Introduction to the AMPERE model intercomparison studies on the economics of climate stabilization

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 90, Issue PA, 2015, Pages 1-7

  Kriegler, Elmar ^a   Riahi, Keywan ^b   Bosetti, Valentina ^c   Capros, Pantelis ^d   Petermann, Nils ^a   van Vuuren, Detlef P ^e,f   Weyant, John P ^g   Edenhofer, Ottmar ^a,h,i  

^a POTSDAM INSTITUTE FOR CLIMATE IMPACT RESEARCH   (Germany)

^b INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSIS   (Austria)

^c FONDAZIONE ENI ENRICO MATTEI   (Italy)

^d INSTITUTE OF COMMUNICATION AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS   (Greece)

^e PBL NETHERLANDS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY   (Netherlands)

^f UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^g STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^h TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

ⁱ MERCATOR RESEARCH INSTITUTE ON GLOBAL COMMONS AND CLIMATE CHANGE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84917709384     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.10.012     Document Type: Editorial

References (43)

1. Arroyo-Curras T., Bauer N., Kriegler E., Schwanitz V.J., Luderer G., Aboumahboub T., Giannousakis A., Hilaire J. Carbon leakage in a fragmented climate regime: the dynamic response of global energy markets. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):192-203. (in this issue).
2. 2 emission mitigation and fossil fuel markets: dynamic and international aspects of climate policies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):243-256. (in this issue).
3. Bertram C., Johnson N., Luderer G., Riahi K., Isaac M., Eom J. Carbon lock-in through capital stock inertia associated with weak near-term climate policies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):62-72. (in this issue).
4. Bibas R., Méjean A., Hamdi-Cherif M. Energy efficiency policies and the timing of action: an assessment of climate mitigation costs. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):137-152. (in this issue).
5. Blanford G.J., Kriegler E., Tavoni M. Harmonization vs. fragmentation: overview of climate policy scenarios in EMF27. Clim. Chang. 2014, 123(3-4):383-396.
6. Bollen J. The value of air pollution co-benefits of climate policies: analysis with a global sector-trade CGE model called WorldScan. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):178-191. (in this issue).
7. Bosetti V., Carraro C., Sgobbi A., Tavoni M. Delayed action and uncertain stabilization targets: how much will the delay cost?. Clim. Chang. 2009, 96:299-312.
8. Bosetti V., Carraro C., Tavoni M. Climate change mitigation strategies in fast-growing countries: the benefits of early action. Energy Econ. 2009, 31(S2):S144-S151.
9. Calvin K., Patel P., Fawcett A., Clarke L., Fisher-Vanden K., Edmonds J., Kim S.H., Sands R., Wise M. The distribution and magnitude of emissions mitigation costs in climate stabilization under less than perfect international cooperation: SGM results. Energy Econ. 2009, 31(S2):S187-S197.
10. Capros P., Paroussos L., Fragkos P., Tsani S., Boitier B., Wagner F., Busch S., Resch G., Blesl M., Bollen J. European decarbonisation pathways under alternative technological and policy choices: a multi-model analysis. Energy Strateg. Rev. 2014, 2(3-4):231-245.
11. Clarke L., Edmonds J., Krey V., Richels R., Rose S., Tavoni M. International climate policy architectures: overview of the EMF 22 international scenarios. Energy Econ. 2009, 31(S2):S64-S81.
12. Clarke L., Jiang K., Akimoto K., Babiker M., Blanford G., Fisher-Vanden K., Hourcade J.-C., Krey V., Kriegler E., Löschel A., McCollum D., Paltsev S., Rose S., Shukla P.R., Tavoni M., van der Zwaan B., van Vuuren D.P. Assessing transformation pathways. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2014, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, J.C. Minx (Eds.).
13. Criqui P., Mima S., Menanteau P., Kitous A. Mitigation strategies and energy technology learning: assessment with the POLES model. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):119-136. (in this issue).
14. Edmonds J., Clarke L., Lurz J., Wise M. Stabilizing CO2 concentrations with incomplete international cooperation. Clim. Pol. 2008, 8:355-376.
15. Eom J., Edmonds J., Krey V., Johnson N., Longden T., Luderer G., Riahi K., Van Vuuren D. The impact of near-term climate policy choices on technology and emissions transition pathways. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):73-88. (in this issue).
16. IPCC WGIII AR5 Scenario Database accessible accessible at. https://secure.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/ene/AR5DB.
17. Krey V., Masera O., Blanford G., Bruckner T., Cooke R., Fisher-Vanden K., Haberl H., Hertwich E., Kriegler E., Müller D., Paltsev S., Price L., Schlömer S., Ürge-Vorsatz D., van Vuuren D., Zwickel T. Annex II: Metrics and Methodogy, Section A.II.10: Scenario Data. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change 2014, Documented in:, Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, J.C. Minx (Eds.).
18. Iyer G., Hultman N., Eom J., McJeon H., Patel P., Clarke L. Diffusion of low-carbon technologies and the feasibility of long-term climate targets. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):103-118. (in this issue).
19. Jakob M., Luderer G., Steckel J., Tavoni M., Monjon S. Time to act now? Assessing the costs of delaying climate measures and benefits of early action. Clim. Chang. 2012, 114(1):79-99.
20. Johnson N., Rao S., McCollum D., Krey V., Riahi K., Rogelj J. Stranded on a low-carbon planet: implications of climate policy for the phase-out of coal-based power plants. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):89-102. (in this issue).
21. Keppo I., Rao S. International climate regimes: effects of delayed participation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2007, 74(7):962-979.
22. Krey V., Riahi K. Implications of delayed participation and technology failure for the feasibility, costs, and likelihood of staying below temperature targets-greenhouse gas mitigation scenarios for the 21st century. Energy Econ. 2009, 31(S2):S94-S106.
23. Krey V., Luderer G., Clarke L., Kriegler E. Getting from here to there - energy technology transformation pathways in the EMF27 scenarios. Clim. Chang. 2014, 123(3-4):369-382.
24. Kriegler E., Riahi K., Bauer N., Schwanitz V.J., Petermann N., Bosetti V., Marcucci A., Otto S., Paroussos L., Rao S., Currás T.A., Ashina S., Bollen J., Eom J., Hamdi-Cherif M., Longden T., Kitous A., Méjean A., Sano F., Schaeffer M. Making or breaking climate targets: The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):24-44. (in this issue).
25. Kriegler E., Petermann N., Krey V., Schwanitz V.J., Luderer G., Ashina S., Bosetti V., Eom J., Kitous A., Méjean A., Paroussos L., Sano F., Turton H., Wilson C., Van Vuuren D.P. Diagnostic indicators for integrated assessment models of climate policy. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):45-61. (in this issue).
26. Kriegler E., Riahi K., Petermann N., Bosetti V., Capros P., van Vuuren D.P., Criqui P., Egenhofer C., Fragkos P., Johnson N., Paroussos L., Behrens A., Edenhofer O., The AMPERE Consortium Assessing Pathways Toward Ambitious Climate Targets at the Global and European Levels: A synthesis of Results From the AMPERE Project 2014, (available at http://ampere-project.eu).
27. Kriegler E., Weyant J.P., Blanford G.J., Krey V., Clarke L., Edmonds J., Fawcett A., Luderer G., Riahi K., Richels R., Rose S.K., Tavoni M., van Vuuren D.P. The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies. Clim. Chang. 2014, 123(3-4):353-367.
28. Luderer G., Pietzcker R.C., Bertram C., Kriegler E., Meinshausen M., Edenhofer O. Economic mitigation challenges: how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets. Environ. Res. Lett. 2013, 8(2013):034033.
29. Luderer G., Bertram C., Calvin K., De Cian E., Kriegler E. Implications of weak near-term climate policies on long-term mitigation pathways. Clim. Chang. 2013, 10.1007/s10584-013-0899-9.
30. Marcucci A., Turton H. Induced technological change in moderate and fragmented climate change mitigation regimes. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):230-242. (in this issue).
31. Otto S., Gernaat D., Isaac M., Lucas P.L., van Sluisveld M.A., van den Berg M., van Vliet J., van Vuuren D.P. Impact of fragmented emission reduction regimes on the energy market and on CO2 emissions related to land use: a case study with China and the European Union as first movers. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):220-229. (in press).
32. Paroussos L., Fragkos P., Capros P., Fragkiadakis K. Assessment of carbon leakage through the industry channel: the EU perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):204-219. (in this issue).
33. Riahi K., Kriegler E., Johnson N., Bertram C., den Elzen M., Eom J., Schaeffer M., Edmonds J., Isaac M., Krey V., Longden T., Luderer G., Méjean A., McCollum D.L., Mima S., Turton H., Van Vuuren D.P., Wada K., Bosetti V., Capros P., Criqui P., Hamdi-Cherif M., Kainuma M., Edenhofer O. Locked into Copenhagen pledges - implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):8-23. (in this issue).
34. Richels R.G., Blanford G.J., Rutherford T.F. International climate policy: a 'second best' solution for a 'second best' world?. Clim. Chang. 2009, 97:289-296.
35. Rogelj J., McCollum D.L., O'Neill B.C., Riahi K. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to below 2 degreess. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2013, 3:405-412.
36. Rogelj J., McCollum D.L., Reisinger A., Meinshausen M., Riahi K. Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation. Nature 2013, 493:79-83.
37. Sano F., Wada K., Akimoto K., Oda J. Assessments of GHG emission reduction scenarios of different levels and different short-term pledges through macro- and sectoral decomposition analyses. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):153-165. (in this issue).
38. Schaeffer M., Gohar L., Kriegler E., Lowe J., Riahi K., van Vuuren D.P. Mid- and long-term climate projections for fragmented and delayed-action scenarios. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):257-268. (in this issue).
39. Schwanitz V.J., Longden T., Knopf B., Capros P. The implications of initiating immediate climate change mitigation - a review of the potential for co-benefits. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 90(PA):166-177. (in this issue).
40. Taylor K.E., Stouffer R.J., Meehl G.A. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2012, 93:485-498.
41. The AMPERE consortium AMPERE Scenario Database https://secure.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/ene/AMPEREDB.
42. van Vliet J., den Elzen M.G.J., van Vuuren D.P. Meeting radiative forcing targets under delayed participation. Energy Econ. 2009, 31(S2):S152-S162.
43. van Vliet J., Berg M., Schaeffer M., van Vuuren D.P., Elzen M., Hof A., Mendoza Beltran A., Meinshausen M. Copenhagen Accord pledges imply higher costs for staying below 2°C warming. Clim. Chang. 2012, 113:551-561.