Exploring fair and ambitious mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement goals

Pan, Xunzhang; Elzen, Michel den; Höhne, Niklas; Teng, Fei; Wang, Lining

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.020

Cited by 123 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This approach is similar to a sectoral version of the contraction-and-convergence proposal (Meyer, 2000). After year c, all countries' emissions would continue to decline, at the same per-capita rate (Figure 1).…”

Section: Equality: Eq2030 and Eq2050mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Although other recent studies have assessed the NDCs against normatively derived targets (Holz et al, 2017;Meinshausen et al, 2015;Pan et al, 2017;du Pont et al, 2017), this study is the first to do so for the agriculture sector in a way consistent with a 2-degree compliant pathway. Although the Paris Agreement directs countries to undertake economy-wide emission reductions, target ranges for emission reductions in the agriculture sector can provide the basis for more ambitious mitigation actions and inform implementation of NDCs (Wollenberg et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there is not currently consensus under the UNFCCC on how to define a fair and ambitious mitigation contribution for each country (Pan et al, 2017;Winkler et al, 2017), numerous allocation schemes have been proposed to operationalize the principles of equity and CBDR-RC. IPCC AR5 (Fleurbaey et al, 2014), using a review of existing approaches by Höhne, den Elzen, and Escalante (2014) grouped the approaches into six categories using particular definitions of equity principles (Pan et al, 2017): responsibility, capability, equality, responsibility-capability-need, equal cumulative per capita emissions and staged approaches.…”

Section: Allocation Of Global Mitigation Goal To Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…IPCC AR5 (Fleurbaey et al, 2014), using a review of existing approaches by Höhne, den Elzen, and Escalante (2014) grouped the approaches into six categories using particular definitions of equity principles (Pan et al, 2017): responsibility, capability, equality, responsibility-capability-need, equal cumulative per capita emissions and staged approaches.…”

Section: Allocation Of Global Mitigation Goal To Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recent studies have calculated allocations consistent with the Paris Agreement goals of a 2°C or 1.5°C warming scenario (Holz, Kartha, & Athanasiou, 2017;Meinshausen et al, 2015;Pan, den Elzen, Höhne, Teng, & Wang, 2017;du Pont et al, 2017) and thereby gauged the ambition of countries' Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

National contributions to climate change mitigation from agriculture: allocating a global target

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, agriculture and related land use change contributed about 17% of the world's anthropogenic GHG emissions in 2010 (8.4 GtCO 2 e yr −1 ), making GHG mitigation in the agriculture sector critical to meeting the Paris Agreement's 2°C goal. This article proposes a range of country-level targets for mitigation of agricultural emissions by allocating a global target according to five approaches to effort-sharing for climate change mitigation: responsibility, capability, equality, responsibility-capability-need and equal cumulative per capita emissions. Allocating mitigation targets according to responsibility for total historical emissions or capability to mitigate assigned large targets for agricultural emission reductions to North America, Europe and China. Targets based on responsibility for historical agricultural emissions resulted in a relatively even distribution of targets among countries and regions. Meanwhile, targets based on equal future agricultural emissions per capita or equal per capita cumulative emissions assigned very large mitigation targets to countries with large agricultural economies, while allowing some densely populated countries to increase agricultural emissions. There is no single 'correct' framework for allocating a global mitigation goal. Instead, using these approaches as a set provides a transparent, scientific basis for countries to inform and help assess the significance of their commitments to reducing emissions from the agriculture sector.

show abstract

Section: Equality: Eq2030 and Eq2050mentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Allocation Of Global Mitigation Goal To Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Allocation Of Global Mitigation Goal To Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

National contributions to climate change mitigation from agriculture: allocating a global target

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Farm‐scale bio‐power‐to‐methane: Comparative analyses of economic and environmental feasibility

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Power‐to‐gas technologies are considered to be part of the future energy system, but their viability and applicability need to be assessed. Therefore, models for the viability of farm‐scale bio‐power‐to‐methane supply chains to produce green gas were analysed in terms of levelised cost of energy, energy efficiency and saving of greenhouse gas emission. In bio‐power‐to‐methane, hydrogen from electrolysis driven by surplus renewable electricity and carbon dioxide from biogas are converted to methane by microbes in an ex situ trickle‐bed reactor. Such bio‐methanation could replace the current upgrading of biogas to green gas with membrane technology. Four scenarios were compared: a reference scenario without bio‐methanation (A), bio‐methanation (B), bio‐methanation combined with membrane upgrading (C) and the latter with use of renewable energy only (all‐green; D). The reference scenario (A) has the lowest costs for green gas production, but the bio‐methanation scenarios (B‐D) have higher energy efficiencies and environmental benefits. The higher costs of the bio‐methanation scenarios are largely due to electrolysis, whereas the environmental benefits are due to the use of renewable electricity. Only the all‐green scenario (D) meets the 2026 EU goal of 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, but it would require a CO2 price of 200 € t−1 to achieve the levelised cost of energy of 65 €ct Nm−3 of the reference scenario. Inclusion of the intermittency of renewable energy in the scenarios substantially increases the costs. Further greening of the bio‐methanation supply chain and how intermittency is best taken into account need further investigation.

show abstract

Nationally Determined Contributions: Material climate commitments and discursive positioning in the NDCs

Mills‐Novoa

Liverman

2019

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the lead‐up to the 2015 Conference of Parties meeting in Paris, 186 countries, representing over 95% of global emissions, submitted Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The NDCs outline national goals for greenhouse gas emission reductions and identify financial needs for unfolding mitigation and adaptation efforts. In this study, we review various analyses of the NDCs that cover the aggregate impact and strength of emissions reduction commitments and discuss recent literature on the adequacy and sectoral focus of the NDCs. We then argue that the NDCs are more than just goal setting reports; they are important discursive documents that are contested, negotiated, and ongoing. To supplement the existing literature, we examine the discursive narratives embedded in the NDCs from the 19 founding nations of the Climate Vulnerable Forum and the top 10 greenhouse gas emitters. Our literature review of quantitative and sectoral aspects of the NDCs highlights the inadequacy of the NDC commitments in the context of limiting warming to 2°C, discusses the uncertainties in the promised mitigation strategies, and identifies the reliance of many countries on policies such as those on forests or renewable energy. Our own analysis of the discourses in the NDCs adds critical depth by highlighting the stark contrasts in NDC discourses between North and South, as well as between historical emitters and emerging economies. These contrasts reflect deeper debates regarding justice and equity between nations within the UNFCCC negotiations. This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Decoupling Emissions from Development

show abstract

Exploring fair and ambitious mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement goals

Cited by 123 publications

References 34 publications

National contributions to climate change mitigation from agriculture: allocating a global target

National contributions to climate change mitigation from agriculture: allocating a global target

Farm‐scale bio‐power‐to‐methane: Comparative analyses of economic and environmental feasibility

Nationally Determined Contributions: Material climate commitments and discursive positioning in the NDCs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About