Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SR15/Chapter-4
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== 4.2.2.1 Mitigation: historical rates of change and state of decoupling ==== <div id="section-4-2-2-1-block-1"></div> Realizing 1.5°C-consistent pathways would require rapid and systemic changes on unprecedented scales (see Chapter 2 and Section 4.2.1). This section examines whether the needed rates of change have historical precedents and are underway. Some studies conduct a de-facto validation of IAM projections. For CO <sub>2</sub> emission intensity over 1990–2010, this resulted in the IAMs projecting declining emission intensities while actual observations showed an increase. For individual technologies (in particular solar energy), IAM projections have been conservative regarding deployment rates and cost reductions (Creutzig et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r36|36]]</sup> , suggesting that IAMs do not always impute actual rates of technological change resulting from influence of shocks, broader changes and mutually reinforcing factors in society and politics (Geels and Schot, 2007; Daron et al., 2015; Sovacool, 2016; Battiston et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r37|37]]</sup> . Other studies extrapolate historical trends into the future (Höök et al., 2011; Fouquet, 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r38|38]]</sup> , or contrast the rates of change associated with specific temperature limits in IAMs (such as those in Chapter 2) with historical trends to investigate plausibility of emission pathways and associated temperature limits (Wilson et al., 2013; Gambhir et al., 2017; Napp et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r39|39]]</sup> . When metrics are normalized to gross domestic product (GDP; as opposed to other normalization metrics such as primary energy), low-emission technology deployment rates used by IAMs over the course of the coming century are shown to be broadly consistent with past trends, but rates of change in emission intensity are typically overestimated (Wilson et al., 2013; Loftus et al., 2014; van Sluisveld et al., 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r40|40]]</sup> . This bias is consistent with the findings from the ‘validation’ studies cited above, suggesting that IAMs may under-report the potential for supply-side technological change assumed in 1.5°-consistent pathways, but may be more optimistic about the systemic ability to realize incremental changes in reduction of emission intensity as a consequence of favourable energy efficiency payback times (Wilson et al., 2013) <sup>[[#fn:r41|41]]</sup> . This finding suggests that barriers and enablers other than costs and climate limits play a role in technological change, as also found in the innovation literature (Hekkert et al., 2007; Bergek et al., 2008; Geels et al., 2016b) <sup>[[#fn:r42|42]]</sup> . One barrier to a greater rate of change in energy systems is that economic growth in the past has been coupled to the use of fossil fuels. Disruptive innovation and socio-technical changes could enable the decoupling of economic growth from a range of environmental drivers, including the consumption of fossil fuels, as represented by 1.5°C-consistent pathways (UNEP, 2014; Newman, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r43|43]]</sup> . This may be relative decoupling due to rebound effects that see financial savings generated by renewable energy used in the consumption of new products and services (Jackson and Senker, 2011; Gillingham et al., 2013) <sup>[[#fn:r44|44]]</sup> , but in 2015 and 2016 total global GHG emissions have decoupled absolutely from economic growth (IEA, 2017g; Peters et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r45|45]]</sup> . A longer data trend would be needed before stable decoupling can be established. The observed decoupling in 2015 and 2016 was driven by absolute declines in both coal and oil use since the early 2000s in Europe, in the past seven years in the United States and Australia, and more recently in China (Newman, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r46|46]]</sup> . In 2017, decoupling in China reversed by 2% due to a drought and subsequent replacement of hydropower with coal-fired power (Tollefson, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r47|47]]</sup> , but this reversal is expected to be temporary (IEA, 2017c) <sup>[[#fn:r48|48]]</sup> . Oil consumption in China is still rising slowly, but absolute decoupling is ongoing in megacities like Beijing (Gao and Newman, 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r49|49]]</sup> (see Box 4.9). <div id="section-4-2-2-2"></div> <span id="transformational-adaptation"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SR15/Chapter-4
(section)
Add languages
Add topic