In a 2021 study we showed that already one third of the carbon price revenues of a 1.5°C path are sufficient to fund 350 billion $ per year of climate finance by 2030, and over 900 billion $ per year by 2050.
www.nature.com/articles/s41...

See also our guest post on @carbonbrief.org : t.co/5aAitpB7Le
10/10

10) The study was a shared effort led by @pik-potsdam.bsky.social with PBL & Utrecht University (NL), IIASA, NTNU (Norway), SRC (Sweden) and IDOS and RIFS (Germany).

All scenario data can be explored and downloaded in a new web tool: shape.apps.ece.iiasa.ac.at
@danielhuppmann.bsky.social

9) On the other hand, the green innovation (EI) scenario needs little change in lifestyle, but relies heavily on efficiency increases. However, it also relies on potentially problematic technologies like bioenergy and CCS.

8) But it relies on substantial changes in energy and food consumption patterns, especially in high-income countries. These might be challenging to adopt.

7) The post-growth/lifestyle change scenario (RC) has the lowest warming and the largest improvements in biodiversity. It also has the least reliance on technologies unproven to work at scale, like carbon capture and storage (CCS).

6) They also avoid some of the unintended side effects of simplistic climate protection strategies, such as higher food prices. And they stop further loss of biodiversity.

5) We show that all three sustainable development scenarios fare much better than “business as usual”. They all limit warming to 1.5°C (with small and temporary overshoot), and make much larger progress towards the SDGs.

4) We used four large-scale computer models to quantify these scenarios. Two of them are integrated assessment models of the energy-economy-land-climate system, and two focus on the global buildings and materials sectors.

3) In this paper we take a systematic look at three different strategies:
- Green growth and tech-innovation (EI)
- Post-growth and lifestyle change (RC)
- Government-led transformation with mix of both (MC)

2) However, there are very different perspectives on how to best pursue these goals. Will green technologies save us? Or do we need to radically reduce our consumption?

1) We have the Paris Agreement on climate change and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), both of which were agreed by all countries worldwide in 2015. Taken together, they are an agenda for securing human well-being on an intact planet.