15.04.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

van Vuuren, Detlef P.; et al. (2018): Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies

van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Stehfest, Elke; Gernaat, David E. H. J.; van den Berg, Maarten; Bijl, David L.; Boer, Harmen Sytze de et al. (2018): Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies. In Nature Climate change 5, p. 519. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-018-0119-8.

"The question arises whether alternative deep mitigation pathways exist. Here, using an integrated assessment model, we explore the impact of alternative pathways that include lifestyle change, additional reduction of non-CO2 greenhouse gases and more rapid electrification of energy demand based on renewable energy. Although these alternatives also face specific difficulties, they are found to significantly reduce the need for CDR, but not fully eliminate it. The alternatives offer a means to diversify transition pathways to meet the Paris Agreement targets, while simultaneously benefiting other sustainability goals."

LINK


Read more »

15.04.2018

# Media

0 Comments

Carbon Brief: World can limit global warming to 1.5C ‘without BECCS’

"It is possible to limit warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures without using negative emissions from bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), new research says."

LINK


Read more »

09.04.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

Kriegler, Elmar; et al. (2018): Pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C. A tale of turning around in no time?

Kriegler, Elmar; Luderer, Gunnar; Bauer, Nico; Baumstark, Lavinia; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Popp, Alexander et al. (2018): Pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C. A tale of turning around in no time? In Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 376 (2119). DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0457.

"We explore the feasibility of limiting global warming to 1.5°C without overshoot and without the deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. For this purpose, we perform a sensitivity analysis of four generic emissions reduction measures to identify a lower bound on future CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes. Final energy demand reductions and electrification of energy end uses as well as decarbonization of electricity and non-electric energy supply are all considered. We find the lower bound of cumulative fossil fuel and industry CO2 emissions to be 570 GtCO2 for the period 2016–2100, around 250 GtCO2 lower than the lower end of available 1.5°C mitigation pathways generated with integrated assessment models."

LINK


Read more »

09.04.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

Winning, Matthew; et al. (2018): How Low Can We Go? The Implications of Delayed Ratcheting and Negative Emissions Technologies on Achieving Well Below 2 °C

Winning, Matthew; Pye, Steve; Glynn, James; Scamman, Daniel; Welsby, Daniel (2018): How Low Can We Go? The Implications of Delayed Ratcheting and Negative Emissions Technologies on Achieving Well Below 2 °C. In George Giannakidis, Kenneth Karlsson, Maryse Labriet, Brian Ó. Gallachóir (Eds.): Limiting Global Warming to Well Below 2 °C. Energy System Modelling and Policy Development. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 51–65.

"In this chapter, we consider the impacts of delaying ratcheting until 2030 on global emissions trajectories towards 2 °C and 1.5 °C, and the role of offsets via negative emissions technologies (NETs). The analysis suggests that delaying action makes pursuing the 1.5 °C goal especially difficult without extremely high levels of negative emissions technologies (NETs), such as carbon capture and storage combined with bioenergy (BECCS). Depending on the availability of biomass, other NETs beyond BECCS will be required. Policymakers must also realise that the outlook for fossil fuels are closely linked to the prospects for NETs."

LINK


Read more »

09.04.2018

# Media

0 Comments

Quartz: A bipartisan US group introduced another bill to support a controversial climate technology

"The support it adds for direct air capture is perhaps just as essential, because that’s a technology nearly every climate model says we’ll need to scale up in the next few decades to avoid cataclysmic climate change. Direct air capture, when powered by carbon-neutral sources, is a negative-emissions machine. And the longer we take to cut global emissions, the greater our need for a negative-emissions technology will be."

LINK


Read more »

03.04.2018

# Political Papers

0 Comments

Shell (2018): Sky. Meeting the Goals of the Paris Agreement

Shell (2018): Sky. Meeting the Goals of the Paris Agreement.

"The Sky Scenario illustrates a technically possible, but challenging pathway for society to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. Sky builds on previous Shell scenarios publications and is our most optimistic scenario in terms of climate outcomes."

LINK


Read more »

03.04.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

Frumhoff, Peter C.; Stephens, Jennie C. (2018): Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise

Frumhoff, Peter C.; Stephens, Jennie C. (2018): Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise. In Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 376 (2119), p. 20160459. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0459.

"Here, we explore whether and how a solar geoengineering research enterprise might be developed in a way that promotes legitimacy as well as scientific credibility and policy relevance. We highlight the distinctive responsibilities of researchers and research funders to ensure that solar geoengineering research proposals are subject to legitimate societal review and scrutiny, recommend steps they can take to strive towards legitimacy and call on them to be explicitly open to multiple potential outcomes, including the societal rejection or considerable alteration of the solar geoengineering research enterprise."

LINK


Read more »

03.04.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

Strefler, Jessica; et al. (2018): Between Scylla and Charybdis. Delayed mitigation narrows the passage between large-scale CDR and high costs

Strefler, Jessica; Bauer, Nico; Kriegler, Elmar; Popp, Alexander; Giannousakis, Anastasis; Edenhofer, Ottmar (2018): Between Scylla and Charybdis. Delayed mitigation narrows the passage between large-scale CDR and high costs. In Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (4), p. 44015. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/aab2ba.

"There are major concerns about the sustainability of large-scale deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. It is therefore an urgent question to what extent CDR will be needed to implement the long term ambition of the Paris Agreement. Here we show that ambitious near term mitigation significantly decreases CDR requirements to keep the Paris climate targets within reach. Following the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) until 2030 makes 2 °C unachievable without CDR."

LINK


Read more »

03.04.2018

# Media

0 Comments

Brisbane Times: 'Harder and riskier': Carbon removal needed if Paris goals don't rise

""Each tonne of CO2 we don't emit, we don't have to remove from the atmosphere afterwards in an expensive and strenuous way," said Jessica Strefler from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and the lead author of the paper published on Thursday in Environmental Research Letters."

LINK


Read more »

03.04.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

MacMartin, Douglas G.; et al. (2018): Solar geoengineering as part of an overall strategy for meeting the 1.5°C Paris target

MacMartin, Douglas G.; Ricke, Katharine L.; Keith, David W. (2018): Solar geoengineering as part of an overall strategy for meeting the 1.5°C Paris target. In Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 376 (2119), p. 20160454. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0454.

"We first provide a physical science review of current research, research trends and some of the key gaps in knowledge that would need to be addressed to support informed decisions. Next, since few climate model simulations have considered these limited-deployment scenarios, we synthesize prior results to assess the projected response if solar geoengineering were used to limit global mean temperature to 1.5°C above preindustrial in an overshoot scenario that would otherwise peak near 3°C. While there are some important differences, the resulting climate is closer in many respects to a climate where the 1.5°C target is achieved through mitigation alone than either is to the 3◦C climate with no geoengineering. This holds for both regional temperature and precipitation changes; indeed, there are no regions where a majority of models project that this moderate level of geoengineering would produce a statistically significant shift in precipitation further away from preindustrial levels."

LINK


Read more »