Search

This global spatially explicit (0.5 by 0.5 degree) analysis presents the nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) inputs, processing and biogeochemical retention and delivery to surface waters and river export to coastal seas according to the five shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP). Four systems are considered: (i) human system; (ii) agriculture; (iii) aquaculture; (iv) nature. Exploring the changes during 1980–2015 and 2015–2050 according to the SSPs shows that the natural nutrient sources have been declining in the past decades and will continue to decline in all SSPs in future decades due to massive land transformations, while agriculture, human sewage and aquaculture are becoming increasingly dominant (globally up to 80% of nutrient delivery). More efforts than those employed in any of the SSPs are needed to slow down the global nutrient cycles. One of the drivers of the proliferation of harmful algal blooms is the tendency towards increasing N:P ratios in global freshwaters and export to the global coastal seas; this is the result of increasing N:P in inputs in food production, more efficient biogeochemical retention of P than of N in river basins, and groundwater N legacies, which seems to be most pronounced in a united world that strives after sustainability. The diverging strategies to achieve UN Sustainable Development Goals 14 (life below water), 2 (zero hunger) and 6 (clean water and sanitation) therefore require a balanced management system for both N and P in all systems, that accounts for future nutrient legacies.

Achieving the objectives of the Paris Climate Agreement requires a fast transition of the energy system. This leads to consequences for energy security, which a central element of the energy strategy of many countries. Important dimensions of energy security are energy diversity and energy sovereignty. The main objective of this study is to assess how different strategies and climate objectives affect these dimensions. For this, we developed a set of model-based mitigation scenarios that limit global warming to below 2 °C and 1.5 °C for 16 world regions. The scenarios differ in the energy transition strategy, focusing either more on intermittent renewables or lifestyle change. We show that energy supply diversity increases in deep mitigation scenarios in practically all regions, especially in India and China. This is due to strong growth of bioenergy and intermittent renewables, together with less fossil fuel use. There is also a substantial decrease in total energy trade in mitigation scenarios with a strong focus on intermittent renewables. Without such a strong focus on renewables, the decrease in oil and coal trade is offset by additional trade in bioenergy. However, more trade in bioenergy leads to a higher diversity in energy exporters.

Increasing renewable energy use is an essential strategy for mitigating climate change. Nevertheless, the sensitivity of renewable energy to climatic conditions means that the energy system's vulnerability to climate change can also become larger. In this research, we used two integrated assessment models and data from four climate models to analyse climate change impacts on primary energy use at a global and regional scale under a low-level (RCP2.6) and a medium-level (RCP6.0) climate change scenario. The impacts are analysed on the energy system focusing on four renewable sources (wind, solar, hydropower, and biomass). Globally, small climate impacts on renewable primary energy use are found in both models (5% for RCP2.6 and 6% for RCP6.0). These impacts lead to a decrease in the use of fossil sources for most regions, especially for North America and Europe under the RCP60 scenario. Overall, IMAGE and GCAM provide a similar signal impact response for most regions. E.g. in Asia (excluding China and India), climate change induces an increase in wind and hydropower use under the RCP6.0 scenarios; however, for India, a decrease in solar energy use can be expected under both scenarios and models.

Limiting warming to well below 2°C requires rapid and complete decarbonisation of energy systems. We compare economy-wide modelling of 1.5°C and 2°C scenarios with sector-focused analyses of four critical sectors that are difficult to decarbonise: aviation, shipping, road freight transport, and industry. We develop and apply a novel framework to analyse and track mitigation progress in these sectors. We find that emission reductions in the 1.5°C and 2°C scenarios of the IMAGE model come from deep cuts in CO2 intensities and lower energy intensities, with minimal demand reductions in these sectors’ activity. We identify a range of additional measures and policy levers that are not explicitly captured in modelled scenarios but could contribute significant emission reductions. These are demand reduction options, and include less air travel (aviation), reduced transportation of fossil fuels (shipping), more locally produced goods combined with high load factors (road freight), and a shift to a circular economy (industry). We discuss the challenges of reducing demand both for economy-wide modelling and for policy. Based on our sectoral analysis framework, we suggest modelling improvements and policy recommendations, calling on the relevant UN agencies to start tracking mitigation progress through monitoring key elements of the framework (CO2 intensity, energy efficiency, and demand for sectoral activity, as well as the underlying drivers), as a matter of urgency. Key policy insights Four critical sectors (aviation, shipping, road freight, and industry) cannot cut their CO2 emissions to zero rapidly with technological supply-side options alone. Without large-scale negative emissions, significant demand reductions for those sectors’ activities are needed to meet the 1.5–2°C goal. Policy priorities include affordable alternatives to frequent air travel; smooth connectivity between low-carbon travel modes; speed reductions in shipping and

Keeping the Earth system in a stable and resilient state, to safeguard Earth's life support systems while ensuring that Earth's benefits, risks, and related responsibilities are equitably shared, constitutes the grand challenge for human development in the Anthropocene. Here, we describe a framework that the recently formed Earth Commission will use to define and quantify target ranges for a “safe and just corridor” that meets these goals. Although “safe” and “just” Earth system targets are interrelated, we see safe as primarily referring to a stable Earth system and just targets as being associated with meeting human needs and reducing exposure to risks. To align safe and just dimensions, we propose to address the equity dimensions of each safe target for Earth system regulating systems and processes. The more stringent of the safe or just target ranges then defines the corridor. Identifying levers of social transformation aimed at meeting the safe and just targets and challenges associated with translating the corridor to actors at multiple scales present scope for future work.

Limiting global warming to 2°C or less compared with pre-industrial temperatures will require unprecedented rates of decarbonization globally. The scale and scope of transformational change required across sectors and actors in society raises critical questions of feasibility. Much of the literature on mitigation pathways addresses technological and economic aspects of feasibility, but overlooks the behavioral, cultural, and social factors that affect theoretical and practical mitigation pathways. We present a tripartite framework that “unpacks” the concept of mitigation pathways by distinguishing three factors that together determine actual mitigation: technical potential, initiative feasibility, and behavioral plasticity. The framework aims to integrate and streamline heterogeneous disciplinary research traditions toward a more comprehensive and transparent approach that will facilitate learning across disciplines and enable mitigation pathways to more fully reflect available knowledge. We offer three suggestions for integrating the tripartite framework into current research on climate change mitigation.

Non-technical summary We summarize some of the past year's most important findings within climate change-related research. New research has improved our understanding of Earth's sensitivity to carbon dioxide, finds that permafrost thaw could release more carbon emissions than expected and that the uptake of carbon in tropical ecosystems is weakening. Adverse impacts on human society include increasing water shortages and impacts on mental health. Options for solutions emerge from rethinking economic models, rights-based litigation, strengthened governance systems and a new social contract. The disruption caused by COVID-19 could be seized as an opportunity for positive change, directing economic stimulus towards sustainable investments. Technical summary A synthesis is made of ten fields within climate science where there have been significant advances since mid-2019, through an expert elicitation process with broad disciplinary scope. Findings include: (1) a better understanding of equilibrium climate sensitivity; (2) abrupt thaw as an accelerator of carbon release from permafrost; (3) changes to global and regional land carbon sinks; (4) impacts of climate change on water crises, including equity perspectives; (5) adverse effects on mental health from climate change; (6) immediate effects on climate of the COVID-19 pandemic and requirements for recovery packages to deliver on the Paris Agreement; (7) suggested long-term changes to governance and a social contract to address climate change, learning from the current pandemic, (8) updated positive cost-benefit ratio and new perspectives on the potential for green growth in the short- A nd long-term perspective; (9) urban electrification as a strategy to move towards low-carbon energy systems and (10) rights-based litigation as an increasingly important method to address climate change, with recent clarifications on the legal standing and representation of future generations. Social media summary Stronger permafrost, QC 20211002

Scenarios showing future greenhouse gas emissions are needed to estimate climate impacts and the mitigation efforts required for climate stabilization. Recently, the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) have been introduced to describe alternative social, economic and technical narratives, spanning a wide range of plausible futures in terms of challenges to mitigation and adaptation1. Thus far the key drivers of the uncertainty in emissions projections have not been robustly disentangled. Here we assess the sensitivities of future CO2 emissions to key drivers characterizing the SSPs. We use six state-of-the-art integrated assessment models with different structural characteristics, and study the impact of five families of parameters, related to population, income, energy efficiency, fossil fuel availability, and low-carbon energy technology development. A recently developed sensitivity analysis algorithm2 allows us to parsimoniously compute both the direct and interaction effects of each of these drivers on cumulative emissions. The study reveals that the SSP assumptions about energy intensity and economic growth are the most important determinants of future CO2 emissions from energy combustion, both with and without a climate policy. Interaction terms between parameters are shown to be important determinants of the total sensitivities.

Projections of future climate change play a fundamental role in improving understanding of the climate system as well as characterizing societal risks and response options. The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) is the primary activity within Phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) that will provide multi-model climate projections based on alternative scenarios of future emissions and land use changes produced with integrated assessment models. In this paper, we describe ScenarioMIP's objectives, experimental design, and its relation to other activities within CMIP6. The ScenarioMIP design is one component of a larger scenario process that aims to facilitate a wide range of integrated studies across the climate science, integrated assessment modeling, and impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability communities, and will form an important part of the evidence base in the forthcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments. At the same time, it will provide the basis for investigating a number of targeted science and policy questions that are especially relevant to scenario-based analysis, including the role of specific forcings such as land use and aerosols, the effect of a peak and decline in forcing, the consequences of scenarios that limit warming to below 2 °C, the relative contributions to uncertainty from scenarios, climate models, and internal variability, and long-term climate system outcomes beyond the 21st century. To serve this wide range of scientific communities and address these questions, a design has been identified consisting of eight alternative 21st century scenarios plus one large initial condition ensemble and a set of long-term extensions, divided into two tiers defined by relative priority. Some of these scenarios will also provide a basis for variants planned to be run in other CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs to investigate questions related to specific forcings. Harmonized, spatially explicit emissio