We present a framework for allocating a global carbon reduction target among nations, in which the concept of ''common but differentiated responsibilities'' refers to the emissions of individuals instead of nations. We use the income distribution of a country to estimate how its fossil fuel CO2 emissions are distributed among its citizens, from which we build up a global CO2 distribution. We then propose a simple rule to derive a universal cap on global individual emissions and find corresponding limits on national aggregate emissions from this cap. All of the world's high CO2-emitting individuals are treated the same, regardless of where they live. Any future global emission goal (target and time frame) can be converted into national reduction targets, which are determined by ''Business as Usual'' projections of national carbon emissions and in-country income distributions. For example, reducing projected global emissions in 2030 by 13 GtCO2 would require the engagement of 1.13 billion high emitters, roughly equally distributed in 4 regions: the U.S., the OECD minus the U.S., China, and the non-OECD minus China. We also modify our methodology to place a floor on emissions of the world's lowest CO2 emitters and demonstrate that climate mitigation and alleviation of extreme poverty are largely decoupled.climate change ͉ climate equity ͉ climate policy ͉ individual emissions ͉ inequality T he 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) created a 2-tier world. It called upon the developed (''Annex I'') countries to ''take the lead'' in reducing carbon emissions, and, under the principle of ''common but differentiated responsibilities,'' established no time frame for developing countries to follow. However, a consensus is now emerging in favor of low stabilization targets. These targets cannot be achieved without the participation of developing countries, which today emit about half of global CO 2 emissions and whose future emissions increase faster than the emissions of industrialized countries under ''business as usual '' scenarios (1).On what terms should developing countries participate? There are many proposals, each buttressed by some appeal to ''fairness.'' Per capita allocation is widely acknowledged to represent the only equitable goal in the long term, but intermediate steps are required in the short-to-medium term. Uniform percentage reductions in emissions across all countries are rightly rejected by all parties, on the grounds that industrialized countries must create headroom for developing countries. Here, we offer a different approach: An allocation of national targets for fossilfuel CO 2 emissions derived from a fairness principle based on the ''common but differentiated responsibilities'' of individuals, rather than nations. Our proposal moves beyond per capita considerations to identify the world's high-emitting individuals, who are present in all countries.Our approach is designed to blend parsimony, fairness, and pragmatism-treat equally those with the same emissions, whe...

Abstract. The interaction of mineral dust with N 2 O 5 was investigated using both airborne mineral aerosol (using an aerosol flow reactor with variable relative humidity) and bulk samples (using a Knudsen reactor at zero humidity). Both authentic (Saharan, SDCV) and synthetic dust samples (Arizona test dust, ATD and calcite, CaCO 3 ) were used to derive reactive uptake coefficients (γ ). The aerosol experiments (Saharan dust only) indicated efficient uptake, with e.g. a value of γ (SDCV)=(1.3±0.2)×10 −2 obtained at zero relative humidity. The values of γ obtained for bulk substrates in the Knudsen reactor studies are upper limits due to assumptions of available surface area, but were in reasonable agreement with the AFT measurements, with: γ (SDCV)=(3.7±1.2)×10 −2 , γ (ATD)=(2.2±0.8)×10 −2 and γ (CaCO 3 )=(5±2)×10 −2 . The errors quoted are statistical only. The results are compared to literature values and assessed in terms of their impact on atmospheric N 2 O 5 .

This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy is furnished to the author for non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the author's institution, sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Almost 20 years ago, the first CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) project began injecting CO 2 into a deep geological formation in an offshore aquifer. Relevant science has advanced in areas such as chemical engineering, geophysics, and social psychology. Governments have generously funded demonstrations. As a result, a handful of industrial-scale CCS projects are currently injecting about 15 megatons of CO 2 underground annually that contribute to climate change mitigation. However, CCS is struggling to gain a foothold in the set of options for dealing with climate change. This review explores why and discusses critical conditions for CCS to emerge as a viable mitigation option. Explanations for this struggle include the absence of government action on climate change, economic crisis-induced low carbon prices, public skepticism, increasing costs, and advances in other options including renewables and shale gas. Climate change action is identified as a critical condition for progress in CCS, in addition to community support, safe storage, robust policy support, and favorable CCS market conditions.

Much discussion has surrounded possible alternatives for international agreements on climate change, particularly post-2012. Among these alternatives, technology-oriented agreements (TOAs) are perhaps the least well defined. We explore what TOAs may consist of, why they might be sensible, which TOAs already exist in international energy and environmental governance, and whether they could make a valuable contribution to addressing climate change. We find that TOAs aimed at knowledge sharing and coordination, research, development, or demonstration could increase the overall efficiency and effectiveness of international climate cooperation, but are likely to have limited environmental effectiveness on their own. Technology-transfer agreements are likely to have similar properties unless the level of resources expended is large, in which case they could be environmentally significant. Technology-specific mandates or incentives could be environmentally effective within the applicable sector, but are more likely to make a cost-effective contribution when viewed as a complement to rather than a substitute for flexible emissions-based policies. These results indicate that TOAs could potentially provide a valuable contribution to the global response to climate change. The success of specific TOAs will depend on their design, implementation, and the role they are expected to play relative to other components of the policy portfolio. r

No abstract

No abstract

a b s t r a c tClosing the gap between carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) rhetoric and technical progress is critically important to global climate mitigation efforts. Developing strong international cooperation on CCS demonstration with global coordination, transparency, cost-sharing and communication as guiding principles would facilitate efficient and cost-effective collaborative global learning on CCS, would allow for improved understanding of the global capacity and applicability of CCS, and would strengthen global trust, awareness and public confidence in the technology.