Long-term reduction potential of non-CO2 greenhouse gases

By P. Lucas, D. P. Vuuren, J. Olivier, M. Elzen. 2007

157 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Environmental Engineering, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8ff3fb1755eb90341ff7d8d5996f005adc3b655b

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

In Environmental Engineering

Citations in the corpus

How can the EU climate targets be met? A combined analysis of technological and demand-side changes in food and agriculture (2016, background): “In studies that have included the reduction potential of specific mitigation technologies, this has often been done simplistically, with no explicit differentiation between mitigation potentials based on dietary developments (see e.g. Lucas et al., 2007; Stehfest et al., 2009).”
Non-CO2 greenhouse gases and climate change (2011, background): “(40% cuts in CH 4 , 10–15% cuts in N 2 O and ∼40% cuts in gases containing fluorine, relative to 2010 value”
The role of negative CO2 emissions for reaching 2 °C—insights from integrated assessment modelling (2013, background): “Also for several non-CO2 emission sources, it will be hard to reduce emissions to zero (Lucas et al. 2007; Van Vuuren et al. 2006).”
Trading more food: Implications for land use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the food system (2012, background): “A first positive effect might be improvements regarding lower emission technology induced by higher income and more international competitiveness (Lucas et al., 2007).”
The value of bioenergy in low stabilization scenarios: an assessment using REMIND-MAgPIE (2014, methodology): “They are exogenously prescribed to REMIND and can be reduced according to marginal abatement cost (MAC) functions (Lucas et al. 2007). The MAC function for CO2 abatement resulting from avoided deforestation was derived from MAgPIE by measuring the response of CO2 emissions to varying CO2 prices. We ”
Exploring SSP land-use dynamics using the IMAGE model: Regional and gridded scenarios of land-use change and land-based climate change mitigation (2018, unknown): “For example, crop productivity is modelled at the grid level and subsequently aggregated to the regional level for the exchange with the agricultural economy (MAGNET) and energy system (TIMER).”
The Copenhagen Accord: abatement costs and carbon prices resulting from the submissions (2011, methodology): “For non-CO2, the long-term abatement curves have been used derived from the EMF21 study (Weyant et al., 2006), but subject to some corrections as described by Lucas et al. (2007) (see also SI).”
Description of the REMIND Model (Version 1.6) (2015, unknown): “Unless coupled with MAgPIE, we use marginal abatement cost curves from Lucas et al. (2007) to derive economic abatement potentials.”
Pathways to achieve a set of ambitious global sustainability objectives by 2050: Explorations using the IMAGE integrated assessment model (2015, unknown): “The emission reductions assumed in the Challenge Scenarios would likely lead to an increase in global mean temperature of less than 2 °C (Van Vuuren et al., 2007).”
Climate benefits of changing diet (2009, methodology): “Marginal abatement cost curves for non-CO 2 gases (including agriculture) are based on the EMF-21 project (Weyant et al. 2006) and on the extensions proposed by Lucas et al. (2006).”
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.”
Technical potentials and costs for reducing global anthropogenic methane emissions in the 2050 timeframe –results from the GAINS model (2020, methodology): “TheGAINSv4model results add to a limited number of independently developed bottom-up estimates of technical abatement potentials and costs to reduce global CH4 emissions in the 2050 timeframe (Lucas et al 2007,Harmsen et al 2019).”
Comparing impacts of climate change and mitigation on global agriculture by 2050 (2018, background): “2007 no, only via MAGNET CH4 emissions from rice produc on methane emissions from rice produc on yes, MAC curve Lucas et al. 2007 yes, emission pricing can alter trade pa erns and investments in TC emission from irrigated rice, emission factor per ha yes/no yes emiss ion from i rrigated rice, emiss…”