WWF Climate Blog

Report on international emissions inventories compares apples and oranges

In a new report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an agency of the U.S. Congress,  evaluates a selection of greenhouse gas inventories submitted to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  It reports that most experts believe the current inventory system is "generally sufficient for monitoring compliance with current agreements." It however finds that inventories from developing countries in particular need to be improved under any future agreement to curb emissions.  Unfortunately, the improvements that countries are making in that direction were not mentioned in the report.

The GAO report “The Quality, Comparability, and Review of Emissions Inventories Vary Between Developed and Developing Nations” [PDF] compared the 2009 inventories from various industrialized countries listed in Annex I of the UNFCCC (Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) to the inventories submitted by a set of high-emitting countries not listed in Annex I (Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico and South Korea).

Unsurprisingly, the GAO found that the seven Annex 1 nations produced generally high-quality inventories whereas the inventories for the selected Non-Annex 1 countries were dated and of lower quality – mainly because the current inventory system does not require the same quality of inventories from these countries. This is no news at all: the difference between Annex 1 and Non-Annex 1 inventories is well recognized. Improving Non-Annex 1 inventories is a point on which the U.S. agrees with many Non-Annex 1 countries.  

Unfortunately, the GAO report did not have the mandate to cover the important progress that Non-Annex 1 nations have made in preparing their next emissions inventories that have not yet been submitted to the UNFCCC.  For example, in Copenhagen, China committed to begin emissions inventories every two years and is completing its inventory for the year 2005 – scheduled for submission in 2011. India adopted the same commitment and released its 2007 inventory in June 2010 (see: India: Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2007 [PDF]).  Brazil also has developed a state of the art deforestation monitoring system, addressing one of the largest sources of emissions.  

In its 2009 report to the UNFCCC (See: Report of the Global Environment Facility to the Conference of the Parties [PDF]), The Global Environment Facility – which provides funds for developing country inventories – also indicated that South Africa's and Malaysia's inventories were more than 75% completed, Indonesia's inventory was completed and should be submitted soon, and Brazil's was 50-75% completed.  These new inventories will most likely have an increased scope, substantially improved data, and include uncertainty analyses.  All of this will make their inventories more comparable to those of Annex 1 countries. For example, China's 2005 inventory will include HFCs, PFCs and SF₆  –  GHGs gases that were excluded in its previous inventory.  It will also use updated emission factors for many industries, reducing the uncertainty of the calculations.

WWF’s recent report, Counting the Gigatonnes: Building trust in greenhouse gas inventories from the United States and China [PDF], provides a description of China's progress in its 2005 inventory. Our research found that China’s measurement system for its energy intensity targets – from which the largest source of emissions are calculated – actually has more spot-checking and auditing in place than the U.S. energy use measurement system, which does not need audits since there are no mandatory targets. 

It is important to understand the source of the difference between inventories of Annex 1 and Non-Annex 1 countries. When the UNFCCC was signed in 1992 and the rules for national inventories were devised, the distinctions between industrialized and developing nations were clearer and so were the level of emissions. Given that developed nations had a much higher share of annual and historical emissions, the Convention was founded on the premise that developed nations should move first to reduce their own emissions. This implied that developed countries needed more accurate data to count their emissions reductions. This was a logical decision since it would not have been a good use of resources to measure with great accuracy the proportionally smaller amount of emissions that came from developing countries, particularly from the many least developed countries.

Over the years, the mandate to produce accurate annual inventories has helped Annex 1 countries develop a good institutional capacity to carry out these inventories, whereas Non-Annex 1 countries have only done the inventories sporadically with no domestic institutional structures to support them. However, high-emitting developing countries are recognizing that they need to build this capacity to be able to produce more regular inventories that are needed in order to understand whether they are progressing towards their goals. India, China and Mexico -- to mention a few countries -- are working hard in doing so. Unfortunately, the GAO did not fully acknowledge that progress.

It is clear that inventories from major emitting countries need to be improved and that there should be a review process to assess the quality of the data and compliance with the guidelines. But the fact that this progress is not in place now is no excuse for perpetual inaction by the United States, as advocated by Congressmen Joe Barton and Michael Burgess (R-Texas) in their reaction to the report (See: House Republicans use GAO report to bash climate proposals).

Even if they don't have the perfect system in place yet to measure  their emissions, many high-emitting developing countries are acting to reduce their emissions. We need to collaborate and build capacity in these countries so that we can learn from each other. But most importantly, we need to act to reduce our own emissions in the U.S. There is no point in a perfect measurement system for pollution, unless we actually have targets for pollution reduction that we are measuring ourselves against.

The old saying says that you should “Measure twice and cut once.” Well, in the U.S. we have measured our emissions 14 times now in quite detailed inventories. Where is the binding commitment to cut?

Counting the Gigatonnes: Building trust in greenhouse gas inventories from the United States and China [PDF].WWF, June 2010.

The Quality, Comparability, and Review of Emissions Inventories Vary Between Developed and Developing Nations[PDF]. U.S. Government Accountability Office. July 2010.

House Republicans use GAO report to bash climate proposals. The Hill E2 Wire Energy and Environment Blog. (08/04/10)

India: Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2007 [PDF]. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Government of India. May 2010.

Report of the Global Environment Facility to the Conference of the Parties. UNFCCC. (10/27/09)

• China’s Emissions Do Not Go Uncounted (06/07/10)
• Texas Congressman in Copenhagen Dismisses Climate Science: "We don’t have an icecap in Texas" (12/23/2009)