Display options
Cite
Duan H, Zhou S, Jiang K, et al. Assessing China's efforts to pursue the 1.5°C warming limit. Science. 2021;372(6540):378-385doi: 10.1126/science.aba8767.
Duan, H., Zhou, S., Jiang, K., Bertram, C., Harmsen, M., Kriegler, E., van Vuuren, D. P., Wang, S., Fujimori, S., Tavoni, M., Ming, X., Keramidas, K., Iyer, G., & Edmonds, J. (2021). Assessing China's efforts to pursue the 1.5°C warming limit. Science (New York, N.Y.), 372(6540), 378-385. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba8767
Duan, Hongbo, et al. "Assessing China's efforts to pursue the 1.5°C warming limit." Science (New York, N.Y.) vol. 372,6540 (2021): 378-385. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba8767
Duan H, Zhou S, Jiang K, Bertram C, Harmsen M, Kriegler E, van Vuuren DP, Wang S, Fujimori S, Tavoni M, Ming X, Keramidas K, Iyer G, Edmonds J. Assessing China's efforts to pursue the 1.5°C warming limit. Science. 2021 Apr 23;372(6540):378-385. doi: 10.1126/science.aba8767. PMID: 33888636.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Science. 2021 Apr 23;372(6540):378-385. doi: 10.1126/science.aba8767.

Assessing China's efforts to pursue the 1.5°C warming limit.

Science (New York, N.Y.)

Hongbo Duan, Sheng Zhou, Kejun Jiang, Christoph Bertram, Mathijs Harmsen, Elmar Kriegler, Detlef P van Vuuren, Shouyang Wang, Shinichiro Fujimori, Massimo Tavoni, Xi Ming, Kimon Keramidas, Gokul Iyer, James Edmonds

Affiliations

  1. School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected].
  2. Institute of Energy, Environment and Economy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected].
  3. Energy Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Macroeconomic Research, Beijing 100038, China.
  4. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Member of the Leibniz Association, 14473 Potsdam, Germany.
  5. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), Postbus 30314, The Hague, Netherlands.
  6. Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80125 3508 TC Utrecht, Netherlands.
  7. Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Potsdam, 14482 Potsdam, Germany.
  8. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), Postbus 30314, The Hague, Netherlands. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected].
  9. Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China.
  10. Department of Environmental Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto 615-8540, Japan.
  11. Center for Social and Environmental Systems Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba 305-8506, Japan.
  12. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2361 Laxenburg, Austria.
  13. Department of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan 20123, Italy.
  14. RFF-CMCC European Institute on Economics and the Environment, Fondazione Centro Euromediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, Milan 20123, Italy.
  15. School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China.
  16. European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Seville E-41092, Spain.
  17. Joint Global Change Research Institute, University of Maryland and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, College Park, MD 20740, USA.

PMID: 33888636 DOI: 10.1126/science.aba8767

Abstract

Given the increasing interest in keeping global warming below 1.5°C, a key question is what this would mean for China's emission pathway, energy restructuring, and decarbonization. By conducting a multimodel study, we find that the 1.5°C-consistent goal would require China to reduce its carbon emissions and energy consumption by more than 90 and 39%, respectively, compared with the "no policy" case. Negative emission technologies play an important role in achieving near-zero emissions, with captured carbon accounting on average for 20% of the total reductions in 2050. Our multimodel comparisons reveal large differences in necessary emission reductions across sectors, whereas what is consistent is that the power sector is required to achieve full decarbonization by 2050. The cross-model averages indicate that China's accumulated policy costs may amount to 2.8 to 5.7% of its gross domestic product by 2050, given the 1.5°C warming limit.

Copyright © 2021 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

Publication Types