{"id":23794,"date":"2024-01-16T14:07:57","date_gmt":"2024-01-16T13:07:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/?p=23794"},"modified":"2024-01-16T14:07:57","modified_gmt":"2024-01-16T13:07:57","slug":"lack-of-industrial-decarbonization-to-reduce-household-carbon-footprint-to-a-15c-compatible-level","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.co2news.sk\/en\/2024\/01\/16\/lack-of-industrial-decarbonization-to-reduce-household-carbon-footprint-to-a-15c-compatible-level\/","title":{"rendered":"(Not) Sufficient industrial decarbonisation to reduce household carbon footprint to a compatible level of 1.5\u00b0C"},"content":{"rendered":"

To limit global warming to 1.5\u00b0C to well below 2\u00b0C, as defined in the Paris Agreement, significant reductions are needed. <\/span>greenhouse gas emissions\u00a0<\/span>However, current emissions pledges are unlikely to limit warming to 1.5\u00b0C (\u00a0<\/span>IPCC, 2022<\/span><\/span>\u00a0). The risks of triggering climate-related events and disasters exist even within the 1.5\u20132\u00b0C range (\u00a0<\/span>Armstrong McKay et al., 2022<\/span><\/span>\u00a0;\u00a0<\/span>Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2019<\/span><\/span>\u00a0;\u00a0<\/span>Wunderling et al., 2023<\/span><\/span>\u00a0). It is also more likely that the Sustainable Development Goals will be met at 1.5\u00b0C warming than at 2\u00b0C ( Roy\u00a0<\/span>etc.\u00a0<\/span>et al., 2018<\/span><\/span>\u00a0).<\/span><\/p>\n

The need to keep global temperature increases below 1.5\u00b0C has been reflected in a growing focus on demand-side climate change mitigation. A landmark chapter in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) AR6 WGIII highlighted the key role of lifestyle change in climate change mitigation (\u00a0<\/span>Creutzig et al., 2022<\/span><\/span>\u00a0).\u00a0<\/span>IPCC mitigation scenarios\u00a0<\/span>developed using Integrated Assessment Models (IAM) were not designed to assess the contribution of lifestyle change to climate change mitigation, although the models may include elements of behavioral change. IAM can model lifestyle changes towards sufficiency, adoption of new\u00a0<\/span>technologies<\/span>\u00a0or other sustainable behavioral interventions as part of a sector-wide shift assuming rational choice as a response to carbon taxes (\u00a0<\/span>van den Berg et al., 2019<\/span><\/span>\u00a0This makes it difficult to distinguish supply-side changes in the sector from coordinated changes in sustainable household lifestyles (\u00a0<\/span>van Sluisveld et al., 2016<\/span><\/span>\u00a0). Although demand-side changes are explicitly included in the IAM scenarios, the scenarios focus on how lifestyle changes can reduce reliance on technological changes or negative emissions technologies, rather than on the absolute contribution of these changes (\u00a0<\/span>Bertram et al., 2018<\/span><\/span>\u00a0;\u00a0<\/span>Grubler et al., 2018<\/span><\/span>\u00a0;\u00a0<\/span>van Vuuren et al., 2018<\/span><\/span>\u00a0). As a result, no scenario accurately assesses the comparative contribution of lifestyle changes and supply to meeting the 1.5\u00b0C target. (