Duality in climate science (original) (raw)

• Commentary
• Published: 12 October 2015

Nature Geoscience volume 8, pages 898–900 (2015) Cite this article

• 9571 Accesses
• 207 Citations
• 321 Altmetric
• Metrics details

Subjects

Delivery of palatable 2 °C mitigation scenarios depends on speculative negative emissions or changing the past. Scientists must make their assumptions transparent and defensible, however politically uncomfortable the conclusions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

• Human development, greenhouse gas emissions and sub-national mitigation burdens: a Brazilian perspective

  • Geanderson Ambrósio
  • , Dênis Antônio Da Cunha
  • … Angelo Costa Gurgel
    Discover Sustainability Open Access 09 August 2021

• How the meanings of ‘home’ influence energy-consuming practices in domestic buildings

  • Xinfang Wang
  • , Dana Abi Ghanem
  • … Carly McLachlan
    Energy Efficiency Open Access 05 December 2020

• Mapping diverse visions of energy transitions: co-producing sociotechnical imaginaries

  • Noel Longhurst
  • & Jason Chilvers
    Sustainability Science Open Access 08 June 2019

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$259.00 per year

only $21.58 per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

• Log in
• Learn about institutional subscriptions
• Read our FAQs
• Contact customer support

References

1. Our Common Future under Climate Change—Outcome Statement (CFCC15 Scientific Committee, 2015); http://go.nature.com/WCKRsl
2. Concluding Instalment of the Fifth Assessment Report IPCC Press Release (2 November 2014); http://go.nature.com/Xgwz7E
3. The Emissions Gap Report 2014 (United Nations Environment Programme, 2014).
4. Fuss, S. et al. Nature 4, 850–853 (2014).
   Google Scholar
5. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Pachauri, R. K. et al.) (IPCC, 2014).
6. IPCC Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
7. Global Carbon Atlas Emissions The Global Carbon Project; http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/?q=en/emissions
8. Anderson, K. et al. Energy Policy 36, 3714–3722 (2008).
   Article Google Scholar
9. Anderson, K. & Bows, A. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 20–44 (2011).
   Article Google Scholar
10. Frame, D. et al. Nature Geosci. 7, 692–693 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
11. Cement Technology Road Map 2009 (International Energy Agency, 2009); http://go.nature.com/Ao4ZcH
12. Energy Technology Perspectives 2014 (International Energy Agency, 2014); http://go.nature.com/CLk8Tf
13. Hammond, G. et al. Energy Policy 52, 103–116 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank G. Peters and R. Andrew from CICERO, Oslo, for guidance with the IPCC scenario database and global cement emissions, respectively; K. West from the IEA, Paris, for information related to IEA cement scenarios; and M. Sharmina and J. Kuriakose for deforestation scenarios, and A. Bows-Larkin and J. Broderick for carbon budgets, from the Tyndall Centre, Univ. Manchester.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Kevin Anderson is at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Manchester, Pariser Building, Sackville Street, Manchester M13 9PL, UK,
   Kevin Anderson

Corresponding author

Correspondence toKevin Anderson.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anderson, K. Duality in climate science.Nature Geosci 8, 898–900 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2559

Download citation

• Published: 12 October 2015
• Issue date: December 2015
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2559

This article is cited by