Computer simulation provides 4k scenarios for a climate turnaround
phys.org
phys.org
> A large computer simulation dealing with this issue is now providing some answers. It combines climate models with economic models and 1,200 technologies for supplying and using energy, as well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As part of the study, a supercomputer calculated 4,000 scenarios for 15 regions of the world, taking into account possible developments in ten-year steps up to the year 2100.
> [...] "We considered 18 uncertainty factors, including population and economic growth, climate sensitivity, resource potential, the impact of changes in agriculture and forestry, the cost of energy technologies and the decoupling of energy demand from economic development," explains James Glynn of Columbia University.
> Abstract: Unprecedented investments in clean energy technology are required for a net-zero carbon energy system before temperatures breach the Paris Agreement goals. By performing a Monte-Carlo Analysis with the detailed ETSAPTIAM Integrated Assessment Model and by generating 4000 scenarios of the world’s energy system, climate and economy, we find that the uncertainty surrounding technology costs, resource potentials, climate sensitivity and the level of decoupling between energy demands and economic growth influence the efficiency of climate policies and accentuate investment risks in clean energy technologies. Contrary to other studies relying on exploring the uncertainty space via model intercomparison, we find that the CO2 emissions and CO2 prices vary convexly and nonlinearly with the discount rate and climate sensitivity over time. Accounting for this uncertainty is important for designing climate policies and carbon prices to accelerate the transition. In 70% of the scenarios, a 1.5 ◦C temperature overshoot was within this decade, calling for immediate policy action. Delaying this action by ten years may result in 2 ◦C mitigation costs being similar to those required to reach the 1.5 ◦C target if started today, with an immediate peak in emissions, a larger uncertainty in the medium-term horizon and a higher effort for net-zero emissions.
> Highlights:
> • Probabilistic assessment of 4000 decarbonisation pathways with the ETSAP-TIAM.
> • Delaying the action for the 2 °C target costs similar to acting now for the 1.5 °C.
> • Demand electrification is higher in 2050 than today in all model runs.
> • Hydrogen is used in 99% of the model runs to meet the 1.5 °C target.
What about non-CO2 emissions and prices/fines/fees; like Methane (natural gas) which is like 80x worse than CO2 for climate?