According to the classification, the global temperature target of 2 °C and the emission reduction target of 50 % by 2050 correspond to the most stringent category, category I (Table 1). Table 1 Classification of emission mitigation scenarios according to different SCH772984 manufacturer stabilization targets (IPCC 2007) Category Additional radiative forcing (W/m2) CO2 concentration (ppm) Epacadostat solubility dmso CO2-eq concentration (ppm) Global mean temperature increase above pre-industrial at equilibrium using best estimate climate sensitivity (°C) Peaking year for CO2 emissions Change in global CO2 emissions in 2050 (% of 2000 emissions) No. of assessed scenarios I 2.5–3.0 350–400 445–490 2.0–2.4 2000–2015 −85 to −50

6 II 3.0–3.5 400–440 490–535 2.4–2.8 2000–2020 −60 to −30 18 III 3.5–4.0 440–485 535–590 2.8–3.2 2010–2030 −30 to +5 21 IV 4.0–5.0 485–570 590–710 3.2–4.0 2020–2060 +10 to +60 118 V 5.0–6.0 570–660 710–855 4.0–4.9 2050–2080 +25 to +85 9 VI 6.0–7.5 660–790 855–1130 4.9–6.1 2060–2090 +90 to +140 5 Total             177 In the scenarios in category I, CO2 emissions peak in 2000–2015 and drop to −85 to −50 % in 2050 relative to the 2000 level. While these results certainly furnish policymakers with valuable information, one should be mindful Selleckchem GDC-0994 of their robustness. The number of scenarios in category

I is quite limited, accounting for only 6 out of all 177 scenarios assessed. To make up for this limitation, the modeling community has been actively exploring low climate stabilization scenarios after the AR4. EMF 22, for MycoClean Mycoplasma Removal Kit example, considered the GHG concentration stabilization target of 450 ppm CO2-eq and examined

the achievability of this target under different international mitigation policies and emission pathways (Clarke et al. 2009). The ADAM project analyzed the technical feasibility and economic viability of the 2 °C target (Edenhofer et al. 2010). The RECIPE project assessed the achievability of a CO2 concentration target of 450 ppm (a level roughly corresponding to 530–550 ppm CO2-eq) and examined how technology and international policy frameworks influenced this achievability (Luderer et al. 2011). The main objective of these existing studies is to assess the long-term (up to 2100) technical feasibility and economic viability of low stabilization targets from a macroscopic perspective. Detailed assessments of the technologies were therefore outside the scope of the studies. Only a few groups so far have conducted detailed technological assessments in stringent climate target scenarios (IEA 2010, for example). As such, a detailed understanding of technologies within a long-term stringent GHG mitigation scenario is still awaited. A mid-term perspective is also required. According to UNEP (2010), the pledged mid-term emission reductions still fall far below the actual mid-term emission reduction required to meet the long-term climate target of 2 °C.