JP

We elucidate the differences between absolute and intensity-based limits of CO2 emission when there is uncertainty about the future. We demonstrate that the two limits are identical under certainty, and rigorously establish their relative attractiveness under two criteria: preservation of expectations-the minimization of the difference between the actual level and the initial expectation of abatement associated with a one-shot emission target, and temporal stability-the minimization of the variance of abatement due to fluctuations in emissions and GDP over time. Empirical tests of these theoretical propositions indicate that intensity caps are preferable for a broad range of emission reduction commitments. This finding is robust for developing countries, but is more equivocal for developed economies.

Cap-and-trade systems limit emissions to some pre-specified absolute quantity. Intensity-based limits, that restrict emissions to some pre-specified rate relative to input or output, are much more widely used in environmental regulation and have gained attention recently within the context of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading. In this paper we provide a non-technical introduction to the differences between these two forms of emission limits. Our aim is not to advocate either form, but to elucidate the properties of each in a world where future emissions and GDP are not known with certainty. We argue that the two forms have identical effects in a world where future emissions and economic output (i.e., GDP) are known with certainty, and show that outcomes for marginal costs, abatement, emissions and welfare diverge only because of the variance of actual future GDP relative to its forecast expectation.

Climate change is perhaps the central challenge that faces humanity. If the concept of green growth is to be anything more than a mere rebranding of the concept of sustainability, then it must elucidate the relationship between economic activity and pollution and provide a more detailed economic account of it. The articles in this Special Issue focus on ways in which GHG emissions may be reduced while satisfying the increasing demand for energy: from global, technological or economic solutions, to sub-national, financial or regulatory ones. Although the wide disparity in income between the least and most wealthy makes it difficult to reach a consensus on the best way to achieve a low-carbon society, the scale and potential effects of climate change make it imperative that one is reached.

© 2013 Taylor & Francis

A key factor in determining the predictability of the climate system, and by extension of climate change, is the sensitivity of the meridional overturning circulation (MOC), commonly referred to as thermohaline circulation, to forcing and changes in forcing from the atmosphere. This problem is addressed by analyzing the geographic patterns of sensitivity of the steady-state MOC to atmospheric wind stresses and the fluxes of heat and water at the ocean-atmosphere interface. These sensitivity maps are obtained from the adjoint version of the MIT Ocean General Circulation Model. The patterns of sensitivity are substantially different when the ocean model is forced by fixed surface boundary conditions and when the ocean model is coupled to a simple energy balance model. This highlights the importance of atmospheric transport of heat and water in determining climate sensitivity and predictability. Striking points which will be discussed include the role of gateways to the Atlantic basin such as the Drake passage and the area of the Agulhas retroflection, and the role of convection in conveying information about perturbations in the model.

Climate changes affect the ocean's biological carbon pumps by modifying the sources of macro- and micro-nutrients to the euphotic zone, cloud cover, surface alkalinity, and phytoplankton assemblages. We use a global model of coupled oceanic cycles of carbon, phosphorus and iron to investigate controls on global productivity and the ocean carbon cycle. We use the adjoint of the model to comprehensively and efficiently map the sensitivity of biological productivity and air-sea carbon fluxes to decadal perturbations in the external sources of iron and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), the availability of phosphate, and the relative export of particulate organic and particulate inorganic carbon (rain ratio). Productivity and air-sea carbon flux in the high nitrate, low chlorophyll regions are most sensitive to perturbations in the iron source while the Atlantic ocean is most sensitive to additional sources of phosphorus and the high latitudes are most sensitive to perturbations in PAR. Air-sea carbon fluxes are most sensitive to variations of the rain-ratio in the equatorial oceans.

This paper surveys and interprets the attitudes of scientists to the use of flux adjustments in climate projections with coupled Atmosphere Ocean General Circulation Models. The survey is based largely on the responses of 19 climate modellers to several questions and a discussion document circulated in 1995. We interpret the responses in terms of the following factors: the implicit assumptions which scientists hold about how the environmental policy process deals with scientific uncertainty over human-related global warming; the different scientific styles that exist in climate research; and the influence of organisations, institutions, and policy upon research agendas. We find evidence that scientists' perceptions of the policy process do play a role in shaping their scientific practices. In particular, many of our respondents expressed a preference for keeping discussion of the issue of flux adjustments within the climate modeling community, apparently fearing that climate contrarians would exploit the issue in the public domain. While this may be true, we point to the risk that such an approach may backfire. We also identify assumptions and cultural commitments lying at a deeper level which play at least as important a role as perceptions of the policy process in shaping scientific practices. This leads us to identify two groups of scientists, 'pragmatists' and 'purists,' who have different implicit standards for model adequacy, and correspondingly are or are not willing to use flux adjustments.

© 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers

This paper surveys and interprets the attitudes of scientists to the use of flux adjustments in climate projections with coupled Atmosphere Ocean General Circulation Models. The survey is based largely on the responses of 19 climate modellers to several questions and a discussion document circulated in 1995. We interpret the responses in terms of the following factors: the implicit assumptions which scientists hold about how the environmental policy process deals with scientific uncertainty over human-related global warming; the different scientific styles that exist in climate research; and the influence of organisations, institutions, and policy upon research agendas. We find evidence that scientists' perceptions of the policy process do play a role in shaping their scientific practices. In particular, many of our respondents expressed a preference for keeping discussion of the issue of flux adjustments within the climate modeling community, apparently fearing that climate contrarians would exploit the issue in the public domain. While this may be true, we point to the risk that such an approach may backfire. We also identify assumptions and cultural commitments lying at a deeper level which play at least as important a role as perceptions of the policy process in shaping scientific practices. This leads us to identify two groups of scientists, 'pragmatists' and 'purists,' who have different implicit standards for model adequacy, and correspondingly are or are not willing to use flux adjustments.

The cost of meeting Kyoto-style emissions reductions is heavily dependent on the malleability of an economy's stock of capital and the number of years available for adjustment. Each year of delay introduces more emission-producing activities that must be squeezed out of the system and shortens the time horizon for change, raising the carbon price required to produce the needed changes in capital structure. The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Assessment model is used to explore the effects of uncertainty in the degree of capital malleability in the short run, and to analyze how implied carbon prices vary depending on the time of credible commitment to emissions targets.

© 1999 International Association for Energy Economics

Considerations regarding the roles of advanced technologies are crucial in energy-economic modeling, as these technologies, while usually not yet commercially viable, could substitute for fossil energy when relevant policies are in place. To improve the representation of the penetration of advanced technologies, we present a formulation that is parameterized based on observations, while capturing elements of rent and real cost increases if high demand suddenly appears due to large policy shock. The formulation is applied to a global economy-wide model to study the roles of low carbon alternatives in the power sector. While other modeling approaches often adopt specific constraints on expansion, our approach is based on the assumption and observation that these constraints are not absolute—the rate at which advanced technologies will expand is endogenous to economic incentives. The policy simulations are designed to illustrate the response under sudden increased demand for the advanced technologies, and are not intended to represent necessarily realistic price paths for greenhouse gas emissions.

Urbanization processes may significantly modify the atmospheric properties in the city area by changing the surface albedo, altering the surface heat conductivity, and increasing both heat and anthropogenic aerosol emissions. These factors are suggested to significantly affect cloud coverage and properties, resulting in climatic changes due to radiative forcing and variations in precipitation.

Urbanization processes may significantly modify the atmospheric properties in the city area by changing the surface albedo, altering the surface heat conductivity, and increasing both heat and anthropogenic aerosol emissions. These factors are suggested to significantly affect cloud coverage and properties, resulting in climatic changes due to radiative forcing and variations in precipitation.

Pages

Subscribe to JP