client logo
Version: 0.0.1 | Published: 23 Jun 2022 | Updated: 1060 days ago

Data for Figure TS.31 - Technical Summary of Working Group III Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report

Dataset

Summary

Citation:
Steg, L.; Veldstra, J.; Frossard, A.; de Lucena, P.; Sugiyama, M.; Kilkis, S.; de Kleijne, K.; Smith, P.; Nilsson, L. J.; van Diemen, R.; de Coninck, H.; Renforth, P.; Mirasgedis, S.; Nemet, G.; Görsch, R.; Posen, D.; Jaramilo, P., 2022, Data for Figure TS.31 - Technical Summary of Working Group III Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, MetadataWorks, https://doi.org/10.48490/gjdy-be46

Documentation

Description:
Figure TS.31 legend: chapter-level assessment for selected mitigation options. Overlaps may exist in the mitigation options assessed and presented by sector and system, and feasibility might differ depending on the demarcation of that option in each sector. Chapters 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12 assess mitigation response options across six feasibility dimensions: geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, socio-cultural and institutional. AFOLU (Ch7) and industry (Ch11) are not included because of the heterogeneity of options in these sectors. For each dimension, a set of feasibility indicators was identified. Examples of indicators include impacts on land use, air pollution, economic costs, technology scalability, public acceptance and political acceptance (see Box TS.15, and Annex II Part IV Section 11 for a detailed explanation). An indicator could refer to a barrier or an enabler to implementation, or could refer to both a barrier or an enabler, depending on the context, speed, and scale of implementation. Dark blue bars indicate the extent of enablers to deployment within each dimension. This is shown relative to the maximum number of possible enablers, as indicated by the light blue shading. Dark orange bars indicate the extent of barriers to deployment within each dimension. This is shown relative to the maximum number of possible barriers, as indicated by light orange shading. A light grey dot indicates that there is limited or no evidence to assess the option. A dark grey dot indicates that one of the feasibility indicators within that dimension is not relevant for the deployment of the option. The relevant sections in the underlying chapters include references to the literature on which the assessment is based and indicate whether the feasibility of an option varies depending on context (e.g., region), scale (e.g., small, medium, full scale), speed (e.g., implementation in 2030 versus 2050) and warming level (e.g., 1.5°C versus 2°C). {6.4, 8.5, 9.10, 10.8, 12.3, Annex II Part IV Section 11}
Is Part Of:
Technical Summary of Working Group III Contribution to the IPCC AR6

Coverage

Spatial Coverage:
Global

Geographic Bounding Box

Lower Left Latitude:
-90.0000
Lower Left Longitude:
-180.0000
Upper Right Latitude:
90.0000
Upper Right Longitude:
180.0000

Provenance

Source:
AR6 WGIII Chapters 6, 8, 9, 10, 12 Notably: Chapter 6: Table SM6 Chapter 8: Table SM8.2 Chapter 9: Table SM9.1 Chapter 10: Appendix 10.3 Chapter 12: Table SM12.B Data processing/treatment: For full details of data processing/treatment, please see "TS.31_Data_Processing_or_Treatment" in the Data Download tab.
Purpose:
Data used by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) authors and supplied for archiving to MetadataWorks Ltd by the Technical Support Unit (TSU) for IPCC Working Group III (WG III).

Accessibility

Access

Access Service:
Available for download from the IPCC Data Catalogue.
Format:
application/vnd.ms-excel
Language:
en

Usage

Resource Creator:
  • Steg, L.
  • Veldstra, J.
  • Frossard, A.
  • de Lucena, P.
  • Sugiyama, M.
  • Kilkis, S.
  • de Kleijne, K.
  • Smith, P.
  • Nilsson, L. J.
  • van Diemen, R.
  • de Coninck, H.
  • Renforth, P.
  • Mirasgedis, S.
  • Nemet, G.
  • Görsch, R.
  • Posen, D.
  • Jaramilo, P.