TY - JOUR
T1 - Feasibility of peak temperature targets in light of institutional constraints
AU - Bertram, Christoph
AU - Brutschin, Elina
AU - Drouet, Laurent
AU - Luderer, Gunnar
AU - van Ruijven, Bas
AU - Aleluia Reis, Lara
AU - Baptista, Luiz Bernardo
AU - de Boer, Harmen Sytze
AU - Cui, Ryna
AU - Daioglou, Vassilis
AU - Fosse, Florian
AU - Fragkiadakis, Dimitris
AU - Fricko, Oliver
AU - Fujimori, Shinichiro
AU - Hultman, Nate
AU - Iyer, Gokul
AU - Keramidas, Kimon
AU - Krey, Volker
AU - Kriegler, Elmar
AU - Lamboll, Robin D.
AU - Mandaroux, Rahel
AU - Rochedo, Pedro
AU - Rogelj, Joeri
AU - Schaeffer, Roberto
AU - Silva, Diego
AU - Tagomori, Isabela
AU - van Vuuren, Detlef
AU - Vrontisi, Zoi
AU - Riahi, Keywan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024. corrected publication 2024.
PY - 2024/9
Y1 - 2024/9
N2 - Despite faster-than-expected progress in clean energy technology deployment, global annual CO2 emissions have increased from 2020 to 2023. The feasibility of limiting warming to 1.5 °C is therefore questioned. Here we present a model intercomparison study that accounts for emissions trends until 2023 and compares cost-effective scenarios to alternative scenarios with institutional, geophysical and technological feasibility constraints and enablers informed by previous literature. Our results show that the most ambitious mitigation trajectories with updated climate information still manage to limit peak warming to below 1.6 °C (‘low overshoot’) with around 50% likelihood. However, feasibility constraints, especially in the institutional dimension, decrease this maximum likelihood considerably to 5–45%. Accelerated energy demand transformation can reduce costs for staying below 2 °C but have only a limited impact on further increasing the likelihood of limiting warming to 1.6 °C. Our study helps to establish a new benchmark of mitigation scenarios that goes beyond the dominant cost-effective scenario design.
AB - Despite faster-than-expected progress in clean energy technology deployment, global annual CO2 emissions have increased from 2020 to 2023. The feasibility of limiting warming to 1.5 °C is therefore questioned. Here we present a model intercomparison study that accounts for emissions trends until 2023 and compares cost-effective scenarios to alternative scenarios with institutional, geophysical and technological feasibility constraints and enablers informed by previous literature. Our results show that the most ambitious mitigation trajectories with updated climate information still manage to limit peak warming to below 1.6 °C (‘low overshoot’) with around 50% likelihood. However, feasibility constraints, especially in the institutional dimension, decrease this maximum likelihood considerably to 5–45%. Accelerated energy demand transformation can reduce costs for staying below 2 °C but have only a limited impact on further increasing the likelihood of limiting warming to 1.6 °C. Our study helps to establish a new benchmark of mitigation scenarios that goes beyond the dominant cost-effective scenario design.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85201020951&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41558-024-02073-4
DO - 10.1038/s41558-024-02073-4
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85201020951
SN - 1758-678X
VL - 14
SP - 954
EP - 960
JO - Nature Climate Change
JF - Nature Climate Change
IS - 9
ER -