Senior Researcher at CICERO. Research on human drivers of global change, global carbon cycle, bioenergy, scenarios, sustainable consumption, international trade and climate policy, emission metrics, and too much more.
Norway’s target of climate neutrality by 2030 is not enshrined in law, impossible to reach without massive use of flexible mechanisms, and currently lacks a clear governmental strategy. A frontrunner in the net zero debate?
Carbon budgets have come to dominate the climate policy discourse, but have they served their purpose? Is it time to move beyond carbon budgets?
Some people love negative emissions, others hate them. Some people think 1.5°C is impossible, others think it is a matter of political will. I think stylised figures are a great way to explain the challenges.
Shell has just released a new scenario, Sky, which meets the goals of the Paris Agreement. How does it compare with other low carbon pathways?
A new estimate of the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity means that the carbon budget to stay below 2°C could be much larger.
The carbon intensity is a useful indicator, but also fraught with difficulties. Depending on the data choices, the policy implications could be quite different.
What sparked my interest in 2017, and what will raise my eyebrow in 2018?
The International Energy Agency (IEA) is often critiqued for being pro fossil fuel and anti-renewables, but are their scenarios so different to those developed by the broader researcher community?
The large-scale carbon dioxide removal in emission scenarios is becoming better known, but is it just a consequence of high discount rates?
No one doubts that oil production will go down in a 2°C world, but whether there is place for new oil fields is a far more nuanced discussion.
DNV GL has added a new addition to the energy outlook literature, one that builds a forecast of the ‘most likely’ future leading to around 2.5°C in 2100.
A new research paper suggests a rather significant upward revision of the carbon budget for 1.5°C. This is a potential game changer, but it is too early to reformulate mitigation plans.
Solar and wind are the flavour of the decade, and carbon capture and storage is having an identity crisis. But, love it or hate it, we need carbon capture and storage to keep below 2°C.
Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry flattened in the last few years, and many argue we are now decoupling emissions from economic growth. Is this a success story or an unfortunate use of the concept?
The science shows that the Paris Agreement requires removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at scale. We suggest a three-point plan for governments to make progress.
Many have reported that CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry are flat, but we have had a record increase in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. Yes, this is exactly what is expected!
The annual release of the BP Statistical Review of World Energy gives a first assessment of how the Global Carbon Budget’s 2016 emission projection fared. In short, it did well.
Global coal consumption may have peaked, solar and wind have had explosive growth, yet global emissions remain flat. We have a way to go!
Keeping global warming below 2°C is hard, but 2.5°C is a walk in the park!
We have had three years with virtually no growth in carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry. What has caused the slowdown and does this put us on a path to «well below 2°C»?
