IMAGE framework/A brief history of IMAGE: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
===Towards IMAGE 3=== | ===Towards IMAGE 3=== | ||
After publication of the IMAGE 2.4 book and a subsequent review of progress by the IMAGE Advisory Board, further development of the framework had has been undertaken, , published in a range of journal articles and conference papers. New features include more bottom-up modeling of household energy systems in TIMER, distinguishing rural and urban population demands by income level. Selected industries were represented in more technical detail to underpin energy demands and emissions better. The forestry sector was revisited and now includes forestry management options besides clear-cutting. Biodiversity impacts modeling was extended to cover freshwater systems besides terrestrial biomes. In cooperation with WUR and PIK (Potsdam, Germany), the natural vegetation and crop modules of IMAGE were replaced by the [[LPJ model|LPJ]] Global Dynamic Vegetation Model , allowing for modeling of coupled carbon and water cycles, and bringing a global hydrological model to IMAGE, which was not available in earlier versions. hydrological modelling. These and other developments were implemented stepwise on top of IMAGE 2.4, in intermediate versions. All these changes together are now incorporated in IMAGE 3.0. These new developments, see below, delineate clearly the new generation IMAGE 3 from the earlier sequence of IMAGE 2 versions . | After publication of the IMAGE 2.4 book and a subsequent review of progress by the IMAGE Advisory Board, further development of the framework had has been undertaken, , published in a range of journal articles and conference papers. New features include more bottom-up modeling of household energy systems in TIMER, distinguishing rural and urban population demands by income level. Selected industries were represented in more technical detail to underpin energy demands and emissions better. The forestry sector was revisited and now includes forestry management options besides clear-cutting. Biodiversity impacts modeling was extended to cover freshwater systems besides terrestrial biomes. In cooperation with WUR and PIK (Potsdam, Germany), the natural vegetation and crop modules of IMAGE were replaced by the [[LPJ model|LPJ]] Global Dynamic Vegetation Model , allowing for modeling of coupled carbon and water cycles, and bringing a global hydrological model to IMAGE, which was not available in earlier versions. hydrological modelling. These and other developments were implemented stepwise on top of IMAGE 2.4, in intermediate versions. All these changes together are now incorporated in IMAGE 3.0. These new developments, see below, delineate clearly the new generation IMAGE 3 from the earlier sequence of IMAGE 2 versions. | ||
Climate policy goals are explored under varying assumptions for participation timing, rules and emission targets under global strategies. A simple cost-benefit analysis tool is added to test the net economic outcome of mitigation efforts, adaptation costs and residual climate change impacts at different levels of forcing, subject to varying cost and damage assumptions found in the literature. | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 13:49, 16 December 2013
Parts of IMAGE framework/A brief history of IMAGE
| Projects/Applications |
| Models/Databases |
| Relevant overviews |
| References |