How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways
Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess h...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Giannousakis, Anastasis [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2021transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion - Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER, 2017, the international journal, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:216 ; year:2021 ; day:1 ; month:02 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV052523411 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV052523411 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230626033405.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 210910s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV052523411 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 15,3 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a PHARM |q DE-84 |2 fid | ||
| 084 | |a 44.40 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Giannousakis, Anastasis |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021transfer abstract | |
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. | ||
| 520 | |a Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Technology costs |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Electromobility |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Carbon dioxide removal |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Transport |2 Elsevier | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hilaire, Jérôme |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nemet, Gregory F. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Luderer, Gunnar |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Pietzcker, Robert C. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rodrigues, Renato |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Baumstark, Lavinia |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kriegler, Elmar |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER |t Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion |d 2017 |d the international journal |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV000529575 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:216 |g year:2021 |g day:1 |g month:02 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a FID-PHARM | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OPC-PHA | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.40 |j Pharmazie |j Pharmazeutika |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 216 |j 2021 |b 1 |c 0201 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
a g ag |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
giannousakisanastasishilairejrmenemetgre:2021----:oucranynehooyotadabnixdrmvlviaiiyfet |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2021transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
44.40 |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica (DE-627)ELV052523411 (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl Giannousakis, Anastasis verfasserin aut How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport Elsevier Hilaire, Jérôme oth Nemet, Gregory F. oth Luderer, Gunnar oth Pietzcker, Robert C. oth Rodrigues, Renato oth Baumstark, Lavinia oth Kriegler, Elmar oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion 2017 the international journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000529575 volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 216 2021 1 0201 0 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica (DE-627)ELV052523411 (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl Giannousakis, Anastasis verfasserin aut How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport Elsevier Hilaire, Jérôme oth Nemet, Gregory F. oth Luderer, Gunnar oth Pietzcker, Robert C. oth Rodrigues, Renato oth Baumstark, Lavinia oth Kriegler, Elmar oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion 2017 the international journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000529575 volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 216 2021 1 0201 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica (DE-627)ELV052523411 (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl Giannousakis, Anastasis verfasserin aut How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport Elsevier Hilaire, Jérôme oth Nemet, Gregory F. oth Luderer, Gunnar oth Pietzcker, Robert C. oth Rodrigues, Renato oth Baumstark, Lavinia oth Kriegler, Elmar oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion 2017 the international journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000529575 volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 216 2021 1 0201 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica (DE-627)ELV052523411 (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl Giannousakis, Anastasis verfasserin aut How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport Elsevier Hilaire, Jérôme oth Nemet, Gregory F. oth Luderer, Gunnar oth Pietzcker, Robert C. oth Rodrigues, Renato oth Baumstark, Lavinia oth Kriegler, Elmar oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion 2017 the international journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000529575 volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 216 2021 1 0201 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica (DE-627)ELV052523411 (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl Giannousakis, Anastasis verfasserin aut How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport Elsevier Hilaire, Jérôme oth Nemet, Gregory F. oth Luderer, Gunnar oth Pietzcker, Robert C. oth Rodrigues, Renato oth Baumstark, Lavinia oth Kriegler, Elmar oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion 2017 the international journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000529575 volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA 44.40 Pharmazie Pharmazeutika VZ AR 216 2021 1 0201 0 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:216 year:2021 day:1 month:02 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Pharmazie Pharmazeutika |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Technology costs Electromobility Carbon dioxide removal Transport |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Giannousakis, Anastasis @@aut@@ Hilaire, Jérôme @@oth@@ Nemet, Gregory F. @@oth@@ Luderer, Gunnar @@oth@@ Pietzcker, Robert C. @@oth@@ Rodrigues, Renato @@oth@@ Baumstark, Lavinia @@oth@@ Kriegler, Elmar @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV000529575 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
ELV052523411 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV052523411</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626033405.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210910s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV052523411</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">15,3</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHARM</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-84</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Giannousakis, Anastasis</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Technology costs</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Electromobility</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Carbon dioxide removal</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Transport</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hilaire, Jérôme</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nemet, Gregory F.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Luderer, Gunnar</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pietzcker, Robert C.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rodrigues, Renato</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Baumstark, Lavinia</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kriegler, Elmar</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion</subfield><subfield code="d">2017</subfield><subfield code="d">the international journal</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV000529575</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:216</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">day:1</subfield><subfield code="g">month:02</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHARM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazie</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazeutika</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">216</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="b">1</subfield><subfield code="c">0201</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Giannousakis, Anastasis |
| spellingShingle |
Giannousakis, Anastasis ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 44.40 Elsevier Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| authorStr |
Giannousakis, Anastasis |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV000529575 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 44.40 Elsevier Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 44.40 Elsevier Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 ssgn 15,3 fid PHARM bkl 44.40 Elsevier Technology costs Elsevier Electromobility Elsevier Carbon dioxide removal Elsevier Transport |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
j h jh g f n gf gfn g l gl r c p rc rcp r r rr l b lb e k ek |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV000529575 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV000529575 |
| title |
How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV052523411 (ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4 |
| title_full |
How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| author_sort |
Giannousakis, Anastasis |
| journal |
Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion |
| journalStr |
Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2021 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Giannousakis, Anastasis |
| container_volume |
216 |
| class |
610 VZ 15,3 ssgn PHARM DE-84 fid 44.40 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Giannousakis, Anastasis |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| title_sort |
how uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| title_auth |
How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| abstract |
Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. |
| abstractGer |
Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U FID-PHARM SSG-OLC-PHA SSG-OPC-PHA |
| title_short |
How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Hilaire, Jérôme Nemet, Gregory F. Luderer, Gunnar Pietzcker, Robert C. Rodrigues, Renato Baumstark, Lavinia Kriegler, Elmar |
| author2Str |
Hilaire, Jérôme Nemet, Gregory F. Luderer, Gunnar Pietzcker, Robert C. Rodrigues, Renato Baumstark, Lavinia Kriegler, Elmar |
| ppnlink |
ELV000529575 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T23:15:48.903Z |
| _version_ |
1803873418115809280 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV052523411</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626033405.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210910s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001293.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV052523411</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0360-5442(20)32360-4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">15,3</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHARM</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-84</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Giannousakis, Anastasis</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Limiting global warming to “well below 2°C” as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Technology costs</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Electromobility</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Carbon dioxide removal</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Transport</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hilaire, Jérôme</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nemet, Gregory F.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Luderer, Gunnar</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pietzcker, Robert C.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rodrigues, Renato</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Baumstark, Lavinia</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kriegler, Elmar</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Solanki, Nayan ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Rheological analysis of itraconazole-polymer mixtures to determine optimal melt extrusion temperature for development of amorphous solid dispersion</subfield><subfield code="d">2017</subfield><subfield code="d">the international journal</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV000529575</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:216</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">day:1</subfield><subfield code="g">month:02</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119253</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHARM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.40</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazie</subfield><subfield code="j">Pharmazeutika</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">216</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="b">1</subfield><subfield code="c">0201</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.400281 |