Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °C (original) (raw)

• van Vuuren, D. et al. The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Climatic Change 109, 5–31 (2011).
  Article Google Scholar
• Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment Design. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2011).
  Article Google Scholar
• Warszawski, L. et al. The inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project (ISI–MIP): project framework. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3228–3232 (2014).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Meinshausen, M. et al. The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Climatic Change 109, 213–241 (2011).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Riahi, K. et al. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 153–168 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• O’Neill, B. et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Climatic Change 122, 387–400 (2014).
  Article Google Scholar
• van Vuuren, D. P. et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: scenario matrix architecture. Climatic Change 122, 373–386 (2014).
  Article Google Scholar
• O’Neill, B. C. et al. The roads ahead: narratives for shared socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 169–180 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• van Vuuren, D. P. et al. Energy, land-use and greenhouse gas emissions trajectories under a green growth paradigm. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 237–250 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Fricko, O. et al. The marker quantification of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2: a middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 251–267 (2017).
• Fujimori, S. et al. SSP3: AIM implementation of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 268–283 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Calvin, K. et al. The SSP4: a world of deepening inequality. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 284–296 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Kriegler, E. et al. Fossil-fueled development (SSP5): an energy and resource intensive scenario for the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 297–315 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Decision 1/CP.16 The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action Under the Convention (UNFCCC, 2010).
• Paris Agreement (UNFCCC, 2015).
• Emmerling, J. et al. The WITCH 2016 model — documentation and implementation of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. FEEM Working Paper 42.2016 (2016).
• O’Neill, B. C. et al. The scenario model intercomparison project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 3461–3482 (2016).
• Eyring, V. et al. Overview of the coupled model intercomparison project phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 1937–1958 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Jones, C. D. et al. C4MIP — the coupled climate–carbon cycle model intercomparison project: experimental protocol for CMIP6. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 2853–2880 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Lawrence, D. M. et al. The land use model intercomparison project (LUMIP) contribution to CMIP6: rationale and experimental design. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 2973–2998 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Kriegler, E. et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared climate policy assumptions. Climatic Change 122, 401–414 (2014).
  Article Google Scholar
• Schleussner, C.-F. et al. Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 827–835 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Knutti, R., Rogelj, J., Sedlacek, J. & Fischer, E. M. A scientific critique of the two-degree climate change target. Nat. Geosci. 9, 13–18 (2016).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Rogelj, J. et al. Differences between carbon budget estimates unravelled. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 245–252 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• IPCC Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Meyer L. A.) (IPCC, 2015).
• Clarke, L. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 413–510 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
• Rogelj, J. et al. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5°C. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 519–527 (2015).
• MacDougall, A. H., Zickfeld, K., Knutti, R. & Matthews, H. D. Sensitivity of carbon budgets to permafrost carbon feedbacks and non-CO2 forcings. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 125003 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• Schneider von Deimling, T. et al. Estimating the near-surface permafrost–carbon feedback on global warming. Biogeosciences 9, 649–665 (2012).
  Article Google Scholar
• Gernaat, D. E. H. J. et al. Understanding the contribution of non-carbon dioxide gases in deep mitigation scenarios. Glob. Environ. Change 33, 142–153 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• Popp, A. et al. in Land-use futures in the shared socio-economic pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 331–345 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Clarke, L. et al. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) Ch. 6, 413–510 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
• Popp, A., Lotze-Campen, H. & Bodirsky, B. Food consumption, diet shifts and associated non-CO2 greenhouse gases from agricultural production. Glob. Environ. Change 20, 451–462 (2010).
  Article Google Scholar
• Havlík, P. et al. Climate change mitigation through livestock system transitions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3709–3714 (2014).
  Article Google Scholar
• Bauer, N. et al. Shared Socio-Economic Pathways of the energy sector — quantifying the narratives. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 316–330 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Creutzig, F. et al. Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 7, 916–944 (2015).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Bonsch, M. et al. Trade-offs between land and water requirements for large-scale bioenergy production. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 8, 11–24 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Smith, P. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) Ch. 11, 811–922 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
• Smith, P. et al. Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 42–50 (2016).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Field, C. B. & Mach, K. J. Rightsizing carbon dioxide removal. Science 356, 706–707 (2017).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Smith, P. et al. How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals? Glob. Change Biol. 19, 2285–2302 (2013).
  Article Google Scholar
• Valin, H. et al. Agricultural productivity and greenhouse gas emissions: trade-offs or synergies between mitigation and food security? Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 035019 (2013).
  Article Google Scholar
• Rogelj, J. et al. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5 °C. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 519–527 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• Creutzig, F. et al. The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change. Nat. Energy 2, 17140 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Tavoni, M. & Tol, R. Counting only the hits? The risk of underestimating the costs of stringent climate policy. Climatic Change 100, 769–778 (2010).
  Article Google Scholar
• Riahi, K. et al. Locked into Copenhagen pledges — implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90, 8–23 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• Sanderson, B. M., O’Neill, B. C. & Tebaldi, C. What would it take to achieve the Paris temperature targets?. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 7133–7142 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Azar, C., Johansson, D. J. A. & Mattsson, N. Meeting global temperature targets—the role of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 034004 (2013).
  Article Google Scholar
• Su, X. et al. Emission pathways to achieve 2.0 °C and 1.5 °C climate targets. Earths Future 5, 592–604 (2017).
  Article Google Scholar
• Walsh, B. et al. Pathways for balancing CO2 emissions and sinks. Nat. Commun. 8, 14856 (2017).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Scott, V., Gilfillan, S., Markusson, N., Chalmers, H. & Haszeldine, R. S. Last chance for carbon capture and storage. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 105–111 2013).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Le Quéré, C. et al. Global Carbon Budget 2015. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 7, 349–396 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• IPCC Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (eds Field, C. B. et al.) 1–32 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
• Frieler, K. et al. Limiting global warming to 2 °C is unlikely to save most coral reefs. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 165–170 (2013).
  Article Google Scholar
• Schleussner, C. F. et al. Differential climate impacts for policy-relevant limits to global warming: the case of 1.5 °C and 2 °C. Earth Syst. Dynam. 7, 327–351 (2016).
  Article Google Scholar
• Moss, R. H. et al. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747–756 (2010).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Meinshausen, M., Raper, S. C. B. & Wigley, T. M. L. Emulating coupled atmosphere–ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6 — part 1: model description and calibration. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 1417–1456 (2011).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Claudia, T., Brian, O. N. & Jean-François, L. Sensitivity of regional climate to global temperature and forcing. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 074001 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• Hendriks C., Graus W. & Van Bergen F. Global Carbon Dioxide Storage Potential and Costs Report No. EEP-02001 (Ecofys, 2004).
• Kriegler, E. et al. Diagnostic indicators for integrated assessment models of climate policy. Technol. Forecast. Social. Change 90, 45–61 (2015).
  Article Google Scholar
• Decision 24/CP.19. Revision of the UNFCCC Reporting Guidelines on Annual Inventories for Parties included in Annex I to the Convention 1–54 (UNFCCC, 2013).
• IPCC Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (eds Solomon, S. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).
• Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458, 1158–1162 (2009).
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M. & Knutti, R. Global warming under old and new scenarios using IPCC climate sensitivity range estimates. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 248–253 (2012).
  Article Google Scholar
• Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Sedláček, J. & Knutti, R. Implications of potentially lower climate sensitivity on climate projections and policy. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 031003 (2014).
  Article Google Scholar
• IPCC Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 1–33 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).