Non-CO2 gas (CH4, N2O and F gas) emissions account for 25percent of all greenhouse gas in the year of2000. Main sources of CH4 and N2O emissions are agriculture-related activities such as enteric fermentation, paddy rice cultivation, soil management. A recursive dynamic CGE (Computer General Equilibrium) model has been developed to analyze greenhouse gas reduction options including non-CO2 gas abatement technologies. Multi-regional, multisectoral and multi-gas CGE model and simple climate change model simulated long-term climate stabilization emission path. Preliminary results showed that multi gas mitigation options including CH4 and N2O abatement technologies will reduce GDP loss more than CO2 only mitigation options for long-term climate stabilization, even though CO2 mitigation options will reduce not only CO2 emissions but non-CO2 gas emissions simultaneously. It is necessary to collect regional non-CO2 gas data (emission, technology options, and so on) and conduct more sensitivity analysis with computer simulation model to reduce uncertainty of non-CO2 gas.

No abstract

Estimates of 21st Century global-mean surface temperature increase have generally been based on scenarios that do not include climate policies. Newly developed multigas mitigation scenarios, based on a wide range of modeling approaches and socioeconomic assumptions, now allow the assessment of possible impacts of climate policies on projected warming ranges. This article assesses the atmospheric CO 2 concentrations, radiative forcing, and temperature increase for these new scenarios using two reducedcomplexity climate models. These scenarios result in temperature increase of 0.5-4.4°C over 1990 levels or 0.3-3.4°C less than the no-policy cases. The range results from differences in the assumed stringency of climate policy and uncertainty in our understanding of the climate system. Notably, an average minimum warming of Ϸ1.4°C (with a full range of 0.5-2.8°C) remains for even the most stringent stabilization scenarios analyzed here. This value is substantially above previously estimated committed warming based on climate system inertia alone. The results show that, although ambitious mitigation efforts can significantly reduce global warming, adaptation measures will be needed in addition to mitigation to reduce the impact of the residual warming.climate ͉ climate policy ͉ stabilization ͉ integrated assessment ͉ scenario A key indicator for climate change is the expected globalmean surface temperature increase. Future global temperature changes will be determined primarily by future emissions of greenhouse gases, ozone, and aerosol precursors and the response of the Earth system to those emissions. Any calculation of the potential range of future climate change requires consideration of both a plausible range of emissions scenarios and uncertainties in Earth system response, preferably by using results from multiple scenarios and models. The present analysis aims to map out the potential benefits of climate mitigation actions in terms of how much temperature increase can be avoided as a function of abatement effort. By including scenarios that are among the most stringent in the current literature, the analysis also provides quantitative insight into how much warming is likely to remain as a result of inertia within the energy system as well as the climate system. Such information is of critical importance in the climate policies that are currently being formulated.The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (1) recently projected that by 2100, global mean surface temperature would increase by 1.1-6.4°C over the 1990 level using the range of illustrative baseline (nonmitigation) emissions scenarios from six energyeconomic modeling teams that had been developed in the IPCC Special Report on Emissions scenarios (SRES) (2) (the low end of the range results from the so-called B1 scenario; the upper range from the A1FI scenario). This uncertainty range originates both from the range in emissions scenarios and from the limited understanding of the climate system. Earlier, ...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract