Mark M. Dekker, Vassilis Daioglou, Robert Pietzcker, Renato Rodrigues, Harmen-Sytze de Boer, Francesco Dalla Longa, Laurent Drouet, Johannes Emmerling, Amir Fattahi, Theofano Fotiou, Panagiotis Fragkos, Oliver Fricko, Ema Gusheva, Mathijs Harmsen, Daniel Huppmann, Maria Kannavou, Volker Krey, Francesco Lombardi, Gunnar Luderer, Stefan Pfenninger, Ioannis Tsiropoulos, Behnam Zakeri, Bob van der Zwaan, Will Usher, Detlef van Vuuren
{"title":"Identifying energy model fingerprints in mitigation scenarios","authors":"Mark M. Dekker, Vassilis Daioglou, Robert Pietzcker, Renato Rodrigues, Harmen-Sytze de Boer, Francesco Dalla Longa, Laurent Drouet, Johannes Emmerling, Amir Fattahi, Theofano Fotiou, Panagiotis Fragkos, Oliver Fricko, Ema Gusheva, Mathijs Harmsen, Daniel Huppmann, Maria Kannavou, Volker Krey, Francesco Lombardi, Gunnar Luderer, Stefan Pfenninger, Ioannis Tsiropoulos, Behnam Zakeri, Bob van der Zwaan, Will Usher, Detlef van Vuuren","doi":"10.1038/s41560-023-01399-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Energy models are used to study emissions mitigation pathways, such as those compatible with the Paris Agreement goals. These models vary in structure, objectives, parameterization and level of detail, yielding differences in the computed energy and climate policy scenarios. To study model differences, diagnostic indicators are common practice in many academic fields, for example, in the physical climate sciences. However, they have not yet been applied systematically in mitigation literature, beyond addressing individual model dimensions. Here we address this gap by quantifying energy model typology along five dimensions: responsiveness, mitigation strategies, energy supply, energy demand and mitigation costs and effort, each expressed through several diagnostic indicators. The framework is applied to a diagnostic experiment with eight energy models in which we explore ten scenarios focusing on Europe. Comparing indicators to the ensemble yields comprehensive ‘energy model fingerprints’, which describe systematic model behaviour and contextualize model differences for future multi-model comparison studies. Energy models play a crucial role in studying mitigation strategies; however, substantial variations among these models exist. This study presents a typology for energy models to map these model differences, based on five dimensions, each characterized by numerous diagnostic indicators.","PeriodicalId":19073,"journal":{"name":"Nature Energy","volume":"8 12","pages":"1395-1404"},"PeriodicalIF":60.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-023-01399-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Energy","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-023-01399-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Energy models are used to study emissions mitigation pathways, such as those compatible with the Paris Agreement goals. These models vary in structure, objectives, parameterization and level of detail, yielding differences in the computed energy and climate policy scenarios. To study model differences, diagnostic indicators are common practice in many academic fields, for example, in the physical climate sciences. However, they have not yet been applied systematically in mitigation literature, beyond addressing individual model dimensions. Here we address this gap by quantifying energy model typology along five dimensions: responsiveness, mitigation strategies, energy supply, energy demand and mitigation costs and effort, each expressed through several diagnostic indicators. The framework is applied to a diagnostic experiment with eight energy models in which we explore ten scenarios focusing on Europe. Comparing indicators to the ensemble yields comprehensive ‘energy model fingerprints’, which describe systematic model behaviour and contextualize model differences for future multi-model comparison studies. Energy models play a crucial role in studying mitigation strategies; however, substantial variations among these models exist. This study presents a typology for energy models to map these model differences, based on five dimensions, each characterized by numerous diagnostic indicators.
Nature EnergyEnergy-Energy Engineering and Power Technology
CiteScore
75.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
193
期刊介绍:
Nature Energy is a monthly, online-only journal committed to showcasing the most impactful research on energy, covering everything from its generation and distribution to the societal implications of energy technologies and policies.
With a focus on exploring all facets of the ongoing energy discourse, Nature Energy delves into topics such as energy generation, storage, distribution, management, and the societal impacts of energy technologies and policies. Emphasizing studies that push the boundaries of knowledge and contribute to the development of next-generation solutions, the journal serves as a platform for the exchange of ideas among stakeholders at the forefront of the energy sector.
Maintaining the hallmark standards of the Nature brand, Nature Energy boasts a dedicated team of professional editors, a rigorous peer-review process, meticulous copy-editing and production, rapid publication times, and editorial independence.
In addition to original research articles, Nature Energy also publishes a range of content types, including Comments, Perspectives, Reviews, News & Views, Features, and Correspondence, covering a diverse array of disciplines relevant to the field of energy.