Skip to main content
Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book

2018 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

How Low Can We Go? The Implications of Delayed Ratcheting and Negative Emissions Technologies on Achieving Well Below 2 °C

Authors : Matthew Winning, Steve Pye, James Glynn, Daniel Scamman, Daniel Welsby

Published in: Limiting Global Warming to Well Below 2 °C: Energy System Modelling and Policy Development

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

share
SHARE

Abstract

Pledges embodied in the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) represent an interim step from a global “no policy” path towards an optimal long-term global mitigation path. However, the goals of the Paris Agreement highlight that current pledges are insufficient. It is, therefore, necessary to ratchet-up parties’ future mitigation pledges in the near-term. The ambitious goals of remaining well below 2 °C and pursuing reductions towards 1.5 °C mean that any delay in ratcheting-up commitments could be extremely costly or may even make the targets unachievable. 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. If NETs cannot be scaled, the levels of fossil fuels suggested in this analysis are not compatible with the Paris Agreement goals i.e. there are risks of lock-in to a high fossil future. Decision makers must, therefore, comprehend fully the risks of different strategies.
Literature
go back to reference Anandarajah G, Pye S, Usher W, Kesicki F, Mcglade C (2011) TIAM-UCL global model documentation. UKERC working paper UKERC/WP/ESY/2011/001; 2011 Anandarajah G, Pye S, Usher W, Kesicki F, Mcglade C (2011) TIAM-UCL global model documentation. UKERC working paper UKERC/WP/ESY/2011/001; 2011
go back to reference Bauer N et al (2017) Shared socio-economic pathways of the energy sector—quantifying the narratives. Glob Environ Change 42:316–330 CrossRef Bauer N et al (2017) Shared socio-economic pathways of the energy sector—quantifying the narratives. Glob Environ Change 42:316–330 CrossRef
go back to reference Clarke L et al (2014) Mitigation of climate change. In: Edenhofer et al (eds) Climate change, Chap. 6. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Clarke L et al (2014) Mitigation of climate change. In: Edenhofer et al (eds) Climate change, Chap. 6. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
go back to reference IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: synthesis report. In: Pachauri RK, Meyer LA (eds) Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: synthesis report. In: Pachauri RK, Meyer LA (eds) Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151
go back to reference Price J, Keppo I (2017) Modelling to generate alternatives: a technique to explore uncertainty in energy-environment-economy models. Appl Energy 195:356–369 Price J, Keppo I (2017) Modelling to generate alternatives: a technique to explore uncertainty in energy-environment-economy models. Appl Energy 195:356–369
go back to reference Scamman D (2017) The Transport Sector. In: Staffell I, Dodds PE (eds) The role of hydrogen and fuel cells in future energy systems. H2FC SUPERGEN, London, p 53–70 Scamman D (2017) The Transport Sector. In: Staffell I, Dodds PE (eds) The role of hydrogen and fuel cells in future energy systems. H2FC SUPERGEN, London, p 53–70
go back to reference Smith P et al. (2014) Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Edenhofer OR et al (eds) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York Smith P et al. (2014) Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Edenhofer OR et al (eds) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York
go back to reference Vandyck T, Keramidas K, Saveyn B, Kitous A, Vrontisi Z (2016) A global stocktake of the Paris pledges: implications for energy systems and economy. Glob Environ Change 41:46–63 Vandyck T, Keramidas K, Saveyn B, Kitous A, Vrontisi Z (2016) A global stocktake of the Paris pledges: implications for energy systems and economy. Glob Environ Change 41:46–63
Metadata
Title
How Low Can We Go? The Implications of Delayed Ratcheting and Negative Emissions Technologies on Achieving Well Below 2 °C
Authors
Matthew Winning
Steve Pye
James Glynn
Daniel Scamman
Daniel Welsby
Copyright Year
2018
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74424-7_4