4.7 Article

Climate constraints on the carbon intensity of economic growth

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 10, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/095006

关键词

kaya; carbon budget; climate change mitigation; carbon intensity; committed emissions; stranded assets

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Development and climate goals together constrain the carbon intensity of production. Using a simple and transparent model that represents committed CO2 emissions (future emissions expected to come from existing capital), we explore the carbon intensity of production related to new capital required for different temperature targets across several thousand scenarios. Future pathways consistent with the 2 degrees C target which allow for continued gross domestic product growth require early action to reduce carbon intensity of new production, and either (i) a short lifetime of energy and industry capital (e.g. early retrofit of coal power plants), or (ii) large negative emissions after 2050 (i.e. rapid development and dissemination of carbon capture and sequestration). To achieve the 2 degrees C target, half of the scenarios indicate a carbon intensity of new production between 33 and 73 gCO(2)/$-much lower than the global average today, at 360 gCO(2)/$. The average lifespan of energy capital (especially power plants), and industry capital, are critical because they commit emissions far into the future and reduce the budget for new capital emissions. Each year of lifetime added to existing, carbon intensive capital, decreases the carbon intensity of new production required to meet a 2 degrees C carbon budget by 1.0-1.5 gCO(2)/$, and each year of delaying the start of mitigation decreases the required CO2 intensity of new production by 20-50 gCO(2)/$. Constraints on the carbon intensity of new production under a 3 degrees C target are considerably relaxed relative to the 2 degrees C target, but remain daunting in comparison to the carbon intensity of the global economy today.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据