As the climate clock ticks, the Energy, Climate, and Environment Program continued to examine the intricate links between climate, energy, and institutional resilience.
From the consequences of temperature overshoot and the role of methane in near-term warming, to the impact of governance on climate feasibility and the value of demand-side solutions for energy security, the Energy, Climate, and Environment Program's interdisciplinary research is aimed at fostering not only technological innovation, but stronger governance, smarter policies, and systems built to withstand an increasingly turbulent world.
Cutting methane emissions to limit global warming
An international team of researchers, including IIASA scientists, set out three imperatives to cut methane emissions and shared a new tool to help find the most cost-effective ways of doing so in different countries.
Methane emissions were responsible for about half of global warming between the pre-industrial period and the 2010s. However, compared to carbon dioxide, methane has received comparatively little attention. Seeking to address this knowledge gap, the study authors laid out three critical imperatives for action backed by analyses of satellite remote sensing data, reported methane emissions, and the interaction of abatement options with market forces.
“Our three imperatives are: bringing methane emissions down; incentivizing and enforcing methane abatement; and coordinating efforts to tackle methane and carbon dioxide emissions. Cutting carbon dioxide without methane won’t stop warming quickly enough, but only cutting methane just delays global heating,” explains Lena Höglund-Isaksson, a senior researcher in the IIASA Pollution Management Research Group, who contributed to the study.
The researchers highlight that the most impactful opportunities to fight methane will depend on the measures a country has already taken and the industries it relies on. They have created an online tool to identify the most effective measures for abatement in different countries. For big fossil fuel producers, regulating production, incentivizing the capture of methane, or charging companies for methane emissions could be the most effective options. For others, the authors suggest focusing on emissions from landfills could offer the biggest rewards.
Further info: pure.iiasa.ac.at/19908
Exploring the consequences of climate overshoot
Overshooting the 1.5°C temperature goal of the Paris Agreement can lead to irreversible climate damage, even if the temperatures are later brought down to safer levels.
A recent study focusing on different overshoot scenarios where temperatures temporarily exceed the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit before descending again by achieving net-negative CO2 emissions, found that even temporary overshoot can lead to irreversible changes, such as sea level rise.
The authors highlight that if we were to exceed 1.5°C, there are clear benefits to reversing warming by acting to achieve net negative emissions globally. Achieving long-term temperature decline could lower sea level rise in 2300 by about 40 cm compared to a situation in which temperatures merely stopped rising.
To address the climate crisis, ambitious emissions reductions need to go hand in hand with scaled and environmentally sustainable carbon dioxide removal technologies and a preventive carbon dioxide removal capacity of several hundred gigatons might be required.
“Only by doing much more in this critical decade to bring emissions down and peak temperatures as low as possible, can we effectively limit damages,” says Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, IIASA Integrated Climate Impacts Research Group Leader, who led the study.
The study, published in Nature, was backed by the European innovation fund HORIZON2020 and is the result of a collaboration between scientists from Austria, France, Germany, Norway, the UK, and Switzerland.
Further info: pure.iiasa.ac.at/20044
Balancing technology and governance are key to achieving climate goals
IIASA researchers contributed to a study that underscores the importance of integrating technological advancements with robust institutional capacities to formulate effective climate policies.
The study was led by the Center for Global Sustainability (CGS) at the University of Maryland, in partnership with the IIASA-led ENGAGE project – a global consortium of international and multidisciplinary leading research groups.
“These insights highlight the challenges in meeting the Paris Agreement's long-term goals given recent global climate-damaging emissions trends,” notes Bas van Ruijven, study coauthor and coordinator of the ENGAGE project.
The authors aimed to co-produce knowledge for designing cost-effective, technologically sound, socially and politically feasible pathways to meet the Paris Agreement’s objectives. Using eight multi-regional and process-based integrated assessment models (IAMs) and 20 different feasibility scenarios, they found that institutional capacity – countries' ability to implement effective climate regulation – has the greatest impact on feasible peak temperature.
“From an international fairness perspective, today’s affluent countries like the US and the EU not only need to reach their net-zero targets, but they need to think about multilateral collaborations to enhance governance and institutional capacity in vulnerable regions,” adds IIASA Program Director, Keywan Riahi.
Stakeholder engagement has been key to the study’s impact, as shown during the recent COP where van Ruijven presented it to an international audience. The findings offer guidance for global climate policy discussions and scenario assessments, supporting informed decision-making on future climate ambitions.
Further info: pure.iiasa.ac.at/19930
Improving energy security with demand-side policies
Energy systems are increasingly threatened by wars, pandemics, and climate change. Researchers showcase that solutions closer to the end-users are more effective than supply-side measures in reducing energy system vulnerability.
Governments typically rely on policies focused on energy supply to enhance energy security, for example fuel mix diversification or changing the source of energy import. This reflects the International Energy Agency’s supply-centered definition of energy security. However, this approach misses key risks faced by states, businesses, and individuals during energy crises.
“Energy security assessments need to reflect these risks, the additional advantages of reducing energy demand, or the ways we consume energy,” explains Nuno Bento, a researcher at the University Institute of Lisbon and lead author of the paper.
Working with IIASA colleagues, the team developed a systematic approach, evaluating both supply and demand measures across various sectors, finding that reducing demand is more effective than increasing supply for boosting resilience to energy shocks. The authors highlight that demand-side policies offer clear advantages to improve energy security in terms of continuity, affordability, and sustainability.
The researchers propose that future studies should compare the benefits of various energy security policies by incorporating a demand-side perspective and adapting the indicators that currently benefit the supply perspective, while missing out on other aspects.
“In simple terms, it’s easier to stay warm in a well-insulated house with decentralized heating sources, even if there is a disruption in gas supply or if prices spike,” concludes coauthor and IIASA researcher Benigna Boza-Kiss.
Further info: pure.iiasa.ac.at/19535