"Carbon debt" proposal assigns responsibility to countries that break climate pledges

Many researchers fear the world is on track to surpass the 1.5°C average temperature rise target of the Paris Agreement within the next ten years. The escalating concern has sparked heated debates about climate justice, responsibility, carbon debt, and what must happen once we cross that line.

“As we near the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit, the question is not just about when we will exceed it, but also how we collectively deal with the consequences in the subsequent period,” said Setu Pelz, a researcher in the Transformative Institutional and Social Solutions Research Group (TISS).

Pelz is the lead author on a recent study that considers who will be held responsible once this threshold temperature is crossed, and how nations should act to restore temperatures to below the agreed-upon level.

”To guide efforts that minimize overshoot and establish who should pay for harms caused during this period, we measure who is responsible and to what extent, under a range of scenarios and approaches,” explained Pelz.

Who owes carbon debt and why

Net-zero carbon debt focuses on the idea of shared but uneven responsibilities for historical and future emissions. It tracks how much a region’s cumulative emissions overshoot its fair share of the remaining global carbon budget.

Fair share calculations consider aspects like population size and past pollution levels. This approach highlights how some high-income regions have used far more of the planet’s carbon budget than others over the decades.

It suggests that when those regions finally reach net-zero CO₂, any excess emissions become their debt.

Why overshoot matters

Climate overshoot is what happens when global temperatures temporarily rise above a key threshold before returning below it.

Researchers point out that even a short period of overshoot can intensify severe heatwaves, droughts, and other extreme events.

Communities with fewer resources are particularly vulnerable, as they often lack adequate funding for adaptation and recovery.

That vulnerability compounds the injustice of overshoot, prompting discussions about financial support and technology transfers.

Carbon debt responsibilities

Wealthy regions are under pressure to reduce emissions quickly to prevent further burden on younger generations.

Failure to achieve significant cuts raises the likelihood that future residents will pay for large-scale carbon removal projects.

Those technological solutions, such as direct air capture, may still be expensive and underdeveloped.

If wealthier regions do not act now, their own grandchildren could end up bearing both the physical risks of climate change and the enormous costs of repairing the damage.

Emerging economies risk carbon debt

Some emerging economies argue they should still be allowed to develop their industries and infrastructure using available energy sources.

Many stress that older industrialized nations built their prosperity through decades of unchecked fossil fuel use.

Still, these newer economies also face the possibility of carbon debt if their emissions exceed a fair slice of the remaining budget.

That means efforts to maintain economic growth while minimizing emissions have become a critical challenge.

Youth and the cost of inaction

Young people in high-emitting countries often stand at the intersection of excess responsibility and increased climate hazards.

They inherit a world that is already struggling with warming, yet they also face the potential duty of massive carbon removal initiatives later in life.

Communities in lower-emitting countries also harbor many young people. They may not be saddled with the same carbon debt, but they confront heightened exposure to heatwaves, floods, and storms made worse by overshoot.

Cooperation and climate finance

International collaboration is often viewed as an essential piece of closing the emissions gap. Some regions might find quick, cost-efficient ways to scale renewable energy, but others may need financial help.

Such support could come in the form of grants, debt relief, or technology transfer. Without it, developing nations that are low emitters could find themselves raising emissions just to meet basic needs, which prolongs temperature overshoot and spreads harm worldwide.

Can carbon removal fix damage?

A central question is whether future carbon removals can fully compensate for present emissions.

Evidence suggests net-negative emissions can help draw temperatures back down over time, but the scientific details are still being studied.

Some climate models assume large-scale carbon removal will happen toward the end of the century. That assumption creates moral and practical dilemmas, since it may place trust in expensive or unproven solutions.

Meanwhile, people living today continue to emit carbon in ways that add to future debt.

Domestic feasibility and fairness

Experts emphasize the importance of separating cost-neutral strategies from those that need extra funding.

Measures like energy efficiency or low-cost solar and wind projects can often pay for themselves quickly.

Other strategies, such as developing advanced carbon capture technologies, typically require heavy investment and international support.

Regions expected to accumulate large carbon debts might need to ramp up these efforts much sooner.

Looking ahead

Discussions about net-zero carbon debt highlight a new level of transparency in climate negotiations.

Instead of merely counting total emissions, stakeholders can monitor which countries and generations owe the most to keep global warming at a safe level.

Scientists and analysts propose that clearer guidelines on responsibility can spark solutions that bridge nations and generations.

While it will not be easy, such coordination could speed up the timeline for bringing global temperatures back below critical thresholds.

Fair recovery must address carbon debt

The carbon debt framework may offer a path to greater clarity on funding and technology sharing. It could guide how to distribute the burdens of overshoot so that the regions that contributed the most take on a fair share of the cost.

No matter the chosen approach, the evidence underscores a need for immediate, collective steps to limit further warming.

Significant delays risk locking in more serious harm and piling up debts that future societies must confront.

A global drive toward higher ambition can still soften the worst impacts. Yet the longer we wait, the bigger the carbon debt becomes, and the tougher it will be to settle that bill.

Younger generations stand to lose the most in a warming world. If we want to prevent staggering climate costs down the road, deep cuts and bold collaboration must start now.

The study is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates. 

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–