9 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 9 of 9
- ItemDifferential climate impacts for policy-relevant limits to global warming: The case of 1.5 °c and 2 °c(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2016) Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Lissner, Tabea K.; Fischer, Erich M.; Wohland, Jan; Perrette, Mahé; Golly, Antonius; Rogelj, Joeri; Childers, Katelin; Schewe, Jacob; Frieler, Katja; Mengel, Matthias; Hare, William; Schaeffer, MichielRobust appraisals of climate impacts at different levels of global-mean temperature increase are vital to guide assessments of dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. The 2015 Paris Agreement includes a two-headed temperature goal: "holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C". Despite the prominence of these two temperature limits, a comprehensive overview of the differences in climate impacts at these levels is still missing. Here we provide an assessment of key impacts of climate change at warming levels of 1.5°C and 2°C, including extreme weather events, water availability, agricultural yields, sea-level rise and risk of coral reef loss. Our results reveal substantial differences in impacts between a 1.5°C and 2°C warming that are highly relevant for the assessment of dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. For heat-related extremes, the additional 0.5°C increase in global-mean temperature marks the difference between events at the upper limit of present-day natural variability and a new climate regime, particularly in tropical regions. Similarly, this warming difference is likely to be decisive for the future of tropical coral reefs. In a scenario with an end-of-century warming of 2°C, virtually all tropical coral reefs are projected to be at risk of severe degradation due to temperature-induced bleaching from 2050 onwards. This fraction is reduced to about 90% in 2050 and projected to decline to 70% by 2100 for a 1.5°C scenario. Analyses of precipitation-related impacts reveal distinct regional differences and hot-spots of change emerge. Regional reduction in median water availability for the Mediterranean is found to nearly double from 9% to 17% between 1.5°C and 2°C, and the projected lengthening of regional dry spells increases from 7 to 11%. Projections for agricultural yields differ between crop types as well as world regions. While some (in particular high-latitude) regions may benefit, tropical regions like West Africa, South-East Asia, as well as Central and northern South America are projected to face substantial local yield reductions, particularly for wheat and maize. Best estimate sea-level rise projections based on two illustrative scenarios indicate a 50cm rise by 2100 relative to year 2000-levels for a 2°C scenario, and about 10 cm lower levels for a 1.5°C scenario. In a 1.5°C scenario, the rate of sea-level rise in 2100 would be reduced by about 30% compared to a 2°C scenario. Our findings highlight the importance of regional differentiation to assess both future climate risks and different vulnerabilities to incremental increases in global-mean temperature. The article provides a consistent and comprehensive assessment of existing projections and a good basis for future work on refining our understanding of the difference between impacts at 1.5°C and 2°C warming.
- ItemImpact of short-lived non-CO2 mitigation on carbon budgets for stabilizing global warming(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2015) Rogelj, Joeri; Meinshausen, Malte; Schaeffer, Michiel; Knutti, Reto; Riahi, KeywanLimiting global warming to any level requires limiting the total amount of CO2 emissions, or staying within a CO2 budget. Here we assess how emissions from short-lived non-CO2 species like methane, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), black-carbon, and sulphates influence these CO2 budgets. Our default case, which assumes mitigation in all sectors and of all gases, results in a CO2 budget between 2011–2100 of 340 PgC for a >66% chance of staying below 2°C, consistent with the assessment of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Extreme variations of air-pollutant emissions from black-carbon and sulphates influence this budget by about ±5%. In the hypothetical case of no methane or HFCs mitigation—which is unlikely when CO2 is stringently reduced—the budgets would be much smaller (40% or up to 60%, respectively). However, assuming very stringent CH4 mitigation as a sensitivity case, CO2 budgets could be 25% higher. A limit on cumulative CO2 emissions remains critical for temperature targets. Even a 25% higher CO2 budget still means peaking global emissions in the next two decades, and achieving net zero CO2 emissions during the third quarter of the 21st century. The leverage we have to affect the CO2 budget by targeting non-CO2 diminishes strongly along with CO2 mitigation, because these are partly linked through economic and technological factors.
- ItemIncremental improvements of 2030 targets insufficient to achieve the Paris Agreement goals(Göttingen : Copernicus Publ., 2020) Geiges, Andreas; Nauels, Alexander; Yanguas Parra, Paola; Andrijevic, Marina; Hare, William; Pfleiderer, Peter; Schaeffer, Michiel; Schleussner, Carl-FriedrichCurrent global mitigation ambition up to 2030 under the Paris Agreement, reflected in the National Determined Contributions (NDCs), is insufficient to achieve the agreement's 1.5 °C long-term temperature limit. As governments are preparing new and updated NDCs for 2020, the question as to how much collective improvement is achieved is a pivotal one for the credibility of the international climate regime. The recent Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has assessed a wide range of scenarios that achieve the 1.5 °C limit. Those pathways are characterised by a substantial increase in near-term action and total greenhouse gas (GHG) emission levels about 50 % lower than what is implied by current NDCs. Here we assess the outcomes of different scenarios of NDC updating that fall short of achieving this 1.5 °C benchmark. We find that incremental improvements in reduction targets, even if achieved globally, are insufficient to align collective ambition with the goals of the Paris Agreement. We provide estimates for global mean temperature increase by 2100 for different incremental NDC update scenarios and illustrate climate impacts under those median scenarios for extreme temperature, long-term sea-level rise and economic damages for the most vulnerable countries. Under the assumption of maintaining ambition as reflected in current NDCs up to 2100 and beyond, we project a reduction in the gross domestic product (GDP) in tropical countries of around 60 % compared to a no-climate-change scenario and median long-term sea-level rise of close to 2 m in 2300. About half of these impacts can be avoided by limiting warming to 1.5 °C or below. Scenarios of more incremental NDC improvements do not lead to comparable reductions in climate impacts. An increase in aggregated NDC ambition of big emitters by 33 % in 2030 does not reduce presented climate impacts by more than about half compared to limiting warming to 1.5 °C. Our results underscore that a transformational increase in 2030 ambition is required to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement and avoid the worst impacts of climate change. © 2020 SPIE. All rights reserved.
- ItemZero emission targets as long-term global goals for climate protection(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2015) Rogelj, Joeri; Schaeffer, Michiel; Meinshausen, Malte; Knutti, Reto; Alcamo, Joseph; Riahi, Keywan; Hare, WilliamRecently, assessments have robustly linked stabilization of global-mean temperature rise to the necessity of limiting the total amount of emitted carbon-dioxide (CO2). Halting global warming thus requires virtually zero annual CO2 emissions at some point. Policymakers have now incorporated this concept in the negotiating text for a new global climate agreement, but confusion remains about concepts like carbon neutrality, climate neutrality, full decarbonization, and net zero carbon or net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Here we clarify these concepts, discuss their appropriateness to serve as a long-term global benchmark for achieving temperature targets, and provide a detailed quantification. We find that with current pledges and for a likely (>66%) chance of staying below 2 °C, the scenario literature suggests net zero CO2 emissions between 2060 and 2070, with net negative CO2 emissions thereafter. Because of residual non-CO2 emissions, net zero is always reached later for total GHG emissions than for CO2. Net zero emissions targets are a useful focal point for policy, linking a global temperature target and socio-economic pathways to a necessary long-term limit on cumulative CO2 emissions.
- ItemCarbon budgets and energy transition pathways(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2016) van Vuuren, Detlef P.; van Soest, Heleen; Riahi, Keywan; Clarke, Leon; Krey, Volker; Kriegler, Elmar; Rogelj, Joeri; Schaeffer, Michiel; Tavoni, MassimoScenarios from integrated assessment models can provide insights into how carbon budgets relate to other policy-relevant indicators by including information on how fast and by how much emissions can be reduced. Such indicators include the peak year of global emissions, the decarbonisation rate and the deployment of low-carbon technology. Here, we show typical values for these indicators for different carbon budgets, using the recently compiled IPCC scenario database, and discuss how these vary as a function of non-CO2 forcing, energy use and policy delay. For carbon budgets of 2000 GtCO2 and less over the 2010–2100 period, supply of low carbon technologies needs to be scaled up massively from today's levels, unless energy use is relatively low. For the subgroup of scenarios with a budget below 1000 GtCO2 (consistent with >66% chance of limiting global warming to below 2 °C relative to preindustrial levels), the 2050 contribution of low-carbon technologies is generally around 50%–75%, compared to less than 20% today (range refers to the 10–90th interval of available data).
- ItemInconsistencies when applying novel metrics for emissions accounting to the Paris agreement(Bristol : IOP Publ., 2019) Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Nauels, Alexander; Schaeffer, Michiel; Hare, William; Rogelj, JoeriAddressing emissions of non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHGs) is an integral part of efficient climate change mitigation and therefore an essential part of climate policy. Metrics are used to aggregate and compare emissions of short- and long-lived GHGs and need to account for the difference in both magnitude and persistence of their climatic effects. Different metrics describe different approaches and perspectives, and hence yield different numerical estimates for aggregated GHG emissions. When interpreting GHG emission reduction targets, being mindful of the underlying metrical choices thus proves to be essential. Here we present the impact a recently proposed GHG metric related to the concept of CO2 forcing-equivalent emissions (called GWP*) would have on the internal consistency and environmental integrity of the Paris Agreement. We show that interpreting the Paris Agreement goals in a metric like GWP* that is significantly different from the standard metric used in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report can lead to profound inconsistencies in the mitigation architecture of the Agreement. It could even undermine the integrity of the Agreement's mitigation target altogether by failing to deliver net-zero CO2 emissions and therewith failing to ensure warming is halted. Our results indicate that great care needs to be taken when applying new concepts that appear scientifically favourable to a pre-existing climate policy context.
- ItemMaking or breaking climate targets: The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy(Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2014) Kriegler, Elmar; Riahi, Keywan; Bauer, Nico; Schwanitz, Valeria Jana; Petermann, Nils; Bosetti, Valentina; Marcucci, Adriana; Otto, Sander; Paroussos, Leonidas; Rao, Shilpa; Currás, Tabaré Arroyo; Ashina, Shuichi; Bollen, Johannes; Eom, Jiyong; Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem; Longden, Thomas; Kitous, Alban; Méjean, Aurélie; Sano, Fuminori; Schaeffer, Michiel; Wada, Kenichi; Capros, Pantelis; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Edenhofer, OttmarThis study explores a situation of staged accession to a global climate policy regime from the current situation of regionally fragmented and moderate climate action. The analysis is based on scenarios in which a front runner coalition – the EU or the EU and China – embarks on immediate ambitious climate action while the rest of the world makes a transition to a global climate regime between 2030 and 2050. We assume that the ensuing regime involves strong mitigation efforts but does not require late joiners to compensate for their initially higher emissions. Thus, climate targets are relaxed, and although staged accession can achieve significant reductions of global warming, the resulting climate outcome is unlikely to be consistent with the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees. The addition of China to the front runner coalition can reduce pre-2050 excess emissions by 20–30%, increasing the likelihood of staying below 2 degrees. Not accounting for potential co-benefits, the cost of front runner action is found to be lower for the EU than for China. Regions that delay their accession to the climate regime face a trade-off between reduced short term costs and higher transitional requirements due to larger carbon lock-ins and more rapidly increasing carbon prices during the accession period.
- ItemLocked into Copenhagen pledges - Implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals(Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 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, OttmarThis 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.
- ItemMid- and long-term climate projections for fragmented and delayed-action scenarios(Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2013) Schaeffer, Michiel; Gohar, Laila; Kriegler, Elmar; Lowe, Jason; Riahi, Keywan; van Vuuren, DetlefThis paper explores the climate consequences of “delayed near-term action” and “staged accession” scenarios for limiting warming below 2 °C. The stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels requires a large-scale transformation of the energy system. Depending on policy choices, there are alternative pathways to reach this objective. An “optimal” path, as emerging from energy-economic modeling, implies immediate action with stringent emission reductions, while the currently proposed international policies translate into reduction delays and higher near-term emissions. In our delayed action scenarios, low stabilization levels need thus to be reached from comparatively high 2030 emission levels. Negative consequences are higher economic cost as explored in accompanying papers and significantly higher mid-term warming, as indicated by a rate of warming 50% higher by the 2040s. By contrast, both mid- and long-term warming are significantly higher in another class of scenarios of staged accession that lets some regions embark on emission reductions, while others follow later, with conservation of carbon-price pathways comparable to the optimal scenarios. Not only is mid-term warming higher in staged accession cases, but the probability to exceed 2 °C in the 21st century increases by a factor of 1.5.