After Trillions of Dollars And 13 Climate Conferences, CO2 Emissions Reach New Record High!

Michael Krueger at German skeptic site Science Skeptical here writes that in 2015 global CO2 emissions reached another new all-time record high, despite all the elaborate climate conferences and hundreds of billions of dollars invested in curbing global “greenhouse gases”.

Krueger asks: What have all the climate conferences brought us since the first UN conference took place in Berlin in 1995?

Over the past 20 years global fossil fuel CO2 emissions have skyrocketed some 50%, from 22.2 billion tonnes per year to 33.5 billion tonnes in 2015. The 2015 figure was a new record high, defying the prognoses of experts who had expected to see a trend reversal by now. See the following charts:


Chronology of UN climate conferences

1 1995: Berlin (COP 1)
2 1996: Geneva (COP 2)
3 2005: Montreal (COP 11/CMP 1)
4 2006 Nairobi (COP 12/CMP 2)
5 2007: Bali (COP 13/CMP 3)
6 2008: Posen
7 2009: Copenhagen
8 2010: Cancún
9 2011: Durban
10 2012: Doha
11 2013: Warsaw
12 2014: Lima
13 2015: Paris
14 2016: Marrakesh

13 UN climate conferences have not led to any reduction in CO2 emissions. The reductions achieved by Russia and Europe were more than completely eliminated by China and India alone – never mind the other developing countries.

Krueger asks: What about Germany?

He writes that Germany recently signed on to the Paris Agreement with not a single Parliamentarian voting against it. This means that Germany commits itself to reduce its CO2 emissions by 95% by 2050 (compared to 1990 levels). However, Germany has not cut its CO2 emissions at all over the past 7 years, despite the last 3 winters being mild ones.

Krueger sums up:

Despite Germany accounts for only 3% of the world’s CO2 emissions, and has not had any reduction in CO2 emissions since 2009, a reduction of a few percent by Germany will mean very little.”


21 responses to “After Trillions of Dollars And 13 Climate Conferences, CO2 Emissions Reach New Record High!”

  1. Henning Nielsen

    Has any country really committed to cuts in co2 emissions by signing the Paris treaty? I doubt that. And no doubt that is also why German politicians don’t worry about this. Come 2050, with no cuts in Germany’s emissions compared to 1990, how would the world punish Germany? Oh, I know. By forbidding them to attend climate conferences.

  2. John Silver

    Wonderful news!
    Our food supply is secured.

    1. John Silver
  3. BobW in NC

    So – I am curious. What are the estimated TOTAL “emissions” (natural and anthropogenic) for the world in 2015. The figure of “33.5 billion tonnes in 2015” sounds scary, but the last I heard, anthropogenic emissions accounted for a trivial ~3% to 5% of total.

    1. Pete

      Climate alarmists use yearly quanta (example – 33.5 billion tonnes in 2015)to try to impress the people, but CO2 is not released in batches on the first of January of each year, but released in a continuous rate. The anthropogenic portion of CO2 release being 385 tonnes of carbon per second while the resident carbon in the hydro- and atmospheres is 38,000 Gigatonnes.

      1. BobW in NC

        Excellent! Thank you, Pete!

  4. Pete

    The total combined mass of ‘carbon’ in the shape of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere and hydrosphere is 38,000 Gt (Gigatonnes).

    The daily global anthropogenic carbon emissions amount to 0.0247 Gt which add up to just 0.0000634% of the 38,0000Gt of resident carbon in the atmosphere and hydrosphere.

    I would be very happy if someone can explain to me how this human-made insignificance (0.0000634%) can alter the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere and oceans. There must be another source or reason for the increase in atmospheric CO2 during the past half century.

    1. David Appell

      Pete, this is easy, well-known, uncontroversial stuff. Please go read some elementary Web sites on the carbon cycles, or books (like David Archer’s), instead of expecting someone to feed you with a spoon.

  5. sod

    Look at the flat top of that graph.

    This might be your last chance to celebrate a record. Enjoy!

    1. John F. Hultquist

      When a person is very young they grow in height quite rapidly until about age 17 or 18. Then height stabilizes – at about 65 or 70 becoming shorter is the issue. I was quite happy to have stopped growing taller.

      Societies across the world have been growing, developing, industrializing. Energy, mostly from carbon based fuel, was needed to make this happen. As societies stabilize various things happen, including innovation and efficiencies**.
      That some countries, and then the world, go through these processes and reach record emissions, then level, then decline seems to be a good thing, and worthy of celebrating. People are becoming better fed and healthier. I remember Polio, do you? I remember a cold house in the morning, do you? I remember walking to grade school in freezing temperatures, do you? I remember summer nights that were so hot we could not sleep, do you?

      **Just one example: My first car was a 1957 Ford that got about 10 miles per gallon of gas. Now my car gets about 30 mpg. I live in a rural area and I cart a lot of stuff around. Otherwise, I could buy a car that would get 40. If I lived in a big city I could do with and EV (or maybe none). Ten years from now I likely won’t need a car, but if I do EVs will have improved so much I likely could get by with one. Where I live the electrons would come from hydro-power, Texas – wind, Southern CA & AZ – solar. I think “nukes” are better than wind and solar (it is a land use issue for me because I enjoy natural landscapes).

    2. David Johnson

      It’s not flat, however it does show that you need to make an appointment to see your optician

    3. AndyG55

      Hey sop.

      Look at India’s coal desires

      Please, for your tiny amount of remaining sanity, try to come to grips with the FACT that global CO2 emissions will continue to climb and climb, regardless.. or more correctly, because of… the anti-CO2 agenda that you so worship.

    4. DirkH

      sod 16. October 2016 at 10:45 PM | Permalink | Reply
      “This might be your last chance to celebrate a record. Enjoy!”

      Well, as Green politicians from the SPD and CDU continue to ramp up the subsidation of wastefulness in the form of wind turbines and electric cars, we can foresee ever higher energy needs to assemble and maintain these subsidized energy sinks. So as long as the total misdirection of human productivity gets worse, energy waste will rise, and CO2 emissions will rise.

      Maybe that is not what the Greens wanted – but they wanted subsidized energy sink gadgets so waste is what they get.

      You either do the maths or you pay for it.

  6. Derek Colman

    None of the western countries have reduced CO2 emissions at all. In fact they have greatly increased them, but hidden the fact by transferring production of consumer goods to China, India, and many other developing countries. The CO2 may have been emitted in developing countries, but the produce of those emissions ended up in American and European homes and driveways.

  7. edmh

    According to BP published data In 2015 the global average for CO2 production was ~4.5 tonnes per head.

    However ~53% of world population, 3.8 billion people, including India and other underdeveloped nations had average emissions of ~1.7 tonnes/head. To bring the standards of living of this 53% of the world population up to the current global average would take extra CO2 emissions of ~11 billion tonnes per annum, bringing global annual emissions to ~46 billion tonnes per annum.

    Note that:
    • France already has CO2 emissions of 4.4 tonnes/head just below the global average
    • China has CO2 emissions of ~6.4 tonnes / head ~45% above the global average
    • the EU as a whole now has CO2 emission only ~53% above the global average


  8. richard verney

    the facts are quite simple:

    1. Only America, which did not sign up to Kyoto and was much criticised by the greens/lefties for not doing so, is the only developed country that has significantly cut CO2 emissions.
    2. America achieved the reduction in CO2 emissions by fracking. The switch from coal to gas.
    3. Europe has had no real success in reducing CO2 emissions despite its pursuit of wind and solar. This is because this technolology produces energy that is intermittent and non despatchable. It requires 100% backup from fossil fuel CO2 emitting power generation.
    4. In the absence of geothermal, hydro or some radical breakthrough in enery storrage/batteries, wind and soolar will never result in any meaningful reduction in CO2. The pursuit of such energy generation merely hikes the cost of nergy to the detriment of all.
    5. Further to 4 above, if one wants to reduce CO2 emissions then the only viable option is either to frack and switch everything to gas, or to go nuclear.
    6. The greens hate fracking and hate nuclear but these are the only viable options for reducing CO2.

    Of course CO2 is not a problem. The atmosphere is currently CO2 defficient. Likewise warming is not a problem, we are in an ice age, very fortunate for us that we are in an interglacial which is more than half way through its projected life span. If by some happy coincidence mans emissions of CO2 leads to some warming that is a double benefit. That scenario is a win win scenario, but unfortunately there is no compelling evidence that CO2 emissions drive temperatures upwards in any significant way.

    1. John Silver

      “if one wants to reduce CO2 emissions then the only viable option is either to frack and switch everything to gas, or to go nuclear.”

      No, there is another option, viable or not. Reduce demand by reducing the population; the goal of the globalists.
      It will be increasingly clear how they want to do it.

  9. DennisA

    The number of COPS (and robbers) is 21, with 22 coming up.

    “The 22nd session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 22) to the UNFCCC is scheduled to take place from 7-18 November 2016. During COP 22, parties will, inter alia, begin preparations for entry into force of the Paris Agreement.”

  10. tom0mason

    Excellent news!
    That well keep the planet green.


  11. terastienstra

    These graphs are all based on calculations, nothing to do with the atmospheric CO2 content. The concentration measured at Mauna Loa will continue to rise (or fall) whatever mankind does with its 3% contribution.

  12. Rob

    Excellent post Pierre

    Now you just need to compare temperature rises since year 2000 (flat) with increase in CO2 emissions.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy