Carbon Dioxide Removal and warming reversal in the light of uncertain Earth System processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current and projected emissions trends suggest a likely reliance on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) to achieve the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement. Studies using Integrated Assessment Models have considered scenarios limiting global warming to 1.5°C in 2100 that include cumulative net removal of up to ~1000 GtCO2 over the 21st century, although also scenarios deploying substantially less CDR have been considered. Large CDR deployment beyond achieving net zero emissions is often assumed to achieve a Global Mean Temperature (GMT) decline after peak warming of several tenths of a degree by the end of the century. The feasibility of achieving CDR on such a large scale has been strongly contested for environmental, technological, geophysical, economic, institutional or socio-cultural reasons. Beyond these considerations, it is important to assess the possible realisation of a GMT decline in the context of uncertainties in the Earth System response. Here we attempt to review and compare these various sources of uncertainty. Some relevant Earth System feedbacks are not represented in climate models or only in a limited manner, such as carbon release from permafrost melting, wetlands and wildfires, which could release ~100 GtCO2 over the 21st century even in stringent mitigation scenarios, but there is low confidence around this number. Another source of uncertainty is the Zero Emissions Commitment, which quantifies how much global warming would occur after global CO2 emissions reach net zero. Its best estimate over 50 years is close to zero, but uncertainties were quantified to be as high as +/-0.3°C for cumulative emissions of 1000 PgC and uncertainties remain on the potential for warming on multi century timescales. Given this, additional post net-zero warming countering CDR induced cooling cannot be ruled out. Furthermore, it is not clear whether the TCRE assessed for increasing CO2 emissions would remain the same once we reach net-negative emissions. In light of these various sources of uncertainty we argue that a broader perspective on CDR and future GMT evolution beyond net zero is advisable. Acknowledging the uncertain efficacy of CDR-induced GMT decrease is important for comprehensive risk assessments and reflections on scenario design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".