Harmsen et al., 2019c
| Publication type: | Journal article |
| Title: | Long-term marginal abatement cost curves of non-CO2 greenhouse gases |
| Authors: | Mathijs J.H.M. Harmsen, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Dali R. Nayak, Andries F. Hof, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Paul L. Lucas, Jens B. Nielsen, Pete Smith, Elke Stehfest |
| Year: | 2019 |
| Journal: | Environmental Science and Policy (under review) |
| Citation: | Mathijs J.H.M. Harmsen, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Dali R. Nayak, Andries F. Hof, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Paul L. Lucas, Jens B. Nielsen, Pete Smith, Elke Stehfest (2019). Long-term marginal abatement cost curves of non-CO2 greenhouse gases. Environmental Science and Policy (under review). |
This reference is used on the following pages:
- Emissions (Category:Component)
- Emissions/Description (Category:ComponentDescription)
- Emissions/Policy issues (Category:ComponentPolicyIssue)
For an overview of all references see All references table overview or All references overview (citation format)
This study presents a new comprehensive set of long-term Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves of all major non-CO2 greenhouse gas emission sources. The work builds on existing short-term MAC curve datasets and recent literature on individual mitigation measures. The new MAC curves include current technology and costs information as well as estimates of technology development and removal of implementation barriers to capture long-term dynamics. Compared to earlier work, we find a higher projected maximum reduction potential (MRP) of nitrous oxide (N2O) and a lower MRP of methane (CH4). The combined MRP for all non-CO2 gases is similar but has been extended to also capture mitigation measures that can be realized at higher implementation costs. When applying the new MAC curves in a 2.6 W/m2 scenario, the total non-CO2 mitigation is projected to be 10.9 Mt CO2equivalents in 2050 (i.e. 58% reduction compared to baseline emissions) and 15.6 Mt CO2equivalents in 2100 (i.e. a 71% reduction). In applying the new MAC curves, we account for inertia in the implementation speed of mitigation measures. Although this does not strongly impact results in an optimal strategy, it means that the contribution of non-CO2 mitigation could be more limited if ambitious climate policy is delayed.