Filters

2018 - 201922020 - 20211

More filters

2022 - 20233
Reset filters

Settings

End date: 2024 × DDC: 690 × Subject: Paris Agreement × WGL Institute: PIK ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Global mean temperature indicators linked to warming levels avoiding climate risks
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2018) Pfleiderer, Peter; Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Mengel, Matthias; Rogelj, Joeri
    International climate policy uses global mean temperature rise limits as proxies for societally acceptable levels of climate change. These limits are informed by risk assessments which draw upon projections of climate impacts under various levels of warming. Here we illustrate that indicators used to define limits of warming and those used to track the evolution of the Earth System under climate change are not directly comparable. Depending on the methodological approach, differences can be time-variant and up to 0.2 °C for a warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. This might lead to carbon budget overestimates of about 10 years of continued year-2015 emissions, and about a 10% increase in estimated 2100 sea-level rise. Awareness of this definitional mismatch is needed for a more effective communication between scientists and decision makers, as well as between the impact and physical climate science communities.
  • Thumbnail Image
    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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Short term policies to keep the door open for Paris climate goals
    (Bristol : IOP Publ., 2018) Kriegler, Elmar; Bertram, Christoph; Kuramochi, Takeshi; Jakob, Michael; Pehl, Michaja; Stevanović, Miodrag; Höhne, Niklas; Luderer, Gunnar; Minx, Jan C; Fekete, Hanna; Hilaire, Jérôme; Luna, Lisa; Popp, Alexander; Steckel, Jan Christoph; Sterl, Sebastian; Yalew, Amsalu Woldie; Dietrich, Jan Philipp; Edenhofer, Ottmar
    Climate policy needs to account for political and social acceptance. Current national climate policy plans proposed under the Paris Agreement lead to higher emissions until 2030 than cost-effective pathways towards the Agreements' long-term temperature goals would imply. Therefore, the current plans would require highly disruptive changes, prohibitive transition speeds, and large long-term deployment of risky mitigation measures for achieving the agreement's temperature goals after 2030. Since the prospects of introducing the cost-effective policy instrument, a global comprehensive carbon price in the near-term, are negligible, we study how a strengthening of existing plans by a global roll-out of regional policies can ease the implementation challenge of reaching the Paris temperature goals. The regional policies comprise a bundle of regulatory policies in energy supply, transport, buildings, industry, and land use and moderate, regionally differentiated carbon pricing. We find that a global roll-out of these policies could reduce global CO2 emissions by an additional 10 GtCO2eq in 2030 compared to current plans. It would lead to emissions pathways close to the levels of cost-effective likely below 2 °C scenarios until 2030, thereby reducing implementation challenges post 2030. Even though a gradual phase-in of a portfolio of regulatory policies might be less disruptive than immediate cost-effective carbon pricing, it would perform worse in other dimensions. In particular, it leads to higher economic impacts that could become major obstacles in the long-term. Hence, such policy packages should not be viewed as alternatives to carbon pricing, but rather as complements that provide entry points to achieve the Paris climate goals.