THE PRESENT, PAST, AND FUTURE CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL

WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS

A Key for Negotiation in the Climate Convention
LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA and SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO
COPPE – Graduate School of Engineering, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and International,
Virtual Institute of Global Change, Centro de Tecnologia Bloco G, room G106, Cidade
Universitária – Ilha do Fundão, Caixa Postal 68501, Rio de Janeiro 21945-970, Brazil
E-mail: lpr@adc.coppe.ufrj.br or skr@pet.coppe.ufrj.br

Abstract. The objective of this paper is to emphasize the responsibility of developed countries to
implement the Climate Convention, as well as the role of developing countries in CO2 emissions
control while sustaining their rights to increase energy consumption per capita during the develop-
ment process. It is shown that the growth in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption in North
America, excluding Mexico, from 1990 to 1996 was 3.7 times higher than that of Latin America
in absolute terms. The cumulative contribution to global warming, expressed as the mass of the gas
multiplied by time (GtCy), can be calculated as the integration of the atmospheric concentration of
the emitted gas along time, with a weight function in the integrand to simulate the climate response.
To simulate climate response, we used the superposition of exponential decay functions with different
decay constants. The historical contributions of the OECD countries, the Eastern European countries
and the ex-Soviet Union, and from all developing countries are considered. The future contributions
are computed in three scenarios. All of them show that emissions from Non-Annex I countries will
become higher than those of Annex I countries soon after 2010, while the curves of atmospheric
concentration will cross one another later, not much before 2050, and the respective contributions to
global temperature increase will cross about 2090.

1. Introduction

The question why developing countries should be concerned with greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions is sometimes politically contested because the majority of the de-
veloped countries is not fulfilling its commitment in the Climate Convention. This
is because countries included in Annex I, which aims to reduce GHG emissions
in the year 2000 to the level of 1990, are now different in the Kyoto Protocol. For
instance, of those countries, only the U.K. and Germany reduced their emissions
between 1990 and 1996. Nevertheless, there is a general consensus within the
scientific community of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
that all countries may be potentially affected by climate change, and that the time
required to reverse the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) in the
atmosphere, according to IPCC reports (IPCC, 1995), is very great.
The objective of this paper is to emphasize the responsibility of developed
countries to implement the Climate Convention, as well as the role of developing
countries in the international effort for CO2 emissions control, while sustaining

Climatic Change 48: 289–308, 2001.

© 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
290 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

their rights to increase energy consumption per capita as a consequence of the

development process. The use of renewable energy alongside improved energy
efficiency should, at any rate, allow the growth of energy per capita in developing
countries without CO2 emissions increasing at the same rate.
The emissions from fossil fuels consumption are considered the most sound
indicator for defining climate policies at present. This has been developed in the
present paper through very simple analytical formulae, a simplified computation of
the historical and hypothetical future contribution of different groups of countries
to the global mean temperature increase at the Earth’s surface due to CO2 emissions
from energy systems.?
Our method has the advantage of being a simple, fast calculation of relative con-
tributions to temperature increase from GHG emissions, because we use analytical
formulae. The method works well for simulations of different scenarios and gives
a feeling for the problem on a clear and transparent basis.
Section 2 presents our estimation of CO2 emissions from the world energy
system from 1750 until the present time. We calculate the remaining CO2 con-
centration in the atmosphere from those emissions, as well as the contribution to
the global temperature increase from (a) developed countries, (b) Eastern Europe
and the ex-Soviet Union, and (c) developing countries. The same is done in Section
3 for different scenarios of CO2 emissions in the next century.
It also shows emissions levels of developed and developing countries expressed
by several indices – carbon emission per capita (tC/capita), emission per GNP
(tC/US$), and emission per energy unit (tC/toe) for geographic regions and groups
of countries. In this way, we show that developing countries can increase their
energy per capita without the emission per capita growing at the same rate. Sec-
tion 5 presents our final comments. Section 4 shows the results for some individual
countries with different emission patterns, as well as a comparison with other
international studies.

2. Computation of the CO2 Atmospheric Concentration from Emissions and

the Contribution to Global Temperature Increase

First of all, we took the energy consumption from the year 1700 up to recent times
from Enerdata (Martin, 1990) to calculate the historical CO2 emissions, as shown
in Table Ia.
Besides fossil fuel emissions, we also included emissions from firewood and
other biomass fuels in Table Ia, assuming that half the corresponding energy was
renewable coming from collected branches or planted trees or crops, while the
other half was non-renewable from deforestation. Our assumptions on firewood
? We did not take into account general deforestation when dealing with energy system emissions,
although we did estimate the emissions from deforestation for firewood production in some cases.
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 291
TABLE Ia
Past CO2 emissions from world fuel combustion

Year Fuel consumption (Mtoe) CO2 emissions (GtC)

Coal Oil Nat. Fossil Fire Fossil Fire Total
gas fuel wood fuels wood a

total

1700 3 – – 3 144 0.002 0.071 0.073

1750 5 – – 5 180 0.004 0.090 0.094
1800 11 – – 11 217 0.011 0.109 0.120
1850 48 – – 48 288 0.048 0.144 0.192
1900 506 20 7 533 429 0.527 0.215 0.742
1950 971 497 156 1624 495 1.46 0.24 1.70
1973 1563 2688 989 5240 670 4.28 0.33 4.61
1987 2249 2968 1550 6767 760 5.52 0.38 5.91
a Firewood and other biomass fuels have been considered as 50% renewable (collected
branches, planted trees or crops) and 50% non-renewable (deforestation); Mtoe = mil-
lions of tons, oil equivalent; GtC = gigatons of carbon.
Source of energy consumption data: Enerdata (Martin, 1990).

and other biomass fuels are fairly arbitrary, serving therefore to give a crude idea
of the order of magnitude.
The same reference (Martin, 1990) gives us the structure of historical fossil
fuel consumption in developed countries, Eastern Europe (including the ex-Soviet
Union), and developing countries. So, we calculated the past CO2 emissions, shown
in Table Ib, for each of these groups of countries.
Recent CO2 emissions (1990–1996) from fossil fuel consumption are given in
Table II, constructed from data of the World Energy Council (1997). The amounts
in Table II are compatible with those of Table Ib in terms of magnitude.
As can be seen in Table II, emissions by developed countries from 1990 (taken
as the basis for the commitment to the Climate Convention) until 1996 have in-
creased. Only the emissions from Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union de-
creased in this period. Although the percentage increase in emissions by developed
countries was lower than that of developing countries, the absolute values were
very high. The growth in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption in North
America, excluding Mexico, from 1990 to 1996 was 3.7 times higher than that of
Latin America in absolute terms.
We calculate how much higher the cumulative concentration of CO2 is in the
atmosphere from developed countries’ emissions than from developing countries’
emissions. Global warming is a consequence of the cumulative effect of emissions
integrated over time. This effect is significant and long-lasting due to the extended
period of time that CO2 remains in the atmosphere.
292 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

TABLE Ib
CO2 emissions from fuel combustion in (a) developed countries,
(b) Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union, and (c) developing
countries

Year Fossil fuels (%) CO2 (GtC)

Coal Oil Nat. Gas

1850 a) 90 – – 0.043
b) 10 – – 0.005
c) – – –

1900 a) 85 90 100 0.448

b) 12 4 – 0.061
c) 3 6 – 0.017

1950 a) 69 80 93 1.072
b) 24 9 5 0.273
c) 7 11 2 0.113

1973 a) 46 70 70 2.625
b) 33 15 24 0.975
c) 21 15 6 0.684

1987 a) 42 42 47 2.696
b) 25 18 39 1.339
c) 33 26 14 1.485

Source of data on energy consumption: Enerdata (Martin, 1990).

The atmospheric concentration N(t) of CO2 due to anthropogenic emissions

c(t) can be calculated using a superposition of exponential functions with different
decay constants
X
N(t) = βi Ni (ki , t) (1)
i

where
Z t
−ki t 0
Ni (ki , t) = e dt 0 eki t ci (t 0 ) (2)
0
is solution of the ordinary differential equation
dNi
= ci (t) − ki Ni (3)
dt
with
X
ci (t) = βi c(t) . . . βi = 1 (4)
i
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 293
TABLE II
Recent CO2 emissions from fuel combustion (GtC)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1990/96 change

(+/–) (%)

North Americaa 1.618 1.600 1.629 1.661 1.693 1.706 1.759 +0.141 +8.7
Latin Americab 0.287 0.272 0.278 0.288 0.304 0.310 0.325 +0.038 +13.2
European Union 0.949 0.949 0.942 0.925 0.923 0.936 0.957 +0.008 +0.8
Eastern Europe +
Ex-Soviet Union 1.311 1.274 1.170 1.068 0.958 0.925 0.901 –0.410 –31.2
Africa 0.183 0.187 1.185 0.189 0.196 0.208 0.218 +0.035 +19.1
Asia/Pacific (total) 1.529 1.561 1.637 1.694 1.836 1.914 2.004 +0.475 +31.0

(a) , (b) and (c)

a) OECDa 3.035 3.034 3.062 3.155 3.130 3.190 3.273 +0.238 +7.8
b) Eastern Europe +
Ex-Soviet Union 1.311 1.274 1.170 1.068 0.958 0.925 0.901 –0.410 –31.2
c) Developing countries 1.774 1.794 1.874 1.894 2.127 2.225 2.339 +0.565 +31.8
World (a+b+c) 6.120 6.102 6.106 6.117 6.215 6.340 6.513 +0.394 +6.4

a Excluding Mexico. b Including Mexico.

Source: This table was constructed from data of the World Energy Council, Report No. 7, May
1997.

The differential equation represents a mass balance: [variation of atmospheric con-

centration] = [gas emitted to the atmosphere] – [gas removed from the atmosphere],
by a specific process, whose rate of removal is supposed to be proportional to the
concentration. This means that there is a partition of emissions c(t) according to
Equation (4), each part being removed from the atmosphere by a process with a
different time constant 1/ki , described by the Equation (3). The IPCC models use
such a combination of exponential decay functions with time constants 1/ki given
by the Bern model (IPCC, 1995).
The warming effect of the emitted gas is related to its permanence in the atmo-
sphere during a time period where its molecules partially absorb the thermal radi-
ation from the Earth’s surface to the external space, blocking the exit of heat and
increasing the average temperature near the Earth’s surface. This effect is driven
by radiative forcing, linked to the atmospheric gas concentration. The non-linear
characteristic of the system complicates this relationship.
We define W (t) as the cumulative contribution to global warming, expressed as
the mass of the gas multiplied by time (GtCy), as the integration of the atmospheric
concentration of the emitted gas along time with a weight function in the integrand
to simulate the climate response. Due to negative feedback of the climate system,
there is a kind of saturation of the anthropogenic contribution to the warming effect
represented by W (t) and so of the global temperature increase, which is related to
294 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

this function. It is possible to simulate the climate response by the superposition of

exponential decay functions with different decay constants w (Appendix A). So,
XX
W (t) = βj γi Wij (ki , wj , t) (5)
i j

where
Z t Z t0
−wj t 0 −(ki −wj )t 0 00
Wij (kj , wj , t) = e dt e dt 00 eki t c(t 00 ) (6)
0 0

N(t) and W (t) can be computed either by the usual way of summing up the an-
nual emissions, performing the integration through a discrete approximation, or by
analytical calculation with a linear continuous function to represent the emissions
in intervals of time:

c(t) = x + yt (7)

So, from Equation (2):

yt
Ni (ki , t) = αi + + (Ni0 − αi )e−ki t (8)
ki
where αi = x/ki − y/k12 and Ni0 form the initial value at t = 0.
We can now calculate the contribution to global warming W (t), defined above
as the integration of the atmospheric concentration from the emissions. It is ex-
pressed in GtCy and is an ingredient for the temperature increase.
In the same way, from Equation (6):
 
1 − e−wt y t 1 e−wt
Wij (k, w, t) = α + − + 2
w k w w2 w
(9)
e−wt − e−kt
+ (N0 − α) + Wij (k, w, 0)e−wt
k−w
The data of historical CO2 emissions c(t) are fitted in the time period of Tables
Ib and II to calculate the atmospheric concentration N(t) and the contributions to
global warming W (t) up to the present time, by using the above formulae. As the
emissions from firewood and other non-renewable biomass fuels are sensitive to
variations in model parameters and the data is extremely imprecise, we concentrate
our attention on fossil fuel emissions.
We performed the exercise of calculating the contributions from the OECD
countries (a), Eastern European countries and the ex-Soviet Union, and all devel-
oping countries (c). Our results for the emissions c(t), the CO2 concentration in the
atmosphere N(t) due to emissions from 1850 up to 1996, and the corresponding
contributions to temperature increase or global warming W (t) from 1900 to 1996
are shown respectively in Figures 1a–c. The parameters used are listed in Table III.
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 295
TABLE III
Parameters used for the decay of contributors of CO2
emissions to atmospheric concentration and to global
warming

For atmospheric For global

concentrationa warmingb
1/ki βi 1/wi γi
(years) (years)

330 0.216 20 0.634

80 0.392 990 0.366
20 0.294
1.6 0.098
a From Bern model (1998).
b From the revised Brazilian proposal (1998).

With regard to fossil fuel emissions, the developing countries’ share of CO2
emissions was 36% in 1996, while their share of the CO2 atmospheric concentra-
tion arising from those emissions was about 20% and their contribution to tem-
perature increase from global warming up to 1996 was only 13%. According to
Figure 1a, the present emissions level from developing countries (1) is higher
than that of Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union (2), whose emissions have
decreased markedly since the end of the 1980s. However, the curves for the CO2
atmospheric concentration from those two groups of countries (Figure 1b) crossed
one another only in 1995, while the contribution to global temperature increase
W (t) from Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union remains higher than that of
developing countries (Figure 1c).
Another point of interest is the way that Figure 1a reflects historical develop-
ment. The emissions showed very accelerated growth in the post-World War II
period, from 1950 to 1973, up to the first oil crisis. After that, there was a stagnant
period from 1973 until 1987. When the relative price of oil decreased substantially,
a strong new growth in emissions occurred (in the second half of the 1980s). They
decreased only in Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union, following the demise
of the socialist regimes there.
The present ratio between the emissions from the energy systems of all OECD
and Eastern European (EE) countries and those of developing countries is 1.8 to
1 (Figure 1a), while the corresponding ratio between their contributions to global
warming up to 1996 is about 6.0 to 1 (Figure 1c). From the World Bank Report
(1996b), the ratio between emissions was 2.87 in 1992. In contrast, from the IPCC
1995 Group III Report, the contributions in 1993 were 50.5% from the OECD and
17% from EE and the ex-Soviet Union, the sum of which was about two times the
total of all developing countries’ emissions (Banuri et al., 1996).
296 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

Figure 1. (a) CO2 emissions GtC/y; (b) CO2 Atmosphere concentration GtC; (c) CO2 contribution
global warming GtCy. (1) Past contributions from developed countries; (2) ex-socialist countries, and
(3) developing countries.

3. Contributions to CO2 Atmospheric Concentration and to Global

Temperature Increase in Different Emissions Scenarios

The present international consensus is that the annual emissions of CO2 from
developed countries must decrease in absolute terms in order to stabilize the cu-
mulative concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Rather than reducing their CO2
emissions, as developed countries must do, developing countries must reduce the
rate of increase of their emissions.
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 297

Emission scenarios have been constructed in order to apply our formulae to

forecast future CO2 atmospheric concentrations and contributions to the global
temperature increase arising from energy system emissions. Our goal here is to
make comparisons and to stress the differences between contrasting situations
rather than compete with more sophisticated works (IPCC, 1995). Our idea is
not to construct scenarios starting from projections of population, GNP, and en-
ergy consumption in the future, but to formulate hypotheses of CO2 emissions
for computing atmospheric concentration and contribution to global temperature
increase.
A continuous linear function (7) for CO2 emissions is assumed for each time
interval so that the variation in the atmospheric concentration N(t) can be obtained
by using the expression (8) for each value of ki in Equation (1). The contribution
W (t) of the emitted gas to a global temperature increase at the Earth’s surface
(expressed in GtCy) is calculated by Equation (5) above combined with Equation
(9).
Instead of using the IPCC scenarios, we built scenarios with a simple hypo-
thesis for future emissions. Our basic Scenario I has some features similar to the
IPCC-IS92a scenario. Emissions from both Annex I and Non-Annex I countries
are assumed to increase, up to about 22 GtC/y by the end of the next century,
of which about 30% will come from Annex I and about 70% from Non-Annex I
countries. Scenario II assumes a more optimistic forecast from a climate policy
point of view, although too severe for Non-Annex I countries. Scenario III tends to
be more realistic. The emissions hypotheses are:
– Scenario I – Emissions from Annex I countries (a+b), that is, developed coun-
tries (a) together with those from Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union
(b) will grow. Emissions from Non-Annex I countries, that is, developing
countries (c) will continue to increase at a constant rate, at an average rate
higher than for the period 1990–1996, until the end of next century.
– Scenario II – Emissions from Annex I countries (a+b) will grow up to 2010
and then decrease to reach the 1996 level by 2030. From then on, the level
will remain constant. Emissions from Non-Annex I countries (c) will behave
just as in Scenario I, but with a low rate of growth to reach about 8 GtC/y by
2090.
– Scenario III – Developed countries together with Eastern Europe and the ex-
Soviet Union (a+b) will reduce from their present level of emissions to reach
the same level of 1996. Developing countries (c) will show emission growth
up to a peak value of about 12 GtC/y at the end of the next century.
Figures 2–4 show the results of computations for the developed countries together
with Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union (a+b) and for developing countries
(c) in Scenarios I, II, and III, respectively.
In scenario I, the emissions from developing countries (c) will become higher
than those of developed countries, Eastern Europe, and the ex-Soviet Union (a+b)
298 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

Figure 2. Scenario I. (a) CO2 emissions GtC/y; (b) CO2 atmosphere concentration (GtC); (c) CO2
contribution to global warming (GtCy).

soon after 2010, while the curves of atmospheric concentration will cross one
another more than 45 years later, just before 2050. The respective contributions
to global temperature increase will cross only a few years before 2090. Scenario II
presents the following crossover points: by 2040 for emissions, soon after 2090 for
atmospheric concentrations, and after the end of the next century for temperature
increase contributions. In Scenario III, a more realistic scenario, the three crossover
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 299

Figure 3. Scenario II. (a) CO2 emissions GtC/y; (b) CO2 atmosphere concentration (GtC); (c) CO2
contribution to global warming (GtCy).

points of the curves representing Annex I and Non-Annex I contributions are:

before 2010 for emissions, by 2050 for atmospheric concentration, and by 2090
for global warming.
In all of the above scenarios, both the total contribution to CO2 atmospheric
concentration and the total contribution to temperature increase do not stabilize in
spite of the stabilization of total emissions of Annex I. We consider here purely and
simply the stabilization of CO2 from fossil fuel emissions.
300 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

Figure 4. Scenario III. (a) CO2 emissions GtC/y; (b) CO2 atmosphere concentration (GtC); (c) CO2
contribution to global warming (GtCy).
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 301

To complete this section, Figure 5 shows the per capita emissions as well as
the per capita contribution to global warming (W (t) per capita) for the groups
of countries (a+b) and (c) until the year 2100 in our Scenario III. This scenario
is considered more realistic. For the population growth, we used the scenarios (1)
IS92a, IS92b, and IS92c from IPCC and (2) the IASA Low Scenario (IPCC, 1995).
We conclude this section by stressing that the per capita emissions of the de-
veloped countries, together with Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union (a+b),
will remain higher than that of the developing countries (c). However, we cannot
conclude from the hypotheses that the same ratio will necessarily occur between
the energy consumption per capita of (a+b) and of (c). The use of renewable energy
without carbon emissions can change this ratio, as can the improvement of energy
efficiency to provide a better use of energy.

4. Comparison between Countries with Different Levels of Emissions

It is possible to use our calculations for hypothetical cases of countries with differ-
ent emissions levels using the linear fitting of past contributions. Let us consider
a developed country A and two developing countries B and C, such that not only
the per capita emissions but also the total emissions of A is substantially higher
than those of B and of C. It is possible to formulate a simple approximation for
calculating the order of magnitude of global warming contributions from their past
emissions. To apply our formulae, we chose the present emissions of the three
hypothetical countries A, B, and C. The emissions of A are similar to those of the
USA, which are around 1.3 GtC/year according to the World Bank Report (1996b).
That of B is similar to the Brazilian emissions, which are 0.08 GtC/year, including
emissions from non-renewable biomass, which were not considered by the report.
Finally, C can be considered analogous to small African countries emitting 0.01
GtC/y.
Table IV shows the results for N(t) and W (t), considering only the emissions up
to 1996 when the emissions of B and C are respectively 6% and 0.7% of that of A.
As we can see, the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 remaining in the atmosphere
in 1996, due to past cumulative emissions from B and C, are respectively 2.9%
and 0.2% that of A. The contributions from B and C to global warming, given by
Equation (5), are 1.7% and 0.1% that of A in 1996.
In B, we consider an emission pattern similar to the one of the Brazil energy
system. However, if we include land uses and CH4 besides CO2, the emissions of
Brazil must be higher.
Addendum 2 of the FCCC/CP Report (1996) shows that CO2 emissions from
the USA increased from 1.34 GtCy in 1992 to 1.39 GtCy in 1994. This means an
increase of 3.7%. Those of Japan increased by 4.5% in the same period. According
to data from the World Bank (1996b), per capita CO2 emissions in 1992 (expressed
in tC/capita) are: low income countries 0.35; low income countries excluding China
302 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

Figure 5. Per capita emissions and contributions to global warming. (a) Forcast of population growth
(109 ); (b) emissions per capita (103 GtC/y); (c) per capita contribution to warming (103 GtCy). (c)
W (t) per capita – in Scenario III – (1) IPPC, (2) from IASA low scenario.
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 303
TABLE IV
Comparison of global warming contributions from three countries with different
past and present CO2 emissions

Countries A B C

Emissions in 1996 1.3 GtC/year 0.08 GtCr/year 0.01 GtC/year

B/A = 6.1% C/A = 0.7%

Past emissions
Gas remaining in 37.3 GtC 1.1 GtC 0.1 GtC
atmosphere – 1996 B/A = 2.9% C/A = 0.2%
Global warming from 859.9 GtCy 14.7 GtCy 1.5 GtCy
emissions until 1996 B/A = 1.7% C/A = 0.1%
Emission values are in gigatons of carbon emitted as CO2 per year. Contributions
to global warming are proportional to gigatons of carbon × year. Past emissions
extrapolated from Table Ib: developed countries for A and developing countries for
B and C.

and India 0.12; middle income countries 0.96; high middle income 1.14; and high
income countries 3.28. The world average is 0.94.
The ratio between the maximum and minimum per capita emissions in the above
figures is 27.3.
Therefore, the argument that emissions per year from developing countries will
surpass those from developed countries in the near future is not a good reason for
discarding the developed countries’ commitment to CO2 abatement. Our results
in Section 3 show that the contribution to global temperature of the developed
countries and Eastern Europe, including the ex-Soviet Union, will remain higher
than that of the developing countries for a long time into the next century.

5. Final Comments

The estimate of the incremental contribution of the carbon dioxide emissions from
different countries to the global temperature increase, at the Earth’s surface, can
be considered in a practical manner for policy measures concerning GHG abate-
ment.? Our model provides a reasonably reliable tool for first calculations with that
purpose.
The results of this paper have shown that developing countries cannot follow
the same path as developed countries, which have high per capita energy and high
per capita CO2 emissions levels. However, the gap between per capita emissions as
well as between per capita contribution to global warming from Annex I, mainly
? Brazilian Proposal.
304 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

developed countries, and from Non-Annex I countries will remain in the next cen-
tury in the current scenarios. This point reinforces the relevance of the equity issue
in climate policy.
There is a tendency in recent discussions on CO2 abatement at the international
level to reduce CDM? to something like Joint Implementation (JI), restricted to
business among big private companies only. However, there is a contradiction in
this reduction since the spirit of CDM, according the original proposal discussed
in Kyoto, is completely different from the previous JI. Some developing countries,
like Brazil, did not support the former JI because of the question of emission credit
transfer. This concern of developing countries with very low energy per capita as
well as low emissions per capita is basically correct.

Acknowledgements

While this article was under review by the journal, the authors received a copy of
the manuscript ‘In defense of historical accountability for Greenhouse Gas Emis-
sions’ by Eric Newmayer, accepted for publication in Ecological Economics, con-
taining, in general, ideas which are similar to the ones presented in this paper.
The authors are grateful to Maria Silvia Muylaert for her cooperation in the revi-
sion of the text. They also acknowledge the National Council of Research (CNPq),
the Ministry of Science and Technology (Global Climate Change Department), and
the Foundation for Research Support of Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ).

Appendix A: Related to Section 2

Computation of the CO2 Atmospheric Concentration from Emissions and the

Contribution to Global Temperature Increase
To calculate the level of gas which remains in the atmosphere as well as its con-
tribution to global warming, we can assume a linear growth in CO2 emissions c(t)
for each time interval:

c(t) = x + yt (A1)

The IPCC models use a linear combination of exponential functions with different
time constants, given by the Bern model for the decay of CO2 atmospheric con-
centration from emissions. In a single exponential approximation, we can calculate
the gas remaining in the atmosphere N(t) in any year t by solving the differential
equation:
dN
= x + yt − kN (A2)
dt
? Clean Development Mechanism.
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 305

where 1/k is the mean life of the gas in the atmosphere. From this simple equation,
we can generalize the results to use the Bern model. The result in such an ap-
proximation (A2) is the atmospheric concentration of CO2 due the anthropogenic
emissions (A1):
Z
0
N(t) = c(t 0 )e−k(t −t ) dt 0 (A20 )

which gives:
yt
N(t) = α + + (N0 − α)e−kt (A3)
k
where:
x y
α= − 2
k k
and N0 form the initial value of Nt , at t = 0. The contribution of the emitted gas to
global temperature increase at the Earth’s surface, due to the GHG warming effect,
is proportional to the integral
Z t
0
W (t) = N(t 0 )e−w(t −t ) dt 0 . (A4)
0

where w represents the time constant of the climate response. So, from Equations
(A3) and (A4):
 
1 − e−wt y t 1 e−wt
W (t) = α + − + 2
w k w w2 w
(A5)
−wt −kt
e −e −−wt
+ (N0 − α) + W (0)e
k−w
Instead of a single exponential description of the climate response, we can also use
a superposition of exponential functions to generalize this result.
As the statistical data for calculating emissions from energy consumption is
annual, we must transform it into a continuous emission distribution over time.
Assuming a linear growth from year 1 to year N and annual emissions in those
years to be, respectively, a1 and aN :
Z Nτ
c(t)dt = aN
(N−1)τ
Z τ
c(t)dt = a1
0

we have:
aN − a1
y= (A6)
(N − 1)τ 2
306 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

aN y
x= − τ (A60 )
τ 2
where τ = 1 given year. The above corrections for using annual emissions data are
important only when we consider emissions of a few years ago. They are irrelevant
for cumulative emissions over an extensive period of many years.
The annual emissions are usually considered as distinct pulses εj in each year
tj instead of continuous distributions c(t). In this approximation, we can rewrite
Equation (A2) as:
X
c(t) = εj δ(t − tj ) (A7)
j

where δ(t − tj ) is the Dirac distribution. So, it is not difficult to show that:
Z X
0
N(t) = c(t 0 )e−k(t −t ) dt 0 = εj e−k(t −tj ) (A30 )
j

XX
W (t) = εj e−k(t −tj ) E −w(t −tj ) (A50 )
i j

The IPCC model uses a linear combination of exponentials with different time
constants. For this reason, we must use a differential equation of type (A2) for
each ki and divide the emissions c(t) in three parts:
X
c(t) = βj ci (t) (A8)
j

each one governed by the respective Equation (A2) with the corresponding ki .
As the Equations (A3) and (A30 ) are linear with respect to the factor βi , we can
generalize them:
X
N(t) = βi N(ki , t) (A9)
i

In the same way, it is possible to describe the climate response through a super-
position of exponential functions with different time constants wi , each component
affected by a factor γi
XX
W (t) = γj βi W (ki , wj , t) (A10)
i j

where N(ki , t) and W (ki , wj , t) are given respectively by Equations (A3) and (A5)
or (A30 ) and (A50 ), with ki in the place of k and wi in the place.
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING OF CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUELS 307

References

Agarwal, A. and Narain, S.: 1991, Global Warming in an Unequal World, Centre for Science and
Environment, New Delhi.
Banuri, T. et al.: 1996, in IPCC, 1995, Working Group III Report, 1996 FCCC/CP, Framework of the
Climate Change Convention, Addendum 2 of the Report, pp. 47 and 49.
Cubasch, U., Hasselmann, K., Hock, H., Maier-Reimer, E., Mikoiajewicz, U., Santer, B. D.,
and Sausen, R.: ‘Time-Dependent Greenhouse Warming Computations with a Coupled Ocean
Atmosphere Model, Climate Dynamics 8, 55–69.
Den Elzen, M., Berk, M., Schaeffer, M., Oliver, J., Hendriks, C., and Metz, B.: 1999, ‘The Brazilian
Proposal and Other Options for International Burden Sharing: An Evaluation of Methodological
and Policy Aspects Using the FAIR Model, National Institute of Public Health and Environment’,
The Netherlands, presented and discussed in the Expert Meeting, INPE, C. Paulista.
Enting, I. E.: 1998, Attribution of GHG Emissions, Concentrations and Radiative Forcing, Technical
Paper 38, CSIRO.
Fuglevesdt, J. and Berntsen, T.: 1999: A Simple Model for Scenarios Studies in Global Climate,
CICERO, Working Paper 2, University of Oslo.
Fuji, Y.: 1990, Working Paper WP-05-55, Luxemburg, I I A S A.
Goldemberg, J. et al.: 1996, in IPCC, 1995 Working Group III Report.
Grubb, M.: 1995, ‘Seeking Fair Weather: Ethics and International Debate on Climate Change’,
International Affairs 1, 463–496.
Grubb, M.: 1996, ‘Seeking Fair Weather: Ethics and International Debate on Climate Change’, in
Rosa L. P. and Santos M. A. (eds.), Greenhouse Gas Emission from Developing Countries’ Point
of View, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, February.
Grubler, A. and Nakicenovic, N.: 1991, International Burden Sharing in GHG Reduction, World
Bank.
Hasselmann, K., Saucen, R., Maier-Reimer, E., and Voss, R.: 1993, ‘On the Gold Start Transient
Simulations with Coupled Atmosphere-Ocean Models’, Climate Dynamics 9, 53.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change): 1996, in Bruce, J., Lee, H., and Haites, E. (eds),
1995 Working Group III Report, Cambridge University Press.
Martin, J.: 1990, L’Économie mondiale de l’énergie, Ed. La Découverte, Paris.
Meira, L. G.: 1999, ‘Note on the Time Dependent Relationship between Emissions of GHG and
Climate Change’, Ministry of Science and Technology, Brasilia, Brazil, presented and discussed
in the Expert Meeting, INPE, C. Paulista.
Meira, L. G. and Miguez, J. D.: 1998, ‘Time Dependent Relationship between Emissions of
Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change’, Ministry of Science and Technology, Brasilia.
Meyer, A.: 1995, IPCC Workshop on Equity and Social Considerations, Nairobi.
Ribeiro, S. K. and Rosa, L. P.: 1997, ‘South–South North Partnership on Climate Change and Green-
house Gas Emissions’, in Ribeiro, S. K. and Rosa, L. P. (eds.), ENERGE – COPPE – UFRJ,
Proceedings of the International Workshop on GHG Emissions and Climate Change, Parallel
Event during the Rio Plus Five Conference, Rio de Janeiro.
Rosa, L. P.: 1997, ‘Activities Implemented Jointly to Mitigate Climate Change’, in Chatterjee, K.
(ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Jointly Implemented Activities, New Delhi, Chapter 2 of
Section 1.
Rosa, L. P. and Ribeiro, S. K.: 1998, ‘The Share of Responsibility between Developed and Devel-
oping Countries in Climate Change, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation’, in Riemer, P. W. F., Smith,
A. Y., and Thambimuthu, K. V., Proceedings from the International Energy Agency Conference
on GHG, Vancouver, 1997, Pergamon Press.
Rosa, L. P. and Tolmasquim, M.: 1993, ‘An Analytical Model to Compare Energy Efficiency Indexes
and CO2 Emissions’, Energy Policy 21, 3.
308 LUIZ PINGUELLI ROSA AND SUZANA KAHN RIBEIRO

Smith, K. R.: 1995, ‘The Natural Debt of North and South’, in T. Giambelluca et al. (eds.), Climate
Change: Developing Southern Perspectives, Wiley, New York.
World Bank: 1996a, The AIJ Program at The World Bank, Global Environmental Division, 72.
World Bank: 1996b, World Development Report 1996, Oxford University Press, 256.

(Received 2 December 1997; in revised form 12 April 2000)