An integrated approach to energy sustainability

By David McCollum, Volker Krey, Keywan Riahi. 2011

127 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Energy, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5d0f88e8fed5400efb4b7c0a4c3660beb631d1a9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Keywan Riahi
2. Volker Krey
3. Gunnar Luderer
4. D. P. Vuuren
5. D. V. van Vuuren
6. Elmar Kriegler
7. John P. Weyant
8. David McCollum

In General Energy

1. Keywan Riahi
2. J. Jewell
3. D. P. Vuuren
4. D. V. van Vuuren

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

1. Keywan Riahi
2. Volker Krey
3. Gunnar Luderer
4. David McCollum
5. J. Jewell
6. Elmar Kriegler
7. Ottmar Edenhofer
8. Arnulf Grubler

Citations in the corpus

• The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies (2014, background): “Such measures (partially) describe the direct costs of mitigation, but neither include climate benefits nor as adverse side effects and co-benefits of climate policy (McCollum et al. 2011; Riahi et al. 2012).”
• A multi-model assessment of food security implications of climate change mitigation (2019, unknown): “47 48 Acknowledgement; 49 SFu, TH, and KT are supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP16K18177, JSPS 50 Overseas Research Fellowships, and the Environment Research and Technology 51 Development Fund (2-1702) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of 52 Japan.”
• Integrating Global Climate Change Mitigation Goals with Other Sustainability Objectives: A Synthesis (2015, unknown): “The GEA scenarios, as pictured in McCollum et al. (119), focus on the same subset of energy policy objectives but instead use a set of normative policy targets (implicitly assuming varying stringencies and forms (i.e., a CEA, see Figure 4 and the table below to explain the three stringency levels…”
• Analysing interactions among Sustainable Development Goals with Integrated Assessment Models (2019, methodology): “IAMs have already been used systematically to study interactions between climate change mitigation and other societal priorities [20e23], including air pollution, health [24,25], energy [26,27], food [28] and water security, and biodiversity.”
• A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared climate policy assumptions (2014, background): “A clear separation of policies with respect to the climate and non-climate objectives in the SSPs and SPAs will make the framework also useful for the assessment of potential synergies and tradeoff between climate and other non-climate policies (McCollum et al. 2011).”
• Climate policies can help resolve energy security and air pollution challenges (2013, background): “This paper elaborates upon and substantiates the assertions made in McCollum et al. (2011), explaining how the common practice of narrowly focusing on singular energy policy issues ignores potentially enormous synergies, quite often leading to the implementation of shortsighted solutions that may…”
• Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models (2015, background): “These include (1) the extent and date of implementation of climate and energy policies, (2) the stringency of the regional emission pledges, (3) the long-term climate objective, and (4) the way the climate policy burden is shared across regions (see Supplementary Table S2 for the scenario descriptio”
• Fossil resource and energy security dynamics in conventional and carbon-constrained worlds (2014, background): “…near-term synergies for energy security derives from both energy efficiency improvements (beyond those foreseen in the baseline) and shifts to non-fossil based energy forms (e.g., renewables, which in most cases are inherently sovereign and thus secure) (McCollum et al. 2011; Riahi et al. 2012).”
• Energy poverty alleviation and climate change mitigation: is there a trade off? (2013, background): “…– which plays an active role in the assessment of climate mitigation scenarios in the IPCC – has recently made steps forward towards an integrated modeling approach to energy sustainability (McCollum et al., 2011), but has dealt only to a limited extent with energy poverty (Ekholm et al., 2010).”
• Feasible mitigation actions in developing countries (2014, background): “increased energy security) in order to provide a 368 full picture.(87) In any case, reducing coal consumption can be expected to have an important part to 369”