Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Michiel Schaeffer is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Michiel Schaeffer.


Climate Change Economics | 2013

WHAT DOES THE 2 C TARGET IMPLY FOR A GLOBAL CLIMATE AGREEMENT IN 2020? THE LIMITS STUDY ON DURBAN PLATFORM SCENARIOS

Elmar Kriegler; Massimo Tavoni; Tino Aboumahboub; Gunnar Luderer; Katherine Calvin; Gauthier Demaere; Volker Krey; Keywan Riahi; Hilke Rösler; Michiel Schaeffer; Detlef P. van Vuuren

This paper provides a novel and comprehensive model-based assessment of possible outcomes of the Durban Platform negotiations with a focus on emissions reduction requirements, the consistency with the 2°C target and global economic impacts. The Durban Platform scenarios investigated in the LIMITS study — all assuming the implementation of comprehensive global emission reductions after 2020, but assuming different 2020 emission reduction levels as well as different long-term concentration targets — exhibit a probability of exceeding the 2°C limit of 22–41% when reaching 450 (450–480) ppm CO2e, and 35–59% when reaching 500 (480–520) ppm CO2e in 2100. Forcing and temperature show a peak and decline pattern for both targets. Consistency of the resulting temperature trajectory with the 2°C target is a societal choice, and may be based on the maximum exceedance probability at the time of the peak and the long run exceedance probability, e.g., in the year 2100. The challenges of implementing a long-term target after a period of fragmented near-term climate policy can be significant as reflected in steep reductions of emissions intensity and transitional and long-term economic impacts. In particular, the challenges of adopting the target are significantly higher in 2030 than in 2020, both in terms of required emissions intensity decline rates and economic impacts. We conclude that an agreement on comprehensive emissions reductions to be implemented from 2020 onwards has particular significance for meeting long-term climate policy objectives.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2014

Disentangling the effects of CO2 and short-lived climate forcer mitigation

Joeri Rogelj; Michiel Schaeffer; Malte Meinshausen; Drew T. Shindell; William Hare; Z. Klimont; Guus J. M. Velders; M. Amann; Hans Joachim Schellnhuber

Significance Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our times. Human activities, like fossil-fuel burning, result in emissions of radiation-modifying substances that have a detectable, either warming or cooling, influence on our climate. Some, like soot (black carbon), are very short lived, whereas others, like carbon dioxide (CO2), are very persistent and remain in the atmosphere for centuries to millennia. Importantly, these substances are often emitted by common sources. As climate policy is looking at options to limit emissions of all these substances, understanding their linkages becomes extremely important. Our study disentangles these linkages and therewith helps to avoid crucial misconceptions: Measures reducing short-lived climate forcers are complementary to CO2 mitigation, but neglecting linkages leads to overestimating their climate benefits. Anthropogenic global warming is driven by emissions of a wide variety of radiative forcers ranging from very short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs), like black carbon, to very long-lived, like CO2. These species are often released from common sources and are therefore intricately linked. However, for reasons of simplification, this CO2–SLCF linkage was often disregarded in long-term projections of earlier studies. Here we explicitly account for CO2–SLCF linkages and show that the short- and long-term climate effects of many SLCF measures consistently become smaller in scenarios that keep warming to below 2 °C relative to preindustrial levels. Although long-term mitigation of methane and hydrofluorocarbons are integral parts of 2 °C scenarios, early action on these species mainly influences near-term temperatures and brings small benefits for limiting maximum warming relative to comparable reductions taking place later. Furthermore, we find that maximum 21st-century warming in 2 °C-consistent scenarios is largely unaffected by additional black-carbon-related measures because key emission sources are already phased-out through CO2 mitigation. Our study demonstrates the importance of coherently considering CO2–SLCF coevolutions. Failing to do so leads to strongly and consistently overestimating the effect of SLCF measures in climate stabilization scenarios. Our results reinforce that SLCF measures are to be considered complementary rather than a substitute for early and stringent CO2 mitigation. Near-term SLCF measures do not allow for more time for CO2 mitigation. We disentangle and resolve the distinct benefits across different species and therewith facilitate an integrated strategy for mitigating both short and long-term climate change.


Climatic Change | 2002

Responsibility for Past and Future Global Warming: Uncertainties in Attributing Anthropogenic Climate Change

Michel den Elzen; Michiel Schaeffer

During the negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol, Brazil proposed a methodology to link the relative contribution of Annex I Parties to emission reductions with the relative contributions of Parties to the global-mean temperature increase. The proposal was not adopted during the negotiations but referred to the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice for consideration of its methodological aspects. In this context we analyze the impact of model uncertainties and methodological choices on the regionally attributed global-mean temperature increase. A climate assessment model has been developed to calculate changes in greenhouse gas concentrations, global-mean temperature and sea-level rise attributable to individual regions. The analysis shows the impact of the different choices in methodological aspects to be as important as the impact of model uncertainties on a regions contribution to present and future global temperature increases. Choices may be the inclusion of the anthropogenic non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions and/or theCO2 emissions associated with land-use changes. When responsibility to global temperature change is attributed to all emitting Parties, the impacts of modeling uncertainties and methodological choices on contributions of individual Parties are considerable. However, if relative contributions are calculated only within the group of Annex I countries, the results are less sensitive to the uncertainty aspects considered here.


Environmental Research Letters | 2010

Analysis of the Copenhagen Accord pledges and its global climatic impacts—a snapshot of dissonant ambitions

Joeri Rogelj; Claudine Chen; Julia E. M. S. Nabel; Kirsten Macey; William Hare; Michiel Schaeffer; Kathleen Markmann; Niklas Höhne; Katrine Krogh Andersen; Malte Meinshausen

This analysis of the Copenhagen Accord evaluates emission reduction pledges by individual countries against the Accords climate-related objectives. Probabilistic estimates of the climatic consequences for a set of resulting multi-gas scenarios over the 21st century are calculated with a reduced complexity climate model, yielding global temperature increase and atmospheric CO2 and CO2-equivalent concentrations. Provisions for banked surplus emission allowances and credits from land use, land-use change and forestry are assessed and are shown to have the potential to lead to significant deterioration of the ambition levels implied by the pledges in 2020. This analysis demonstrates that the Copenhagen Accord and the pledges made under it represent a set of dissonant ambitions. The ambition level of the current pledges for 2020 and the lack of commonly agreed goals for 2050 place in peril the Accords own ambition: to limit global warming to below 2 °C, and even more so for 1.5 °C, which is referenced in the Accord in association with potentially strengthening the long-term temperature goal in 2015. Due to the limited level of ambition by 2020, the ability to limit emissions afterwards to pathways consistent with either the 2 or 1.5 °C goal is likely to become less feasible.


Environmental Research Letters | 2015

Zero emission targets as long-term global goals for climate protection

Joeri Rogelj; Michiel Schaeffer; Malte Meinshausen; Reto Knutti; Joseph Alcamo; Keywan Riahi; William Hare

Recently, assessments have robustly linked stabilization of global-mean temperature rise to the necessity of limiting the total amount of emitted carbon-dioxide (CO2). Halting global warming thus requires virtually zero annual CO2 emissions at some point. Policymakers have now incorporated this concept in the negotiating text for a new global climate agreement, but confusion remains about concepts like carbon neutrality, climate neutrality, full decarbonization, and net zero carbon or net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Here we clarify these concepts, discuss their appropriateness to serve as a long-term global benchmark for achieving temperature targets, and provide a detailed quantification. We find that with current pledges and for a likely (>66%) chance of staying below 2 °C, the scenario literature suggests net zero CO2 emissions between 2060 and 2070, with net negative CO2 emissions thereafter. Because of residual non-CO2 emissions, net zero is always reached later for total GHG emissions than for CO2. Net zero emissions targets are a useful focal point for policy, linking a global temperature target and socio-economic pathways to a necessary long-term limit on cumulative CO2 emissions.


Environmental Research Letters | 2015

Impact of short-lived non-CO2 mitigation on carbon budgets for stabilizing global warming

Joeri Rogelj; Malte Meinshausen; Michiel Schaeffer; Reto Knutti; Keywan Riahi

Limiting global warming to any level requires limiting the total amount of CO2 emissions, or staying within a CO2 budget. Here we assess how emissions from short-lived non-CO2 species like methane, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), black-carbon, and sulphates influence these CO2 budgets. Our default case, which assumes mitigation in all sectors and of all gases, results in a CO2 budget between 2011–2100 of 340 PgC for a >66% chance of staying below 2°C, consistent with the assessment of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Extreme variations of air-pollutant emissions from black-carbon and sulphates influence this budget by about ±5%. In the hypothetical case of no methane or HFCs mitigation—which is unlikely when CO2 is stringently reduced—the budgets would be much smaller (40% or up to 60%, respectively). However, assuming very stringent CH4 mitigation as a sensitivity case, CO2 budgets could be 25% higher. A limit on cumulative CO2 emissions remains critical for temperature targets. Even a 25% higher CO2 budget still means peaking global emissions in the next two decades, and achieving net zero CO2 emissions during the third quarter of the 21st century. The leverage we have to affect the CO2 budget by targeting non-CO2 diminishes strongly along with CO2 mitigation, because these are partly linked through economic and technological factors.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2008

Near-linear cost increase to reduce climate-change risk

Michiel Schaeffer; T. Kram; Malte Meinshausen; D.P. van Vuuren; William Hare

One approach in climate-change policy is to set normative long-term targets first and then infer the implied emissions pathways. An important example of a normative target is to limit the global-mean temperature change to a certain maximum. In general, reported cost estimates for limiting global warming often rise rapidly, even exponentially, as the scale of emission reductions from a reference level increases. This rapid rise may suggest that more ambitious policies may be prohibitively expensive. Here, we propose a probabilistic perspective, focused on the relationship between mitigation costs and the likelihood of achieving a climate target. We investigate the qualitative, functional relationship between the likelihood of achieving a normative target and the costs of climate-change mitigation. In contrast to the example of exponentially rising costs for lowering concentration levels, we show that the mitigation costs rise proportionally to the likelihood of meeting a temperature target, across a range of concentration levels. In economic terms investing in climate mitigation to increase the probability of achieving climate targets yields “constant returns to scale,” because of a counterbalancing rapid rise in the probabilities of meeting a temperature target as concentration is lowered.


Environmental Research Letters | 2016

Carbon budgets and energy transition pathways

Detlef P. van Vuuren; Heleen van Soest; Keywan Riahi; Leon E. Clarke; Volker Krey; Elmar Kriegler; Joeri Rogelj; Michiel Schaeffer; Massimo Tavoni

Scenarios from integrated assessment models can provide insights into how carbon budgets relate to other policy-relevant indicators by including information on how fast and by how much emissions can be reduced. Such indicators include the peak year of global emissions, the decarbonisation rate and the deployment of low-carbon technology. Here, we show typical values for these indicators for different carbon budgets, using the recently compiled IPCC scenario database, and discuss how these vary as a function of non-CO2 forcing, energy use and policy delay. For carbon budgets of 2000 GtCO2 and less over the 2010-2100 period, supply of low carbon technologies needs to be scaled up massively from todays levels, unless energy use is relatively low. For the subgroup of scenarios with a budget below 1000 GtCO2 (consistent with >66% chance of limiting global warming to below 2 °C relative to preindustrial levels), the 2050 contribution of low-carbon technologies is generally around 50%-75%, compared to less than 20% today (range refers to the 10-90th interval of available data).


Nature Climate Change | 2012

Long-term sea-level rise implied by 1.5 degrees C and 2 degrees C warming levels

Michiel Schaeffer; William Hare; Stefan Rahmstorf; Martin Vermeer

Sea-level rise is one of the key consequences of climate change. Its impact is long-term owing to the multi-century response timescales involved. This study addresses how much sea-level rise will result in coming centuries from climate-policy decisions taken today.


Archive | 2017

Piecing Together the Adaptation Puzzle for Small Island States

Tabea Lissner; Carl-Friedrich Schleussner; Olivia Serdeczny; Florent Baarsch; Michiel Schaeffer; Bill Hare

Island states are especially at risk of climate impacts and are already feeling the effects of rising sea levels, acidification, climate extremes and other impacts. Small islands face several unique challenges: They usually have limited resources to react, but are exceptionally exposed due to their physical setting and limited livelihood options. In addition, they are remote and not easily reached in time of crisis, making adaptation an imperative. This contribution presents the concept for an integrated database on climate impacts and adaptation, focussing specifically on the requirements of small island states. The database contains information on climate impact projections, linked to examples of existing adaptation projects. The database provides a structured overview of success-factors and limitations, piecing together fragmented knowledge and fostering knowledge exchange across regions in order to support science-based adaptation. While adaptation experience is increasing, including an evolving understanding of prerequisites and limitations to specific forms of adaptation, knowledge is still fragmented, due to the mostly local nature of adaptation. Island states across the world can benefit from a structured exchange, focussing on the transferability of success-criteria for adaptation. An improved knowledge base is also important for other regions, which will face similar challenges in the coming years.

Collaboration


Dive into the Michiel Schaeffer's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joeri Rogelj

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Bill Hare

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dim Coumou

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Olivia Serdeczny

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Sophie Adams

University of New South Wales

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alexander Robinson

Complutense University of Madrid

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Florent Baarsch

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Katja Frieler

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mahé Perette

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Keywan Riahi

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge