Abstract

We explore the feasibility of limiting global warming to 1.5°C without overshoot and without the deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. For this purpose, we perform a sensitivity analysis of four generic emissions reduction measures to identify a lower bound on future CO2emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes. Final energy demand reductions and electrification of energy end uses as well as decarbonization of electricity and non-electric energy supply are all considered. We find the lower bound of cumulative fossil fuel and industry CO2emissions to be 570 GtCO2for the period 2016-2100, around 250 GtCO2lower than the lower end of available 1.5°C mitigation pathways generated with integrated assessment models. Estimates of 1.5°C-consistent CO2budgets are highly uncertain and range between 100 and 900 GtCO2from 2016 onwards. Based on our sensitivity analysis, limiting warming to 1.5°C will require CDR or terrestrial net carbon uptake if 1.5°C-consistent budgets are smaller than 650 GtCO2The earlier CDR is deployed, the more it neutralizes post-2020 emissions rather than producing net negative emissions. Nevertheless, if the 1.5°C budget is smaller than 550 GtCO2, temporary overshoot of the 1.5°C limit becomes unavoidable if CDR cannot be ramped up faster than to 4 GtCO2in 2040 and 10 GtCO2in 2050.This article is part of the theme issue 'The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

Original languageEnglish
Article number20160457
JournalPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Volume376
Issue number2119
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 13 May 2018

Keywords

  • 1.5°C goal
  • mitigation pathways
  • Integrated assessment
  • CO2 emissions
  • carbon budget
  • carbon dioxide removal

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C: a tale of turning around in no time?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this