Revisiting the 80×50 Report

I know I’ve talked plenty about the 80×50 report here, through my research and also for the purpose of helping people understand the goals in a simple and concise manner. However, some recent research involving Professor James Shope from the Rutgers Climate Change Resource Center and Environmental Sciences Department, whom I have interviewed in the past, has been published that advises a slightly different goal. 

To recap, the 80×50 report was published by New Jersey with the aim to cut carbon emissions by 80% by the year 2050. Since the 80×50 goal was established, the goalpost has not been moved even though the planned policies (the avenue to reach these milestones) were revisited during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Among developments in the world of climate science was the Paris Agreement, which involved countries pledging to curb their emissions drastically to prevent global temperatures from rising an average of 2 degrees (Celsius) above pre-industrial age levels. While the USA has now submitted a withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the goals themselves will remain active for one year until January 20th, 2026.

The paper found that the level of emissions reduction prior to the pandemic was significantly lower compared to the expected amount needed to reach 50% emissions by 2006 standards, at only about 0.9 MMT per year compared to the required 4.1. Using a baseline year of 2015, the NJ goals were converted to be 40% reduction by 2030 and 76% by 2050, with the goal to see if the goals, if achieved, would have the desired impacts of satisfying the Paris Agreement aligned policies.

There are four emissions reduction pathways by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change used in this report which describe 4 scenarios in which emissions are limited to 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius with various levels of overshoot. Overshoot means by how much temperatures exceed the target before eventually dropping to milestone levels. All of these presumably meet Paris Agreement requirements but with different levels of emissions curbing and different levels of overall success. 

By comparing global, US, and NJ goals using these four pathways, they found that the USA as a whole is projected to remain at or below 1.5C with limited overshoot given their 2030 goals. However, New Jersey’s 2030 goals will more likely be aligned with the 1.5C target with high overshoot. Subsequently, New Jersey’s emissions goals become proportionally less ambitious compared to the nation as a whole for 2050, with a 2C increase much more likely. 

While NJ is in line with Paris Agreement standards, it remains behind USA’s ambitions to reach net-0 emissions by 2050. The US Climate Alliance (of which NJ is a member) may well serve as a continuity of the ideas of the Paris Agreement despite US withdrawal, and NJ can take inspiration from nearby states who have enacted policies that directly demand net-0 or net-negative carbon emissions (via sequestration). 

In conclusion, it is now advised according to this paper that New Jersey amend their goals from 80% reduction in emissions by 2050 compared to 2006 levels to 100% (or net-0) reduction in emissions.

This was just a brief overview and the report is incredibly comprehensive and interesting. You can give it a read here: Comparison-of-NJ-GHG-Reduction-Targets042525.pdf