2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ItemAll options, not silver bullets, needed to limit global warming to 1.5 °C: a scenario appraisal(Bristol : IOP Publ., 2021-5-25) Warszawski, Lila; Kriegler, Elmar; Lenton, Timothy M.; Gaffney, Owen; Jacob, Daniela; Klingenfeld, Daniel; Koide, Ryu; Máñez Costa, María; Messner, Dirk; Nakicenovic, Nebojsa; Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim; Schlosser, Peter; Takeuchi, Kazuhiko; Van Der Leeuw, Sander; Whiteman, Gail; Rockström, JohanClimate science provides strong evidence of the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. The IPCC 1.5 °C special report (SR1.5) presents 414 emissions scenarios modelled for the report, of which around 50 are classified as '1.5 °C scenarios', with no or low temperature overshoot. These emission scenarios differ in their reliance on individual mitigation levers, including reduction of global energy demand, decarbonisation of energy production, development of land-management systems, and the pace and scale of deploying carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. The reliance of 1.5 °C scenarios on these levers needs to be critically assessed in light of the potentials of the relevant technologies and roll-out plans. We use a set of five parameters to bundle and characterise the mitigation levers employed in the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios. For each of these levers, we draw on the literature to define 'medium' and 'high' upper bounds that delineate between their 'reasonable', 'challenging' and 'speculative' use by mid century. We do not find any 1.5 °C scenarios that stay within all medium upper bounds on the five mitigation levers. Scenarios most frequently 'over use' CDR with geological storage as a mitigation lever, whilst reductions of energy demand and carbon intensity of energy production are 'over used' less frequently. If we allow mitigation levers to be employed up to our high upper bounds, we are left with 22 of the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios with no or low overshoot. The scenarios that fulfil these criteria are characterised by greater coverage of the available mitigation levers than those scenarios that exceed at least one of the high upper bounds. When excluding the two scenarios that exceed the SR1.5 carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, this subset of 1.5 °C scenarios shows a range of 15–22 Gt CO2 (16–22 Gt CO2 interquartile range) for emissions in 2030. For the year of reaching net zero CO2 emissions the range is 2039–2061 (2049–2057 interquartile range).
- ItemIntegrated Solutions for the Water-Energy-Land Nexus: Are Global Models Rising to the Challenge?(Basel : MDPI, 2019) Johnson, Nils; Burek, Peter; Byers, Edward; Falchetta, Giacomo; Flörke, Martina; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Havlik, Petr; Hejazi, Mohamad; Hunt, Julian; Krey, Volker; Langan, Simon; Nakicenovic, Nebojsa; Palazzo, Amanda; Popp, Alexander; Riahi, Keywan; van Dijk, Michiel; van Vliet, Michelle; van Vuuren, Detlef; Wada, Yoshihide; Wiberg, David; Willaarts, Barbara; Zimm, Caroline; Parkinson, SimonIncreasing human demands for water, energy, food and materials, are expected to accentuate resource supply challenges over the coming decades. Experience suggests that long-term strategies for a single sector could yield both trade-offs and synergies for other sectors. Thus, long-term transition pathways for linked resource systems should be informed using nexus approaches. Global integrated assessment models can represent the synergies and trade-offs inherent in the exploitation of water, energy and land (WEL) resources, including the impacts of international trade and climate policies. In this study, we review the current state-of-the-science in global integrated assessment modeling with an emphasis on how models have incorporated integrated WEL solutions. A large-scale assessment of the relevant literature was performed using online databases and structured keyword search queries. The results point to the following main opportunities for future research and model development: (1) improving the temporal and spatial resolution of economic models for the energy and water sectors; (2) balancing energy and land requirements across sectors; (3) integrated representation of the role of distribution infrastructure in alleviating resource challenges; (4) modeling of solution impacts on downstream environmental quality; (5) improved representation of the implementation challenges stemming from regional financial and institutional capacity; (6) enabling dynamic multi-sectoral vulnerability and adaptation needs assessment; and (7) the development of fully-coupled assessment frameworks based on consistent, scalable, and regionally-transferable platforms. Improved database management and computational power are needed to address many of these modeling challenges at a global-scale.