The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post-2000 emission trends
Abstract
The 2007 Bali conference heard repeated calls for reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions of 50 per cent by 2050 to avoid exceeding the 2°C threshold. While such endpoint targets dominate the policy agenda, they do not, in isolation, have a scientific basis and are likely to lead to dangerously misguided policies. To be scientifically credible, policy must be informed by an understanding of cumulative emissions and associated emission pathways. This analysis considers the implications of the 2°C threshold and a range of post-peak emission reduction rates for global emission pathways and cumulative emission budgets. The paper examines whether empirical estimates of greenhouse gas emissions between 2000 and 2008, a period typically modelled within scenario studies, combined with short-term extrapolations of current emissions trends, significantly constrains the 2000–2100 emission pathways. The paper concludes that it is increasingly unlikely any global agreement will deliver the radical reversal in emission trends required for stabilization at 450 ppmv carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e). Similarly, the current framing of climate change cannot be reconciled with the rates of mitigation necessary to stabilize at 550 ppmv CO 2 e and even an optimistic interpretation suggests stabilization much below 650 ppmv CO 2 e is improbable.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
Canadell, J. G., Le Quéré, C., Raupach, M. R., Field, C. B., Buitenhuis, E. T., Ciais, P., Conway, T. J., Gillett, N. P., Houghton, R. A., & Marland, G. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0702737104 · Cited by 2,136
Cited by
Carbon capture and storage: how green can black be
Haszeldine, R. S. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1172246 · Cited by 2,021
Negative emissions physically needed to keep global warming below 2 °C
Gasser, T., Guivarch, C., Tachiiri, K., Jones, C. D., & Ciais, P. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms8958 · Cited by 374
The geopolitics of energy system transformation: A review
Blondeel, M., Bradshaw, M. J., Bridge, G., & Kuzemko, C. (2021) · Geography Compass · doi:10.1111/gec3.12580 · Cited by 341
Energy, Economic Growth and Environmental Sustainability: Five Propositions
Sorrell, S. (2010) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su2061784 · Cited by 143
Metadata
- Authors
- Anderson, K., & Bows, A.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2008-08-29
- Volume
- 366
- Issue
- 1882
- Pages
- 3863-3882
- ISSN
- 1364-503X (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2962
- OpenAlex
- W2101058796
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 100.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post-2000 emission trends. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rsta.2008.0138
- The paper
- Anderson, K., & Bows, A. (2008). Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post-2000 emission trends. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0138
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.