4comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
 Yang Ruan Oct 14, 2010 03:35  | Proposal contributor
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this proposal?
|
Yang Ruan Oct 20, 2010 10:18 | Proposal contributor
It is difficult to decide what are reasonable targets when trying to advocate for each group by myself. It is an interesting dynamic when have multiple people embody the interests of different country groups. Then it is easier to negotiate, even though you are just playing roles.
|
Yang Ruan Oct 25, 2010 06:31 | Proposal contributor
I found that in order to stabilize the CO2 concentration, developed emissions would need to reduce 95%, and all developing nations need to reduce emissions by 50%. Only 3 models found that this is feasible. Then, the exact level that it stabilizes at depends on how soon you start mitigating or how soon you stop mitigating.
|
Yang Ruan Oct 28, 2010 12:07 | Proposal contributor
I think it might be possible for developing nations to start reducing emissions in 2016, and then reduce emissions by 1.2% every year through 2100 to be -60% of 2005 levels.
Developing A can be allowed a slight delay before following Developed nations' lead in 2020, and then reduce emissions by about .9% every year through 2100 to reach -10% of 2005 levels.
Developing B starts reducing by .6% starting 2020 and be 0% of 2005 levels by 2100.
Although some models (SGM) calculate a high mitigation cost, I would think that having a modest but steady target should be cheaper to mitigate so I would have to see the details of how they are calculating that.
C-Learn calculates a constant rate of reduction starting the start year to reach the target by end year. They don't explicitly tell you what it is, but if you run your model on their site and look at the emissions data, you can calculate what the rate is.
http://forio.com/simulation/climate-development/
|
