2 °C and SDGs: united they stand, divided they fall?

Video thumbnail (Frame 0) Video thumbnail (Frame 762) Video thumbnail (Frame 1047) Video thumbnail (Frame 1979) Video thumbnail (Frame 2781) Video thumbnail (Frame 4610) Video thumbnail (Frame 5338) Video thumbnail (Frame 5996)
Video in TIB AV-Portal: 2 °C and SDGs: united they stand, divided they fall?

Formal Metadata

Title
2 °C and SDGs: united they stand, divided they fall?
Title of Series
Author
License
CC Attribution 3.0 Unported:
You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
Identifiers
Publisher
Release Date
2016
Language
English

Content Metadata

Subject Area
Abstract
The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the new international climate treaty could put 2015 into the history books as a defining year for setting human development on a more sustainable pathway. The global climate policy and SDG agendas are highly interconnected: the way that the climate problem is addressed strongly affects the prospects of meeting numerous other SDGs and vice versa. Drawing on existing scenario results from a recent energy-economy-climate model inter-comparison project, this letter analyses these synergies and (risk) trade-offs of alternative 2 °C pathways across indicators relevant for energy-related SDGs and sustainable energy objectives. We find that limiting the availability of key mitigation technologies yields some co-benefits and decreases risks specific to these technologies but greatly increases many others. Fewer synergies and substantial trade-offs across SDGs are locked into the system for weak short-term climate policies that are broadly in line with current Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), particularly when combined with constraints on technologies. Lowering energy demand growth is key to managing these trade-offs and creating synergies across multiple energy-related SD dimensions. We argue that SD considerations are central for choosing socially acceptable 2 °C pathways: the prospects of meeting other SDGs need not dwindle and can even be enhanced for some goals if appropriate climate policy choices are made. Progress on the climate policy and SDG agendas should therefore be tracked within a unified framework.

Related Material

Video is accompanying material for the following resource
Prozessleittechnik Musical development Effects unit Video Electric power distribution Spare part Year Florett Coin Climate
Effects unit Alcohol proof Power (physics) Key (engineering) Limiter Nuclear power Membrane potential Global warming Climate Renewable energy Capacity factor
Coal Grey Refractive index Short circuit Power (physics) Emission nebula Climate Flexibility (anatomy) Fulling Climate change Alcohol proof Constraint (mathematics) Trade wind Video Contrast (vision) Trade wind Atmosphere of Earth Renewable energy
Impact event Alcohol proof Energy conversion efficiency Nuclear power Relative articulation Flexibility (anatomy) Climate
with the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals in a new international climate treaty in Paris 2015 might become a historic year for setting human development on a more sustainable path sustainable development is an explicit part of the Paris Agreement taking urgent climate action features as 1 of the of the trees but how do these 2 processes relate to each other in our letter we look at St through climate lands we argue that the way we
address the climate problem strongly affects the prospects of meeting numerous other sustainable energy objectives Our analysis is based on existing
scenarios with different short-term climate policy assumptions they also defend their reliance on key mitigation technologies but all stay below 2 degrees C we now want to know how delaying ambitious climate policy until 2030 affects the prospects of achieving others to Jesus and what are the effects of constraining the availability of key mitigation technologies such as limited renewable electricity potential limited global bioenergy potential no new nuclear capacity or unavailability of carbon capture and storage we summarize the results by
comparing such constraint to degree pathways to those with immediate mitigation full availability of mitigation technologies shown here in Gray we differentiate between those indicators that usually shows synergies with growing climate policy ambition on the left side and those that show tradeoffs with climate action on the right side points closer to the origin imply more synergies and fewer trade-offs the opposite is true for points outside the gray line the technologies are constrained we need to act
even fast on climate change to stay below 2 degrees which results in more synergies but also more trade limiting technologies that play a bigger role in reaching the long-term climate goal results and both hire additional co-benefits and hire additional risks for the Colts for example if we rely less on bioenergy and pursue to food security some Goals such as air quality would also be easier to accomplish in contrast other goal such as affordable energy would become more difficult to reach we would also have to decarbonize the economy more quickly by stopping coal power earlier and accelerating the expansion of renewables insufficient short term action such as the emission reduction pledges submitted by country so far lead to higher risks of not meeting others to Jesus constraining technologies and delaying climate action reinforce each other shortsighted climate policy hence reduces our flexibility in managing trade-offs across institutes saving energy
however can maintain a certain degree of flexibility in managing these trade-offs if 50 % increase in energy efficiency improvements would decrease our dependence on problematic technologies such as CCS in nuclear power roughly by a 3rd even short-term economic impacts would be significantly less severe and food security it would be less threatened in conclusion
St considerations as central for choosing socially acceptable to degree pathways the longer we wait with ambitious climate policy and the fewer technologies we're willing to use the more we lower our prospects of reading other as to trees we must follow up on the Paris agreement with problems but were thought out action to preserve our chances of reaching Wallace cities this letter has
been published in Environmental Research letters and as openly accessible
Feedback