2014, Kriegler, Elmar, Petermann, Nils, Krey, Volker, Schwanitz, Valeria Jana, Luderer, Gunnar, Ashina, Shuichi, Bosetti, Valentina, Eom, Jiyong, Kitous, Alban, Méjean, Aurélie, Paroussos, Leonidas, Sano, Fuminori, Turton, Hal, Wilson, Charlie, Van Vuuren, Detlef P.

Integrated assessments of how climate policy interacts with energy-economy systems can be performed by a variety of models with different functional structures. In order to provide insights into why results differ between models, this article proposes a diagnostic scheme that can be applied to a wide range of models. Diagnostics can uncover patterns of model behavior and indicate how results differ between model types. Such insights are informative since model behavior can have a significant impact on projections of climate change mitigation costs and other policy-relevant information. The authors propose diagnostic indicators to characterize model responses to carbon price signals and test these in a diagnostic study of 11 global models. Indicators describe the magnitude of emission abatement and the associated costs relative to a harmonized baseline, the relative changes in carbon intensity and energy intensity, and the extent of transformation in the energy system. This study shows a correlation among indicators suggesting that models can be classified into groups based on common patterns of behavior in response to carbon pricing. Such a classification can help to explain variations among policy-relevant model results.

2013, Riahi, Keywan, Kriegler, Elmar, Johnson, Nils, Bertram, Christoph, den Elzen, Michel, Eom, Jiyong, Schaeffer, Michiel, Edmonds, Jae, Isaac, Morna, Krey, Volker, Longden, Thomas, Luderer, Gunnar, Méjean, Aurélie, McCollum, David L., Mima, Silvana, Turton, Hal, van Vuuren, Detlef P., Wada, Kenichi, Bosetti, Valentina, Capros, Pantelis, Criqui, Patrick, Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem, Kainuma, Mikiko, Edenhofer, Ottmar

This paper provides an overview of the AMPERE modeling comparison project with focus on the implications of near-term policies for the costs and attainability of long-term climate objectives. Nine modeling teams participated in the project to explore the consequences of global emissions following the proposed policy stringency of the national pledges from the Copenhagen Accord and Cancún Agreements to 2030. Specific features compared to earlier assessments are the explicit consideration of near-term 2030 emission targets as well as the systematic sensitivity analysis for the availability and potential of mitigation technologies. Our estimates show that a 2030 mitigation effort comparable to the pledges would result in a further “lock-in” of the energy system into fossil fuels and thus impede the required energy transformation to reach low greenhouse-gas stabilization levels (450 ppm CO2e). Major implications include significant increases in mitigation costs, increased risk that low stabilization targets become unattainable, and reduced chances of staying below the proposed temperature change target of 2 °C in case of overshoot. With respect to technologies, we find that following the pledge pathways to 2030 would narrow policy choices, and increases the risks that some currently optional technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) or the large-scale deployment of bioenergy, will become “a must” by 2030.

2020, Roelfsema, Mark, van Soest, Heleen L., Harmsen, Mathijs, van Vuuren, Detlef P., Bertram, Christoph, den Elzen, Michel, Höhne, Niklas, Iacobuta, Gabriela, Krey, Volker, Kriegler, Elmar, Luderer, Gunnar, Riahi, Keywan, Ueckerdt, Falko, Després, Jacques, Drouet, Laurent, Emmerling, Johannes, Frank, Stefan, Fricko, Oliver, Gidden, Matthew, Humpenöder, Florian, Huppmann, Daniel, Fujimori, Shinichiro, Fragkiadakis, Kostas, Gi, Keii, Keramidas, Kimon, Köberle, Alexandre C., Aleluia Reis, Lara, Rochedo, Pedro, Schaeffer, Roberto, Oshiro, Ken, Vrontisi, Zoi, Chen, Wenying, Iyer, Gokul C., Edmonds, Jae, Kannavou, Maria, Jiang, Kejun, Mathur, Ritu, Safonov, George, Vishwanathan, Saritha Sudharmma

Many countries have implemented national climate policies to accomplish pledged Nationally Determined Contributions and to contribute to the temperature objectives of the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2023, the global stocktake will assess the combined effort of countries. Here, based on a public policy database and a multi-model scenario analysis, we show that implementation of current policies leaves a median emission gap of 22.4 to 28.2 GtCO2eq by 2030 with the optimal pathways to implement the well below 2 °C and 1.5 °C Paris goals. If Nationally Determined Contributions would be fully implemented, this gap would be reduced by a third. Interestingly, the countries evaluated were found to not achieve their pledged contributions with implemented policies (implementation gap), or to have an ambition gap with optimal pathways towards well below 2 °C. This shows that all countries would need to accelerate the implementation of policies for renewable technologies, while efficiency improvements are especially important in emerging countries and fossil-fuel-dependent countries.

2021-6-29, Bertram, Christoph, Riahi, Keywan, Hilaire, Jérôme, Bosetti, Valentina, Drouet, Laurent, Fricko, Oliver, Malik, Aman, Pupo Nogueira, Larissa, van der Zwaan, Bob, van Ruijven, Bas, van Vuuren, Detlef, Weitzel, Matthias, Dalla Longa, Francesco, de Boer, Harmen-Sytze, Emmerling, Johannes, Fosse, Florian, Fragkiadakis, Kostas, Harmsen, Mathijs, Keramidas, Kimon, Kishimoto, Paul Natsuo, Kriegler, Elmar, Krey, Volker, Paroussos, Leonidas, Saygin, Deger, Vrontisi, Zoi, Luderer, Gunnar

The Paris Agreement does not only stipulate to limit the global average temperature increase to well below 2 °C, it also calls for 'making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions'. Consequently, there is an urgent need to understand the implications of climate targets for energy systems and quantify the associated investment requirements in the coming decade. A meaningful analysis must however consider the near-term mitigation requirements to avoid the overshoot of a temperature goal. It must also include the recently observed fast technological progress in key mitigation options. Here, we use a new and unique scenario ensemble that limit peak warming by construction and that stems from seven up-to-date integrated assessment models. This allows us to study the near-term implications of different limits to peak temperature increase under a consistent and up-to-date set of assumptions. We find that ambitious immediate action allows for limiting median warming outcomes to well below 2 °C in all models. By contrast, current nationally determined contributions for 2030 would add around 0.2 °C of peak warming, leading to an unavoidable transgression of 1.5 °C in all models, and 2 °C in some. In contrast to the incremental changes as foreseen by current plans, ambitious peak warming targets require decisive emission cuts until 2030, with the most substantial contribution to decarbonization coming from the power sector. Therefore, investments into low-carbon power generation need to increase beyond current levels to meet the Paris goals, especially for solar and wind technologies and related system enhancements for electricity transmission, distribution and storage. Estimates on absolute investment levels, up-scaling of other low-carbon power generation technologies and investment shares in less ambitious scenarios vary considerably across models. In scenarios limiting peak warming to below 2 °C, while coal is phased out quickly, oil and gas are still being used significantly until 2030, albeit at lower than current levels. This requires continued investments into existing oil and gas infrastructure, but investments into new fields in such scenarios might not be needed. The results show that credible and effective policy action is essential for ensuring efficient allocation of investments aligned with medium-term climate targets.

2013, Kriegler, Elmar, Edenhofer, Ottmar, Reuster, Lena, Luderer, Gunnar, Klein, David

The ability to directly remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere allows the decoupling of emissions and emissions control in space and time. We ask the question whether this unique feature of carbon dioxide removal technologies fundamentally alters the dynamics of climate mitigation pathways. The analysis is performed in the coupled energy-economy-climate model ReMIND using the bioenergy with CCS route as an application of CDR technology. BECCS is arguably the least cost CDR option if biomass availability is not a strongly limiting factor. We compare mitigation pathways with and without BECCS to explore the impact of CDR technologies on the mitigation portfolio. Effects are most pronounced for stringent climate policies where BECCS is a key technology for the effectiveness of carbon pricing policies. The decoupling of emissions and emissions control allows prolonging the use of fossil fuels in sectors that are difficult to decarbonize, particularly in the transport sector. It also balances the distribution of mitigation costs across future generations. CDR is not a silver bullet technology. The largest part of emissions reductions continues to be provided by direct mitigation measures at the emissions source. The value of CDR lies in its flexibility to alleviate the most costly constraints on mitigating emissions.

2019, Gidden, Matthew J., Riahi, Keywan, Smith, Steven J., Fujimori, Shinichiro, Luderer, Gunnar, Kriegler, Elmar, van Vuuren, Detlef P., van den Berg, Maarten, Feng, Leyang, Klein, David, Calvin, Katherine, Doelman, Jonathan C., Frank, Stefan, Fricko, Oliver, Harmsen, Mathijs, Hasegawa, Tomoko, Havlik, Petr, Hilaire, Jérôme, Hoesly, Rachel, Horing, Jill, Popp, Alexander, Stehfest, Elke, Takahashi, Kiyoshi

We present a suite of nine scenarios of future emissions trajectories of anthropogenic sources, a key deliverable of the ScenarioMIP experiment within CMIP6. Integrated assessment model results for 14 different emissions species and 13 emissions sectors are provided for each scenario with consistent transitions from the historical data used in CMIP6 to future trajectories using automated harmonization before being downscaled to provide higher emissions source spatial detail. We find that the scenarios span a wide range of end-of-century radiative forcing values, thus making this set of scenarios ideal for exploring a variety of warming pathways. The set of scenarios is bounded on the low end by a 1.9 W m−2 scenario, ideal for analyzing a world with end-of-century temperatures well below 2 ∘C, and on the high end by a 8.5 W m−2 scenario, resulting in an increase in warming of nearly 5 ∘C over pre-industrial levels. Between these two extremes, scenarios are provided such that differences between forcing outcomes provide statistically significant regional temperature outcomes to maximize their usefulness for downstream experiments within CMIP6. A wide range of scenario

2018, Vrontisi, Zoi, Luderer, Gunnar, Saveyn, Bert, Keramidas, Kimon, Lara, Aleluia Reis, Baumstark, Lavinia, Bertram, Christoph, de Boer, Harmen Sytze, Drouet, Laurent, Fragkiadakis, Kostas, Fricko, Oliver, Fujimori, Shinichiro, Guivarch, Celine, Kitous, Alban, Krey, Volker, Kriegler, Elmar, Broin, Eoin Ó., Paroussos, Leonidas, van Vuuren, Detlef

The Paris Agreement is a milestone in international climate policy as it establishes a global mitigation framework towards 2030 and sets the ground for a potential 1.5 °C climate stabilization. To provide useful insights for the 2018 UNFCCC Talanoa facilitative dialogue, we use eight state-of-the-art climate-energy-economy models to assess the effectiveness of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) in meeting high probability 1.5 and 2 °C stabilization goals. We estimate that the implementation of conditional INDCs in 2030 leaves an emissions gap from least cost 2 °C and 1.5 °C pathways for year 2030 equal to 15.6 (9.0–20.3) and 24.6 (18.5–29.0) GtCO2eq respectively. The immediate transition to a more efficient and low-carbon energy system is key to achieving the Paris goals. The decarbonization of the power supply sector delivers half of total CO2 emission reductions in all scenarios, primarily through high penetration of renewables and energy efficiency improvements. In combination with an increased electrification of final energy demand, low-carbon power supply is the main short-term abatement option. We find that the global macroeconomic cost of mitigation efforts does not reduce the 2020–2030 annual GDP growth rates in any model more than 0.1 percentage points in the INDC or 0.3 and 0.5 in the 2 °C and 1.5 °C scenarios respectively even without accounting for potential co-benefits and avoided climate damages. Accordingly, the median GDP reductions across all models in 2030 are 0.4%, 1.2% and 3.3% of reference GDP for each respective scenario. Costs go up with increasing mitigation efforts but a fragmented action, as implied by the INDCs, results in higher costs per unit of abated emissions. On a regional level, the cost distribution is different across scenarios while fossil fuel exporters see the highest GDP reductions in all INDC, 2 °C and 1.5 °C scenarios.

2013, Arroyo-Currás, Tabaré, Bauer, Nico, Kriegler, Elmar, Schwanitz, Valeria Jana, Luderer, Gunnar, Aboumahboub, Tino, Giannousakis, Anastasis, Hilaire, Jérôme

As a global climate agreement has not yet been achieved, a variety of national climate policy agendas are being pursued in different parts of the world. Regionally fragmented climate policy regimes are prone to carbon leakage between regions, which has given rise to concerns about the environmental effectiveness of this approach. This study investigates carbon leakage through energy markets and the resulting macro-economic effects by exploring the sensitivity of leakage to the size and composition of pioneering regions that adopt ambitious climate action early on. The study uses the multi-regional energy–economy–climate model REMIND 1.5 to analyze the implications of Europe, China and the United States taking unilateral or joint early action. We find that carbon leakage is the combined effect of fossil fuel and capital market re-allocation. Leakage is limited to 15% of the emission reductions in the pioneering regions, and depends on the size and composition of the pioneering coalition and the decarbonization strategy in the energy sector. There is an incentive to delay action to avoid near-term costs, but the immediate GDP losses after acceding to a global climate regime can be higher in the case of delayed action compared to early action. We conclude that carbon leakage is not a strong counter-argument against early action by pioneers to induce other regions to adopt more stringent mitigation.

2021, Strefler, Jessica, Kriegler, Elmar, Bauer, Nico, Luderer, Gunnar, Pietzcker, Robert C., Giannousakis, Anastasis, Edenhofer, Ottmar

The large majority of climate change mitigation scenarios that hold warming below 2 °C show high deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR), resulting in a peak-and-decline behavior in global temperature. This is driven by the assumption of an exponentially increasing carbon price trajectory which is perceived to be economically optimal for meeting a carbon budget. However, this optimality relies on the assumption that a finite carbon budget associated with a temperature target is filled up steadily over time. The availability of net carbon removals invalidates this assumption and therefore a different carbon price trajectory should be chosen. We show how the optimal carbon price path for remaining well below 2 °C limits CDR demand and analyze requirements for constructing alternatives, which may be easier to implement in reality. We show that warming can be held at well below 2 °C at much lower long-term economic effort and lower CDR deployment and therefore lower risks if carbon prices are high enough in the beginning to ensure target compliance, but increase at a lower rate after carbon neutrality has been reached.

2018, Bertram, Christoph, Luderer, Gunnar, Popp, Alexander, Minx, Jan Christoph, Lamb, William F, Stevanović, Miodrag, Humpenöder, Florian, Giannousakis, Anastasis, Kriegler, Elmar

Meeting the 1.5 °C goal will require a rapid scale-up of zero-carbon energy supply, fuel switching to electricity, efficiency and demand-reduction in all sectors, and the replenishment of natural carbon sinks. These transformations will have immediate impacts on various of the sustainable development goals. As goals such as affordable and clean energy and zero hunger are more immediate to great parts of global population, these impacts are central for societal acceptability of climate policies. Yet, little is known about how the achievement of other social and environmental sustainability objectives can be directly managed through emission reduction policies. In addition, the integrated assessment literature has so far emphasized a single, global (cost-minimizing) carbon price as the optimal mechanism to achieve emissions reductions. In this paper we introduce a broader suite of policies—including direct sector-level regulation, early mitigation action, and lifestyle changes—into the integrated energy-economy-land-use modeling system REMIND-MAgPIE. We examine their impact on non-climate sustainability issues when mean warming is to be kept well below 2 °C or 1.5 °C. We find that a combination of these policies can alleviate air pollution, water extraction, uranium extraction, food and energy price hikes, and dependence on negative emissions technologies, thus resulting in substantially reduced sustainability risks associated with mitigating climate change. Importantly, we find that these targeted policies can more than compensate for most sustainability risks of increasing climate ambition from 2 °C to 1.5 °C.