CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 184Climate Change Policy and EconomicsEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesRenewable energy and sustainable power systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 243 of the 243 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mitigation from a cross sectoral perspective

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change·2012·Climate Change 2007
DOI 10.1017/cbo9780511546013.015
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Mitigation potentials and costs from sectoral studies The economic potentials for GHG mitigation at different costs have been reviewed for 2030 on the basis of bottom-up studies. The review confirms the Third Assessment Report (TAR) finding that there are substantial opportunities for mitigation levels of about 6 GtCO 2 -eq involving net benefits (costs less than 0), with a large share being located in the buildings sector. Additional potentials are 7 GtCO 2 -eq at a unit cost (carbon price) of less than 20 US$/tCO 2 -eq, with the total, low-cost, potential being in the range of 9 to 18 GtCO 2 -eq. The total range is estimated to be 13 to 26 GtCO 2 -eq, at a cost of less than 50 US$/tCO 2 -eq and 16 to 31 GtCO 2 -eq at a cost of less than 100 US$/tCO 2 -eq (370 US$/tC-eq). As reported in Chapter 3, these ranges are comparable with those suggested by the top-down models for these carbon prices by 2030, although there are differences in sectoral attribution ( medium agreement, medium evidence ). No one sector or technology can address the entire mitigation challenge. This suggests that a diversified portfolio is required based on a variety of criteria. All the main sectors contribute to the total. In the lower-cost range, and measured according to end-use attribution, the potentials for electricity savings are largest in buildings and agriculture. When attribution is based on point of emission, energy supply makes the largest contribution ( high agreement, much evidence ).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9780511546013.015

Cites

243 of 243 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Items 201–243 of 243

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 184

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Change, I. P. O. C.
Corresponding author
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Venue
Climate Change 2007
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
2012-12-12
Pages
619-690
DOI
10.1017/cbo9780511546013.015
OpenAlex
W1576403083
Cited by
184
References
243
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 30
FWCI
125.17
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Renewable energy and sustainable power systems
Keywords
greenhouse gas emissions reduction, emission reduction potential, mitigation costs, carbon price, building sector, electricity saving, energy supply, 2030 scenarios

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review