1.5°C degrowth scenarios suggest the need for new mitigation pathways

被引:206
|
作者
Keysser, Lorenz T. [1 ,2 ]
Lenzen, Manfred [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Sch Phys, ISA, A28, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Dept Environm Syst Sci, Inst Environm Decis, Zurich, Switzerland
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
SOCIETAL TRANSFORMATIONS; ENERGY DEMAND; CLIMATE; MODELS; RETURN;
D O I
10.1038/s41467-021-22884-9
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
1.5 degrees C scenarios reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) rely on combinations of controversial negative emissions and unprecedented technological change, while assuming continued growth in gross domestic product (GDP). Thus far, the integrated assessment modelling community and the IPCC have neglected to consider degrowth scenarios, where economic output declines due to stringent climate mitigation. Hence, their potential to avoid reliance on negative emissions and speculative rates of technological change remains unexplored. As a first step to address this gap, this paper compares 1.5 degrees C degrowth scenarios with IPCC archetype scenarios, using a simplified quantitative representation of the fuel-energy-emissions nexus. Here we find that the degrowth scenarios minimize many key risks for feasibility and sustainability compared to technology-driven pathways, such as the reliance on high energy-GDP decoupling, large-scale carbon dioxide removal and large-scale and high-speed renewable energy transformation. However, substantial challenges remain regarding political feasibility. Nevertheless, degrowth pathways should be thoroughly considered. Established climate mitigation modelling relies on controversial negative emissions and unprecedented technological change, but neglects to consider degrowth scenarios. Here the authors show that degrowth scenarios minimize many key risks for feasibility and sustainability and thus need to be thoroughly assessed.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Mitigation scenarios must cater to new users
    Christopher Weber
    David L. McCollum
    Jae Edmonds
    Pedro Faria
    Alban Pyanet
    Joeri Rogelj
    Massimo Tavoni
    Jakob Thoma
    Elmar Kriegler
    Nature Climate Change, 2018, 8 : 845 - 848
  • [22] FIELD TESTS SUGGEST NEED FOR NEW TECHNIQUES.
    Fontenot, J.E.
    Oil and Gas Journal, 1975, 73 (27): : 55 - 58
  • [23] The impact of aerosol emissions on the 1.5 °C pathways
    Hienola, Anca
    Partanen, Antti-Ilari
    Pietikainen, Joni-Pekka
    O'Donnell, Declan
    Korhonen, Hannele
    Matthews, H. Damon
    Laaksonen, Ari
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2018, 13 (04):
  • [24] Rapid implementation of mitigation measures can facilitate decarbonization of the global steel sector in 1.5°C-consistent pathways
    Speizer, Simone
    Durga, Siddarth
    Blahut, Nina
    Charles, Molly
    Lehne, Johanna
    Edmonds, Jae
    Yu, Sha
    ONE EARTH, 2023, 6 (11): : 1494 - 1509
  • [25] The 1.5°C climate and energy scenarios: impacts on economic growth
    Ekins, Paul
    Drummond, Paul
    Scamman, Daniel
    Paroussos, Leonidas
    Keppo, Ilkka
    OXFORD OPEN ENERGY, 2022, 1
  • [26] US climate mitigation pathways post-2012: Transition scenarios in ADAGE
    Ross, Martin T.
    Fawcett, Allen A.
    Clapp, Christa S.
    ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2009, 31 : S212 - S222
  • [27] Equitable mitigation to achieve the 1.5 °C goal in the Mediterranean Basin
    Olga Alcaraz
    Bàrbara Sureda
    Albert Turon
    Cindy Ramírez
    Marta Gebellí
    Climatic Change, 2021, 165
  • [28] Equitable mitigation to achieve the 1.5 °C goal in the Mediterranean Basin
    Alcaraz, Olga
    Sureda, Barbara
    Turon, Albert
    Ramirez, Cindy
    Gebelli, Marta
    CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2021, 165 (3-4)
  • [29] Energy system changes in 1.5 °C, well below 2 °C and 2 °C scenarios
    Gambhir, Ajay
    Rogelj, Joeri
    Luderer, Gunnar
    Few, Sheridan
    Napp, Tamaryn
    ENERGY STRATEGY REVIEWS, 2019, 23 : 69 - 80
  • [30] Emission pathways to achieve 2.0°C and 1.5°C climate targets
    Su, Xuanming
    Takahashi, Kiyoshi
    Fujimori, Shinichiro
    Hasegawa, Tomoko
    Tanaka, Katsumasa
    Kato, Etsushi
    Shiogama, Hideo
    Masui, Toshihiko
    Emori, Seita
    EARTHS FUTURE, 2017, 5 (06) : 592 - 604