• Energy Research
• CN close
• DE close
• AU close

{"references": ["UNSD Demographic Statistics, available at http://data.un.org", "The World Bank GDP data, available at https://data.worldbank.org/", "UNFCCC: Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data, available at https://unfccc.int/process/transparency-and-reporting/greenhouse-gas-data/what-is-greenhouse-gas-data"]} Dataset containing all greenhouse gas emissions data submitted by countries under climate change convention (including CRF data) as published by the UNFCCC secretariat at 2021-12-03. The dataset is also available via datalad. To obtain the dataset with datalad, see the instructions at https://github.com/mikapfl/unfccc_di_data .

This climate change impact data (future scenarios on temperature-induced GDP losses) and climate change mitigation cost data (REMIND model scenarios) is published under doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3541809 and used in this paper: Ueckerdt F, Frieler K, Lange S, Wenz L, Luderer G, Levermann A (2018) The economically optimal warming limit of the planet. Earth System Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-741-2019 Below the individual file contents are explained. For further questions feel free to write to Falko Ueckerdt (ueckerdt@pik-potsdam.de). Climate change impact data File 1: Data_rel-GDPpercapita-changes_withCC_per-country_all-RCP_all-SSP_4GCM.csv Content: Data of relative change in absolute GDP/CAP levels (compared to the baseline path of the respective SSP in the SSP database) for each country, RCP (and a zero-emissions scenario), SSP and 4 GCMs (spanning a broad range of climate sensitivity). Negative (positive) values indicate losses (gains) due to climate change. For figure 1a of the paper, this data was aggregated for all countries. File 2: Data_rel-GDPpercapita-changes_withCC_per-country_all-SSP_4GCM_interpolated-for-REMIND-scenarios.csv Content: Data of relative change in absolute GDP/CAP levels (compared to the baseline path of the respective SSP in the SSP database) for each country, SSP and 4 GCMs (spanning a broad range of climate sensitivity). The RCP (and a zero-emissions scenario) are interpolated to the temperature pathways of the ten REMIND model scenarios used for climate change mitigation costs. Hereby the set of scenarios for climate impacts and climate change mitigation are consistent and can be combined to total costs of climate change (for a broad range of mitigation action). File 3: Data_rel-GDPpercapita-changes_withCC_per-country_SSP2_12GCM_interpolated-for-REMIND-scenarios.csv Content: Same as file 2, but only for the SSP2 (chosen default scenario for the study) and for all 12 GCMs. Data of relative change in absolute GDP/CAP levels (compared to the baseline path of the respective SSP in the SSP database) for each country, SSP-2 and 12 GCMs (spanning a broad range of climate sensitivity). The RCP (and a zero-emissions scenario) are interpolated to the temperature pathways of the ten REMIND model scenarios used for climate change mitigation costs. Hereby the set of scenarios for climate impacts and climate change mitigation are consistent and can be combined to total costs of climate change (for a broad range of mitigation action). In addition, reference GDP and population data (without climate change) for each country until 2100 was downloaded from the SSP database, release Version 1.0 (March 2013, https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb/, last accessed 15Nov 2019). Climate change mitigation cost data The scenario design and runs used in this paper have first been conducted in [1] and later also used in [2]. File 4: REMIND_scenario_results_economic_data.csv File 5: REMIND_scenarios_climate_data.csv Content: A broad range of climate change mitigation scenarios of the REMIND model. File 4 contains the economic data of e.g. GDP and macro-economic consumption for each of the countries and world regions, as well as GHG emissions from various economic sectors. File 5 contains the global climate-related data, e.g. forcing, concentration, temperature. In the scenario description “FFrunxxx” (column 2), the code “xxx” specifies the scenario as follows. See [1] for a detailed discussion of the scenarios. The first dimension specifies the climate policy regime (delayed action, baseline scenarios): 1xx: climate action from 2010 5xx: climate action from 2015 2xx climate action from 2020 (used in this study) 3xx climate action from 2030 4x1 weak policy baseline (before Paris agreement) The second dimension specifies the technology portfolio and assumptions: x1x Full technology portfolio (used in this study) x2x noCCS: unavailability of CCS x3x lowEI: lower energy intensity, with final energy demand per economic output decreasing faster than historically observed x4x NucPO: phase out of investments into nuclear energy x5x Limited SW: penetration of solar and wind power limited x6x Limited Bio: reduced bioenergy potential p.a. (100 EJ compared to 300 EJ in all other cases) x6x noBECCS: unavailability of CCS in combination with bioenergy The third dimension specifies the climate change mitigation ambition level, i.e. the height of a global CO2 tax in 2020 (which increases with 5% p.a.). xx1 0$/tCO2 (baseline) xx2 10$/tCO2 xx3 30$/tCO2 xx4 50$/tCO2 xx5 100$/tCO2 xx6 200$/tCO2 xx7 500$/tCO2 xx8 40$/tCO2 xx9 20$/tCO2 xx0 5$/tCO2 For figure 1b of the paper, this data was aggregated for all countries and regions. Relative changes of GDP are calculated relative to the baseline (4x1 with zero carbon price). [1] Luderer, G., Pietzcker, R. C., Bertram, C., Kriegler, E., Meinshausen, M. and Edenhofer, O.: Economic mitigation challenges: how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets, Environmental Research Letters, 8(3), 034033, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034033, 2013a. [2] Rogelj, J., Luderer, G., Pietzcker, R. C., Kriegler, E., Schaeffer, M., Krey, V. and Riahi, K.: Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5 °C, Nature Climate Change, 5(6), 519–527, doi:10.1038/nclimate2572, 2015.

The HANZE dataset covers riverine, pluvial, coastal and compound floods that have occurred in 42 European countries. It contains: 2521 historical floods with impact data (1870-2020); 237 further historical floods with significant impacts, but without precise impact data (1950-2020) Nearly 15,000 modelled floods with a potential to cause significant impacts, classified by actual historical occurrence or non-occurrence impacts (1950-2020). Historical floods and the classification of modelled floods was completed by extensive data-collection from more than 900 sources ranging from news reports through government databases to scientific papers. Impact data collected or modelled include area inundated, fatalities, persons affected or economic loss. Economic losses were inflation- and exchange-rate adjusted to 2020 value of the euro. The historical catalogue (lsit A) also includes losses in the original currencies and price levels. The spatial footprint of affected areas is consistently recorded using more than 1400 subnational units corresponding, with minor exceptions, to the European Union’s Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), level 3. Apart from the possibility to download the data, the database can be viewed, filtered and visualized online: https://naturalhazards.eu. The dataset contains the following files (CSV comma-delimited, UTF8, and ESRI shapefiles in zipped folders): HANZE_historical_floods_catalogue_listA.csv - historical floods with impact data (1870-2020) HANZE_historical_floods_catalogue_listB.csv - historical floods without impact data (1950-2020) HANZE_potential_flood_catalogue_all.csv - modelled potential floods (1950-2020) HANZE_list_of_references.csv - List of all references used in the catalogues HANZE_model_completness_analysis.csv - Comparison between modelled and reported footprints of historical floods Regions_v2010_simplified.zip - Map of subnational regions (v2010) Regions_v2021_simplified.zip - Map of subnational regions (regions v2021) v1.1: errors in two records in "HANZE_historical_floods_catalogue_listB.csv" (wrong country code in event ID 8227 and wrong start date in event ID 8237) were corrected. This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) through project "Decomposition of flood losses by environmental and economic drivers" (FloodDrivers), project no. 449175973 

CASCADE is a global dataset for 139 extant coccolithophore taxonomic units. CASCADE includes a trait database (size and cellular organic and inorganic carbon contents) and taxonomic-specific global spatiotemporal distributions (Lat/Lon/Depth/Month/Year) of coccolithophore abundance and organic and inorganic carbon stocks. CASCADE covers all ocean basins over the upper 275 meters, spans the years 1964-2019 and includes 33,119 taxonomic-specific abundance observations. Within CASCADE, we characterise the underlying uncertainties due to measurement errors by propagating error estimates between the different studies. Full details of the data set are provided in the associated Scientific Data manuscript. The repository contains five main folders: 1) "Classification", which contains YAML files with synonyms, family-level classifications, and life cycle phase associations and definitions; 2) "Concatenated literature", which contains the merged datasets of size, PIC and POC and which were corrected for taxonomic unit synonyms; 3) "Resampled cellular datasets", which contains the resampled datasets of size, PIC and POC in long format as well as a summary table; 4) "Gridded data sets", which contains gridded datasets of abundance, PIC and POC; 5) "Species lists", which contains spreadsheets of the "common" (>20 obs) and "rare" (<20 obs) species and their number of observations. The CASCADE data set can be easily reproduced using the scripts and data provided in the associated github repository: https://github.com/nanophyto/CASCADE/ (zenodo.12797197) Correspondence to: Joost de Vries, joost.devries@bristol.ac.uk v.0.1.2 has some fixes: 1. The wrongly specified S. neapolitana was removed from synonyms.yml (this species is now S. nana)2. Longitudes were corrected for Guerreiro et al., 20233. A double entry for Dimizia et al., 2015 was fixed4. Units in Sal et al., 2013 were correct to cells/L (previously cells/ml)5. Data from Sal et al., 2013 was re-done, as some species were missing6. Duplicate entries from Baumann et al., 2000 were dropped

This is the dataset for our research on assessing CO2 emissions from Chinese inland waters, including streams, rivers, lakes and reservoirs. The dataset includes three parts, including Part 1: Lakes and Reservoirs_1980s, Part 2: CO2 Dataset_2010s, and Part 3: Water chemistry records. Detailed information on these data can be found from the 'README' text file.

The data consists of annual measurements of standing aboveground plant biomass, annual aboveground net primary productivity and annual soil respiration between 1998 and 2012. Data were collected from seven European shrublands that were subject to the climate manipulations drought and warming. Sites were located in the United Kingdom (UK), the Netherlands (NL), Denmark ( two sites, DK-B and DK-M), Hungary (HU), Spain (SP) and Italy (IT). All field sites consisted of untreated control plots, plots where the plant canopy air is artificially warmed during night time hours, and plots where rainfall is excluded from the plots at least during the plants growing season. Standing aboveground plant biomass (grams biomass per square metre) was measured in two undisturbed areas within the plots using the pin-point method (UK, DK-M, DK-B), or along a transect (IT, SP, HU, NL). Aboveground net primary productivity was calculated from measurements of standing aboveground plant biomass estimates and litterfall measurements. Soil respiration was measured in pre-installed opaque soil collars bi-weekly, monthly, or in measurement campaigns (SP only). The datasets provided are the basis for the data analysis presented in Reinsch et al. (2017) Shrubland primary production and soil respiration diverge along European climate gradient. Scientific Reports 7:43952 https://doi.org/10.1038/srep43952 Standing biomass was measured using the non-destructive pin-point method to assess aboveground biomass. Measurements were conducted at the state of peak biomass specific for each site. Litterfall was measured annually using litterfall traps. Litter collected in the traps was dried and the weight was measured. Aboveground biomass productivity was estimated as the difference between the measured standing biomass in year x minus the standing biomass measured the previous year. Soil respiration was measured bi-weekly or monthly, or in campaigns (Spain only). It was measured on permanently installed soil collars in treatment plots. The Gaussen Index of Aridity (an index that combines information on rainfall and temperature) was calculated using mean annual precipitation, mean annual temperature. The reduction in precipitation and increase in temperature for each site was used to calculate the Gaussen Index for the climate treatments for each site. Data of standing biomass and soil respiration was provided by the site responsible. Data from all sites were collated into one data file for data analysis. A summary data set was combined with information on the Gaussen Index of Aridity Data were then exported from these Excel spreadsheet to .csv files for ingestion into the EIDC.

Although GPS coordinates for current populations are not included due to the potential threat of poaching, the climate variables for each species are provided. The records for extant gecko and skinks mainly came from the New Zealand's Department of Conervation Herpetofauna Database. After updating the taxonomy and cleaning the data to reflect the taxonomy as at 2019 of 43 geckos speceis recognised across seven genera and 61 species in genus, we then thinned the occurrence records at a 1 km resolution for all species then predicted distributions for those with > 15 records using species distribution models. The climate variables for each species were selected among annual mean temperature (bio1), maximum temperature of the warmest month (bio5), minimum temperature of the coldest month (bio6), mean temperature of driest quarter (bio9), mean temperature of wettest quarter (bio10), and precipitation of the driest quarter (bio17). To reduce multicollinearity in species distribution models for each species, we only retained climate variables with a variable inflation factor < 10. The climate variables were from the CHELSA database (https://chelsa-climate.org/), which can be freely downloaded for current and future scenarios. We also provide MCC tree files for the geckos and skinks. The phylogenetic trees have been constructed for NZ geckos by (Nielsen et al., 2011) and for NZ skinks by (Chapple et al., 2009). For geckos we used a subset of the sequences used by Nielsen et al. (2011) for four genes, two nuclear (RAG 1, PDC) and two mitochondrial (16S, ND2 along with flanking tRNA sequences). For skinks, we used sequences from Chapple et al. (2009) for one nuclear (RAG 1) and five mitochondrial (ND2, ND4, Cyt b, 12S and 16S) genes, and additional ND2 sequences for taxa not included in the original phylogeny (Chapple et al., 2011, p. 201). In total we used sequences for all recognised extant taxa (Hitchmough et al., 2016) as at 2019 except for three species of skink (O. aff. inconspicuum “Okuru”, O. robinsoni, and O. aff. inconspicuum “North Otago”) and two species of gecko (M. “Cupola” and W. “Kaikouras”) for which genetic data were not available. Aim: The primary drivers of species and population extirpations have been habitat loss, overexploitation, and invasive species, but human-mediated climate change is expected to be a major driver in future. To minimise biodiversity loss, conservation managers should identify species vulnerable to climate change and prioritise their protection. Here, we estimate climatic suitability for two speciose taxonomic groups, then use phylogenetic analyses to assess vulnerability to climate change. Location: Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) Taxa: NZ lizards: diplodactylid geckos and eugongylinae skinks Methods: We built correlative species distribution models (SDMs) for NZ geckos and skinks to estimate climatic suitability under current climate and 2070 future-climate scenarios. We then used Bayesian phylogenetic mixed models (BPMMs) to assess vulnerability for both groups with predictor variables for life history traits (body size and activity phase) and current distribution (elevation and latitude). We explored two scenarios: an unlimited dispersal scenario, where projections track climate, and a no-dispersal scenario, where projections are restricted to areas currently identified as suitable. Results: SDMs projected vulnerability to climate change for most modelled lizards. For species’ ranges projected to decline in climatically suitable areas, average decreases were between 42–45% for geckos and 33–91% for skinks, although area did increase or remain stable for a minority of species. For the no-dispersal scenario, the average decrease for geckos was 37–52% and for skinks was 33–52%. Our BPMMs showed phylogenetic signal in climate change vulnerability for both groups, with elevation increasing vulnerability for geckos, and body size reducing vulnerability for skinks. Main conclusions: NZ lizards showed variable vulnerability to climate change, with most species’ ranges predicted to decrease. For species whose suitable climatic space is projected to disappear from within their current range, managed relocation could be considered to establish populations in regions that will be suitable under future climates.

Supplementary Information is available for this paper.