Meeting the EU 2°C climate target: Global and regional emission implications

Climate Policy

Volumn 6, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 545-564

  den Elzen, Michel ^a   Meinshausen, Malte ^b  

^a PBL NETHERLANDS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY   (Netherlands)

^b POTSDAM INSTITUTE FOR CLIMATE IMPACT RESEARCH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Climate target; Multi gas emission pathway; Post 2012 commitments

Indexed keywords

CARBON DIOXIDE; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; EUROPEAN UNION; GREENHOUSE GAS;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34249824264     PISSN: 14693062     EISSN: 17527457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2006.9685620     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. ACIA. 2004. Impacts of a Warming Arctic:Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
2. Allen, M. R., and Lord, R., 2004. The blame game:who will pay for the damaging consequences of climate change?. Nature, 432:551–552. 2 December 2004
3. Azar, C., Lindgren, K., Larson, E., and Möllersten, K., 2006. Carbon capture and storage from fossil fuels and biomass:costs and potential role in stabilizing the atmosphere. Climatic Change, 74 (1–3):47–79.
4. Berk, M. M., and den Elzen, M. G.J., 2001. Options for differentiation of future commitments in climate policy:how to realise timely participation to meet stringent climate goals?. Climate Policy, 1 (4):465–480.
5. Berk, M. M., and den Elzen, M. G.J., 2004. What if the Russians don't ratify? MNP Report 728001028[available at http://www.mnp.nl/en/publications/2004/index.html] Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
6. Criqui, P., and Kouvaritakis, N., 2000. World energy projections to 2030. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 14 (1–4):116–136.
7. Criqui, P., 2003. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Pathways in the UNFCCC Process up to 2025:Technical Report. B4–3040/2001/325703/MAR/E.1. for the DG Environment Grenoble, France:CNRS-IEPE.
8. Cubasch, U., 2001. “ Projections of future climate change. ”. In Climate Change 2001:The Scientific Basis Edited by:Houghton, J. T., 525–582. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
9. de Vries, H. J.M., van Vuuren, D. P., den Elzen, M. G.J., and Janssen, M. A., 2002. The Targets IMage Energy Regional (TIMER) Model:Technical Documentation MNP Report 461502024[available at http://www.mnp.nl/en/publications/2001/index.html]. MNP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
10. den Elzen, M. G.J., 2002. Exploring climate regimes for differentiation of future commitments to stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations. Integrated Assessment, 3 (4):343–359.
11. den Elzen, M. G.J., and Lucas, P., 2003. FAIR 2.0:A Decision-support Model to Assess the Environmental and Economic Consequences of Future Climate Regimes MNP Report 550015001[available at http://www.mnp.nl/fair/]. MNP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
12. den Elzen, M. G.J., and Lucas, P., 2005. The FAIR model:a tool to analyse environmental and costs implications of climate regimes. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 10 (2):115–134.
13. den Elzen, M. G.J., and Meinshausen, M., 2005. Meeting the EU 2 degrees C climate target:global and regional emission implications MNP Report 728001031/2005[available at available at http://www.mnp.nl/en/publications/2005/index.html]. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
14. den Elzen, M. G.J., Berk, M. M., Lucas, P., Eickhout, B., and van Vuuren, D. P., 2003. Exploring climate regimes for differentiation of commitments to achieve the EU climate target MNP Report 728001023[available at http://www.mnp.nl/en/publications/2003/index.html]. MNP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
15. den Elzen, M. G.J., Berk, M. M., Lucas, P., Criqui, C., and Kitous, A., 2005a. Multi-Stage:a rule-based evolution of future commitments under the Climate Change Convention. International Environmental Agreements, 10 (2):115–134.
16. den Elzen, M. G.J., Lucas, P., and van Vuuren, D. P., 2005b. Abatement costs of post-Kyoto climate regimes. Energy Policy, 33 (16):2138–2151.
17. EIA. 2003. Analysis of S.139, The Climate Stewardship Act of 2003:Highlights and Summary. Energy Information Administration Report SR/OIAF/2003–02/S Washington, DC:Energy Information Administration.
18. Eickhout, B., den Elzen, M. G.J., and van Vuuren, D. P., 2003. Multi-gas emission profiles for stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations:emission implications of limiting global temperature increase to 2 degrees centigrade MNP Report 728001026[available at http://www.mnp.nl/en/publications/2003/index.html]. MNP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
19. Enting, I. G., Wigley, T. M.L., and Heimann, M., 1994. Future emissions and concentrations of carbon dioxide. Australia:Mordialloc.
20. European Council. 1996. Communication on Community Strategy on Climate Change:Council Conclusions. Brussels:European Council.
21. European Council. 2005. Presidency Conclusions. Brussels:European Council.
22. Folland, C. K., 2001. Global temperature change and its uncertainties since 1861. Geophysical Research Letters, 28 (13):2621–2624.
23. Gritsevskyi, A., and Nakicenovic, N., 2000. Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change. Energy Policy, 28 (13):907–921.
24. Gritsevskyi, A., and Schrattenholzer, L., 2003. Costs of reducing carbon emissions:an integrated modeling framework approach. Climatic Change, 56 (1):167–184.
25. Hare, B., and Meinshausen, M., 2006. How much warming are we committed to and how much can be avoided?. Climatic Change, 75 (1):111–149.
26. Hare, W., 2003. Assessment of Knowledge on Impacts of Climate Change:Contribution to the Specification of Art. 2 of the UNFCCCWBGU. Potsdam, Berlin:German Advisory Council on Global Change.
27. Höhne, N., Galleguillos, C., Blok, K., Harnisch, J., and Phylipsen, D., 2003. Evolution of Commitments under the UNFCCC:Involving Newly Industrialized Countries and Developing Countries. Research Report 20141255, UBA-FB 000412. Berlin:ECOFYS Gmbh.
28. Hourcade, J.-C., and Shukla, P. R., 2001. “ Global, regional and national costs and ancillary benefits of mitigation. ”. In Climate Change 2001:Mitigation; Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC. Edited by:Metz, B., Davidson, O., Swart, R., and Pan, J., Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
29. IMAGE Team. 2001. The IMAGE 2.2 Implementation of the SRES Scenarios:A Comprehensive Analysis of Emissions, Climate Change and Impacts in the 21st Century. CD-ROM Publication 481508018 The Netherlands:Bilthoven.
30. Manne, A. S., and Richels, R. G., 2001. An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases. Nature, 410:675–677.
31. Meinshausen, M., 2006. “ What does a 2°C target mean for greenhouse gas concentrations? A brief analysis based on multi-gas emission pathways and several climate sensitivity uncertainty estimates. ”. In Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change. Edited by:Schellnhuber, H. J., Cramer, W., Nakicenovic, N., Wigley, T., and Yohe, G., 266–279. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
32. Meinshausen, M., Hare, W. L., Wigley, T. M.L., van Vuuren, D. P., den Elzen, M. G.J., and Swart, R., 2006. Multi-gas emission pathways to meet climate targets. Climatic Change, 75 (1–2):151–194.
33. Meyer, A., 2000. Contraction & Convergence:The Global Solution to Climate Change. Schumacher Briefings 5. Bristol, UK:Green Books.
34. Morita, T., Nakicenovic, N., and Robinson, J., 2000. Overview of mitigation scenarios for global climate stabilization based on new IPCC emission scenarios (SRES). Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 3:65–88.
35. Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M.H., Barnett, D. N., Jones, G. S., Webb, M. J., Collins, M., and Stainforth, D. A., 2004. Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations. Nature, 430:768–772.
36. Nakicenovic, N., and Riahi, K., 2003. Model runs with MESSAGE in the Context of the Further Development of the Kyoto Protocol. Berlin:WBGU (German Advisory Council on Global Change).
37. Paltsev, S., Reilly, J., Jacoby, H., Ellerman, A. D., and Tay, K. H., 2003. Emissions Trading to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States:The McCain—Lieberman Proposal. Report No. 97 Cambridge, MA:Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
38. Raper, S. C.B., and Cubasch, U., 1996. Emulation of the results from a coupled general circulation model using a simple climate model. Geophysical Research Letters, 23 (10):1107–1110.
39. Reilly, J., 1999. Multi-gas assessment of the Kyoto Protocol. Nature, 401 (6753):549–555.
40. Smith, J. B., Schellnhuber, H.-J., and Mirza, M. Q.M., 2001. “ Vulnerability to climate change and reasons for concern:a synthesis. ”. In Climate Change 2001:Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Edited by:McCarthy, J. J., Canziani, O. F., Leary, N. A., Dokken, D. J., and White, K. S., Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
41. Stott, P. A., Stone, D. A., and Allen, M. R., 2004. Human contribution to the European heatwave of 2003. Nature, 432:610–614.
42. Swart, R., Berk, M., Janssen, M., Kreileman, E., and Leemans, R., 1998. “ The safe landing analysis:risks and trade-offs in climate change. ”. In Global Change Scenarios of the 21st Century:Results from the IMAGE 2.1 Model. Edited by:Alcamo, J., Leemans, R., and Kreileman, E., 193–218. Oxford:Elsevier Science.
43. Swart, R., Mitchell, J., Morita, T., and Raper, S., 2002. Stabilisation scenarios for climate impact assessment. Global Environmental Change, 12 (3):155–165.
44. van Vuuren, D. P., den Elzen, M. G.J., Berk, M. M., Lucas, P., Eickhout, B., Eerens, H., and Oostenrijk, R., 2003. Regional costs and benefits of alternative post-Kyoto climate regimes:comparison of variants of the Multi-stage and Per Capita Convergence regimes MNP Report 728001025[available at http://www.mnp.nl/en/publications/2003/index.html] MNP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
45. van Vuuren, D. P., de Vries, H. J.M., Eickhout, B., and Kram, T., 2004. Responses to technology and taxes in a simulated world. Energy Economics, 26:579–601.
46. van Vuuren, D. P., Eickhout, B., Lucas, P. L., and den Elzen, M. G.J., 2005. Long-term multi-gas scenarios to stabilise radiative forcing:exploring costs and benefits within an integrated assessment framework. Energy Journal, Special Issue #3.
47. White House. 2002. Executive Summary of Bush Climate Change Initiative.
48. Wigley, T. M.L., 2003. MAGICC/SCENGEN 4.1:Technical Manual. Boulder, CO, USA:UCAR, Climate and Global Dynamics Division.
49. Wigley, T. M.L., and Raper, S. C.B., 2001. Interpretation of high projections for global-mean warming. Science, 293 (5529):451–454.
50. Wigley, T. M.L., and Raper, S. C.B., 2002. Reasons for larger warming projections in the IPCC Third Assessment Report. Journal of Climate, 15 (20):2945–2952.
51. 2 concentrations. Nature, 379:240–243.