Climate implications of GWP‐based reductions in greenhouse gas emissions

Fuglestvedt, Jan S.; Berntsen, Terje; Godal, Odd; Skodvin, Tora

doi:10.1029/1999gl010939

Cited by 64 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been suggested that an additional short-term (Fuglestvedt et al 2000;Rypdal et al 2005;Jackson 2009) or mid-term target (O'Neill et al 2010) can be introduced to the climate policy as an interim goal leading toward the long-term target. The motivation to set up such an interim target may also be as a means to avoid crossing the tipping elements (Lenton et al 2008) or to curb environmental side-effects (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does black carbon abatement hamper CO 2 abatement?

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns have been raised that near-term black carbon abatement strategies for global warming mitigation would interfere with the longer-term CO 2 abatement efforts. In response, we put forward a "combined target and metric approach", a theoretical framework, in which the time horizon of the metric is linked to the specific target of the climate policy. In this approach, a shorter time horizon for the metric is justified only when the overall climate policy is tightened; the lower the target level of the climate policy, the earlier the year of the target. Employing a consistent time perspective for the metric and target means that enhanced near-term reduction of short-lived climate forcers does not reduce the importance of the CO 2 abatement, since the overall climate target is stricter.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does black carbon abatement hamper CO 2 abatement?

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The scientific critique has pointed to the choice of indicator (i.e. radiative forcing rather than temperature response), the fact that a constant background atmosphere is used (thereby overlooking feedbacks on lifetime and radiative forcing of the gases), the use of an impulse emission rather than a sustained or finite step emission change, and that equal emissions, weighted by GWP, can give very different climate impacts, depending on the mix of gases 2 (Smith, 2003;O'Neill, 2000;Smith and Wigley, 2000a,b;Fuglestvedt et al, 2000;Reilly et al, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cost of Using Global Warming Potentials: Analysing the Trade off Between CO2, CH4 and N2O

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The metric governing the trade-off between different greenhouse gases in the Kyoto Protocol, the Global Warming Potentials (GWPs), has received ample critique from both scientific and economic points of view. Here we use an integrated climate-economic optimization model to estimate the cost-effective trade-off between CO 2 , CH 4 and N 2 O when meeting a temperature stabilization target. We then estimate the increased cost from using GWPs when meeting the same temperature target. Although the efficient valuation of the gases differs significantly from their respective GWPs, the potential economic benefit of valuing them in a more correct way amounts to 3.8 percent of the overall costs of meeting the temperature stabilization target in the base case. In absolute value, this corresponds to an additional net present value cost of US$ 2000 100 billion. To corroborate our findings we perform a Monte Carlo-analysis where several key parameters are randomly varied simultaneously. The result from this exercise shows that our main result is robust to a wide range of changes in the key parameter values, giving a median economic loss from using GWPs of 4.2 percent.

show abstract

“…There is a delicate balance between metrics that adequately include our understanding of the relevant climateimpact parameters (e.g., sea-level rise, ecosystem change, economic consequences, etc.) and those with a level of scientific uncertainty and controversy low enough to be perceived as acceptable by policy makers; this may be one reason the GWP, despite its shortcomings (4,23,24), has retained favor in terms of its use in the Kyoto Protocol (18).…”

Section: Difficulties In Defining a Gwp For No Xmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific issues in the design of metrics for inclusion of oxides of nitrogen in global climate agreements

Shine

Berntsen²,

Fuglestvedt³

et al. 2005

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Kyoto Protocol seeks to limit emissions of various greenhouse gases but excludes short-lived species and their precursors even though they cause a significant climate forcing. We explore the difficulties that are faced when designing metrics to compare the climate impact of emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NO x) with other emissions. There are two dimensions to this difficulty. The first concerns the definition of a metric that satisfactorily accounts for its climate impact. NO x emissions increase tropospheric ozone, but this increase and the resulting climate forcing depend strongly on the location of the emissions, with low-latitude emissions having a larger impact. NO x emissions also decrease methane concentrations, causing a global-mean radiative forcing similar in size but opposite in sign to the ozone forcing. The second dimension of difficulty concerns the intermodel differences in the values of computed metrics. We explore the use of indicators that could lead to metrics that, instead of using global-mean inputs, are computed locally and then averaged globally. These local metrics may depend less on cancellation in the global mean; the possibilities presented here seem more robust to model uncertainty, although their applicability depends on the poorly known relationship between local climate change and its societal͞ecological impact. If it becomes a political imperative to include NO x emissions in future climate agreements, policy makers will be faced with difficult choices in selecting an appropriate metric.climate change ͉ climate metrics ͉ Kyoto Protocol T he Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change aims to control emissions of relatively long-lived greenhouse gases. It excludes emissions of short-lived species, or their precursors, perhaps reflecting the difficulties policymakers would have faced had they tried to include them. Nevertheless, short-lived species are believed to contribute significantly to human-induced climate change (1). Their absence from the protocol could weaken efforts to mitigate climate change by weakening the ''comprehensive'' approach embodied in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; indeed, the U.S. administration has cited the absence of black carbon and tropospheric ozone from the protocol as one reason why they have not become signatories (see www.whitehouse.gov͞news͞releases͞ 2001͞06͞20010611-2.html). The absence could also lead to a distortion of national priorities in emission reductions and discourage full engagement in the protocol if proper credit is not given to measures leading to reductions in climatically significant emissions.The overall question that we pose here is whether there are fundamental barriers to the inclusion of short-lived species in climate treaties. We focus on the most important precursor to tropospheric ozone, oxides of nitrogen (NO x ) (1), which poses some unique difficulties. The discussion has wider applicability to other ozone precursors, aerosols, and contrails and contrail ...

show abstract

Climate implications of GWP‐based reductions in greenhouse gas emissions

Cited by 64 publications

References 6 publications

Does black carbon abatement hamper CO 2 abatement?

Does black carbon abatement hamper CO 2 abatement?

The Cost of Using Global Warming Potentials: Analysing the Trade off Between CO2, CH4 and N2O

Scientific issues in the design of metrics for inclusion of oxides of nitrogen in global climate agreements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About