" report, released by Oxfam, uses modeling by Climate Analytics researchers in Berlin, and shows that five of the G7 members, including Germany, have been burning more coal since 2009. In an interview with DW, Oxfam's energy advisor Kiri Hanks says Africa stands to lose millions of tons of staple crops by the 2080s.  
A new report from Oxfam, Let Them Eat Coal, has pointed out that all seven countries remain bound to coal - one of the most polluting fossil fuels. Using modelling by Climate Analytics, which assumes all governments implement their existing policies, the report says that emissions from G7 coal plants will cause $84bn per year in climate-related costs in Africa by the end of the century, based on the expected the costs resulting from adaptation and damage.  
Coal plants in the G7 are on track to cost the world $450 billion a year by the end of the century and reduce crops by millions of tonnes as they fuel the gathering pace of climate change, according to Oxfam' new report. In the report, Let Them Eat Coal, which uses modelling by Climate Analytics, endorsed by business leaders, academics and climate experts, Oxfam warns that coal is the biggest driver of climate change, which is already hitting the world’s poorest people hardest and making the fight to end hunger tougher. The G7 countries remain major consumers of coal.  
Four leading developed countries have been singled out as “free riders” on climate change by a panel chaired by former UN chief Kofi Annan. “This is not a moment for prevarication, short-term self-interest, and constrained ambition, but for bold global leadership and decisive action,” he said. The independent analysis group Climate Action Tracker rates climate pledges made by Canada, Australia, Russia and Japan as “inadequate”.  
Many of the world's leading economies have submitted to the United Nations their plans for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. The plans are part of an international effort to keep temperature rise within 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-Industrial Age levels. But the pledges are so far inadequate for accomplishing that goal, according to an analysis by the non-profit Climate Analytics, and will only delay reaching a 2°C rise by two years. Rather than occurring in 2036, the group says, temperature increase will surpass 2°C in 2038.  
Australia has been challenged at UN climate talks in Bonn about the 'fairness' of its climate policies and its ability to achieve bigger carbon cuts than the current 2020 target of five per cent. Climate Analytics' Bill Hare talks to ABC Radio National about the Climate Action Tracker's analysis released ahead of the G7 meeting in Germany, which warns that there is 'an extreme risk' of locking in high emissions levels for the next 15 years.  
Depuis la conférence de Copenhague de 2009 (COP15), les 2 °C sont devenus la base des négociations climatiques en cours. Le niveau de sécurité garanti par ce seuil est pourtant largement sujet à caution. C’est le sens d’un rapport technique de la Convention-cadre des Nations unies sur les changements climatiques (CCNUCC) discrètement apporté, mardi 2 juin, en appui des négociations qui se tiennent du 1er au 11 juin à Bonn (Allemagne), dans la perspective de la conférence de Paris (COP21) en décembre. Dans une brève note d’analyse du rapport, publiée par la société Climate Analytics, les climatologues Bill Hare et Carl-Friedrich Schleussner (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research) ne s’embarrassent pas de circonlocutions et estiment simplement que la teneur du rapport de la CCNUCC « montre que la limite des 2 °C est trop haute ».  
Brazil, China, South Africa and the US have questioned whether Australia’s current climate policies will see the country able to make future greenhouse gas cuts. In response, Australia’s Ambassador Peter Woolcott insisted the country would meet its 2020 goal, a view not shared by analysts at the Climate Action Tracker, who say emissions will likely rise 12-18% above 2000 levels.  
Australian delegates have been questioned about the government’s climate policies at a United Nations conference in Germany. Countries questioned Australia’s scrapping of the carbon tax and whether the federal government’s $2.55bn direct action policy will be enough to meet Australia’s emissions reduction target of five per cent by 2020. Further work is needed to ratchet up commitments, said a report of the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) initiative, issued on the sidelines of the Bonn talks.  
Nessuno degli impegni sul clima resi pubblici fino a questo momento è coerente con il target dei 2 °C. Anzi: le promesse arrivate fino ad oggi da 38 Paesi per ridurre le emissioni di CO2 in vista della COP 21 di Parigi, potrebbero al massimo allontanare il tipping point (punto di non ritorno) mondiale di soli due anni. Sono le conclusioni sconvolgenti di una nuova analisi diffusa oggi da Climate Analytics, organizzazione no profit con sede a Berlino. La ricerca, guidata da Bill Hare, un ex componente dell’IPCC, ha scoperto che gli impegni assunti davanti all’ONU fino ad ora potrebbero ritardare la soglia critica dal 2036 al 2038.  
In March, the White House pledged that, by 2025, the United States would reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by at least twenty-six per cent. The centerpiece of the Administration’s plan is a set of new power-plant regulations expected to reduce demand for coal by compelling utilities to shift toward less carbon-intensive fuels, mainly natural gas, and carbon-free energy sources like wind and solar. Independent analysis (Climate Action Tracker) suggests that the White House’s plan is insufficient to produce the cuts it has promised, but we’ll leave that issue aside for the moment.  
Pledges made by countries to cut their carbon emissions ahead of a crunch climate summit in Paris later this year will delay the world passing the threshold for dangerous global warming by just two years, according to a new analysis. “The action and ambition we have seen to date is far from sufficient and unless it is rapidly accelerated, the difficulties of limiting warming below 2C will be extreme,” said Dr Bill Hare, the founder of Climate Action Tracker and a former Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.  
What can we say about the climate pledges that countries have submitted so far? The Climate Action Tracker, produced by four research orgsanisations in Europe, has rated most of the INDCs that have come in so far as 'medium'. This means that if all governments adopted this notion of how much they should do, warming would probably exceed 2°C.  
Kevin Rudd, a former prime minister of Australia and president of the Asia Society Policy Institute in New York calls for climate action by India and China, quoting research by Climate Analytics.  
Under its INDC (Intended Nationally Determined Contribution), Canada proposes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30% below 2005 levels in 2030. This translates to a 21% reduction below 2005 emissions levels excluding forestry, or 2% below 1990 levels.  
On 15 May 2015, Canada submitted its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), communicating its economy-wide target to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 30% below 2005 levels in 2030. After accounting for forestry we estimate this is a reduction of 21% below 2005 levels of industrial GHG emissions [1]. This is equivalent to a reduction of 2% below 1990 industrial GHG emissions levels.  
Experts have revealed that limiting global warming to 2°C is feasible and will bring about many co-benefits, but poses substantial technological, economic and institutional challenges. The experts urge that the 2 °C limit should therefore be seen as a line that needs to be stringently defended. Less warming would be preferable and efforts should be made to push the defence line as low as possible.  
The findings of the Structured Expert Dialogue vindicate the stance of SIDS and LDCs in insisting on the review occurring and on keeping the 1.5°C goal in sight during the negotiations over the last several years. The SED report should lead to increasing recognition the climate policy world of the rising level of scientific evidence that indicates the 2°C goal is inadequate and that ultimately limiting warming below 1.5°C would be substantially safer.  
Just in case you were wondering, a key “Structured Expert Dialogue” between IPCC scientists and UNFCCC negotiators has just released its technical summary. And, happily, it has been digested by the Climate Analytics team into this short, clear overview. This SED is news because it essentially confirms the arguments that the Small Island Developing States and the Least Developed Countries have been making for years, that 2°C warming limit is too high. And that it must not be crossed.  
The UNFCCC’s Structured Expert Dialogue (SED) published its technical summary last week. The summary states that using the globally-agreed warming limit of 2˚C as a “guardrail” is not safe, and that Governments should aim for 1.5˚C instead. Today, the Berlin-based research organisation, Climate Analytics, released a briefing on the main points covered by the SED.  
IS THE climate finally right for a new deal on emissions? Several major economies have pledged to cut greenhouse-gas emissions, meeting the UN's April deadline, with a view to signing a deal at a summit in Paris in December.  
"Ambitious and achievable" is how the White House described its formal emissions reduction pledge--a cut of 26 to 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025--to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in preparation for negotiation of a binding climate agreement in Paris in December. Opinion about the aptness of the two adjectives was, predictably, mixed.  
On Tuesday, the U.S. submitted its first-ever official, internationally recognized plan to limit greenhouse gas emissions beyond 2020. Problem is, it’s pretty much just a retread of the path the U.S. is already on, which isn’t enough to keep global warming from crossing the “dangerous” two degree Celsius threshold—a point above which scientific consensus paints an increasingly bleak future, with global impacts capable of destabilizing human society.  
The US has set out its contribution to a new international climate change agreement, due to be agreed in Paris this December. Analysis by Climate Action Tracker suggests the US pledge is not consistent with a two degrees path and can only be considered a "fair share" of action if the cost of reducing US emissions is high in global terms. To make the pledge compatible with a two degrees pathway, other countries would need to make more ambitious efforts than the US.  
This week Climate Analytics, a research organisation led by several IPCC authors, published what is probably the most rigorous attempt to apply IPCC science to net-zero emissions. It offers different pathways to 1.5 or two degrees, depending on how quickly emissions are cut in the next five years and how certain we want to be that warming limits won't be exceeded.  
The Climate Action Tracker has undertaken an initial assessment of the recent announcements by the United States and China’s new pledges and proposals on emissions reductions for 2025 and 2030, in the context of the present international negotiations for a new climate agreement to be adopted at the end of 2015.  
This is the summary of a response to an article published in the journal Nature by David Victor and Charles Kennel (both of University of California) that international efforts to address climate change should ditch the target of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.  
Having renewed their commitment to saving Earth's climate, governments face daunting challenges in the coming months to draft a global pact and set targets for slashing carbon emissions, analysts said Wednesday.  
Having renewed their commitment to saving Earth’s climate, governments face daunting challenges in the coming months to draft a global pact and set targets for slashing carbon emissions, analysts said Wednesday.  
HAVING renewed their commitment to saving Earth’s climate, governments face daunting challenges in the coming months to draft a global pact and set targets for slashing carbon emissions, analysts said yesterday. I  
A U.S. plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants is not enough to achieve its goals for limiting climate change, and all nations will need to significantly step up actions to curb warming, a group of scientists said in a report on Wednesday.  
New data from the United Nations suggests that under current government arrangements, the world is poised for a 3.7 degree rise in temperature by the end of the century. As James Bourne writes, climate scientist Dr Bill Hare says that to avoid this 'extreme' outcome, member states have to radically rethink their climate change policies.  
When Japan dramatically slashed its plans last week for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, from 25 percent to just 3.8 percent compared to 2005 figures, the international reaction was swift and damning.  
The Abbott Government’s proposed repeal of Australia’s climate legislation will be heard through history. This action is being taken at a time when the rest of the world is moving in the other direction. As the effects of climate change become clearer to the Australian public, the political legacy of this act of repeal is likely to be seen as a historic mistake - Climate Analytics CEO and Senior Scientist, Bill Hare on The Conversation.  
Japan and Norway topped a list of industrialised nations that beat a $US30 billion ($31 billion) funding goal for climate-protection projects in poorer countries, Climate Analytics said as it urged better coordination in future rounds.  
Carbon Tsunami: World Bank Study Warns of Lethal Global Temperature Rise Even If Emissions Pledges Are Met  
Every so often, the TckTckTck team interviews one of the thought leaders and scientific experts whose work defines our movement. This week we are pleased to share an interview with Climate Analytics Director Bill Hare who took the time to answer our questions about the scientific connections between climate change and extreme weather and what world regions are most at risk.