Short introduction on Turkmenistan’s emissions

Although CO2 is the driving force behind the temperature changes, other gases such as methane (CH4) also contribute their share to global warming, for example through the exploitation of gas fields, and emissions by livestock. While methane is emitted much less than CO2 on a global scale, it is a much stronger greenhouse gas (GHG). Scientists estimated the relative strength of the important Kyoto greenhouse gases so that we can convert all emissions to an equivalent of CO2 emissions. For example, the emission of one ton of methane has approximately the warming effect of 25 tons of CO2. The factor of 25 reflects the climate forcing on a 100-year time horizon, following the Global Warming Potential presented in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4).

With greenhouse gas emissions of approximately the equivalent of 108.2 mega tonnes of CO2 (Mt CO2eq), Turkmenistan contributed 0.22% to the global greenhouse gas emissions of 2017 (rank 53 - incl. EU27 on rank 3). All emissions estimates exclude emissions and absorption from land, which result from activities such as cutting down or planting of forests (Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry: LULUCF). Emissions from bunker fuels (international aviation and shipping) were also excluded, as they are not accounted for in national totals.

For 2030, Turkmenistan’s global contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is projected to increase to approximately 0.28% (157.4 mega tonnes of CO2 equivalent / rank 46 - incl. EU27 on rank 4). The emissions projections for Turkmenistan were derived by downscaling the Shared Socio-Economic Pathways’ (SSPs) “Middle-of-the-Road” baseline marker scenario SSP2. These pathways describe certain narratives of socio-economic developments and were, i.a., used to derive greenhouse gas emissions scenarios that correspond to these developments. SSP2 is a narrative with little shifts in socio-economic patterns compared to historical ones, and is connected to medium socio-economic challenges for both climate mitigation and adaptation. While different models were used for each storyline, per SSP (SSPs1-5) one model was chosen as representative “marker scenario”. As the emissions projections are not readily available on country-level, but national estimates are important, the pathways were downscaled in the aftermath. In 2017, Turkmenistan represented 0.076% of the global population. Its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2017 were 0.11% of the global GDP.

Looking at the highest contributing emissions sectors and gases separately, we find that in 2017 the highest contributing emissions sectors were Energy and Agriculture (86.2% and 10.1%). Amongst the greenhouse gases that are considered in the Kyoto Protocol, the strongest contributor with 54.2% was CO2. This was followed by CH4 emissions, with a share of 43.5%. When not considering the sectors and gases independently, but the sector-gas combinations instead, Energy CO2 and Energy CH4 (51.4% and 34.7%) represented the largest emissions in 2017.

Greenhouse gas mitigation and Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC)

In 2015, the majority of countries agreed to the Paris Agreement (PA), with the goal of “Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change” (Article 2.1.a). Countries stated their pledges and targets towards achieving the PA’s goals in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). With Article 4.4 of the Paris Agreement, Parties decided that “Developed country Parties should continue taking the lead by undertaking economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets. Developing country Parties should continue enhancing their mitigation efforts, and are encouraged to move over time towards economy-wide emission reduction or limitation targets in the light of different national circumstances.”

Even though in its NDC, the country states that “Turkmenistan […] choose the contribution Type 3 (GHG goal/target), which uses a target indicator attached to per unit of GDP.” (NDC, p. 3), and the year 2000 as base year (NDC, p. 2), in the NDC we could not find an indication of how much the national emissions intensity per unit of GDP should be reduced. The country communicates that “In order to prevent the climate change Turkmenistan’s National Strategy on Climate Change has identified the main directions of the policy for consistent transition to the economy with minimal greenhouse gas emissions without prejudice to the socio-economic development. Energy efficiency and conservation, sustainable use of natural gas and petroleum products, increased use of alternative energy sources are the main priorities of the policy for limiting GHG emissions envisaged in the Strategy.” (NDC, p. 2-3).

The NDC has an unconditional and conditional part, with the unconditional part being a decoupling of the growth rates of GHG emissions and GDP. Turkmenistan indicates that “So it can be noted that the growth rate of GHG emissions will significantly lag behind the GDP growth. Such a result would be achieved by the country at the expense of its own financial resources and require limited support from the developed countries to carry out preparatory work for developing legislative and regulatory documents and plans, as well as for implementation of actions to improve institutional, administrative and expertise potential on problems for reducing emissions.” (NDC, p. 4). Additionally to this unconditional part, “If financial and technological support is provided by developed countries, Turkmenistan could achieve zero growth in emissions and even reduce them up to 2030.” (NDC, p. 4).

The country provides forecasts of the expected 2030 GHG emissions (135.833 MtCO2eq, GWP not indicated), while the emissions intensity is forecast to be 0.0004 tCO2eq/thousand USD GDP in PPP (NDC, p. 3-4). Turkmenistan indicates that its contribution is “economy-wide”, and states explicitly that GHG Inventory results for “Energy; Industrial processes; Agriculture; Waste” are included (NDC, p. 2). As LULUCF is not mentioned, we assume it to be excluded. As for the Kyoto GHGs, CO2, CH4, and N2O are stated to be included (NDC, p. 2), why we assess F-gases (HFCs, PFCs, SF6, and NF3) to be excluded. In total, our assessment of covered sectors and gases results in an estimated 99.8% of 2017’ emissions being targeted by the NDC (based on PRIMAP-hist v2.1 HISTCR exclLU, in AR4).

As we did not quantify mitigation contributions by Turkmenistan, we assume the country’s emissions to follow projected baseline emissions. This is of special need when aggregating country-level data to regional or global values, to then, e.g., derive estimates of the end-of-century warming levels in line with mitigation pledges.

The NDC-assessment is based on Turkmenistan’s NDC submitted to the UNFCCC in October 2016.

The Figure below provides additional information, regarding both the baseline emissions used in our assessment and the quantified mitigated pathways for Turkmenistan.

Baseline emissions and mitigated emissions pathways based on the country’s Nationally Determined Contribution. In terms of national emissions, we look at the SSP2 baseline marker scenario, and the emissions of all IPCC sectors. Contributions from LULUCF are excluded (exclLU), and the emissions are based on GWPs from AR4. The left panel (a) shows the baseline emissions, indicating the contributions of the Kyoto Greenhouse Gases CO2, CH4, N2O, and the basket of F-gases to the national emissions. If we could extract baseline data exclLU from the NDC, you can see their values as black squares (converted from GWP SAR to AR4 if needed). In the right panel (b), the quantified mitigated emissions pathways are shown, based on information from the country’s NDC and also on non-NDC emissions baselines, per target conditionality and range (marked un-/conditional best/worst). Even though not all countries have targets with different conditionalities or ranges, we need assumptions for all four cases to build one global pathway per conditionality plus range combination and to derive corresponding temperature estimates. Therefore, we indicate these four pathways here. Per combination, we performed several quantifications with differing assumptions and show the median and the minimal and maximal pathways here. Additionally, if we could quantify the targets based on data extracted purely from the NDC - or if the targets were directly given in absolute emissions, these targets are shown as squares (in the GWP originally given in the NDC).


Data sources and further information

  • Historical emissions: PRIMAP-hist v2.1 (Guetschow et al., 2016, 2019).
  • Historical socio-economic data: PRIMAP-hist Socio-Eco v2.1 (Guetschow et al., 2019).
  • Projected emissions and socio-economic data: downscaled SSPs (Guetschow et al., 2020, 2020).
  • NDC quantifications: NDCmitiQ (Guenther et al., 2020, 2021).
  • GDP is given in purchasing power parity (PPP).
  • Main emissions sectors (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC): Energy, Industrial Processes and Product Use (IPPU), Agriculture and LULUCF (Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry), also named AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use), and Waste.
  • Kyoto GHG: basket of several GHGs, namely carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), and since the second Kyoto Protocol period (2013-20) additionally nitrogen fluoride (NF3).
  • Global Warming Potentials (GWPs): GHGs have very different warming potentials. To make them comparable and for aggregation purposes, GWPs are used (how much energy will 1 ton of a certain gas absorb over a defined period of time, relative to the same mass of CO2?).


1 Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), 14473 Potsdam, Germany