recent development in scenario analysis

1

Recent development in scenario analysis

Detlef van Vuuren

RCPsClimateSSPs

Scenarios as mean to link communities

Drivers (population

, GDP)

Energy use,

Land useEmissions Conc./

forcingClimate/

Environmental change

ImpactExposed population, ability to adapt

http://www.google.nl/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.radio.gov.pk%2Finside%2F17&ei=EUbcVMvlBYSvPOuSgagM&bvm=bv.85761416,d.ZWU&psig=AFQjCNFXOJ5LL5eqPEaaYoEqpkfmFXfzRg&ust=1423808319069985

http://www.google.nl/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.radio.gov.pk%2Finside%2F17&ei=EUbcVMvlBYSvPOuSgagM&bvm=bv.85761416,d.ZWU&psig=AFQjCNFXOJ5LL5eqPEaaYoEqpkfmFXfzRg&ust=1423808319069985

Forc

ing

leve

l (W

/m2)

8.5

6.0

4.5

2.6

SSP1 SSP2 SSP3Shared Socio-economic Pathways

SSP4 SSP5RCPsClimateSSPs

NarrativesQuantitative

drivers

IAM reference scenario(e.g., SSP3-Ref)

IAM SSP-RCP scenario(e.g., SSP3-4.5)

The Scenario Matrix Architecture

Socioeconomicinformation

Climateinformation

SSP1 SSP2 SSP3Shared Socio-economic Pathways

SSP4 SSP5

Challenge to adaptation

Cha

lleng

e to

miti

gatio

nThe Scenario Matrix Architecture


Cha

lleng

e to

miti

gatio

n

SSP1:Sustainability

SSP2:Middle of the Road

SSP3: Regional rivalry

SSP4: Inequality

SSP5: Fossil fuel-ed development


http://www.google.nl/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsustainability.rpi.edu%2F&ei=5lC0VKq1K9HjaLe1goAD&bvm=bv.83339334,d.d2s&psig=AFQjCNFyjB5-CZcoZWykueuXm0Lj6KxwEg&ust=1421189725339011



Cha

lleng

e to

miti

gatio

n

SSP1:Sustainability Global cooperation Rapid technology dev. Strong env. policy Low population growth Low inequity Focus on renewables and efficiency Dietary shifts Forest protection


SSP3: Regional rivalry

SSP4: Inequality



UN world




Cha

lleng

e to

miti

gatio

n



SSP3: Regional rivalry• Competition among regions• Low technology development• Environment and social goals

not a priority• Focus on domestic resources• High population growth• Slow economic growth dev.

countries

SSP4: Inequality



UN world

Clash of civilisations




Cha

lleng

e to

miti

gatio

n





countries

SSP4: Inequality

SSP5: Fossil fuel-eddevelopment• Rapid growth, free trade• High technology

development, • Environment and social

goals not a priority: adaptive, technology-fix

• Focus on economic growth


UN world


Marketsfirst




Cha

lleng

e to

miti

gatio

n





countries

SSP4: Inequality• Inequality across and

within regions• Low technology

development• Environment priority for

those that can afford• Limited trade

SSP5: Fossil fuel-eddevelopment• Rapid growth, free trade• High technology

development, • Environment and social

goals not a priority: adaptive, technology-fix

• Focus on economic growth


UN world


Marketsfirst

Have’s and have not’s



Narratives

Model tables

Energy

Land-use

Overview

Air pollution

SSP process

O’Neill et al

GDP

POP

Urbanization

Dellink, Crespo, Leimbach et al.

KC & Lutz

Jiang & O’Neill

AIM

/CG

E, G

CAM

, IM

AG

E, M

ESSA

GE-

GLO

BIO

M,

REM

IND

-M

AG

PIE,

WIT

CH

-GLO

BIO

M

SPAs

IAM-basedSSPs

Mitigationscenarios

Riahi et al

Bauer et al

Popp et al

Rao et al

Primary energy supplyTradePower systemCommodity prices

Natural area, land coverYields, managementFertiliserAgriculture land

Emissions of air pollutantsAerosol concentrations[deposition, ozone]

Greenhouse gas emissionsClimate change

2010 2040 2070 2100

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

SSP5 REMIND-MAGPIE

2010 2040 2070 2100

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

SSP4 GCAM4

SSP5 REMIND MAGPIE

2010 2040 2070 2100

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

SSP3 AIM/CGE

SSP4 GCAM4

2010 2040 2070 2100

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

SSP2 MESSAGE-GLOBIOM

2010 2040 2070 2100

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

SSP1 IMAGE

Coal

Oil/gasOther

19 september 201611

Bauer et al.

Baseline

4.5 W/2

2.6 W/2

Primary energy use (EJ)

Coal intensiveSlow changesTransition

High energydemand

Low energydemand

2oC:600 EJ,Little BECCS

2oC:1000 EJ,Strong BECCS

19 september 201612

Power sector

19 september 201613

Full decarbonisation of the electricity sector in 2050-2060

Diverse set of power sector scenarios

14

CO2 emissions

Climate policy

19 september 201615

Scenario matrix architecture formsscenario tool kit

• Offers storylines and quantitative information for‘reference scenarios’ for:• Further elaboration in impact research (consistent

set of socio-economic data)• Basis for new climate research (e.g. treatment of

land-use, aerosols)• Offers opportunity to elaborate scenarios in

regional/sectoral studies• Provides opportunity for mitigation ánd

impact/adaption research in one structure

SSP3 SSP2 SSP1 SSP3 SSP2 SSP1MitigationImpacts/adaptation

Feasibility and costs of targets greatly depend on the SSP

(Mitigation costs as % of GDP)

Forc

ing

leve

l (W

/m2) 8.5

6.0

4.5

2.6

0.01(0.01-0.03)

0.27(0.01-0.27)

0.15(0.08-0.15)

0.62(0.23-1.00)

0.54(0.44-0.54)

1.88(0.50-1.88)

1.33(1.33-3.47)

0.02(0.02-0.02)

0.09(0.03-0.28)

0.68(0.46-0.68)

3.09(3.09-4.62)

0.18(0.1-0.18)

SSP1 SSP4 SSP2 SSP3 SSP5

0.09(0.07-0.12)

0.93(0.08-0.93)

0.43(0.43-0.82)

2.09(0.87-2.79)

1.40(1.40-1.41)3.4

0.04(0.01-0.04)

1

<0.1

2

3

>5

Mitigation costs are given as area under the MAC and percent of total GDP (2010-2100)

COP21 – agreement on long-term climate objectives

What do these long-term objectives imply for climate policy (reduction targets)

19 september 201617

The universal agreement’s main aim is to keep a global temperature

rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius and to drive efforts to limit the temperature increase

even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels

Risks of climate change

Paris agreement: … with the aim to keep temperature rise well below 2 oC (and push for 1.5 oC)

Relationship CO2 / temperature

Cumulative CO2 emissiesfrom 1870

0 2000 4000 6000 80000

1

2

3

4

5

Source: IPCC, 2013/2014

1000 GtCO2

19 september 201619

1000 GtCO2 is very tight.TimingContribution non-CO2 gassesRegional contribution

All factors that play a role in UNFCCC negotiations

Negative emissions: Bio-energy + CCS / reforestation

1.5oC: 400 GtCO2negative emissionsfor sure

19 september 201620

Peak in 2020-2030Steep

emissions reduction

Carbon neutrality

Zero or negative emissions

2oC scenarios have 4 distinct phases

19 september 201621

Delay leads to more rapid decarbonisation after 2030 – and even more stringent reductions

Not strengthening the INDCs (and EU’s 40% goal) make achieving the 2oC target without negative emissions almost unthinkable.

19 september 201622

-20 Mton

-50 Mton

Netherlands’ climate policy would need to increase level of ambition to be consistent with 2oC

PossibleNL

budget (2oC)

• Prepare in theshort-term foracceleration (focus on LT transition)

• International programme on CCS

6 step decarbonisation strategy

19 september 201623

1. Increase energy efficiency

2. Decarbonize the electricity asap

3. Electrification where feasible

4. Negative emissions

6. Mitigate non-CO2; halt deforestation; reforest

5. Difficult bit: decarbonize the remainder Biofuels, CCS, H2

AlternativesLifestyle change

19 september 201624

Priorities for research agenda Join in SSP-based research; elaborate alternative scenarios

(‘fill the matrices’) Research feasability of the “default” mitigation strategy –

model analysis – but especially combination with transition sciences How to achieve enough momentum for change

1.5oC scenarios Comparison to 2oC (how much negative emissions are needed)

Look into alternative pathways Map out infrastructure and investment requirements for

mitigation strategies Connections between mitigation strategies and SDGs

(increase support; trade-off LUC)

19 september 201625

Thank you for your attention

Twitter: @detlefvanvuuren

Email: [email protected]

Skype: detlef.van.vuuren

19 september 201626

mailto:[email protected]

recent development in scenario analysis

Documents