Search

Water is essential for the world’s food supply, for energy production, including bioenergy and hydroelectric power, and for power system cooling. Water is already scarce in many regions of the world and could present a critical constraint as society attempts simultaneously to mitigate climate forcing and adapt to climate change, and to provide for a larger and more prosperous human population. Numerous studies have pointed to growing pressures on the world’s scarce fresh water resources from population and economic growth, and climate change. This study goes further. We use the Global Change Assessment Model to analyze interactions between population, economic growth, energy, land, and water resources simultaneously in a dynamically evolving system where competing claims on water resources from all claimants—energy, land, and economy—are reconciled with water resource availability—from renewable water, non-renewable groundwater and desalinated water sources —across 14 geopolitical regions, 151 agriculture-ecological zones, and 235 major river basins. We find that previous estimates of global water withdrawal projections are overestimated. Model simulations show that it is more economical in some basins to alter agricultural and energy activities rather than utilize non-renewable groundwater or desalinated water. This study highlights the importance of accounting for water as a binding factor in agriculture, energy and land use decisions in integrated assessment models and implications for global responses to water scarcity, particularly in the trade of agricultural commodities and land-use decisions.

We demonstrate and apply methods for assessing global, system-scale effects on energy and greenhouse emissions of offset programs that explicitly consider the rules by which energy-based offset credits are awarded. We compare our approach to idealized calculations in which all regions, including those without mitigation obligations, face a common carbon tax. We find a substantial gap between potential reductions in emissions and those realized in a suite of hypothetical offset assignment protocols as well as between offset creation and system-scales emissions mitigation, even when project-scale additionality and compliance issues are absent and baselines are known with certainty. In the worst cases, seemingly reasonable rules were counterproductive—i.e. increased global carbon emissions, despite strictly meeting additionality and baseline requirements. But, even when we modified the rules for creating offsets to reflect more closely implementation practices, there remained a large gap between potential and realized mitigation. This difference is systemic and traces to the basic nature of offsets. Offsets subsidize the deployment of non-emitting technologies instead of penalizing the use of emitting technologies. As a consequence, offsets lower the cost of energy, and encourage greater use energy rather than its conservation. Thus, even in well-crafted programs, it is impossible to capture the full economic potential because the program lacks a means by which to engage energy conservation. We demonstrate that while offsets programs reduce the cost to regions with emissions caps, they may achieve this result at the expense of reduced global emissions mitigation.

We demonstrate the effectiveness of a new method for quantifying radiative forcing from land use and land cover change (LULCC) within an integrated assessment model, the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM). The method relies on geographically differentiated estimates of radiative forcing from albedo change associated with major land cover transitions derived from the Community Earth System Model. We find that conversion of 1 km2 of woody vegetation (forest and shrublands) to non-woody vegetation (crops and grassland) yields between 0 and −0.71 nW/m2 of globally averaged radiative forcing determined by the vegetation characteristics, snow dynamics, and atmospheric radiation environment characteristic within each of 151 regions we consider globally. Across a set of scenarios designed to span a range of potential future LULCC, we find LULCC forcing ranging from −0.06 to −0.29 W/m2 by 2070 depending on assumptions regarding future crop yield growth and whether climate policy favors afforestation or bioenergy crops. Inclusion of this previously uncounted forcing in the policy targets driving future climate mitigation efforts leads to changes in fossil fuel emissions on the order of 1.5 PgC/yr by 2070 for a climate forcing limit of 4.5 Wm−2, corresponding to a 12–67 % change in fossil fuel emissions depending on the scenario. Scenarios with significant afforestation must compensate for albedo-induced warming through additional emissions reductions, and scenarios with significant deforestation need not mitigate as aggressively due to albedo-induced cooling. In all scenarios considered, inclusion of albedo forcing in policy targets increases forest and shrub cover globally.

Climate change impacts on water resources in the United States are likely to be far-reaching and substantial because the water is integral to climate, and the water sector spans many parts of the economy. This paper estimates impacts and damages from five water resource-related models addressing runoff, drought risk, economics of water supply/demand, water stress, and flooding damages. The models differ in the water system assessed, spatial scale, and unit of assessment, but together provide a quantitative and descriptive richness in characterizing water sector effects that no single model can capture. The results, driven by a consistent set of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and climate scenarios, examine uncertainty from emissions, climate sensitivity, and climate model selection. While calculating the net impact of climate change on the water sector as a whole may be impractical, broad conclusions can be drawn regarding patterns of change and benefits of GHG mitigation. Four key findings emerge: 1) GHG mitigation substantially reduces hydro-climatic impacts on the water sector; 2) GHG mitigation provides substantial national economic benefits in water resources related sectors; 3) the models show a strong signal of wetting for the Eastern US and a strong signal of drying in the Southwest; and 4) unmanaged hydrologic systems impacts show strong correlation with the change in magnitude and direction of precipitation and temperature from climate models, but managed water resource systems and regional economic systems show lower correlation with changes in climate variables due to non-linearities created by water infrastructure and the socio-economic changes in non-climate driven water demand.

Many papers have shown that bioenergy and land-use are potentially important elements in a strategy to limit anthropogenic climate change. But, significant expansion of bioenergy production can have a large terrestrial footprint. In this paper, we test the implications for land use, the global energy system, emissions and mitigation costs of meeting a specific climate target, using a single fossil fuel and industrial sector policy instrument, but with five alternative bioenergy and land-use policy architectures. These scenarios are illustrative in nature, and designed to explore trade-offs. We find that the policies we examined have differing effects on the different segments of the economy. Comprehensive land policies can reduce land-use change emissions, increasing allowable emissions in the energy system, but have implications for the cost of food. Bioenergy penalties and constraints, on the other hand, have little effect on food prices, but result in less bioenergy and thus can increase mitigation costs and energy prices.

The magnitude and character of the global resource base of fossil fuels is a key determinant of the evolution of the future global energy system and corresponding fossil fuel carbon emissions. What is less well understood is the potential magnitude of impact of the availability of fossil fuels, due to the interaction with biomass energy, on agriculture, land use, ecosystems and therefore carbon emissions from land-use change. This paper explores these links and implications. We show that if oil resources are limited, then the consequently higher price for liquids induces both the use of coal-to-liquids technology deployment, but also enhanced production of bioenergy crops particularly in a business-as-usual scenario. This in turn implies greater pressure to convert unmanaged ecosystems to produce bioenergy, and higher rates of terrestrial carbon emissions from land use.

While the international community has agreed on the long-term target of limiting global warming to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels, only a few concrete climate policies and measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have been implemented.We use a set of three global integrated assessment models to analyze the implications of current climate policies on long-term mitigation targets. We define a weak-policy baseline scenario, which extrapolates the current policy environment by assuming that the global climate regime remains fragmented and that emission reduction efforts remain unambitious in most of the world’s regions. These scenarios clearly fall short of limiting warming to 2°C. We investigate the cost and achievability of the stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 ppm CO2e by 2100, when countries follow the weak policy pathway until 2020 or 2030 before pursuing the long-term mitigation target with global cooperative action. We find that after a deferral of ambitious action the 450 ppm CO2e is only achievable with a radical up-scaling of efforts after target adoption. This has severe effects on trans-formation pathways and exacerbates the challenges of climate stabilization, in particular for a delay of cooperative action until 2030. Specifically, reaching the target with weak near-term action implies (a) faster and more aggressive transformations of energy systems in the medium term, (b) more stranded investments in fossil-based capacities, (c) higher long-term mitigation costs and carbon prices and (d) stronger transitional economic impacts, rendering the political feasibility of such pathways questionable.

Fossil resource endowments and the future development of fossil fuel prices are important factors that will critically influence the nature and direction of the global energy system. In this paper we analyze a multi-model ensemble of long-term energy and emissions scenarios that were developed within the framework of the EMF27 integrated assessment model intercomparison exercise. The diverse nature of these models highlights large uncertainties in the likely development of fossil resource (coal, oil, and natural gas) consumption, trade, and prices over the course of the twenty-first century and under different climate policy frameworks. We explore and explain some of the differences across scenarios and models and compare the scenario results with fossil resource estimates from the literature. A robust finding across the suite of IAMs is that the cumulative fossil fuel consumption foreseen by the models is well within the bounds of estimated recoverable reserves and resources. Hence, fossil resource constraints are, in and of themselves, unlikely to limit future GHG emissions this century. Our analysis also shows that climate mitigation policies could lead to a major reallocation of financial flows between regions, in terms of expenditures on fossil fuels and carbon, and can help to alleviate near-term energy security concerns via the reductions in oil imports and increases in energy system diversity they will help to motivate. Aggressive efforts to promote energy efficiency are, on their own, not likely to lead to markedly greater energy independence, however, contrary to the stated objectives of certain industrialized countries., JRC.J.1-Economics of Climate Change, Energy and Transport

Most research on future climate change discusses mitigation and impacts/adaptation separately. However, mitigation will have implications for impacts and adaptation. Similarly, impacts and adaptation will affect mitigation. This paper begins to explore these two veins of research simultaneously using an integrated assessment model. We begin by discussing the types of interactions one might expect by impact sector. Then, we develop a numerical experiment in the agriculture sector to illustrate the importance of considering mitigation, impacts, and adaptation at the same time. In our experiment, we find that climate change can reduce crop yields, resulting in an expansion of cropland to feed a growing population and a reduction in bioenergy production. These two effects, in combination, result in an increase in the cost of mitigation.

Combining bioenergy and carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technologies (BECCS) has the potential to remove CO2 from the atmosphere while producing useful energy. BECCS has played a central role in scenarios that reduce climate forcing to low levels such as 2.6 Wm−2. In this paper we consider whether BECCS is essential to limiting radiative forcing (RF) to 2.6 Wm−2 by 2100 using the Global Change Assessment Model, a closely coupled model of biogeophysical and human Earth systems. We show that BECCS can potentially reduce the cost of limiting RF to 2.6 Wm−2 by 2100 but that a variety of technology combinations that do not include BECCS can also achieve this goal, under appropriate emissions mitigation policies. We note that with appropriate supporting land-use policies terrestrial sequestration could deliver carbon storage ranging from 200 to 700 PgCO2-equiavalent over the 21st century. We explore substantial delays in participation by some geopolitical regions. We find that the value of BECCS is substantially higher under delay and that delay results in higher transient RF and climate change. However, when major regions postponed mitigation indefinitely, it was impossible to return RF to 2.6 Wm−2 by 2100. Neither finite land resources nor finite potential geologic storage capacity represented a meaningful technical limit on the ability of BECCS to contribute to emissions mitigation in the numerical experiments reported in this paper.

Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 is a scenario that stabilizes radiative forcing at 4.5 W m−2 in the year 2100 without ever exceeding that value. Simulated with the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM), RCP4.5 includes long-term, global emissions of greenhouse gases, short-lived species, and land-use-land-cover in a global economic framework. RCP4.5 was updated from earlier GCAM scenarios to incorporate historical emissions and land cover information common to the RCP process and follows a cost-minimizing pathway to reach the target radiative forcing. The imperative to limit emissions in order to reach this target drives changes in the energy system, including shifts to electricity, to lower emissions energy technologies and to the deployment of carbon capture and geologic storage technology. In addition, the RCP4.5 emissions price also applies to land use emissions; as a result, forest lands expand from their present day extent. The simulated future emissions and land use were downscaled from the regional simulation to a grid to facilitate transfer to climate models. While there are many alternative pathways to achieve a radiative forcing level of 4.5 W m−2, the application of the RCP4.5 provides a common platform for climate models to explore the climate system response to stabilizing the anthropogenic components of radiative forcing.

In order to evaluate the effectiveness of climate policy, it is important to understand emission trends and policies at the national level. The 2015 Paris Agreement includes (Intended) Nationally Determined Contributions, so-called (I)NDCs, outlining the contribution of different Parties to the overall target of the agreement to limit global mean temperature increase to well below 2 °C. Here, we assess emission trajectories and the energy system transition of 11 major economies (in the remainder: countries) projected by integrated assessment models (IAMs) for baseline and cost-optimal 450 ppm CO2 eq mitigation scenarios and compare the results with the (I)NDCs. Limiting global temperature increase to below 2 °C implies a substantial reduction of the estimated available carbon budget for each country. The national carbon budgets between 2010 and 2100 showed reductions between the baseline and the 2 °C consistent mitigation scenario ranging from 52% in South Korea to 95% in Brazil. While in the baseline scenario, the share of low-carbon primary energy sources is projected to remain around 15% (with Brazil being a notable exception, reaching 30%); in the mitigation scenarios, the share of low-carbon energy is projected to increase to over 50% in 2050 in nearly all countries, with the EU, Japan and Canada reaching the largest shares. Comparison with the (I)NDCs shows that in Brazil, Canada, the EU, Mexico (conditional target), South Korea and the USA, the emission reduction targets of the NDCs are closer to the mitigation requirement of the 2 °C scenario; in other countries, however, there is still a large gap. The national detail of the indicators adds to the literature on low-carbon emission pathways, assists the assessment of the Paris Agreement and provides support to national policymakers to identify focus areas for climate policy in the coming years.