@article{WarszawskiKrieglerLentonetal.2021,
  author    = {Warszawski, Lila and Kriegler, Elmar and Lenton, Timothy M. and Gaffney, Owen and Jacob, Daniela and Klingenfeld, Daniel and Koide, Ryu and Costa, Mar{\´i}a M{\´a}{\~n}ez and Messner, Dirk and Nakicenovic, Nebojsa and Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim and Schlosser, Peter and Takeuchi, Kazuhiko and van der Leeuw, Sander and Whiteman, Gail and Rockstr{\"o}m, Johan},
  title     = {All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit global warming to 1.5 °C},
  series = {Environmental research letters},
  volume    = {16},
  journal   = {Environmental research letters},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {IOP Publishing},
  address   = {Bristol},
  issn      = {1748-9326},
  doi       = {10.1088/1748-9326/abfeec},
  pages     = {15},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Climate science provides strong evidence of the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. The IPCC 1.5 °C special report (SR1.5) presents 414 emissions scenarios modelled for the report, of which around 50 are classified as '1.5 °C scenarios', with no or low temperature overshoot. These emission scenarios differ in their reliance on individual mitigation levers, including reduction of global energy demand, decarbonisation of energy production, development of land-management systems, and the pace and scale of deploying carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. The reliance of 1.5 °C scenarios on these levers needs to be critically assessed in light of the potentials of the relevant technologies and roll-out plans. We use a set of five parameters to bundle and characterise the mitigation levers employed in the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios. For each of these levers, we draw on the literature to define 'medium' and 'high' upper bounds that delineate between their 'reasonable', 'challenging' and 'speculative' use by mid century. We do not find any 1.5 °C scenarios that stay within all medium upper bounds on the five mitigation levers. Scenarios most frequently 'over use' CDR with geological storage as a mitigation lever, whilst reductions of energy demand and carbon intensity of energy production are 'over used' less frequently. If we allow mitigation levers to be employed up to our high upper bounds, we are left with 22 of the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios with no or low overshoot. The scenarios that fulfil these criteria are characterised by greater coverage of the available mitigation levers than those scenarios that exceed at least one of the high upper bounds. When excluding the two scenarios that exceed the SR1.5 carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, this subset of 1.5 °C scenarios shows a range of 15-22 Gt CO2 (16-22 Gt CO2 interquartile range) for emissions in 2030. For the year of reaching net zero CO2 emissions the range is 2039-2061 (2049-2057 interquartile range).},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SteffenRoeckstromRichardsonetal.2018,
  author    = {Steffen, Will and R{\"o}ckstrom, Johan and Richardson, Katherine and Lenton, Timothy M. and Folke, Carl and Liverman, Diana and Summerhayes, Colin P. and Barnosky, Anthony D. and Cornell, Sarah E. and Crucifix, Michel and Donges, Jonathan Friedemann and Fetzer, Ingo and Lade, Steven J. and Scheffer, Marten and Winkelmann, Ricarda and Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim},
  title     = {Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene},
  series = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America},
  volume    = {115},
  journal   = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America},
  number    = {33},
  publisher = {National Acad. of Sciences},
  address   = {Washington},
  issn      = {0027-8424},
  doi       = {10.1073/pnas.1810141115},
  pages     = {8252 -- 8259},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {We explore the risk that self-reinforcing feedbacks could push the Earth System toward a planetary threshold that, if crossed, could prevent stabilization of the climate at intermediate temperature rises and cause continued warming on a "Hothouse Earth" pathway even as human emissions are reduced. Crossing the threshold would lead to a much higher global average temperature than any interglacial in the past 1.2 million years and to sea levels significantly higher than at any time in the Holocene. We examine the evidence that such a threshold might exist and where it might be. If the threshold is crossed, the resulting trajectory would likely cause serious disruptions to ecosystems, society, and economies. Collective human action is required to steer the Earth System away from a potential threshold and stabilize it in a habitable interglacial-like state. Such action entails stewardship of the entire Earth System-biosphere, climate, and societies-and could include decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values.},
  language  = {en}
}