Global energy sector emission reductions and bioenergy use: overview of the bioenergy demand phase of the EMF-33 model comparison

By Nico Bauer, S. Rose, Shinichiro Fujimori, D. P. Vuuren, John P. Weyant, Marshall Wise, Yiyun Cui, V. Daioglou, M. Gidden, Etsushi Kato and 13 more. Climatic Change, 2018

171 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/e7bad01170739d984b209213640bbf61f46114b0

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. Pei-Hao Li
2. N. Strachan
3. I. Butnar
4. Pete Smith
5. D. V. van Vuuren
6. André P. C. Faaij
7. A. Gambhir
8. S. Kelly

In Environmental Engineering

1. Pete Smith
2. N. Strachan
3. D. V. van Vuuren
4. André P. C. Faaij

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

1. Pei-Hao Li
2. N. Strachan
3. I. Butnar
4. Pete Smith
5. D. V. van Vuuren
6. André P. C. Faaij
7. A. Gambhir
8. S. Kelly

Citations in the corpus

• Integrated assessment of biomass supply and demand in climate change mitigation scenarios (2019, background): “Other IAM projections have shown that when available, this technology plays a very important role at decarbonizing the energy system and contributing to negative emissions (Bauer et al., 2018).”
• A Review of Criticisms of Integrated Assessment Models and Proposed Approaches to Address These, through the Lens of BECCS (2019, background): “Over-reliance on negative emissions technologies Unrealistically high levels of (largely untested) negative emissions technologies such as BECCS to reach climate targets Studies limiting BECCS to explore its importance in low-carbon pathways [39]”