The role of methane in future climate strategies: mitigation potentials and climate impacts

Journal Article · Fri May 24 00:00:00 EDT 2019 · Climatic Change

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02437-2· OSTI ID:1773480

Harmsen, Mathijs ^[1]; van Vuuren, Detlef P. ^[1]; Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon ^[2]; Chateau, Jean ^[3]; Durand-Lasserve, Olivier ^[3]; Drouet, Laurent ^[4]; Fricko, Oliver ^[5]; Fujimori, Shinichiro ^[6]; Gernaat, David E. H. J. ^[1]; Hanaoka, Tatsuya ^[7]; Hilaire, Jérôme ^[8]; Keramidas, Kimon ^[9]; Luderer, Gunnar ^[2]; Moura, Maria Cecilia P. ^[10]; Sano, Fuminori ^[11]; Smith, Steven J. ^[10]; Wada, Kenichi ^[11]

---

1. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague (Netherlands); Univ. of Utrecht (Netherlands)
2. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam (Germany)
3. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris (France). Environment Directorate
4. RFF-CMCC European Inst. on Economics and the Environment (EIEE), Milan (Italy)
5. International Inst. for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg (Austria)
6. Kyoto Univ. (Japan); National Inst. for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba (Japan)
7. National Inst. for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba (Japan)
8. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam (Germany); Mercator Research Inst. on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC), Berlin (Germany)
9. European Commission, Sevilla (Spain)
10. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
11. Research Inst. of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE) Kyoto (Japan)

This study examines model-specific assumptions and projections of methane (CH₄) emissions in deep mitigation scenarios generated by integrated assessment models (IAMs). For this, scenarios of nine models are compared in terms of sectoral and regional CH₄ emission reduction strategies, as well as resulting climate impacts. The models’ projected reduction potentials are compared to sector and technology-specific reduction potentials found in literature. Significant cost-effective and non-climate policy related reductions are projected in the reference case (10–36% compared to a “frozen emission factor” scenario in 2100). Still, compared to 2010, CH₄ emissions are expected to rise steadily by 9–72% (up to 412 to 654 Mt CH₄/year). Ambitious CO₂ reduction measures could by themselves lead to a reduction of CH₄ emissions due to a reduction of fossil fuels (22–48% compared to the reference case in 2100). However, direct CH₄ mitigation is crucial and more effective in bringing down CH₄ (50–74% compared to the reference case). Given the limited reduction potential, agriculture CH₄ emissions are projected to constitute an increasingly larger share of total anthropogenic CH₄ emissions in mitigation scenarios. Enteric fermentation in ruminants is in that respect by far the largest mitigation bottleneck later in the century with a projected 40–78% of total remaining CH₄ emissions in 2100 in a strong (2 °C) climate policy case.

• Research Organization: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE
• Grant/Contract Number: AC05-76RL01830
• OSTI ID: 1773480
• Report Number(s): PNNL-SA--131904
• Journal Information: Climatic Change, Journal Name: Climatic Change Journal Issue: 3 Vol. 163; ISSN 0165-0009
• Publisher: Springer
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES