RESUMEN
Taking stock of global progress towards achieving the Paris Agreement requires consistently measuring aggregate national actions and pledges against modelled mitigation pathways1. However, national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs) and scientific assessments of anthropogenic emissions follow different accounting conventions for land-based carbon fluxes resulting in a large difference in the present emission estimates2,3, a gap that will evolve over time. Using state-of-the-art methodologies4 and a land carbon-cycle emulator5, we align the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)-assessed mitigation pathways with the NGHGIs to make a comparison. We find that the key global mitigation benchmarks become harder to achieve when calculated using the NGHGI conventions, requiring both earlier net-zero CO2 timing and lower cumulative emissions. Furthermore, weakening natural carbon removal processes such as carbon fertilization can mask anthropogenic land-based removal efforts, with the result that land-based carbon fluxes in NGHGIs may ultimately become sources of emissions by 2100. Our results are important for the Global Stocktake6, suggesting that nations will need to increase the collective ambition of their climate targets to remain consistent with the global temperature goals.
Asunto(s)
Dióxido de Carbono , Congresos como Asunto , Objetivos , Gases de Efecto Invernadero , Cooperación Internacional , Temperatura , Benchmarking , Ciclo del Carbono , Dióxido de Carbono/análisis , Congresos como Asunto/legislación & jurisprudencia , Gases de Efecto Invernadero/análisis , Actividades Humanas , Cooperación Internacional/legislación & jurisprudencia , Paris , Política Ambiental/legislación & jurisprudenciaRESUMEN
Public perception of emerging climate technologies, such as greenhouse gas removal (GGR) and solar radiation management (SRM), will strongly influence their future development and deployment. Studying perceptions of these technologies with traditional survey methods is challenging, because they are largely unknown to the public. Social media data provides a complementary line of evidence by allowing for retrospective analysis of how individuals share their unsolicited opinions. Our large-scale, comparative study of 1.5 million tweets covers 16 GGR and SRM technologies and uses state-of-the-art deep learning models to show how attention, and expressions of sentiment and emotion developed between 2006 and 2021. We find that in recent years, attention has shifted from general geoengineering themes to specific GGR methods. On the other hand, there is little attention to specific SRM technologies and they often coincide with conspiracy narratives. Sentiments and emotions in GGR tweets tend to be more positive, particularly for methods perceived to be natural, but are more negative when framed in the geoengineering context.
Asunto(s)
Dióxido de Carbono/aislamiento & purificación , Secuestro de Carbono , Política Ambiental/legislación & jurisprudencia , Análisis Ético , Calentamiento Global/legislación & jurisprudencia , Calentamiento Global/prevención & control , Gestión de Riesgos/ética , Gestión de Riesgos/métodos , Animales , Biodiversidad , Biomasa , Dióxido de Carbono/análisis , Retroalimentación , Agricultura Forestal , Derechos Humanos , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Desarrollo SostenibleRESUMEN
Today, more than 70 carbon pricing schemes have been implemented around the globe, but their contributions to emissions reductions remains a subject of heated debate in science and policy. Here we assess the effectiveness of carbon pricing in reducing emissions using a rigorous, machine-learning assisted systematic review and meta-analysis. Based on 483 effect sizes extracted from 80 causal ex-post evaluations across 21 carbon pricing schemes, we find that introducing a carbon price has yielded immediate and substantial emission reductions for at least 17 of these policies, despite the low level of prices in most instances. Statistically significant emissions reductions range between -5% to -21% across the schemes (-4% to -15% after correcting for publication bias). Our study highlights critical evidence gaps with regard to dozens of unevaluated carbon pricing schemes and the price elasticity of emissions reductions. More rigorous synthesis of carbon pricing and other climate policies is required across a range of outcomes to advance our understanding of "what works" and accelerate learning on climate solutions in science and policy.
RESUMEN
The volume of published academic research is growing rapidly and this new era of "big literature" poses new challenges to evidence synthesis, pushing traditional, manual methods of evidence synthesis to their limits. New technology developments, including machine learning, are likely to provide solutions to the problem of information overload and allow scaling of systematic maps to large and even vast literatures. In this paper, we outline how systematic maps lend themselves well to automation and computer-assistance. We believe that it is a major priority to consolidate efforts to develop and validate efficient, rigorous and robust applications of these novel technologies, ensuring the challenges of big literature do not prevent the future production of systematic maps.