Search

One approach in climate-change policy is to set normative long-term targets first and then infer the implied emissions pathways. An important example of a normative target is to limit the global-mean temperature change to a certain maximum. In general, reported cost estimates for limiting global warming often rise rapidly, even exponentially, as the scale of emission reductions from a reference level increases. This rapid rise may suggest that more ambitious policies may be prohibitively expensive. Here, we propose a probabilistic perspective, focused on the relationship between mitigation costs and the likelihood of achieving a climate target. We investigate the qualitative, functional relationship between the likelihood of achieving a normative target and the costs of climate-change mitigation. In contrast to the example of exponentially rising costs for lowering concentration levels, we show that the mitigation costs rise proportionally to the likelihood of meeting a temperature target, across a range of concentration levels. In economic terms investing in climate mitigation to increase the probability of achieving climate targets yields 'constant returns to scale,' because of a counterbalancing rapid rise in the probabilities of meeting a temperature target as concentration is lowered. abatement costs | climate targets | mitigation | probabilistic framework | risk approach

How can dangerous interference with the climate system be avoided? Science can help decision-makers answer this political question. Earlier publications have focused on the probability of keeping global mean temperature change below certain thresholds by stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at particular levels. We compare the results of such 'stabilization profiles' with a set of 'peaking profiles' that reduce emissions further after stabilization and thus result in a concentration peak. Given the inertia in the climate system, stabilization profiles lead to ongoing warming beyond 2100 until the temperature reaches equilibrium. This warming partly can be prevented for peaking profiles, in this way, these profiles can increase the likelihood of achieving temperature thresholds by 10-20% compared with the likelihood for the associated stabilization profiles. Because the additional mitigation efforts and thus costs for peaking profiles lie mainly beyond 2100, peaking profiles achieving temperature thresholds with the same likelihood as the original stabilization profile, but at considerably lower cost (up to 40%), can be identified. The magnitude of the cost reductions depends on the assumptions on discounting. Peaking profiles and overshoot profiles with a limited overshoot may, in particular, play an important role in making more ambitious climate targets feasible. abatement costs | concentration stabilization | climate change | integrated assessment model | multigas emission pathway

Safely achieving the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement requires a worldwide transformation to carbon-neutral societies within the next 30 y. Accelerated technological progress and policy implementations are required to deliver emissions reductions at rates sufficiently fast to avoid crossing dangerous tipping points in the Earth's climate system. Here, we discuss and evaluate the potential of social tipping interventions (STIs) that can activate contagious processes of rapidly spreading technologies, behaviors, social norms, and structural reorganization within their functional domains that we refer to as social tipping elements (STEs). STEs are subdomains of the planetary socioeconomic system where the required disruptive change may take place and lead to a sufficiently fast reduction in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. The results are based on online expert elicitation, a subsequent expert workshop, and a literature review. The STIs that could trigger the tipping of STE subsystems include 1) removing fossil-fuel subsidies and incentivizing decentralized energy generation (STE1, energy production and storage systems), 2) building carbon-neutral cities (STE2, human settlements), 3) divesting from assets linked to fossil fuels (STE3, financialmarkets), 4) revealing the moral implications of fossil fuels (STE4, norms and value systems), 5) strengthening climate education and engagement (STE5, education system), and 6) disclosing information on greenhouse gas emissions (STE6, information feedbacks). Our research reveals important areas of focus for larger-scale empirical and modeling efforts to better understand the potentials of harnessing social tipping dynamics for climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Crop-livestock production systems are the largest cause of human alteration of the global nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) cycles. Our comprehensive spatially explicit inventory of N and P budgets in livestock and crop production systems shows that in the beginning of the 20th century, nutrient budgets were either balanced or surpluses were small; between 1900 and 1950, global soil N surplus almost doubled to 36 trillion grams (Tg).y-1 and P surplus increased by a factor of 8 to 2 Tg.y-1. Between 1950 and 2000, the global surplus increased to 138 Tg.y-1 of N and 11 Tg.y-1 of P. Most surplus N is an environmental loss; surplus P is lost by runoff or accumulates as residual soil P. The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development scenario portrays a world with a further increasing global crop (+82% for 2000-2050) and livestock production (+115%); despite rapidly increasing recovery in crop (+35% N recovery and +6% P recovery) and livestock (+35% N and P recovery) production, global nutrient surpluses continue to increase (+23% N and +54% P), and in this period, surpluses also increase in Africa (+49% N and +236% P) and Latin America (+75% N and +120% P). Alternative management of livestock production systems shows that combinations of intensification, better integration of animal manure in crop production, and matching N and P supply to livestock requirements can effectively reduce nutrient flows. A shift in human diets, with poultry or pork replacing beef, can reduce nutrient flows in countries with intensive ruminant production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]