Emissions scenarios database and regional mitigation analysis: a review of post-TAR mitigation scenarios

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to carry out a review of mitigation scenarios that have emerged since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Assessment Report (TAR), to update the current Emissions Scenarios Database with these scenarios, and to analyze emissions and mitigation scenarios. This article first discusses the characterization of mitigation scenarios and systematically classifies mitigation scenarios. Second, quantitative analyses on gross domestic product (GDP), population, carbon intensity, energy intensity, and carbon taxes are conducted at the regional level in the four regional aggregations used by the IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. Results show that the range of emissions trajectories is extensive and that the maximum potential mitigation of global CO2 emissions from the baseline level by 2100 is around 95% . There is a correlation between GDP growth and energy intensity improvement. The relationship between energy intensity improvement and carbon intensity reduction changes over the 21st century, with energy intensity improvement outweighing carbon intensity reduction in the first half of the century and carbon intensity reduction becoming more dominant in the latter half. Predicted carbon tax levels for 2100 range from around 50 to 1400 US$/t-C, although a uniform level of carbon tax brings about widely varying CO2 mitigation outcomes across different regions. The range of GDP loss, resulting from CO2 emissions mitigation, varies from -10% to 40% in 2100, with GDP losses in developing regions more evident than those in developed regions.

Drivers of regional decarbonization through 2100: A multi-model decomposition analysis

“…Decomposition analysis has also been used to analyse future modelbased energy scenarios, including analyses from the IEA (Ang and Liu, 2007a;IEA, 2004IEA, , 2012 and the assessments prepared for use by the IPCC 2 (Hanaoka et al, 2006(Hanaoka et al, , 2009Nakicenovic et al, 1998). Moreover, Riahi et al (2007) project the evolution of global energy intensity of GDP and carbon intensity of energy until 2100; Agnolucci et al (2009) decompose future energy scenarios for the UK; Kesicki and Anandarajah (2011) decompose global and regional future energy-emissions scenarios using the Times Integrated assessment model; and Fisher-Vanden et al (2012) apply a new decomposition technique to the results of a multiregion, multi-sector CGE model.…”

Limitations of Oil Production to the IPCC Scenarios: The New Realities of US and Global Oil Production

“…These future scenarios included CO 2 concentration and emissions, and were generated by four IAMs. Each of the modeling teams developed its own scenario and each uniquely linked input assumptions regarding population growth and energy efficiency with their model to create an RCP (Hanaoka et al 2006;Clarke et al 2009;Edenhofer et al 2010). These are documented in a special issue of Climatic Change focused on development of the RCPs (van Vuuren et al 2011a, b).…”

History of the Futures

“…In 2003, the IPCC panel decided to use both SRES (Nakicenovic and Swart, 2000a) and post-SRES scenarios (Hanaoka et al, 2006;Nakicenovic et al, 2003) for AR4 based on similar socioeconomic assumptions (R. . IPCC assessments evaluated the environmental and climatic consequences of "intervention" futures published in the literature and the feasibility and costs of mitigating GHGs from regions and sectors, which were not incorporated in the SA90, IS92, and SRES (IPCC, 2001e).…”