Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T21:57:29.546Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

32 - Moving beyond concentrations: the challenge of limiting temperature change

from Part IV - Policy design and decisionmaking under uncertainty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2010

Richard G. Richels
Affiliation:
Electric Power Research Institute 2000 L Street NW, Suite 805 Washington, DC 20036, USA
Alan S. Manne
Affiliation:
Electric Power Research Institute 2000 L Street NW, Suite 805 Washington, DC 20036, USA
Tom M.L. Wigley
Affiliation:
National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder CO 80307–3000, USA
Michael E. Schlesinger
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Haroon S. Kheshgi
Affiliation:
ExxonMobil Research and Engineering
Joel Smith
Affiliation:
Stratus Consulting Ltd, Boulder
Francisco C. de la Chesnaye
Affiliation:
US Environmental Protection Agency
John M. Reilly
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Tom Wilson
Affiliation:
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto
Charles Kolstad
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) shifted the attention of the policy community from stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions to stabilizing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. While this represents a step forward, it does not go far enough. We find that, given the uncertainty in the climate system, focusing on atmospheric concentrations is likely to convey a false sense of precision. The causal chain between human activity and impacts is laden with uncertainty. From a benefit–cost perspective, it would be desirable to minimize the sum of mitigation costs and damages. Unfortunately, our ability to quantify and value impacts is limited. For the time being, we must rely on a surrogate. Focusing on temperature rather than on concentrations provides much more information on what constitutes an ample margin of safety. Concentrations mask too many uncertainties that are crucial for policymaking.

The climate debate is fraught with uncertainty. In order to better understand the link between human activities and impacts, we must first understand the causal chain between the two, i.e., the relationship between human activities, emissions, concentrations, radiative forcing, temperature, climate, and impacts. The focus of the UNFCCC is on atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. Although this represents a major step forward by advancing the debate beyond emissions, it does not go far enough. In this paper, we carry the analysis beyond atmospheric concentrations to temperature change.

Type
Chapter
Information
Human-Induced Climate Change
An Interdisciplinary Assessment
, pp. 387 - 402
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Caldeira, K., Jain, A. K. and Hoffert, M. I. (2003). Climate sensitivity uncertainty and the need for energy without CO2 emission. Science, 299, 2052–2054.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, L. and Weyant, J. (2002). Modeling Induced Technical Change: An Overview. Working Paper. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Conference of the Parties (1997). Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Report of the Conference of the Parties, Third Session, Kyoto, 1–10 December, FCCC/CP/1997/L.7/Add.1.
Edmonds, J. and Wise, M. (1999). Exploring a technology strategy for stabilizing atmospheric CO2. In International Environmental Agreements on Climate Change. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Forest, C. E., Stone, P. H., Sokolov, A. P., Allen, M. R. and Webster, M. (2002). Quantifying uncertainties in climate system properties with the use of recent climate observations. Science 295, 113–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffert, M. I., Caldeira, K., Benford, G.et al. (2002). Advanced technology paths to global climate stability: energy for a greenhouse planet. Science, 298, 981–987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
IPCC (1994). Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and an Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Emissions Scenarios. Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. Houghton, J. T., Filho, L. G. Meira, Bruce, J.et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
IPCC (1996). Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. Bruce, J. P., Lee, H., Haites, E. F.. et al. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
IPCC (2000). Emissions Scenarios: A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. Nakicenovic, N. and Swart, R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
IPCC (2001). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assesment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. Houghton, J. T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., et al. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manne, A. S. and Richels, R. G. (1994). The costs of stabilizing global CO2 emissions: a probabilistic analysis based on expert judgments. Energy Journal 15(1), 31–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manne, A. S. and Richels, R. G. (1995). The greenhouse debate: Economic efficiency, burden sharing and hedging strategies. The Energy Journal, 16(4), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manne, A. S. and Richels, R. G. (1997). On stabilizing CO2 concentrations: cost-effective emission reductions strategies. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 2(4), 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manne, A. S. and Richels, R. G. (2001). An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases. Nature 410, 675–677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moss, R. H. and Schneider, S. H. (2000). Uncertainties in the IPCC Third Assessment Report: Recommendations to lead authors for more consistent assessment and reporting. In Guidance Papers on the Cross Cutting Issues of the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC, ed. Pachauri, R., Tanaka, K. and Taniguchi, T.. Geneva: IPCC, pp. 33–51.
Nakićenović, N., Grubler, A. and McDonald, A. (1998). Global Energy Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reilly, J., Prinn, R., Harnisch, J.et al. (1999). Multigas assessment of the Kyoto Protocol. Nature 401, 549–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runci, P., Clarke, L. and Dooley, J. (2005). Energy R&D Investment in the Industrialized World: Historic and Future Directions. Working Paper PNNL-SA-47701. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Schmalensee, R. (1993). Comparing greenhouse gases for policy purposes. The Energy Journal, 14(1), 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, S. H. and Goulder, L. (1997). Achieving low-cost emission targets. Nature 389, 13–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford Energy Modeling Forum (EMF-21) (2005). Multi-gas Mitigation and Climate Control, January 31, 2005, Washington, DC. www.stanford.edu/group/EMF/
Wigley, T. M. L. and Raper, S. C. B. (1992). Implications for climate and sea level of revised IPCC emissions scenarios. Nature 357, 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wigley, T. M. L. and Raper, S. C. B. (2001). Interpretation of high projections for global-mean warming. Science 293, 451–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wigley, T. M. L. and Raper, S. C. B. (2002). Reasons for larger warming projections in the IPCC Third Assessment Report. Journal of Climate 15, 2945–2952.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wigley, T. M. L., Richels, R. and Edmonds, J. A. (1996). Economic and environmental choices in the stabilization of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Nature 379, 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×