Next Article in Journal
The Economy-Carbon Nexus in China: A Multi-Regional Input-Output Analysis of the Influence of Sectoral and Regional Development
Next Article in Special Issue
Exploring the Feasibility of Low-Carbon Scenarios Using Historical Energy Transitions Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
A States of Matter Search-Based Approach for Solving the Problem of Intelligent Power Allocation in Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles
Previous Article in Special Issue
Energy Rebound as a Potential Threat to a Low-Carbon Future: Findings from a New Exergy-Based National-Level Rebound Approach
Article Menu
Issue 1 (January) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Energies 2017, 10(1), 89; doi:10.3390/en10010089

Assessing the Feasibility of Global Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios

1
Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AA, UK
2
Fondazione Centro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici (CMCC), Corso Magenta 63, 20123 Milan, Italy
3
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
4
Met Office Hadley Centre, FitzRoy Road, Exeter, Devon EX1 3PB, UK
5
Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
6
Institute of Thermal Engineering, Graz University of Technology, Infeldgasse 25b, 8010 Graz, Austria
7
Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Corso Magenta 63, 20123 Milan, Italy
8
Department of Economics, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: John Barrett
Received: 3 October 2016 / Revised: 8 December 2016 / Accepted: 16 December 2016 / Published: 13 January 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Low Carbon Economy)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [2960 KB, uploaded 13 January 2017]   |  

Abstract

This study explores the critical notion of how feasible it is to achieve long-term mitigation goals to limit global temperature change. It uses a model inter-comparison of three integrated assessment models (TIAM-Grantham, MESSAGE-GLOBIOM and WITCH) harmonized for socio-economic growth drivers using one of the new shared socio-economic pathways (SSP2), to analyse multiple mitigation scenarios aimed at different temperature changes in 2100, in order to assess the model outputs against a range of indicators developed so as to systematically compare the feasibility across scenarios. These indicators include mitigation costs and carbon prices, rates of emissions reductions and energy efficiency improvements, rates of deployment of key low-carbon technologies, reliance on negative emissions, and stranding of power generation assets. The results highlight how much more challenging the 2 °C goal is, when compared to the 2.5–4 °C goals, across virtually all measures of feasibility. Any delay in mitigation or limitation in technology options also renders the 2 °C goal much less feasible across the economic and technical dimensions explored. Finally, a sensitivity analysis indicates that aiming for less than 2 °C is even less plausible, with significantly higher mitigation costs and faster carbon price increases, significantly faster decarbonization and zero-carbon technology deployment rates, earlier occurrence of very significant carbon capture and earlier onset of global net negative emissions. Such a systematic analysis allows a more in-depth consideration of what realistic level of long-term temperature changes can be achieved and what adaptation strategies are therefore required. View Full-Text
Keywords: climate change mitigation; low-carbon scenarios; mitigation feasibility climate change mitigation; low-carbon scenarios; mitigation feasibility
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Gambhir, A.; Drouet, L.; McCollum, D.; Napp, T.; Bernie, D.; Hawkes, A.; Fricko, O.; Havlik, P.; Riahi, K.; Bosetti, V.; Lowe, J. Assessing the Feasibility of Global Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios. Energies 2017, 10, 89.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Energies EISSN 1996-1073 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top