Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11
  • Item
    Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies
    ([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2019) Luderer, Gunnar; Pehl, Michaja; Arvesen, Anders; Gibon, Thomas; Bodirsky, Benjamin L.; de Boer, Harmen Sytze; Fricko, Oliver; Hejazi, Mohamad; Humpenöder, Florian; Iyer, Gokul; Mima, Silvana; Mouratiadou, Ioanna; Pietzcker, Robert C.; Popp, Alexander; van den Berg, Maarten; van Vuuren, Detlef; Hertwich, Edgar G.
    A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy.
  • Item
    Corrigendum: Air quality and health implications of 1.5 °C–2 °C climate pathways under considerations of ageing population: a multi-model scenario analysis (2021 Environ. Res. Lett. 16 045005)
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2021) Rafaj, Peter; Kiesewetter, Gregor; Krey, Volker; Schoepp, Wolfgang; Bertram, Christoph; Drouet, Laurent; Fricko, Oliver; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Harmsen, Mathijs; Hilaire, Jérôme; Huppmann, Daniel; Klimont, Zbigniew; Kolp, Peter; Aleluia Reis, Lara; van Vuuren, Detlef
    We have identified an error in the text of section 3.3 where the health co-benefits of 1.5 °C + MFR scenario in the whole of Asia are compared to the reference. In the last paragraph of the section 3.3 (page 11), the manuscript states that 'Across the Asia domain, this reduction is approximately 2.5-3 million cases or 40%-51% depending on the IAM used'. Unfortunately, the numbers quoted here were accidentally taken from a sensitivity analysis using different integrated exposure-response curves (GBD-2010, obtained from Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network 2013), which have not been used in the results shown in the paper-our results are based on the GBD-2013 version, reported by Forouzanfar et al (2015). The correct statement is: 'Across the Asia domain, this reduction is approximately 1.2-1.5 million cases or 33%-42% depending on the IAM used'. The same correction applies to the statement in the Conclusions section 5 (4th paragraph, page 14), which should read: 'The 1.5 °C + MFR scenario decreases premature deaths by 33%-42% across Asia, compared to NPi'.
  • Item
    Enhancing global climate policy ambition towards a 1.5 °c stabilization: A short-term multi-model assessment
    (Bristol : IOP Publishing, 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.
  • Item
    Mapping the yields of lignocellulosic bioenergy crops from observations at the global scale
    (Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernics Publications, 2020) Li, Wei; Ciais, Philippe; Stehfest, Elke; van Vuuren, Detlef; Popp, Alexander; Arneth, Almut; Di Fulvio, Fulvio; Doelma, Jonathan; Humpenöder, Florian; Harper, Anna B.; Park, Taejin; Makowski, David; Havlik, Petr; Obersteiner, Michael; Wang, Jingmeng; Krause, Andreas; Liu, Wenfeng
    Most scenarios from integrated assessment models (IAMs) that project greenhouse gas emissions include the use of bioenergy as a means to reduce CO2 emissions or even to achieve negative emissions (together with CCS carbon capture and storage). The potential amount of CO2 that can be removed from the atmosphere depends, among others, on the yields of bioenergy crops, the land available to grow these crops and the efficiency with which CO2 produced by combustion is captured. While bioenergy crop yields can be simulated by models, estimates of the spatial distribution of bioenergy yields under current technology based on a large number of observations are currently lacking. In this study, a random-forest (RF) algorithm is used to upscale a bioenergy yield dataset of 3963 observations covering Miscanthus, switchgrass, eucalypt, poplar and willow using climatic and soil conditions as explanatory variables. The results are global yield maps of five important lignocellulosic bioenergy crops under current technology, climate and atmospheric CO2 conditions at a 0:5 0:5 spatial resolution. We also provide a combined "best bioenergy crop" yield map by selecting one of the five crop types with the highest yield in each of the grid cells, eucalypt and Miscanthus in most cases. The global median yield of the best crop is 16.3 tDMha1 yr1 (DM dry matter). High yields mainly occur in the Amazon region and southeastern Asia. We further compare our empirically derived maps with yield maps used in three IAMs and find that the median yields in our maps are 50% higher than those in the IAM maps. Our estimates of gridded bioenergy crop yields can be used to provide bioenergy yields for IAMs, to evaluate land surface models or to identify the most suitable lands for future bioenergy crop plantations. The 0:5 0:5 global maps for yields of different bioenergy crops and the best crop and for the best crop composition generated from this study can be download from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3274254 (Li, 2019). © 2019 Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
  • Item
    Assessing inter-sectoral climate change risks: The role of ISIMIP
    (Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2017) Rosenzweig, Cynthia; Arnell, Nigel W.; Ebi, Kristie L.; Lotze-Campen, Hermann; Raes, Frank; Rapley, Chris; Smith, Mark Stafford; Cramer, Wolfgang; Frieler, Katja; Reyer, Christopher P.O.; Schewe, Jacob; van Vuuren, Detlef; Warszawski, Lila
    The aims of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) are to provide a framework for the intercomparison of global and regional-scale risk models within and across multiple sectors and to enable coordinated multi-sectoral assessments of different risks and their aggregated effects. The overarching goal is to use the knowledge gained to support adaptation and mitigation decisions that require regional or global perspectives within the context of facilitating transformations to enable sustainable development, despite inevitable climate shifts and disruptions. ISIMIP uses community-agreed sets of scenarios with standardized climate variables and socio-economic projections as inputs for projecting future risks and associated uncertainties, within and across sectors. The results are consistent multi-model assessments of sectoral risks and opportunities that enable studies that integrate across sectors, providing support for implementation of the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
  • Item
    Energy system developments and investments in the decisive decade for the Paris Agreement goals
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 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.
  • Item
    Challenges in producing policy-relevant global scenarios of biodiversity and ecosystem services
    (Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2020) Rosa, Isabel M.D.; Purvis, Andy; Alkemade, Rob; Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca; Ferrier, Simon; Guerra, Carlos A.; Hurtt, George; Kim, HyeJin; Leadley, Paul; Martins, Inês S.; Popp, Alexander; Schipper, Aafke M.; van Vuuren, Detlef; Pereira, Henrique M.
    Scenario-based modelling is a powerful tool to describe relationships between plausible trajectories of drivers, possible policy interventions, and impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Model inter-comparisons are key in quantifying uncertainties and identifying avenues for model improvement but have been missing among the global biodiversity and ecosystem services modelling communities. The biodiversity and ecosystem services scenario-based inter-model comparison (BES-SIM) aims to fill this gap. We used global land-use and climate projections to simulate possible future impacts on terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services using a variety of models and a range of harmonized metrics. The goal of this paper is to reflect on the steps taken in BES-SIM, identify remaining methodological challenges, and suggest pathways for improvement. We identified five major groups of challenges; the need to: 1) better account for the role of nature in future human development storylines; 2) improve the representation of drivers in the scenarios by increasing the resolution (temporal, spatial and thematic) of land-use as key driver of biodiversity change and including additional relevant drivers; 3) explicitly integrate species- and trait-level biodiversity in ecosystem services models; 4) expand the coverage of the multiple dimensions of biodiversity and ecosystem services; and finally, 5) incorporate time-series or one-off historical data in the calibration and validation of biodiversity and ecosystem services models. Addressing these challenges would allow the development of more integrated global projections of biodiversity and ecosystem services, thereby improving their policy relevance in supporting the interlinked international conservation and sustainable development agendas. © 2019 The Authors
  • Item
    Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models
    (Lisbon : Cogitatio Press, 2022) Hickmann, Thomas; Bertram, Christoph; Biermann, Frank; Brutschin, Elina; Kriegler, Elmar; Livingston, Jasmine E.; Pianta, Silvia; Riahi, Keywan; van Ruijven, Bas; van Vuuren, Detlef
    The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, paved the way for a new hybrid global climate governance architecture with both bottom‐up and top‐down elements. While governments can choose individual climate goals and actions, a global stocktake and a ratcheting‐up mechanism have been put in place with the overall aim to ensure that collective efforts will prevent increasing adverse impacts of climate change. Integrated assessment models show that current combined climate commitments and policies of national governments fall short of keeping global warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C above preindustrial levels. Although major greenhouse gas emitters, such as China, the European Union, India, the United States under the Biden administration, and several other countries, have made new pledges to take more ambitious climate action, it is highly uncertain where global climate policy is heading. Scenarios in line with long‐term temperature targets typically assume a simplistic and hardly realistic level of harmonization of climate policies across countries. Against this backdrop, this article develops four archetypes for the further evolution of the global climate governance architecture and matches them with existing sets of scenarios developed by integrated assessment models. By these means, the article identifies knowledge gaps in the current scenario literature and discusses possible research avenues to explore the pre‐conditions for successful coordination of national policies towards achieving the long‐term target stipulated in the Paris Agreement.
  • Item
    CO2 emission mitigation and fossil fuel markets: Dynamic and international aspects of climate policies
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2013) Bauer, Nico; Bosetti, Valentina; Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem; Kitous, Alban; McCollum, David; Méjean, Aurélie; Rao, Shilpa; Turton, Hal; Paroussos, Leonidas; Ashina, Shuichi; Calvin, Katherine; Wada, Kenichi; van Vuuren, Detlef
    This paper explores a multi-model scenario ensemble to assess the impacts of idealized and non-idealized climate change stabilization policies on fossil fuel markets. Under idealized conditions climate policies significantly reduce coal use in the short- and long-term. Reductions in oil and gas use are much smaller, particularly until 2030, but revenues decrease much more because oil and gas prices are higher than coal prices. A first deviation from optimal transition pathways is delayed action that relaxes global emission targets until 2030 in accordance with the Copenhagen pledges. Fossil fuel markets revert back to the no-policy case: though coal use increases strongest, revenue gains are higher for oil and gas. To balance the carbon budget over the 21st century, the long-term reallocation of fossil fuels is significantly larger—twice and more—than the short-term distortion. This amplifying effect results from coal lock-in and inter-fuel substitution effects to balance the full-century carbon budget. The second deviation from the optimal transition pathway relaxes the global participation assumption. The result here is less clear-cut across models, as we find carbon leakage effects ranging from positive to negative because trade and substitution patterns of coal, oil, and gas differ across models. In summary, distortions of fossil fuel markets resulting from relaxed short-term global emission targets are more important and less uncertain than the issue of carbon leakage from early mover action.
  • Item
    Integrated 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, Simon
    Increasing 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.