Evidence review of the potential wider impacts of climate change mitigation options: agriculture, forestry, land use and waste sectors

A report prepared for Scottish Government. Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation is a central policy objective in Scotland. The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 sets an interim 42% reduction target for 2020 and an 80% target for 2050 across all sectors of society (1990 baseline). As a priority policy area, it has become vital to better understand the co-benefits and adverse impacts arising from mitigation actions on our environment, economy and society. Integrated assessment is key in prioritising environmental actions, reducing adverse impacts and enhancing positive co-effects. This report aims to summarise evidence on the wider impacts (WI) of GHG mitigation options (MO) in the Agriculture, land use, land use change and forestry sectors (ALULUCF) and those related waste management. The key findings of the review, are a summary of the wider impacts and an overview of the challenges in quantifying and monetising these impacts

Potentials and Costs for Mitigation of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases in Annex 1 Countries: Version 2.0

This report documents the specific methodology of IIASA's GAINS model on methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases that has been used for comparing mitigation efforts across Annex I Parties. More details are available at gains.iiasa.ac.at

Chapter 2 - Integrated risk and uncertainty assessment of climate change response policies

This framing chapter considers ways in which risk and uncertainty can affect the process and outcome of strategic choices in responding to the threat of climate change

Bringing Transportation into a Cap-and-Trade Regime

Abstract in HTML and technical report in PDF available on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://mit.edu/globalchange/www/).The U.S. may at some point adopt a national cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gases, and if and when that happens the system of CAFE regulation of vehicle design very likely could still be in place. Imposed independently these two systems can lead to economic waste. One way to avoid the inefficiency is to integrate the two systems by allowing emissions trading between them. Two possible approaches to potential linkage are explored here, along with a discussion of ways to guard against violation under such a trading regime of vehicle standards that may be justified by non-climate objectives. At a minimum, implementation of a U.S. cap-and-trade system is several years in the future, so we also suggest intermediate measures that would gain some of the advantages of an integrated system and smooth the way to ultimate interconnection.This study received funding from the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which is supported by a consortium of government, industry and foundation sponsors