Strategy and Governance > Sustainability Strategy > 

The Science Behind Our Climate Change Strategy

Our climate change strategy is based on our commitment to do our share to stabilize CO₂ in the atmosphere.

Ford’s Plans and Targets Are Rooted in Climate Science

Many scientists, businesses and government agencies have concluded that limiting global temperature increase to less than 2℃ may help to forestall or substantially delay the most serious consequences of climate change (Figure 1). This is extremely challenging and requires a major effort globally to decrease emissions of CO₂ and stabilize the atmospheric concentration of CO₂ below 450 parts per million (ppm). At the time of writing, atmospheric CO₂ concentrations have already reached approximately 405 ppm.¹

Figure 1. Stabilizing Global Temperature Increase Requires Stabilizing CO₂eq Concentration^*

• * The CO₂eq concentration represents the climate forcing of all greenhouse gases, which are converted to CO₂-equivalent based on global warming potentials from the IPCC 2nd assessment report.² In 2100, CO₂ represents 80–90% of the CO₂eq concentration or 425–460 ppm CO₂ for less than 2℃ temperature increase (480–530 ppm CO₂eq).³ Figure reprinted by permission of IPCC from Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, Figure 6.13 a).⁴

How We Developed Our Approach

1. 

   Based on climate science and modeling by recognized authorities, including the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research and the International Energy Agency, we developed a model of global and light-duty vehicle (LDV) CO₂ emissions from different regions.

2. 

   Using the model, we calculated the stabilization emission reduction levels for LDVs over time, resulting in “CO₂ glide paths” for the LDV sector (Figure 2), taking into account regional differences in vehicle size and fuel consumption, government regulations and biofuel availability.

   Ford’s estimated share of global LDV CO₂ emissions is about 10%.

3. 

   We then applied the sector methodology to our new vehicles, to create Ford-specific “glide paths” (CO₂ reduction goals) for our vehicle lineups across our major operating regions as well as CO₂ reduction targets for our facilities.

4. 

   To ensure alignment with the latest scientific knowledge, we review our glide path model every year and carry out major updates every five years.

   Our CO₂ model is not intended to provide “the answer,” but a portfolio of possible vehicle/ fuel solutions and insights into cost-effective mobility choices in a carbon-constrained world.

   In the absence of certainty about future regulations, the glide paths are an approximate guide rather than a precise limitation – being roughly consistent with the overall, long-term trajectory of existing and proposed fuel economy and vehicle CO₂ regulations in a number of markets.⁵

Our Thinking on Sector-Wide Glide Paths

We have shared our thinking behind the development of industry-average CO₂ glide paths (Figure 2) with interested stakeholders, have published the methodology in the peer-reviewed scientific literature⁶ and have received positive feedback and external recognition for our application of climate science to set our CO₂ targets.

By following the 2℃ CO₂ glide paths, the automotive and fuel industry would reduce global well-to-wheels absolute CO₂ emissions by about 450 million metric tons (a reduction of 14 percent)⁷ between 2010 and 2030. Ford’s share is estimated to be about 10 percent of global LDV fleet emissions.

For the LDV sector to meet the 2℃ limit, all automakers must reduce their LDV emissions by the proportion prescribed by the CO₂ glide paths. Although the initial (current) CO₂ emissions rate varies considerably by region, to provide the significant emission reductions needed, all regions need to move toward similar targets.

Figure 2. Industry-Average CO₂ Glide Paths⁸

Delivering Long-Term Reductions Across Our Lineup

Every year we review our product development plans to ensure our vehicles are aligned with the stabilization glide path. While our plans are based upon delivering long-term reductions in CO₂ emissions from new vehicles that are similar to those shown for the industry-average glide paths, we anticipate that in some years, the reductions will be greater or less than those shown in the glide paths.

That is because delivering on these targets will be dependent to a large degree on market forces that we do not fully control (e.g., changes in energy prices and changes in the mix of vehicles demanded by consumers) and multiple other factors that influence our product plans, including regulatory requirements.

Refining Our Model

Because of the long timeframe of climate science, we only update our glide path model’s assumptions and input data on a five-year basis. In 2016, we began a major revision, updating the stabilization pathways and forecasts of vehicle sales and biofuel availability. The new stabilization pathway is specific to light-duty vehicles,⁹ instead of an all-sector pathway. Furthermore, the new pathway is based on stabilizing temperature rather than CO₂ concentration. We model a 2℃ temperature increase stabilization pathway as our base case. In a sensitivity analysis, we explore a 1.5℃ pathway to learn about the implications of the COP21 Paris Agreement’s call for less temperature increase.¹⁰

Between major updates we conduct sensitivity studies to understand the effect on the glide paths of global changes, such as economic conditions, biofuel availability or regulations. We have also explored which combinations of vehicle and fuel technologies might be most cost-effective in the long-term stabilization of atmospheric CO₂ concentrations. Working with colleagues from government, national laboratories and industry, we have published an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of CO₂ reductions of current (2015) and future (2030) alternative vehicle-fuel technologies.¹¹ In our journey since our first public discussions of the need to reduce CO₂ emissions in the early 2000s, the energy efficiency of vehicles has improved substantially and the costs of further improvements have increased. The imperative of taking a broad multi-sector approach when dealing with climate change is clearer to us now than ever before.

As climate science, alternative fuels and technologies advance, we will be considering ways to refine and adjust our science-based CO₂ targets in future updates – for example, how best to factor in emissions other than CO₂ – and how best to recognize the fact that to address climate change, cost-effective actions across different economic sectors are needed.

At Ford, we believe that collective efforts and a holistic approach to the challenges of climate change are essential. This is why we are focused on collaboration and engagement – working with other sectors, including fuel providers, utilities and even cities – to develop the most efficient solutions. At the same time, we will continue to invest in facilities, products and infrastructure that go beyond today’s business models and help create a sustainable future.