RESUMO
The Paris Agreement calls for a cooperative response with the aim of limiting global warming to well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels while reaffirming the principles of equity and common, but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities1. Although the goal is clear, the approach required to achieve it is not. Cap-and-trade policies using uniform carbon prices could produce cost-effective reductions of global carbon emissions, but tend to impose relatively high mitigation costs on developing and emerging economies. Huge international financial transfers are required to complement cap-and-trade to achieve equal sharing of effort, defined as an equal distribution of mitigation costs as a share of income2,3, and therefore the cap-and-trade policy is often perceived as infringing on national sovereignty2-7. Here we show that a strategy of international financial transfers guided by moderate deviations from uniform carbon pricing could achieve the goal without straining either the economies or sovereignty of nations. We use the integrated assessment model REMIND-MAgPIE to analyse alternative policies: financial transfers in uniform carbon pricing systems, differentiated carbon pricing in the absence of financial transfers, or a hybrid combining financial transfers and differentiated carbon prices. Under uniform carbon prices, a present value of international financial transfers of 4.4 trillion US dollars over the next 80 years to 2100 would be required to equalize effort. By contrast, achieving equal effort without financial transfers requires carbon prices in advanced countries to exceed those in developing countries by a factor of more than 100, leading to efficiency losses of 2.6 trillion US dollars. Hybrid solutions reveal a strongly nonlinear trade-off between cost efficiency and sovereignty: moderate deviations from uniform carbon prices strongly reduce financial transfers at relatively small efficiency losses and moderate financial transfers substantially reduce inefficiencies by narrowing the carbon price spread. We also identify risks and adverse consequences of carbon price differentiation due to market distortions that can undermine environmental sustainability targets8,9. Quantifying the advantages and risks of carbon price differentiation provides insight into climate and sector-specific policy mixes.
Assuntos
Comércio/economia , Comércio/legislação & jurisprudência , Política Ambiental/economia , Política Ambiental/legislação & jurisprudência , Aquecimento Global/legislação & jurisprudência , Aquecimento Global/prevenção & controle , Cooperação Internacional/legislação & jurisprudência , Aquecimento Global/economia , Paris , Justiça Social , Fatores SocioeconômicosRESUMO
Current National Determined Contributions require strengthening to achieve the 2-degree target set in the Paris Agreement. Here, we contrast two mitigation effort strengthening ideas: the "burden-sharing" principle, which requires each region to meet the mitigation goal through domestic mitigation with no international cooperation, and the cooperation focused "cost effective conditional-enhancing" principle, which combines domestic mitigation with carbon trading and low-carbon investment transfer. By applying a burden-sharing model covering several equity principles, we analyze the 2030 mitigation burden for each region, then the energy system model generates the results for the carbon trade and the investment transfer for the conditional-enhancing plan, and an air pollution cobenefit model is used to analyze the cobenefit on air quality and public health. Here, we show that the conditional-enhancing plan leads to an international carbon trading volume of 339.2 billion USD per year and reduces the marginal mitigation cost of the quota-purchase regions by 25%-32%. Furthermore, the international cooperation incentivizes a faster and deeper decarbonization in developing and emerging regions, raising the air pollution health cobenefits by 18% to 731,000 avoided premature deaths annually compared to the "burden-sharing" principle, amounting to a reduction in the life value loss of 131 billion dollars per year.
Assuntos
Poluentes Atmosféricos , Poluição do Ar , Poluentes Atmosféricos/análise , Análise de Custo-Efetividade , Saúde Pública , Mudança Climática , Poluição do Ar/prevenção & controle , CarbonoRESUMO
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. Estimates of 1.5°C-consistent CO2 budgets are highly uncertain and range between 100 and 900 GtCO2 from 2016 onwards. Based on our sensitivity analysis, limiting warming to 1.5°C will require CDR or terrestrial net carbon uptake if 1.5°C-consistent budgets are smaller than 650 GtCO2 The earlier CDR is deployed, the more it neutralizes post-2020 emissions rather than producing net negative emissions. Nevertheless, if the 1.5°C budget is smaller than 550 GtCO2, temporary overshoot of the 1.5°C limit becomes unavoidable if CDR cannot be ramped up faster than to 4 GtCO2 in 2040 and 10 GtCO2 in 2050.This article is part of the theme issue 'The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.
RESUMO
The events of March 2011 at the nuclear power complex in Fukushima, Japan, raised questions about the safe operation of nuclear power plants, with early retirement of existing nuclear power plants being debated in the policy arena and considered by regulators. Also, the future of building new nuclear power plants is highly uncertain. Should nuclear power policies become more restrictive, one potential option for climate change mitigation will be less available. However, a systematic analysis of nuclear power policies, including early retirement, has been missing in the climate change mitigation literature. We apply an energy economy model framework to derive scenarios and analyze the interactions and tradeoffs between these two policy fields. Our results indicate that early retirement of nuclear power plants leads to discounted cumulative global GDP losses of 0.07% by 2020. If, in addition, new nuclear investments are excluded, total losses will double. The effect of climate policies imposed by an intertemporal carbon budget on incremental costs of policies restricting nuclear power use is small. However, climate policies have much larger impacts than policies restricting the use of nuclear power. The carbon budget leads to cumulative discounted near term reductions of global GDP of 0.64% until 2020. Intertemporal flexibility of the carbon budget approach enables higher near-term emissions as a result of increased power generation from natural gas to fill the emerging gap in electricity supply, while still remaining within the overall carbon budget. Demand reductions and efficiency improvements are the second major response strategy.
Assuntos
Mudança Climática/economia , Modelos Econômicos , Centrais Nucleares/economia , Produto Interno Bruto , Centrais Nucleares/normas , Política PúblicaRESUMO
A transition to healthy diets such as the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet could considerably reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, the specific contributions of dietary shifts for the feasibility of 1.5°C pathways remain unclear. Here, we use the open-source integrated assessment modeling (IAM) framework REMIND-MAgPIE to compare 1.5°C pathways with and without dietary shifts. We find that a flexitarian diet increases the feasibility of the Paris Agreement climate goals in different ways: The reduction of GHG emissions related to dietary shifts, especially methane from ruminant enteric fermentation, increases the 1.5°C compatible carbon budget. Therefore, dietary shifts allow to achieve the same climate outcome with less carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and less stringent CO2 emission reductions in the energy system, which reduces pressure on GHG prices, energy prices, and food expenditures.
Assuntos
Dieta , Gases de Efeito Estufa , Estudos de Viabilidade , Alimentos , Dióxido de Carbono/metabolismo , Mudança Climática , Efeito EstufaRESUMO
Achieving net-zero CO2 emissions has become the explicitgoal of many climate-energy policies around the world. Although many studies have assessed net-zero emissions pathways, the common features and tradeoffs of energy systems across global scenarios at the point of net-zero CO2 emissions have not yet been evaluated. Here, we examine the energy systems of 177 net-zero scenarios and discuss their long-term technological and regional characteristics in the context of current energy policies. We find that, on average, renewable energy sources account for 60% of primary energy at net-zero (compared to â¼14% today), with slightly less than half of that renewable energy derived from biomass. Meanwhile, electricity makes up approximately half of final energy consumed (compared to â¼20% today), highlighting the extent to which solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels remain prevalent in the scenarios even when emissions reach net-zero. Finally, residual emissions and offsetting negative emissions are not evenly distributed across world regions, which may have important implications for negotiations on burden-sharing, human development, and equity.
RESUMO
The large majority of climate change mitigation scenarios that hold warming below 2 °C show high deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR), resulting in a peak-and-decline behavior in global temperature. This is driven by the assumption of an exponentially increasing carbon price trajectory which is perceived to be economically optimal for meeting a carbon budget. However, this optimality relies on the assumption that a finite carbon budget associated with a temperature target is filled up steadily over time. The availability of net carbon removals invalidates this assumption and therefore a different carbon price trajectory should be chosen. We show how the optimal carbon price path for remaining well below 2 °C limits CDR demand and analyze requirements for constructing alternatives, which may be easier to implement in reality. We show that warming can be held at well below 2 °C at much lower long-term economic effort and lower CDR deployment and therefore lower risks if carbon prices are high enough in the beginning to ensure target compliance, but increase at a lower rate after carbon neutrality has been reached.
RESUMO
Many countries have implemented national climate policies to accomplish pledged Nationally Determined Contributions and to contribute to the temperature objectives of the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2023, the global stocktake will assess the combined effort of countries. Here, based on a public policy database and a multi-model scenario analysis, we show that implementation of current policies leaves a median emission gap of 22.4 to 28.2 GtCO2eq by 2030 with the optimal pathways to implement the well below 2 °C and 1.5 °C Paris goals. If Nationally Determined Contributions would be fully implemented, this gap would be reduced by a third. Interestingly, the countries evaluated were found to not achieve their pledged contributions with implemented policies (implementation gap), or to have an ambition gap with optimal pathways towards well below 2 °C. This shows that all countries would need to accelerate the implementation of policies for renewable technologies, while efficiency improvements are especially important in emerging countries and fossil-fuel-dependent countries.
RESUMO
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.