Mitigation Scenarios and Pathways

 ©Henrike Doebert / Climate Analytics
©Henrike Doebert / Climate Analytics

We explore the greenhouse-gas emission reductions necessary to achieve long-term global climate goals, such as holding warming below 1.5 and 2°C warming relative to pre-industrial levels. Analysing emissions scenarios from energy-economic models and other sources with coupled carbon-cycle/climate models leads to globally “allowed” ranges of emissions for different greenhouse gases, air pollutants and sectors, as well as associated time- and pathway-dependent mitigation costs and technology portfolios.

Latest

A new Climate Analytics report, released by The Climate Institute today, looks at the implications of the 1.5°C warming limit in the Paris Agreement for Australia, and, in the light of the severe environmental impacts it faces, emphasises the urgency of ramping up climate action.  
A new analysis of the scientific and policy aspects of the 1.5°C temperature limit in the Paris Agreement’s long-term temperature goal has identified a number of important areas that require more scientific research.  
Finland and the European Union need to strengthen their climate pledges, rapidly cut emissions and speed up introducing renewables into the energy mix to be in line with the 1.5°C warming limit in the Paris Agreement, according to a new report.  
Drilling oil in the Great Australian Bight could create the world’s next carbon bomb, according to a report released today by Climate Analytics. Commissioned by The Wilderness Society, the report’s release coincides with BP’s Annual General Meeting. Protests at BP’s Melbourne headquarters today are calling on BP to rethink their plans for the area to protect the pristine environment.  
A new paper in Nature Climate Change, co-authored by Dr. Michiel Schaeffer of Climate Analytics, assesses the differences between various carbon budget estimates from IPCC and other sources, and identifies the most appropriate carbon budget for holding warming below 2°C.  

Publications

A new analysis of the scientific and policy aspects of the 1.5°C temperature limit in the Paris Agreement’s long-term temperature goal has identified a number of important areas that require more scientific research. The analysis, written by a team of scientists who have published key research papers on the science, impacts and policy aspects of the 1.5˚C limit, is a centrepiece of a collection by Nature Climate Change, Nature Geoscience and Nature on 'Targeting 1.5°C'  
Accepted estimates of how much carbon we can still burn by the end of this century and keep temperature rise to below 2°C range from 590 to 2390 billion tons of carbon dioxide. The high end of this estimate does not take into account warming by non-CO2 emissions and was never intended to be used to address a real-world policy question. Consequently, this study finds that the most appropriate carbon budget estimate for keeping warming to below 2°C is in the range of 590-1240 billion tons of carbon dioxide.  
This document provides briefing points and explains why initial and successive 5 year commitment periods for all Parties are a necessary element of the new agreement to help ensure that the 1.5/2°C goal is met, and how a 10-year commitment period would in fact fail to provide the long-term stability and certainty that Parties seek. It steps through evidence from scientific, economic, regulatory and political perspectives.  

Projects

Science and policy to assist and support SIDSs and LDCs to negotiate a strong international climate regime, enabling low carbon development and supporting adaptation needs.  
The "Climate Action Tracker" is an independent science-based assessment, which tracks the emission commitments and actions of countries.  
Implemented under a collaborative framework, this project is designed to provide specific analytical, scientific and strategic information and support to strengthen the capacity of Least Developed Countries (LDCs). Project Period: 2011 - 2012  
Assessment of Climate Change Mitigation Pathways and Evaluation of the Robustness of Mitigation Cost Estimates Project Period: 2011 - 2014