by Emily Jack-Scott, Aspen Global Change Institute

December 2020 Quarterly Research Review

This year the UNFCCC was forced to postpone COP26 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead of November 2020 serving as a five-year anniversary of progress, it was marked by the U.S.’s official withdrawal from the Agreement under the Trump Administration. However, President-elect Joe Biden has vowed to rejoin the Paris Agreement within his first months, if not days, in office. What exactly does the U.S. stand to gain by rejoining the Paris Agreement? Recent research reviews progress to date, and the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead for member countries.

by Martín Bonzi, Aspen Global Change Institute

December 2020 Quarterly Research Review

Teleworking became increasingly used worldwide in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. What does the latest research say about if teleworking reduces greenhouse gas emissions and how effective teleworking is as an environmental or energy policy?

by Emily Jack-Scott, Aspen Global Change Institute

September 2020 Quarterly Research Review

Looking to the future, most scenarios that curb climate change to less than 2°C by 2100 rely heavily upon rapid scaling up of biofuels to offset emissions, especially within the transportation sector (including hard-to-decarbonize aviation and long-distance transport like trucking) as well as in the industry sector. Advocates point out that large bioenergy systems have the potential to not only displace fossil fuel emissions but sequester carbon in soils of feedstock crops, biochar, or when coupled with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS). Critics, however, point out that bioenergy at scale is land intensive, which will likely bring it into competition with food production (even with increasing crop yields), as well as habitat conservation and restoration priorities.

Two recent publications investigate questions about when and how biofuels and bioenergy can be sustainably deployed in the coming decades.

by James Arnott, Aspen Global Change Institute

September 2020 Quarterly Research Review

California is in the middle of another unprecedented fire year. Amid the bleak outlook, there are important lessons to learn about the climate and non-climate drivers of California’s fire activity. The clear and mounting evidence that climate change is influencing—and will continue to influence—California’s recent fire activity augments the rationale for more aggressive efforts to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, more attention to the non-climate factors that drive fire risk, such as the political and social dynamics of fire management, may also be crucial for reducing future impacts.

by Emily Jack-Scott, Aspen Global Change Institute

June 2020 Quarterly Research Review

The COVID-19 pandemic spurred a global cessation of travel, manufacturing, and countless economic activities. Because our economies are still coupled with the burning of fossil fuels, this markedly reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In April, daily emissions fell by as much as 17 percent, and total 2020 emissions may be 7-11 percent lower than 2019. But as many countries’ economic activities have resumed, emissions have quickly begun resurging. And yet, opportunities exist through climate-friendly recovery packages to not only stimulate economies, but also reduce emissions while promoting social and environmental co-benefits. While economic rescue packages were targeted at triaging markets and personal financial impacts on immediate time scales, subsequent recovery packages will hold the key to whether the global response to this pandemic will curb or accelerate climate change in the long-term.

by James Arnott, Aspen Global Change Institute

June 2020 Quarterly Research Review

Rapid coal phase-out is a key part of limiting warming below 2°C, and new research provides insight into how that could happen. A mix of climate and non-climate factors, as well as market and non-market drivers, are key to charting out a speedy and equitable transition.

by James Arnott, Aspen Global Change Institute

March 2020 Quarterly Research Review

Moving society to near zero carbon emissions will entail a substantial amount of distributed clean energy generation, such as through rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) panels. Adoption patterns of this carbon-free technology illustrates important social dynamics that influence the speed and scale of energy transitions. Knowing who is—or is not—participating in the adoption of cleaner energy sources can help guide more effective policy and communication strategies. For example, commonalities in participation across different groups of people may help to justify and expand strategies that are shown to work well in many contexts. On the other hand, disparities in participation reveal underlying problems where targeted interventions may be required to ensure a just, equitable energy transition is achieved.

by Eric Masanet and Nuoa Lei, Northwestern University

March 2020 Quarterly Research Review

As the number of global internet users has grown, so too has demand for data center services, giving rise to concerns about growing data center energy use. And new forms of information services such as artificial intelligence (AI), which are particularly computationally-intensive, may accelerate demand growth further. Therefore, the ability to quantify and project data center energy use is a key energy and climate policy priority.

by Emily Jack-Scott, Aspen Global Change Institute

December 2019 Quarterly Research Review

The global energy system of the future will look drastically different than it does today. Energy sources, markets, grids, governance structures: every dimension of the energy system is already undergoing rapid changes. While the challenges posed by the pace and scale of this transformation are immense, so too are the opportunities for environmental sustainability, economic gain, and social well-being. Of all the potential co-benefits of a low carbon energy system, one that is not necessarily assured is energy justice. If this important component is overlooked, our future energy system has the potential to exacerbate existing inequities or create new ones. But if done with intention, this can be a rare and vital opportunity to amend structures that have long inflicted damages and injustice on communities and ecosystems around the world. In so doing, we can create a far more robust and equitable energy system, while bypassing opposition and friction to a clean energy transition.

by John Katzenberger, Aspen Global Change Institute

December 2019 Quarterly Research Review

Given the aspirations of the Paris Accord, the challenge facing humanity can be expressed in simple terms: halve annual CO2 emissions by 2030, halve them again by 2040, and again by 2050. The difficulty of the task goes up the longer peak emissions are delayed, as does the ultimate amount of negative emissions needed by 2100. Negative Emissions Technologies (NET) are a suite of technologies that can draw down CO2 from the atmosphere and by use or storage keep it from reentering the air. This simplistic prescription of halving annual emissions pencils out to reducing the 40 billion tons of CO2 (GtCO2) emitted today in each decade: first to 20, then to 10, and finally to 5 GtCO2. The final 5 GtCO2 offset by reducing land use emissions to zero and ramping up CO2 removal to 5 GtCO2 – all happening in about 30 years.