Skip to main content

Climate Change Mitigation: Options, Costs and Risks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Climate Change, Justice and Sustainability

Abstract

Over the last few years political declarations by the European Union (EC (European Community), Climate change – Council conclusions 8518/96 (Presse 188-G) 25/26. VI.96, 1996), the G8 (Major Economics Forum, Declaration of the leaders of the major economies forum on energy and climate, MEF, 2009. http://www.g8italia2009.it/static/G8_Allegato/MEF_Declarationl.pdf) and in the Copenhagen Accord (UNFCCC, Draft decision -/CP.15: Proposal by the President. Conference of the Parties, Fifteenth session, Copenhagen, 2010. Retrieved July 6, 2010, from http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf) have referred to the 2°C target as a potential goal for climate protection. Such an objective is undoubtedly highly ambitious but has not been made a binding target under international law. The Copenhagen Accord also failed to address the willingness of nations to take the necessary measures to attain this target. If the 2°C target is to be pursued by policy-makers, a robust assessment by the scientific community of the side risks and benefits of achieving this mitigation target will be required. This includes the careful evaluation of different technology options and the associated costs of mitigation.

In this chapter we describe the historical challenge of mitigating climate change and present mitigation strategies assessed with intertemporal general equilibrium models. We complement the analysis with a detailed risk assessment of the technology portfolio.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, J., Chiavari, J., de Coninck, H., Shackley, S., Sigurthorsson, G., Flach, T., Reiner, D., Upham, P., Richardson, P., & Curnow, P. (2009). Results from the project ‘Acceptance of CO2 capture and storage: Economics, policy and technology (ACCSEPT)’. Energy Procedia, 1(1), 4649–4653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, S. (2008). The incredible economics of geoengineering. Environmental and Resource Economics, 39(1), 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BGR (Bundesamt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe). (2009). Energierohstoffe 2009: Reserven, Ressourcen,Verfügbarkeit. Hannover: Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boden, T. A., Marland, G., & Andres, R. J. (2009). Global, regional, and national fossil-fuel CO 2 emissions. Oak Ridge: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy. doi:10.3334/CDIAC/00001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, L., Edmonds, J., Krey, V., Richels, R., Rose, S., & Tavoni, M. (2009). International climate policy architectures: Overview of the EMF 22 international scenarios. Energy Economics, 31, 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Coninck, H., Stephens, J., & Metz, B. (2009). Global learning on carbon capture and storage: A call for strong international cooperation on CCS demonstration. Energy Policy, 37(6), 2161–2165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC (European Community). (1996). Climate change – Council conclusions 8518/96 (Presse 188-G) 25/26. VI.96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edenhofer, O., Knopf, B., Barker, T., Baumstark, L., Bellevrat, E., Chateau, B., Criqui, P., Isaac, M., Kitous, A., Kypreos, S., Leimbach, M., Lessmann, K., Magné, B., Scrieciu, S., Turton, H., & van Vuuren, D. P. (2010). The economics of low stabilization: Model comparison of mitigation strategies and costs. The Energy Journal, 31, 11–48 (Special Issue 1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, M., & Schellnhuber, H.-J. (2009). Oceanic acidification affects marine carbon pump and triggers extended marine oxygen holes. PNAS, 106(9), 3017–3022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IEA (International Energy Agency). (2007a). Energy balances of OECD countries 1960–2005. Manchester: Energy Statistics Division. University of Manchester: ESDS International.

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (International Energy Agency). (2007b). Energy balances of non-OECD countries 1971–2005. Manchester: Energy Statistics Division University of Manchester: ESDS International.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • IEA (International Energy Agency). (2009). World energy outlook 2009. Paris: IEA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC. (2005). IPCC special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. In B. Metz, O. Davidson, H. C. de Coninck, M. Loos, & L. A. Meyer (Eds.). In O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlömer, & C. von Stechow (Eds.). Prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC. (2011). IPCC special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. In O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlömer, & C. von Stechow (Eds.). Prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, D. W., Parson, E., & Morgan, M. G. (2010). Research on global sun block needed now: Opinion. Nature, 463, 426–427. doi:10.1038/463426a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knopf, B., Edenhofer, O., Barker, T., Bauer, N., Baumstark, L., Chateau, B., Criqui, P., Held, A., Isaac, M., Jakob, M., Jochem, E., Kitous, A., Kypreos, S., Leimbach, M., Magné, B., Mima, S., Schade, W., Scrieciu, S., Turton, H., & van Vuurenm, D. (2009). The economics of low stabilisation: Implications for technological change and policy. In M. Hulme & H. Neufeldt (Eds.), Making climate change work for us: European perspectives on adaptation and mitigation strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knopf, B., Edenhofer, O., Flachsland, C., Kok, M. T. J., Lotze-Campen, H., Luderer, G., Popp, A., & Van Vuuren, D. P. (2010). Managing the low-carbon transition – From model results to policies. Energy Journal, 31, 223–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knopf, B., Luderer, G., & Edenhofer, O. (2011). Exploring the feasibility of low mitigation targets. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 617–626. doi:10.1002/wcc.124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krey, V., & Clarke, L. (2011). Renewable energy and climate mitigation: A large-scale scenarios review. Climate Policy, 11(4), 1131–1158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenton, T. M., & Vaughan, N. E. (2009). The radiative forcing potential of different climate geoengineering options. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 9, 5539–5561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, R. (2010). Geoengineering won’t curb sea-level rise. Nature News. Retrieved August 23, 2010, from (http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100823/full/news.2010.426.html). doi: 10.1038/news.2010.426

  • Luderer, G., Bosetti, V., Jakob, M., Leimbach, M., Steckel, J., & Waisman, H. (2011). On the economics of decarbonization – Results and insights from the RECIPE model intercomparison. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0105-x.

  • Major Economics Forum. (2009). Declaration of the leaders of the Major Economies Forum on energy and climate, MEF. http://www.g8italia2009.it/static/G8_Allegato/MEF_Declarationl.pdf

  • Meinshausen, M., Meinshausen, N., Hare, W., Raper, S. C. B., Frieler, K., Knutti, R., Frame, D. J., & Allen, M. R. (2009). Greenhouse gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2°C. Nature, 458(7242), 1158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. C., Jevrejevad, S., & Grinstede, A. (2010). Efficacy of geoengineering to limit 21st century sea-level rise. PNAS, 107(36), 15699–15703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuhoff, K., Dröge, S., Edenhofer, O., Flachsland, C., Held, H., Ragwitz, M., Strohschein, J., Türk, A., & Michaelowa, A. (2009). Translating model results into economic policies (RECIPE Working Paper). Potsdam: PIK. www.pik-potsdam.de/recipe

  • Popp, A., Lotze-Campen, H., & Bodirsky, B. (2010). Food consumption, diet shifts and associated non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural production. Global Environmental Change, 20, 451–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popp, A., Dietrich, J. P., Lotze-Campen, H., Klein, D., Bauer, N., Krause, M., Beringer, T., Gerten, D., & Edenhofer, O. (2011). The economic potential of bioenergy for climate change mitigation with special attention given to implications for the land system. Environmental Research Letters. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034017.

  • Ricke, K., Morgan, M. G., & Allen, M. R. (2010). Regional climate response to solar-radiation management. Nature Geoscience, 3, 537–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robock, A., Marquardt, A., Kravitz, B., & Stenchikov, G. (2009). Benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering. Geophysical Research Letters, 36. doi:10.1029/2009GL039209.

  • Stehfest, E., Bouwman, L., van Vuuren, D. P., den Elzen, M. G. J., Eickhout, B., & Kabat, P. (2009). Climate benefits of changing diet. Climatic Change, 95(1–2), 83–102. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9534-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Royal Society. (2009). Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty (RS Policy document 10/09). London: The Royal Society. From http://royalsociety.org/geoengineering-the-climate/

  • Tilman, D., Socolow, R., Foley, J. A., Hill, J., Larson, E., Lynd, L., Pacala, S., Reilly, J., Searchinger, T., Somerville, C., & Williams, R. (2009). Beneficial biofuels – The food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science, 325, 270–271. doi:10.1126/science.1177970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNFCCC. (2010, 7–18 December). Draft decision -/CP.15: Proposal by the President. Conference of the Parties, Fifteenth session, Copenhagen. Retrieved July 6, 2010, from http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf

  • Victor, D. G., Morgan, M. G., Apt, J., Steinbruner, J., & Ricke, K. (2009). The geoengineering option: A last resort against global warming? Foreign Affairs, published by the Council on Foreign Relations. From http://d1027732.mydomainwebhost.com/articles/articles/CFR_The_Geoengineering_Option.pdf

  • Wigley, T. M. L. (2006). A combined mitigation/geoengineering approach to climate stabilization. Science, 314, 452–454. doi:10.1126/science.1131728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, M., Calvin, K., Thomson, A., Clarke, L., Bond-Lamberty, B., Sands, R., Smith, S., Janetos, A., & Edmonds, J. (2009). Implications of limiting CO2 concentrations for land use and energy. Science, 324, 1183–1186. doi:10.1126/science.1168475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brigitte Knopf .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Knopf, B., Kowarsch, M., Edenhofer, O., Luderer, G. (2012). Climate Change Mitigation: Options, Costs and Risks. In: Edenhofer, O., Wallacher, J., Lotze-Campen, H., Reder, M., Knopf, B., Müller, J. (eds) Climate Change, Justice and Sustainability. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4540-7_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics