2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ItemImpact of methane and black carbon mitigation on forcing and temperature: a multi-model scenario analysis(Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 2020) Smith, Steven J.; Chateau, Jean; Dorheim, Kalyn; Drouet, Laurent; Durand-Lasserve, Olivier; Fricko, Oliver; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Hanaoka, Tatsuya; Harmsen, Mathijs; Hilaire, Jérôme; Keramidas, Kimon; Klimont, Zbigniew; Luderer, Gunnar; Moura, Maria Cecilia P.; Riahi, Keywan; Rogelj, Joeri; Sano, Fuminori; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Wada, KenichiThe relatively short atmospheric lifetimes of methane (CH4) and black carbon (BC) have focused attention on the potential for reducing anthropogenic climate change by reducing Short-Lived Climate Forcer (SLCF) emissions. This paper examines radiative forcing and global mean temperature results from the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF)-30 multi-model suite of scenarios addressing CH4 and BC mitigation, the two major short-lived climate forcers. Central estimates of temperature reductions in 2040 from an idealized scenario focused on reductions in methane and black carbon emissions ranged from 0.18–0.26 °C across the nine participating models. Reductions in methane emissions drive 60% or more of these temperature reductions by 2040, although the methane impact also depends on auxiliary reductions that depend on the economic structure of the model. Climate model parameter uncertainty has a large impact on results, with SLCF reductions resulting in as much as 0.3–0.7 °C by 2040. We find that the substantial overlap between a SLCF-focused policy and a stringent and comprehensive climate policy that reduces greenhouse gas emissions means that additional SLCF emission reductions result in, at most, a small additional benefit of ~ 0.1 °C in the 2030–2040 time frame. © 2020, Battelle Memorial Institute.
- ItemNegative emissions and international climate goals—learning from and about mitigation scenarios(Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 2019) Hilaire, Jérôme; Minx, Jan C.; Callaghan, Max W.; Edmonds, Jae; Luderer, Gunnar; Nemet, Gregory F.; Rogelj, Joeri; del Mar Zamora, MariaFor aiming to keep global warming well-below 2 °C and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 °C, as set out in the Paris Agreement, a full-fledged assessment of negative emission technologies (NETs) that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is crucial to inform science-based policy making. With the Paris Agreement in mind, we re-analyse available scenario evidence to understand the roles of NETs in 1.5 °C and 2 °C scenarios and, for the first time, link this to a systematic review of findings in the underlying literature. In line with previous research, we find that keeping warming below 1.5 °C requires a rapid large-scale deployment of NETs, while for 2 °C, we can still limit NET deployment substantially by ratcheting up near-term mitigation ambition. Most recent evidence stresses the importance of future socio-economic conditions in determining the flexibility of NET deployment and suggests opportunities for hedging technology risks by adopting portfolios of NETs. Importantly, our thematic review highlights that there is a much richer set of findings on NETs than commonly reflected upon both in scientific assessments and available reviews. In particular, beyond the common findings on NETs underpinned by dozens of studies around early scale-up, the changing shape of net emission pathways or greater flexibility in the timing of climate policies, there is a suite of “niche and emerging findings”, e.g. around innovation needs and rapid technological change, termination of NETs at the end of the twenty-first century or the impacts of climate change on the effectiveness of NETs that have not been widely appreciated. Future research needs to explore the role of climate damages on NET uptake, better understand the geophysical constraints of NET deployment (e.g. water, geological storage, climate feedbacks), and provide a more systematic assessment of NET portfolios in the context of sustainable development goals. © 2019, The Author(s).