Explore the vast range of titles available.

Energy efficiency (EE) and renewable energy (RE) can benefit public health and the climate by displacing emissions from fossil-fuelled electrical generating units (EGUs). Benefits can vary substantially by EE/RE installation type and location, due to differing electricity generation or savings by location, characteristics of the electrical grid and displaced power plants, along with population patterns. However, previous studies have not formally examined how these dimensions individually and jointly contribute to variability in benefits across locations or EE/RE types. Here, we develop and demonstrate a high-resolution model to simulate and compare the monetized public health and climate benefits of four different illustrative EE/RE installation types in six different locations within the Mid-Atlantic and Lower Great Lakes of the United States. Annual benefits using central estimates for all pathways ranged from US$5.7–US$210 million (US$14–US$170 MWh −1 ), emphasizing the importance of site-specific information in accurately estimating public health and climate benefits of EE/RE efforts. Clean energy can provide different health and environmental benefits depending on location. Modelling shows that renewable energy and energy-saving projects could deliver annual benefits of up to US$210 million across six locations in the USA.

Most research on future climate change discusses mitigation and impacts/adaptation separately. However, mitigation will have implications for impacts and adaptation. Similarly, impacts and adaptation will affect mitigation. This paper begins to explore these two veins of research simultaneously using an integrated assessment model. We begin by discussing the types of interactions one might expect by impact sector. Then, we develop a numerical experiment in the agriculture sector to illustrate the importance of considering mitigation, impacts, and adaptation at the same time. In our experiment, we find that climate change can reduce crop yields, resulting in an expansion of cropland to feed a growing population and a reduction in bioenergy production. These two effects, in combination, result in an increase in the cost of mitigation.

Electricity from fossil fuels contributes substantially to both climate change and the health burden of air pollution. Renewable energy sources are capable of displacing electricity from fossil fuels, but the quantity of health and climate benefits depend on site-specific attributes that are not often included in quantitative models. Here, we link an electrical grid simulation model to an air pollution health impact assessment model and US regulatory estimates of the impacts of carbon to estimate the health and climate benefits of offshore wind facilities of different sizes in two different locations. We find that offshore wind in the Mid-Atlantic is capable of producing health and climate benefits of between $54 and $120 per MWh of generation, with the largest simulated facility (3000 MW off the coast of New Jersey) producing approximately $690 million in benefits in 2017. The variability in benefits per unit generation is a function of differences in locations (Maryland versus New Jersey), simulated years (2012 versus 2017), and facility generation capacity, given complexities of the electrical grid and differences in which power plants are offset. This work demonstrates health and climate benefits of offshore wind, provides further evidence of the utility of geographically-refined modeling frameworks, and yields quantitative insights that would allow for inclusion of both climate and public health in benefits assessments of renewable energy.

The release of the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM) version 3.0 represents a major revision in the treatment of agriculture and land-use activities in a model of long-term, global human and physical Earth systems. GCAM 3.0 incorporates greater spatial and temporal resolution compared to GCAM 2.0. In this paper, we document the methods embodied in the new release, describe the motivation for the changes, compare GCAM 3.0 methods to those of other long-term, global agriculture-economy models and apply GCAM 3.0 to explore the impact of changes in agricultural crop yields on global land use and terrestrial carbon. In the absence of continued crop yield improvements throughout the century, not only are cumulative carbon emissions a major source of CO2 emissions to the atmosphere, but bioenergy production remains trivial — land is needed for food. In contrast, the high crop yield improvement scenario cuts terrestrial carbon emissions dramatically and facilitates both food and energy production.

The magnitude and character of the global resource base of fossil fuels is a key determinant of the evolution of the future global energy system and corresponding fossil fuel carbon emissions. What is less well understood is the potential magnitude of impact of the availability of fossil fuels, due to the interaction with biomass energy, on agriculture, land use, ecosystems and therefore carbon emissions from land-use change. This paper explores these links and implications. We show that if oil resources are limited, then the consequently higher price for liquids induces both the use of coal-to-liquids technology deployment, but also enhanced production of bioenergy crops particularly in a business-as-usual scenario. This in turn implies greater pressure to convert unmanaged ecosystems to produce bioenergy, and higher rates of terrestrial carbon emissions from land use.

Issue Title: Special Issue: Science and Policy of Negative Emission Technologies Combining bioenergy and carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technologies (BECCS) has the potential to remove CO2 from the atmosphere while producing useful energy. BECCS has played a central role in scenarios that reduce climate forcing to low levels such as 2.6 Wm^sup -2^. In this paper we consider whether BECCS is essential to limiting radiative forcing (RF) to 2.6 Wm^sup -2^ by 2100 using the Global Change Assessment Model, a closely coupled model of biogeophysical and human Earth systems. We show that BECCS can potentially reduce the cost of limiting RF to 2.6 Wm^sup -2^ by 2100 but that a variety of technology combinations that do not include BECCS can also achieve this goal, under appropriate emissions mitigation policies. We note that with appropriate supporting land-use policies terrestrial sequestration could deliver carbon storage ranging from 200 to 700 PgCO2-equiavalent over the 21st century. We explore substantial delays in participation by some geopolitical regions. We find that the value of BECCS is substantially higher under delay and that delay results in higher transient RF and climate change. However, when major regions postponed mitigation indefinitely, it was impossible to return RF to 2.6 Wm^sup -2^ by 2100. Neither finite land resources nor finite potential geologic storage capacity represented a meaningful technical limit on the ability of BECCS to contribute to emissions mitigation in the numerical experiments reported in this paper.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Combining bioenergy and carbon dioxide (CO sub(2)) capture and storage (CCS) technologies (BECCS) has the potential to remove CO sub(2) from the atmosphere while producing useful energy. BECCS has played a central role in scenarios that reduce climate forcing to low levels such as 2.6 Wm super(-2). In this paper we consider whether BECCS is essential to limiting radiative forcing (RF) to 2.6 Wm super(-2) by 2100 using the Global Change Assessment Model, a closely coupled model of biogeophysical and human Earth systems. We show that BECCS can potentially reduce the cost of limiting RF to 2.6 Wm super(-2) by 2100 but that a variety of technology combinations that do not include BECCS can also achieve this goal, under appropriate emissions mitigation policies. We note that with appropriate supporting land-use policies terrestrial sequestration could deliver carbon storage ranging from 200 to 700 PgCO sub(2)-equiavalent over the 21st century. We explore substantial delays in participation by some geopolitical regions. We find that the value of BECCS is substantially higher under delay and that delay results in higher transient RF and climate change. However, when major regions postponed mitigation indefinitely, it was impossible to return RF to 2.6 Wm super(-2) by 2100. Neither finite land resources nor finite potential geologic storage capacity represented a meaningful technical limit on the ability of BECCS to contribute to emissions mitigation in the numerical experiments reported in this paper.

Combining bioenergy and carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technologies (BECCS) has the potential to remove CO2 from the atmosphere while producing useful energy. BECCS has played a central role in scenarios that reduce climate forcing to low levels such as 2.6Wm-2. In this paper we consider whether BECCS is essential to limiting radiative forcing (RF) to 2.6Wm-2 by 2100 using the Global Change Assessment Model, a closely coupled model of biogeophysical and human Earth systems. We show that BECCS can potentially reduce the cost of limiting RF to 2.6Wm-2 by 2100 but that a variety of technology combinations that do not include BECCS can also achieve this goal, under appropriate emissions mitigation policies. We note that with appropriate supporting land-use policies terrestrial sequestration could deliver carbon storage ranging from 200 to 700 PgCO2-equiavalent over the 21st century. We explore substantial delays in participation by some geopolitical regions. We find that the value of BECCS is substantially higher under delay and that delay results in higher transient RF and climate change. However, when major regions postponed mitigation indefinitely, it was impossible to return RF to 2.6Wm-2 by 2100. Neither finite land resources nor finite potential geologic storage capacity represented a meaningful technical limit on the ability of BECCS to contribute to emissions mitigation in the numerical experiments reported in this paper.