Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item
    Powers of 10: seeking ‘sweet spots’ for rapid climate and sustainability actions between individual and global scales
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2020) Bhowmik, Avit K.; McCaffrey, Mark S.; Ruskey, Abigail M.; Frischmann, Chad; Gaffney, Owen
    Achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement and related sustainability initiatives will require halving of global greenhouse gas emissions each decade from now on through to 2050, when net zero emissions should be achieved. To reach such significant reductions requires a rapid and strategic scaling of existing and emerging technologies and practices, coupled with economic and social transformations and novel governance solutions. Here we present a new ‘Powers of 10’ (P10) logarithmic framework and demonstrate its potential as a practical tool for decision makers and change agents at multiple scales to inform and catalyze engagement and actions, complementing and adding nuance to existing frameworks. P10 assists in identifying the suitable cohorts and cohort ranges for rapidly deploying climate and sustainability actions between a single individual and the globally projected ∼ 10 billion persons by 2050. Applying a robust dataset of climate solutions from Project Drawdown’s Plausible scenario that could cumulatively reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1051 gigatons (Gt) against a reference scenario (2190 Gt) between 2020 and 2050, we seek to identify a ‘sweet spot’ where these climate and sustainability actions are suitably scaled. We suggest that prioritizing the analyzed climate actions between community and urban scales, where global and local converge, can help catalyze and enhance individual, household and local practices, and support national and international policies and finances for rapid sustainability transformations.
  • Item
    The meso scale as a frontier in interdisciplinary modeling of sustainability from local to global scales
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2023) Johnson, Justin Andrew; Brown, Molly E.; Corong, Erwin; Dietrich, Jan Philipp; C. Henry, Roslyn; Jeetze, Patrick José von; Leclère, David; Popp, Alexander; Thakrar, Sumil K.; Williams, David R.
    Achieving sustainable development requires understanding how human behavior and the environment interact across spatial scales. In particular, knowing how to manage tradeoffs between the environment and the economy, or between one spatial scale and another, necessitates a modeling approach that allows these different components to interact. Existing integrated local and global analyses provide key insights, but often fail to capture ‘meso-scale’ phenomena that operate at scales between the local and the global, leading to erroneous predictions and a constrained scope of analysis. Meso-scale phenomena are difficult to model because of their complexity and computational challenges, where adding additional scales can increase model run-time exponentially. These additions, however, are necessary to make models that include sufficient detail for policy-makers to assess tradeoffs. Here, we synthesize research that explicitly includes meso-scale phenomena and assess where further efforts might be fruitful in improving our predictions and expanding the scope of questions that sustainability science can answer. We emphasize five categories of models relevant to sustainability science, including biophysical models, integrated assessment models, land-use change models, earth-economy models and spatial downscaling models. We outline the technical and methodological challenges present in these areas of research and discuss seven directions for future research that will improve coverage of meso-scale effects. Additionally, we provide a specific worked example that shows the challenges present, and possible solutions, for modeling meso-scale phenomena in integrated earth-economy models.
  • Item
    Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability
    (Oxford : Wiley-Blackwell, 2021) Calvin, Katherine; Cowie, Annette; Berndes, Göran; Arneth, Almut; Cherubini, Francesco; Portugal‐Pereira, Joana; Grassi, Giacomo; House, Jo; Johnson, Francis X.; Popp, Alexander; Rounsevell, Mark; Slade, Raphael; Smith, Pete
    Many global climate change mitigation pathways presented in IPCC assessment reports rely heavily on the deployment of bioenergy, often used in conjunction with carbon capture and storage. We review the literature on bioenergy use for climate change mitigation, including studies that use top-down integrated assessment models or bottom-up modelling, and studies that do not rely on modelling. We summarize the state of knowledge concerning potential co-benefits and adverse side effects of bioenergy systems and discuss limitations of modelling studies used to analyse consequences of bioenergy expansion. The implications of bioenergy supply on mitigation and other sustainability criteria are context dependent and influenced by feedstock, management regime, climatic region, scale of deployment and how bioenergy alters energy systems and land use. Depending on previous land use, widespread deployment of monoculture plantations may contribute to mitigation but can cause negative impacts across a range of other sustainability criteria. Strategic integration of new biomass supply systems into existing agriculture and forest landscapes may result in less mitigation but can contribute positively to other sustainability objectives. There is considerable variation in evaluations of how sustainability challenges evolve as the scale of bioenergy deployment increases, due to limitations of existing models, and uncertainty over the future context with respect to the many variables that influence alternative uses of biomass and land. Integrative policies, coordinated institutions and improved governance mechanisms to enhance co-benefits and minimize adverse side effects can reduce the risks of large-scale deployment of bioenergy. Further, conservation and efficiency measures for energy, land and biomass can support greater flexibility in achieving climate change mitigation and adaptation.
  • Item
    The energy and carbon inequality corridor for a 1.5 °C compatible and just Europe
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2021-6-15) Jaccard, Ingram S; Pichler, Peter-Paul; Többen, Johannes; Weisz, Helga
    The call for a decent life for all within planetary limits poses a dual challenge: provide all people with the essential resources needed to live well and, collectively, not exceed the source and sink capacity of the biosphere to sustain human societies. We examine the corridor of possible distributions of household energy and carbon footprints that satisfy both minimum energy use for a decent life and available energy supply compatible with the 1.5 °C target in 2050. We estimated household energy and carbon footprints for expenditure deciles for 28 European countries in 2015 by combining data from national household budget surveys with the environmentally-extended multi-regional input–output model EXIOBASE. We found a top-to-bottom decile ratio (90:10) of 7.2 for expenditure, 3.1 for net energy and 2.6 for carbon. The lower inequality of energy and carbon footprints is largely attributable to inefficient energy and heating technologies in the lower deciles (mostly Eastern Europe). Adopting best technology across Europe would save 11 EJ of net energy annually, but increase environmental footprint inequality. With such inequality, both targets can only be met through the use of CCS, large efficiency improvements, and an extremely low minimum final energy use of 28 GJ per adult equivalent. Assuming a more realistic minimum energy use of about 55 GJ ae−1 and no CCS deployment, the 1.5 °C target can only be achieved at near full equality. We conclude that achieving both stated goals is an immense and widely underestimated challenge, the successful management of which requires far greater room for maneuver in monetary and fiscal terms than is reflected in the current European political discourse.
  • Item
    Integrate health into decision-making to foster climate action
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2021-4-8) Vandyck, Toon; Rauner, Sebastian; Sampedro, Jon; Lanzi, Elisa; Reis, Lara Aleluia; Springmann, Marco; Dingenen, Rita Van
    The COVID-19 pandemic reveals that societies place a high value on healthy lives. Leveraging this momentum to establish a more central role for human health in the policy process will provide further impetus to a sustainable transformation of energy and food systems.
  • Item
    Giving Legs to Handprint Thinking: Foundations for Evaluating the Good We Do
    (Hoboken, NJ : Wiley-Blackwell, 2020) Guillaume, Joseph H.A.; Sojamo, Suvi; Porkka, Miina; Gerten, Dieter; Jalava, Mika; Lankoski, Leena; Lehikoinen, Elina; Lettenmeier, Michael; Pfister, Stephan; Usva, Kirsi; Wada, Yoshihide; Kummu, Matti
    In environmental management and sustainability there is an increasing interest in measurement and accounting of beneficial impact—as an incentive to action, as a communication tool, and to move toward a positive, constructive approach focused on opportunities rather than problems. One approach uses the metaphor of a “handprint,” complementing the notion of environmental footprints, which have been widely adopted for impact measurement and accounting. We analyze this idea by establishing core principles of handprint thinking: Handprint encourages actions with positive impacts and connects to analyses of footprint reductions but adds value to them and addresses the issue of what action should be taken. We also identify five key questions that need to be addressed and decisions that need to be made in performing a (potentially quantitative) handprint assessment, related to scoping of the improvement to be made, how it is achieved, and how credit is assigned, taking into account constraints on action. A case study of the potential water footprint reduction of an average Finn demonstrates how handprint thinking can be a natural extension of footprint reduction analyses. We find that there is a diversity of possible handprint assessments that have the potential to encourage doing good. Their common foundation is “handprint thinking.”. © 2020 The Authors.
  • Item
    Integrating Life Cycle and Impact Assessments to Map Food's Cumulative Environmental Footprint
    (Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2020) Kuempel, Caitlin D.; Frazier, Melanie; Nash, Kirsty L.; Jacobsen, Nis Sand; Williams, David R.; Blanchard, Julia L.; Cottrell, Richard S.; McIntyre, Peter B.; Moran, Daniel; Bouwman, Lex; Froehlich, Halley E.; Gephart, Jessica A.; Metian, Marc; Többen, Johannes; Halpern, Benjamin S.
    Producing food exerts pressures on the environment. Understanding the location and magnitude of food production is key to reducing the impacts of these pressures on nature and people. In this Perspective, Kuempel et al. outline an approach for integrating life cycle assessment and cumulative impact mapping data and methodologies to map the cumulative environmental pressure of food systems. The approach enables quantification of current and potential future environmental pressures, which are needed to reduce the net impact of feeding humanity. © 2020 The AuthorsFeeding a growing, increasingly affluent population while limiting environmental pressures of food production is a central challenge for society. Understanding the location and magnitude of food production is key to addressing this challenge because pressures vary substantially across food production types. Applying data and models from life cycle assessment with the methodologies for mapping cumulative environmental impacts of human activities (hereafter cumulative impact mapping) provides a powerful approach to spatially map the cumulative environmental pressure of food production in a way that is consistent and comprehensive across food types. However, these methodologies have yet to be combined. By synthesizing life cycle assessment and cumulative impact mapping methodologies, we provide guidance for comprehensively and cumulatively mapping the environmental pressures (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions, spatial occupancy, and freshwater use) associated with food production systems. This spatial approach enables quantification of current and potential future environmental pressures, which is needed for decision makers to create more sustainable food policies and practices. © 2020 The Authors