Demand, Services and Social Aspects of Mitigation

Abstract

Demand-side mitigation and new ways of providing services can help avoid, shift, and improve final service demand. Rapid and deep changes in demand make it easier for every sector to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the short and medium term (high confidence). {5.2, 5.3}The indicative potential of demand-side strategies to reduce emissions of direct and indirect CO 2 and non-CO 2 GHG emissions in three end-use sectors (buildings, land transport, and food) is 40-70% globally by 2050 (high confidence). Technical mitigation potentials compared to the 2050 emissions projection of two scenarios consistent with policies announced by national governments until 2020 amount to 6.8 GtCO 2 for building use and construction, 4.6 GtCO 2 for land transport and 8.0 GtCO 2 -eq for food demand, and amount to 4.4 GtCO 2 for industry. Mitigation strategies can be classified as Avoid-Shift-Improve (ASI) options, that reflect opportunities for socio-cultural, infrastructural, and technological change. The greatest 'Avoid' potential comes from reducing long-haul aviation and providing short-distance low-carbon urban infrastructures. The greatest 'Shift' potential would come from switching to plant-based diets. The greatest 'Improve' potential comes from within the building sector, and in particular increased use of energy-efficient end-use technologies and passive housing. {5.

Emission pathways and mitigation options for achieving consumption-based climate targets in Sweden

“…In addition, consumption-based targets adopted alongside territorial targets could introduce a consumer perspective 1 , incentivizing both demand-and supply-side emission reductions irrespective of where the emissions occur. Demand-side measures are instrumental in some scenarios 39 that strive to limit the global mean temperature increase to 1.5 °C without large dependency on carbon dioxide removal. These scenarios often foresee substitution away from carbon-intensive products and services to lowcarbon options-e.g., car-free mobility solutions, plant-based diets-or absolute reductions in demand-e.g., air travel, space heating/cooling-that could be incentivized by consumptionbased policies.…”

Energy supply/ demand policy asymmetry: A meta-narrative review for a systems explanation

“…Hierarchies of solution strategies. -Supply/ demand policy asymmetry [10] -Relative attention to the supply-and demand-side in energy future assessment/ scenarios: o An assumption that demand will outstrip supply of sustainable energy and carbon capture technologies will be required: [5,23,45] o An assumption of low energy demand: [3,17] o Variation of scenarios: [40] o Other evidence of asymmetry: [33] -Arguments in favour of demand-side reductions: o Effectiveness of carbon emission reductions: [10,29] o Numerous co-benefits: [7,24] Table 3 Hierarchies of solution strategies in supply/demand energy policy.…”

The role of carbon pricing in transforming pathways to reach net zero emissions

“…One approach to increase international collaboration on carbon pricing is through linking ETS in different jurisdictions, e.g. Cap and Trade systems in California (USA) and Québec (Canada) (ICAP, 2022 [172]), and the EU ETS and Switzerland's ETS (Council of the EU, 2019 [173]). Linking different ETS can help to improve cost-efficiency by increasing the number of mitigation options with low abatement costs.…”