Перейти к основному содержанию
AkademIndex

Продукты

Для разработчиков

AkademBaseОткрытый API экосистемы
Статья

The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview

Keywan RiahiInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaDetlef P. van VuurenPBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, NetherlandsElmar KrieglerPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyJae EdmondsPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland-College Park, College Park, MD, United StatesBrian C. O’NeillNational Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO, United StatesShinichiro FujimoriNational Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, JapanNico BauerPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyKatherine CalvinPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland-College Park, College Park, MD, United StatesRob DellinkOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris, FranceOliver FrickoInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaWolfgang LutzInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaAlexander PoppPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyJesús Crespo CuaresmaInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaSamir KCAsian Demographic Research Institute, Shanghai University, Shanghai, ChinaMarian LeimbachPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyLeiwen JiangNational Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO, United StatesTom KramPBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, NetherlandsShilpa RaoInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaJohannes EmmerlingCentro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, ItalyKristie L. EbiSchool of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, United StatesTomoko HasegawaNational Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, JapanPeter HavlíkInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaFlorian HumpenöderPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyLara Aleluia Da SilvaFondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milan, ItalySteve SmithPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland-College Park, College Park, MD, United StatesElke StehfestPBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, NetherlandsValentina BosettiBocconi University, Department of Economics, ItalyJiyong EomKAIST College of Business, Seoul, Republic of South KoreaDavid GernaatPBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, NetherlandsToshihiko MasuiNational Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, JapanJoeri RogeljInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaJessica StreflerPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyLaurent DrouetCentro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, ItalyVolker KreyInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaGunnar LudererPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyMathijs HarmsenPBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, NetherlandsKiyoshi TakahashiNational Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, JapanLavinia BaumstarkPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Telegrafenberg A31, 14473 Potsdam, GermanyJonathan DoelmanPBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, NetherlandsMikiko KainumaNational Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, JapanZbigniew KlimontInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaGiacomo MarangoniCentro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, ItalyHermann Lotze‐CampenLotze-Campen: Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, GermanyMichael ObersteinerInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, AustriaAndrzej TabeauLandbouw Economisch Instituutm, Wageningen University and Research Centre, NetherlandsMassimo TavoniFondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milan, Italy
2016en
ABI

Аннотация

This paper presents the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications. The SSPs are part of a new scenario framework, established by the climate change research community in order to facilitate the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation. The pathways were developed over the last years as a joint community effort and describe plausible major global developments that together would lead in the future to different challenges for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The SSPs are based on five narratives describing alternative socio-economic developments, including sustainable development, regional rivalry, inequality, fossil-fueled development, and middle-of-the-road development. The long-term demographic and economic projections of the SSPs depict a wide uncertainty range consistent with the scenario literature. A multi-model approach was used for the elaboration of the energy, land-use and the emissions trajectories of SSP-based scenarios. The baseline scenarios lead to global energy consumption of 400–1200 EJ in 2100, and feature vastly different land-use dynamics, ranging from a possible reduction in cropland area up to a massive expansion by more than 700 million hectares by 2100. The associated annual CO2 emissions of the baseline scenarios range from about 25 GtCO2 to more than 120 GtCO2 per year by 2100. With respect to mitigation, we find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socio-economic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target. The carbon price for reaching the target of 2.6 W/m2 that is consistent with a temperature change limit of 2 °C, differs in our analysis thus by about a factor of three across the SSP marker scenarios. Moreover, many models could not reach this target from the SSPs with high mitigation challenges. While the SSPs were designed to represent different mitigation and adaptation challenges, the resulting narratives and quantifications span a wide range of different futures broadly representative of the current literature. This allows their subsequent use and development in new assessments and research projects. Critical next steps for the community scenario process will, among others, involve regional and sectoral extensions, further elaboration of the adaptation and impacts dimension, as well as employing the SSP scenarios with the new generation of earth system models as part of the 6th climate model intercomparison project (CMIP6).

Перевод пока недоступен

Идентификаторы

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 7Использованных источников: 0