Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Journal Article

How climate metrics affect global mitigation strategies and costs: a multi-model study


Harmsen,  M. J. H. M.
External Organizations;

Berg,  M. van den
External Organizations;

Krey,  V.
External Organizations;


Luderer,  Gunnar
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

Marcucci,  A.
External Organizations;


Strefler,  Jessica
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

Vuuren,  D. P. van
External Organizations;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)

(Postprint), 3MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Harmsen, M. J. H. M., Berg, M. v. d., Krey, V., Luderer, G., Marcucci, A., Strefler, J., Vuuren, D. P. v. (2016): How climate metrics affect global mitigation strategies and costs: a multi-model study. - Climatic Change, 136, 2, 203-216.

Cite as: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_20776
In climate policy, substitutions metrics are used to determine exchange ratios for different greenhouse gases as part of a multi-gas strategy. The suitability of the metric depends on the policy goals and considerations regarding its practical use. Here, we present a multi-model comparison study to look at the impact of different metrics on the mitigation strategies and global climate policy costs. The study looks into different Global Warming Potentials (GWP) and the Global Temperature change Potential (GTP). The study shows that for all the models, varying between GWPs - from different IPCC reports, with different integration periods: 20 or 100 years - has a relatively small influence on policy costs (< 2.2 % spread across scenarios with a 2.8 W/m2 target) and climate outcomes. Metrics with a constant low substitution value for methane (effectively reducing its abatement), in contrast, lead to higher-cost mitigation pathways (with an average cost increase of 32.8 % in a 2.8 W/m2 scenario). If implemented efficiently, a time-varying GTP leads to a limited cost reduction compared to GWP. However, under imperfect foresight in combination with inertia of CH4 abatement options, or if implemented sub-optimally, time-varying GTP can result in higher costs than a 100-year GWP. At the same time, given a long-term radiative forcing target, a time-varying GTP results in slightly higher maximum global temperature change rates.