At the Haga initiative blog, Henrik Ny says that the Swedish Environmental Objectives Committee has recently proposed a stricter target of a Sweden with zero net emissions of greenhouse gases to 2045. A clear improvement over 2050. But is this goal indeed, as alleged, in line with the Paris Agreement? And should we really look at this transition as a burden to be minimized and pushed in front of us? Is it not a desirable business opportunity that should be accelerated instead?

As part of my ongoing research on a sustainable and fast shift to fossil-free transportation, I decided to look into what the Paris agreement might mean for Sweden.

What does the Paris Agreement say, then? That the world should keep global warming to well below two degrees and preferably below 1.5 degrees. According to the IPCC, this means that the world has a remaining emissions budget from 2015 to 2050 of about 840 000 megatons of carbon dioxide equivalents for a high probability to be able to keep warming below two degrees and 240 000 megatons for 1.5 degrees. If we assume that Sweden is entitled to a share of the remaining emissions budget corresponding to our share of the world’s population (about 1.3 per mille), we have the right to about 1100 megatons for two degrees and 310 megatons for 1.5 degrees.

This calculation does not take into account that Sweden is one of the world’s richest countries (about 7 per mille of world GDP) and that during its industrialization it has used up a significantly greater proportion than one per mille of the approximately 2 million megatons that the entire world has emitted since the industrial era began. From a global equity perspective Sweden’s share of the remaining emissions budget should therefore be less than the one per mille mentioned above.

But are the Swedish climate goals up to this challenge then? Johan Rockström, the Haga Initiative and others have gone beyond the Swedish Environmental Objectives Committee and proposed that Sweden should phase out fossil fuels already by 2030. Assuming a constant rate of decrease from the 2015 level (about 55 megatons) would correspond to about 400 megatons – near the 310 megatons that fit within our emission budget for 1.5 degrees. the Swedish Environmental Objectives Committee’s proposed target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045, but will not be enough for Sweden to be able to live up to the Paris Agreement.

Ok. But why is this a problem? Sweden has a good starting position right now with world-leading share of renewable energy. Should not we be able to take it easy? Why should Sweden bear the main burden of these global societal transitions?

Well. If the world’s most advanced country in terms of sustainability slows down its efforts just when development takes off globally, we risk two things. First, it could contribute to that the world at large will not be able to face out fossil fuels by 2050 with catastrophic climate changes as a result. Secondly, it is a business opportunity rather than a burden that Sweden will loose when other countries’ companies will catch up and take market shares in the sustainability transition that despite everything will take place. We have the other 999 pro mille of the world’s population that soon will seriously begin to demand climate solutions.

I will return with a more detailed analysis of what this means in the book on a sustainable and fast shift to fossil-free transport system that I will launch in a few months.

Read more about the blog post at the Haga initiative website (in Swedish)