Filters

2013 - 20192

More filters

2019 - 201912020 - 20221
Reset filters

Settings

search.filters.applied.f.access: openAccess × Author: Minx, Jan ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The mutual dependence of negative emission technologies and energy systems
    (Cambridge : RSC Publ., 2019) Creutzig, Felix; Breyer, Christian; Hilaire, Jérôme; Minx, Jan; Peters, Glen P.; Socolow, Robert
    While a rapid decommissioning of fossil fuel technologies deserves priority, most climate stabilization scenarios suggest that negative emission technologies (NETs) are required to keep global warming well below 2 °C. Yet, current discussions on NETs are lacking a distinct energy perspective. Prominent NETs, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), will integrate differently into the future energy system, requiring a concerted research effort to determine adequate means of deployment. In this perspective, we discuss the importance of energy per carbon metrics, factors of future cost development, and the dynamic response of NETs in intermittent energy systems. The energy implications of NETs deployed at scale are massive, and NETs may conceivably impact future energy systems substantially. DACCS outperform BECCS in terms of primary energy required per ton of carbon sequestered. For different assumptions, DACCS displays a sequestration efficiency of 75–100%, whereas BECCS displays a sequestration efficiency of 50–90% or less if indirect land use change is included. Carbon dioxide removal costs of DACCS are considerably higher than BECCS, but if DACCS modularity and granularity helps to foster technological learning to <100$ per tCO2, DACCS may remove CO2 at gigaton scale. DACCS also requires two magnitudes less land than BECCS. Designing NET systems that match intermittent renewable energies will be key for stringent climate change mitigation. Our results contribute to an emerging understanding of NETs that is notably different to that derived from scenario modelling.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Carbon footprints of cities and other human settlements in the UK
    (Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2013) Minx, Jan; Baiocchi, Giovanni; Wiedmann, Thomas; Barrett, John; Creutzig, Felix; Feng, Kuishuang; Förster, Michael; Pichler, Peter-Paul; Weisz, Helga; Hubacek, Klaus
    A growing body of literature discusses the CO2 emissions of cities. Still, little is known about emission patterns across density gradients from remote rural places to highly urbanized areas, the drivers behind those emission patterns and the global emissions triggered by consumption in human settlements—referred to here as the carbon footprint. In this letter we use a hybrid method for estimating the carbon footprints of cities and other human settlements in the UK explicitly linking global supply chains to local consumption activities and associated lifestyles. This analysis comprises all areas in the UK, whether rural or urban. We compare our consumption-based results with extended territorial CO2 emission estimates and analyse the driving forces that determine the carbon footprint of human settlements in the UK. Our results show that 90% of the human settlements in the UK are net importers of CO2 emissions. Consumption-based CO2 emissions are much more homogeneous than extended territorial emissions. Both the highest and lowest carbon footprints can be found in urban areas, but the carbon footprint is consistently higher relative to extended territorial CO2 emissions in urban as opposed to rural settlement types. The impact of high or low density living remains limited; instead, carbon footprints can be comparatively high or low across density gradients depending on the location-specific socio-demographic, infrastructural and geographic characteristics of the area under consideration. We show that the carbon footprint of cities and other human settlements in the UK is mainly determined by socio-economic rather than geographic and infrastructural drivers at the spatial aggregation of our analysis. It increases with growing income, education and car ownership as well as decreasing household size. Income is not more important than most other socio-economic determinants of the carbon footprint. Possibly, the relationship between lifestyles and infrastructure only impacts carbon footprints significantly at higher spatial granularity.