Author:
Canuto Enrico,Mazza Daniele,Novara Carlo
Abstract
AbstractThe paper has been suggested by the following observations: (1) the atmospheric growth rate of carbon dioxide concentration is smaller than that ascribed to the emission of fossil-fuel combustion and (2) the fossil-fuel reserves are finite. The first observation leads to a simple dynamic model, based on the balance of CO2 land/ocean absorption and anthropogenic emissions, only limited by the depletion of fossil-fuel reserves, in a business-as-usual scenario. The second observation suggests of projecting the past CO2 emissions to the future, by constraining emissions to the limit of reserve availability. Similar projections are available in the literature, but either driven by heuristics or by complex simulation packages. The paper provides a simple and formal method only driven by historical data, their uncertainty and simple models. The method aims to provide CO2 concentration projections, which being constrained by fossil-fuel finite reserve may be in principle employed as bounds to forecasting exercises. The time–invariant dynamics of the land/ocean absorption is the simplification of a more complex set of equations describing carbon dioxide exchange between different reservoirs. Contribution of other greenhouse gases like methane and nitrous oxide has been neglected, since their emissions cannot be projected with the paper methodology. Comparison with recent profiles of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirms that the finite-reserve projections of the fossil fuel emissions is close to those of a moderate Shared Socioeconomic Scenario (SSP) like SSP2-4.5—a result in agreement with other authors—but also reveals the limits of the simplified model, when extending the tuned dynamics of the recent mean CO2 exchanges to long-term future. The limits derive from linearity, time invariance, and aggregation assumptions, which allow a more complex model of CO2 exchanges to be simplified and tuned on experimental data.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference59 articles.
1. IPCC. (2022). Summary for Policymakers. In P.R. Shukla et al. (Eds.), Climate Change 2022: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.001.
2. Houghton, J. T., Jenkins, G. J., & Ephraums, J. J. (1990). Climate change. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
3. Climate Action Tracker. (2024). Global temperatures, addressing global warming, dataset retrieved April 10, 2024 from https://climateactiontracker.org/global/temperatures/.
4. Arias P.A. et al. (2021). Technical Summary. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, V. Masson-Delmotte et al. (Eds.), Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 33–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.002.
5. Sterman, J., et al. (2014). WORLD CLIMATE: a role-play simulation of climate negotiations. Simulation and Gaming,46(4), 1–35.