2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to below 2 °C

By Joeri Rogelj, David McCollum, Brian C. O'Neill, Keywan Riahi. 2013

198 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Environmental Engineering, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bca9753232c4159b5539889ee656cf56e241c7a4

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

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

Citations in the corpus

Climate Smart Agriculture? Assessing the Adaptation Implications in Zambia (2015, background): “It is widely accepted that our ability to contain the pace of climate change within the 2°C threshold in the long run is now limited and we will have to deal with the consequences of this at various levels (Rogelj et al., 2011, 2013; IPCC, 2014).”
Zero emission targets as long-term global goals for climate protection (2015, methodology): “…Systems Analysis and available at https:// secure.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/ene/AR5DB/), complemented with scenarios from three studies (Luderer et al 2013, Rogelj et al 2013a, 2013b) that additionally explored scenarios that return warming to below 1.5 °C in 2100, as assessed in Rogelj et al (2015).”
The legacy of our CO2 emissions: a clash of scientific facts, politics and ethics (2015, background): “…and societal transformation, and increases the risk of failing the climate target if assumptions in technology or cost turn out to be incorrect or inacceptable (Rogelj et al. 2013a): Burden sharing approaches provide ways to distribute emission allowances over time, and over countries and regions.”
Climate change and aquaculture: considering adaptation potential (2019, background): “The anticipated increase in emissions is likely to be inconsistent with the international goal of limiting the rise in global mean surface tempera - ture to no more than 2°C above preindustrial levels (Rogelj et al. 2013, R. Boyd et al. 2015).”
The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview (2017, background): “As a matter of fact, some studies indicate that under certain conditions targets as low as 2.0 W/m 2 might still be attainable during this century (Luderer et al., 2013; Rogelj et al., 2015, 2013a, 2013b).”
Economic mitigation challenges: how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets (2013, background): “Only a few studies have analyzed the combined effects of delayed action and technology failure (Rogelj et al 2013a, 2013b, van Vliet et al 2012).”
Investigating afforestation and bioenergy CCS as climate change mitigation strategies (2014, background): “The resulting GHG tax with prices of 102 $/tCO2eq in 2045 and 1165 $/tCO2eq in 2095 is close to GHG price trajectories required to limit global average temperature increase to 2 °C above preindustrial levels with a probability of 50% (Rogelj et al 2013b).”
Expert assessment concludes negative emissions scenarios may not deliver (2016, background): “…with 2 °C without BECCS (e.g. Luderer et al 2013), the modelling widely suggests that keeping climate change well below two degrees may not be feasible without BECCS, even with ambitious emission reductions in all sectors (Rogelj et al 2013, van Vuuren et al 2013, Krey et al 2014, Anderson 2015b).”
Negative emissions—Part 2: Costs, potentials and side effects (2018, methodology): “For IPCC AR5, evidence from only two models was available (Luderer et al 2013, Rogelj et al 2015a, 2013a, 2013b).”