2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ItemThe world’s growing municipal solid waste: trends and impacts(Bristol : IOP Publ., 2020) Chen, David Meng-Chuen; Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon; Krueger, Tobias; Mishra, Abhijeet; Popp, AlexanderGlobal municipal waste production causes multiple environmental impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions, ocean plastic accumulation, and nitrogen pollution. However, estimates of both past and future development of waste and pollution are scarce. We apply compositional Bayesian regression to produce the first estimates of past and future (1965–2100) waste generation disaggregated by composition and treatment, along with resultant environmental impacts, for every country. We find that total wastes grow at declining speed with economic development, and that global waste generation has increased from 635 Mt in 1965 to 1999 Mt in 2015 and reaches 3539 Mt by 2050 (median values, middle-of-the-road scenario). From 2015 to 2050, the global share of organic waste declines from 47% to 39%, while all other waste type shares increase, especially paper. The share of waste treated in dumps declines from 28% to 18%, and more sustainable recycling, composting, and energy recovery treatments increase. Despite these increases, we estimate environmental loads to continue increasing in the future, although yearly plastic waste input into the oceans has reached a peak. Waste production does not appear to follow the environmental Kuznets curve, and current projections do not meet UN SDGs for waste reduction. Our study shows that a continuation of current trends and improvements is insufficient to reduce pressures on natural systems and achieve a circular economy. Relative to 2015, the amount of recycled waste would need to increase from 363 Mt to 740 Mt by 2030 to begin reducing unsustainable waste generation, compared to 519 Mt currently projected.
- ItemComparing impacts of climate change and mitigation on global agriculture by 2050(Bristol : IOP Publ., 2018) van Meijl, Hans; Havlik, Petr; Lotze-Campen, Hermann; Stehfest, Elke; Witzke, Peter; Pérez Domínguez, Ignacio; Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon; van Dijk, Michiel; Doelman, Jonathan; Fellmann, Thomas; Humpenöder, Florian; Koopman, Jason F. L.; Müller, Christoph; Popp, Alexander; Tabeau, Andrzej; Valin, Hugo; van Zeist, Willem-JanSystematic model inter-comparison helps to narrow discrepancies in the analysis of the future impact of climate change on agricultural production. This paper presents a set of alternative scenarios by five global climate and agro-economic models. Covering integrated assessment (IMAGE), partial equilibrium (CAPRI, GLOBIOM, MAgPIE) and computable general equilibrium (MAGNET) models ensures a good coverage of biophysical and economic agricultural features. These models are harmonized with respect to basic model drivers, to assess the range of potential impacts of climate change on the agricultural sector by 2050. Moreover, they quantify the economic consequences of stringent global emission mitigation efforts, such as non-CO2 emission taxes and land-based mitigation options, to stabilize global warming at 2 °C by the end of the century under different Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. A key contribution of the paper is a vis-à-vis comparison of climate change impacts relative to the impact of mitigation measures. In addition, our scenario design allows assessing the impact of the residual climate change on the mitigation challenge. From a global perspective, the impact of climate change on agricultural production by mid-century is negative but small. A larger negative effect on agricultural production, most pronounced for ruminant meat production, is observed when emission mitigation measures compliant with a 2 °C target are put in place. Our results indicate that a mitigation strategy that embeds residual climate change effects (RCP2.6) has a negative impact on global agricultural production relative to a no-mitigation strategy with stronger climate impacts (RCP6.0). However, this is partially due to the limited impact of the climate change scenarios by 2050. The magnitude of price changes is different amongst models due to methodological differences. Further research to achieve a better harmonization is needed, especially regarding endogenous food and feed demand, including substitution across individual commodities, and endogenous technological change.