Notes on the CO2 clock of the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC)

The clock indicates how many years the remaining budget would last if emissions remained the same. You can choose between the 2°C and 1.5°C scenarios.

The CO2 clock is intended to illustrate how tight the remaining budgets are. The terms "2°C scenario" and "1.5°C scenario" are perhaps somewhat misleading, as it will not be the case that we emit at the same level every year for a certain period of time and then suddenly emit nothing at all from one year to the next. If you double the years given, you get roughly the years until emissions neutrality would have to be achieved with a linear reduction path. Here is a web app with which you can derive global linear emission paths and also take an overshoot into account: http://global-paths.climate-calculator.info

Please also note that the remaining budgets used were based on a compliance probability of only 66%. However, the closer we get to the 2°C limit, the more certain we should be that we will actually comply with it, as otherwise we are playing Russian roulette with the tipping points in the climate system. The 2°C scenario should therefore actually be based on a significantly lower remaining budget than the MCC's CO2 clock does.

Here a detailed description of the MCC's CO2 clock.

More information on this topic can be found on our website at "CO2 budget".

A brief overview of the remaining global CO2 budget to Paris-compatible national CO2 budgets here: co2-budgets.save-the-climate.info.

How an effective CO2 price with a climate dividend works

If all fossil fuels are priced uniformly according to their carbon content, then the end consumer prices of all products across all value chains reflect the CO2 footprint in the price.

All companies in the supply chain have an incentive to reduce the carbon footprint of their products in order to make more profit and remain competitive.

Consumers can then also consider whether the benefits of a product are still worth the price or whether they see alternatives. If the end consumer can choose between different manufacturers, then the cheaper product is better for the climate in case of doubt.

If the CO2 price is high enough (whatever-it-takes-CO2-price), we will meet our overall CO2 reduction target with innovative, customised and cost-effective solutions, including the necessary lifestyle changes.

In this sense, an effective CO2 price would revolutionise climate protection and greatly simplify it, as everyone is actually looking out for their own advantage and yet the world is being saved.

Of course, even with an effective carbon price, the state must ensure that planning and approval processes are accelerated, that there is sufficient land available for wind turbines, that the necessary power lines, cycle paths, railway tracks etc. are built and that other regulations do not stand in the way of a fossil-free future. But the state and society as a whole will also find it easier to make the right decisions with an effective CO2 price. Basically, the better the other instrument mix is set up, the less the CO2 price will have to rise in order to meet the targets.

The open flank of any purely national climate policy is that - where possible - imported products could be used, which are subject to a less ambitious climate policy and may therefore be more cost-effective. Intelligent special regulations (carbon leakage protection) are therefore necessary for particularly CO2-intensive production processes such as steel production or cracking in the chemical industry, as long as comparable rules do not yet apply globally or comparable climate ambitions exist. Overall, however, we need to ensure that we also get into gear globally (see a web application for clarification). There is no other way to achieve the Paris climate targets. If we meet climate targets significantly with an effective carbon price, this will strengthen national competitiveness due to its advantages in terms of cost efficiency and innovation.

The climate dividend is simply calculated by dividing the total revenue from CO2 pricing by the number of citizens (in short: per capita emissions * CO2 price).

With a full climate dividend, the average citizen is not burdened by the CO2 price per se. Low-income earners and families, on the other hand, will benefit significantly, as their per capita emissions are generally well below average. The bottom line is that around 60% of citizens would be relieved in terms of the CO2 price and climate dividend.

See for yourself how the CO2 price and climate dividend interact with the www.co2-preis-rechner.de from the citizens' climate lobby.