4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- ItemNear-real-time monitoring of global CO2 emissions reveals the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2020) Liu, Zhu; Ciais, Philippe; Deng, Zhu; Lei, Ruixue; Davis, Steven J.; Feng, Sha; Zheng, Bo; Cui, Duo; Dou, Xinyu; Zhu, Biqing; Guo, Rui; Ke, Piyu; Sun, Taochun; Lu, Chenxi; He, Pan; Wang, Yuan; Yue, Xu; Wang, Yilong; Lei, Yadong; Zhou, Hao; Cai, Zhaonan; Wu, Yuhui; Guo, Runtao; Han, Tingxuan; Xue, Jinjun; Boucher, Olivier; Boucher, Eulalie; Chevallier, Frédéric; Tanaka, Katsumasa; Wei, Yiming; Zhong, Haiwang; Kang, Chongqing; Zhang, Ning; Chen, Bin; Xi, Fengming; Liu, Miaomiao; Bréon, François-Marie; Lu, Yonglong; Zhang, Qiang; Guan, Dabo; Gong, Peng; Kammen, Daniel M.; He, Kebin; Schellnhuber, Hans JoachimThe COVID-19 pandemic is impacting human activities, and in turn energy use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Here we present daily estimates of country-level CO2 emissions for different sectors based on near-real-time activity data. The key result is an abrupt 8.8% decrease in global CO2 emissions (−1551 Mt CO2) in the first half of 2020 compared to the same period in 2019. The magnitude of this decrease is larger than during previous economic downturns or World War II. The timing of emissions decreases corresponds to lockdown measures in each country. By July 1st, the pandemic’s effects on global emissions diminished as lockdown restrictions relaxed and some economic activities restarted, especially in China and several European countries, but substantial differences persist between countries, with continuing emission declines in the U.S. where coronavirus cases are still increasing substantially.
- ItemEnvironmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2019) Luderer, Gunnar; Pehl, Michaja; Arvesen, Anders; Gibon, Thomas; Bodirsky, Benjamin L.; de Boer, Harmen Sytze; Fricko, Oliver; Hejazi, Mohamad; Humpenöder, Florian; Iyer, Gokul; Mima, Silvana; Mouratiadou, Ioanna; Pietzcker, Robert C.; Popp, Alexander; van den Berg, Maarten; van Vuuren, Detlef; Hertwich, Edgar G.A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy.
- ItemReply to Burgess et al: Catastrophic climate risks are neglected, plausible, and safe to study(Washington, DC : National Acad. of Sciences, 2022) Kemp, Luke; Xu, Chi; Depledge, Joanna; Ebi, Kristie L.; Gibbins, Goodwin; Kohler, Timothy A.; Rockström, Johan; Scheffer, Marten; Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim; Steffen, Will; Lenton, Timothy M.
- ItemProjections of temperature-related excess mortality under climate change scenarios(Amsterdam : Elsevier B.V., 2017) Gasparrini, A.; Guo, Y.; Sera, F.; Vicedo-Cabrera, A.M.; Huber, V.; Tong, S.; de Sousa Zanotti Stagliorio Coelho, M.; Nascimento Saldiva, P.H.; Lavigne, E.; Matus Correa, P.; Valdes Ortega, N.; Kan, H.; Osorio, S.; Kyselý, J.; Urban, A.; Jaakkola, J.J.K.; Ryti, N.R.I.; Pascal, M.; Goodman, P.G.; Zeka, A.; Michelozzi, P.; Scortichini, M.; Hashizume, M.; Honda, Y.; Hurtado-Diaz, M.; Cesar Cruz, J.; Seposo, X.; Kim, H.; Tobias, A.; Iñiguez, C.; Forsberg, B.; Åström, D.O.; Ragettli, M.S.; Guo, Y.L.; Wu, C.-F.; Zanobetti, A.; Schwartz, J.; Bell, M.L.; Dang, T.N.; Van, D.D.; Heaviside, C.; Vardoulakis, S.; Hajat, S.; Haines, A.; Armstrong, B.Background: Climate change can directly affect human health by varying exposure to non-optimal outdoor temperature. However, evidence on this direct impact at a global scale is limited, mainly due to issues in modelling and projecting complex and highly heterogeneous epidemiological relationships across different populations and climates. Methods: We collected observed daily time series of mean temperature and mortality counts for all causes or non-external causes only, in periods ranging from Jan 1, 1984, to Dec 31, 2015, from various locations across the globe through the Multi-Country Multi-City Collaborative Research Network. We estimated temperature–mortality relationships through a two-stage time series design. We generated current and future daily mean temperature series under four scenarios of climate change, determined by varying trajectories of greenhouse gas emissions, using five general circulation models. We projected excess mortality for cold and heat and their net change in 1990–2099 under each scenario of climate change, assuming no adaptation or population changes. Findings: Our dataset comprised 451 locations in 23 countries across nine regions of the world, including 85 879 895 deaths. Results indicate, on average, a net increase in temperature-related excess mortality under high-emission scenarios, although with important geographical differences. In temperate areas such as northern Europe, east Asia, and Australia, the less intense warming and large decrease in cold-related excess would induce a null or marginally negative net effect, with the net change in 2090–99 compared with 2010–19 ranging from −1·2% (empirical 95% CI −3·6 to 1·4) in Australia to −0·1% (−2·1 to 1·6) in east Asia under the highest emission scenario, although the decreasing trends would reverse during the course of the century. Conversely, warmer regions, such as the central and southern parts of America or Europe, and especially southeast Asia, would experience a sharp surge in heat-related impacts and extremely large net increases, with the net change at the end of the century ranging from 3·0% (−3·0 to 9·3) in Central America to 12·7% (−4·7 to 28·1) in southeast Asia under the highest emission scenario. Most of the health effects directly due to temperature increase could be avoided under scenarios involving mitigation strategies to limit emissions and further warming of the planet. Interpretation: This study shows the negative health impacts of climate change that, under high-emission scenarios, would disproportionately affect warmer and poorer regions of the world. Comparison with lower emission scenarios emphasises the importance of mitigation policies for limiting global warming and reducing the associated health risks. Funding: UK Medical Research Council.