• Energy Research
• FR close

AbstractStudies of global environmental change make extensive use of scenarios to explore how the future can evolve under a consistent set of assumptions. The recently developed Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) create a framework for the study of climate-related scenario outcomes. Their five narratives span a wide range of worlds that vary in their challenges for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Here we provide background on the quantification that has been selected to serve as the reference, or ‘marker’, implementation for SSP2. The SSP2 narrative describes a middle-of-the-road development in the mitigation and adaptation challenges space. We explain how the narrative has been translated into quantitative assumptions in the IIASA Integrated Assessment Modelling Framework. We show that our SSP2 marker implementation occupies a central position for key metrics along the mitigation and adaptation challenge dimensions. For many dimensions the SSP2 marker implementation also reflects an extension of the historical experience, particularly in terms of carbon and energy intensity improvements in its baseline. This leads to a steady emissions increase over the 21st century, with projected end-of-century warming nearing 4°C relative to preindustrial levels. On the other hand, SSP2 also shows that global-mean temperature increase can be limited to below 2°C, pending stringent climate policies throughout the world. The added value of the SSP2 marker implementation for the wider scientific community is that it can serve as a starting point to further explore integrated solutions for achieving multiple societal objectives in light of the climate adaptation and mitigation challenges that society could face over the 21st century.

AbstractForests of the European Union (EU) have been intensively managed for decades, and they have formed a significant sink for carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere over the past 50 years. The reasons for this behavior are multiple, among them are: forest aging, area expansion, increasing plant productivity due to environmental changes of many kinds, and, most importantly, the growth rates of European forest having been higher than harvest rates. EU countries have agreed to reduce total emissions of GHG by 20% in 2020 compared to 1990, excluding the forest sink.A relevant question for climate policy is: how long will the current sink of EU forests be maintained in the near future? And could it be affected by other mitigation measures such as bioenergy? In this article we assess tradeoffs of bioenergy use and carbon sequestration at large scale and describe results of the comparison of two advanced forest management models that are used to project CO2 emissions and removals from EU forests until 2030. EFISCEN, a detailed statistical matrix model and G4M, a geographically explicit economic forestry model, use scenarios of future harvest rates and forest growth information to estimate the future carbon balance of forest biomass. Two scenarios were assessed: the EU baseline scenario and the EU reference scenario (including additional bioenergy and climate policies).Our projections suggest a significant decline of the sink until 2030 in the baseline scenario of about 25–40% (or 65–125 Mt CO2) compared to the models’ 2010 estimate. Including additional bioenergy targets of EU member states has an effect on the development of this sink, which is not accounted in the EU emission reduction target. A sensitivity analysis was performed on the role of future wood demand and proved the importance of this driver for the future sink development.

To keep global warming possibly below 1.5 °C and mitigate adverse effects of climate change, agriculture, like all other sectors, will have to contribute to efforts in achieving net negative emissions by the end of the century. Cost-efficient distribution of mitigation across regions and economic sectors is typically calculated using a global uniform carbon price in climate stabilization scenarios. However, in reality such a carbon price would substantially affect food availability. Here, we assess the implications of climate change mitigation in the land use sector for agricultural production and food security using an integrated partial equilibrium modelling framework and explore ways of relaxing the competition between mitigation in agriculture and food availability. Using a scenario that limits global warming cost-efficiently across sectors to 1.5 °C, results indicate global food calorie losses ranging from 110–285 kcal per capita per day in 2050 depending on the applied demand elasticities. This could translate into a rise in undernourishment of 80–300 million people in 2050. Less ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation in the land use sector reduces the associated food security impact significantly, however the 1.5 °C target would not be achieved without additional reductions outside the land use sector. Efficiency of GHG mitigation will also depend on the level of participation globally. Our results show that if non-Annex-I countries decide not to contribute to mitigation action while other parties pursue their mitigation efforts to reach the global climate target, food security impacts in these non-Annex-I countries will be higher than if they participate in a global agreement, as inefficient mitigation increases agricultural production costs and therefore food prices. Land-rich countries with a high proportion of emissions from land use change, such as Brazil, could reduce emissions with only a marginal effect on food availability. In contrast, agricultural mitigation in high population (density) countries, such as China and India, would lead to substantial food calorie loss without a major contribution to global GHG mitigation. Increasing soil carbon sequestration on agricultural land would allow reducing the implied calorie loss by 65% when sticking to the initially estimated land use mitigation requirements, thereby limiting the impact on undernourishment to 20–75 million people, and storing significant amounts of carbon in soils.

Abstract Preservation of biodiversity and reduction of deforestation are considered as key elements when addressing an increased use of bioenergy in the future. This paper presents different combinations of scenarios for global feedstock supply for the production of bioenergy under specified social and environmental safeguard provisions. The objectives of this study were threefold: a) to present a global perspective using an integrated modeling approach; b) to frame the boundaries for lower scale assessments; and c) to identify potential trade-offs to be considered in future research. The aggregate results, achieved through the application of an integrated global modeling cluster, indicate that under a high global demand for bioenergy by mid-century, biomass will to a large extent be sourced from the conversion of unmanaged forest into managed forest, from new fast-growing short-rotation plantations, intensification, and optimization of land use. Depending on the underlying scenario, zero net deforestation by 2020 could be reached and maintained with only a minor conversion of managed forests into other land cover types. Results further indicate that with rising populations and projected consumption levels, there will not be enough land to simultaneously conserve natural areas completely, halt forest loss, and switch to 100% renewable energy. Especially in the tropical regions of the southern hemisphere, it will be important to achieve a controlled conversion from unmanaged to sustainably managed forest as well as increased protection of areas for ecosystems services such as biodiversity. The study concludes with the recommendation to focus on targeted regional policy design and its implementation based on integrated global assessment modeling.