Adriana Marcucci

Dr. Adriana Marcucci


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2015 in Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EKElmar Kriegler
Elmar Kriegler
Keywan RiahiKeywan Riahi
Keywan Riahi
NBNico Bauer
Nico Bauer
VSValeria Jana Schwanitz
Valeria Jana Schwanitz
NPNils Petermann
Nils Petermann
OEOttmar Edenhofer
Ottmar Edenhofer
International audienceThis study explores a situation of staged accession to a global climate policy regime from the current situation of regionally fragmented and moderate climate action. The analysis is based on scenarios in which a front runner coalition - the EU or the EU and China - embarks on immediate ambitious climate action while the rest of the world makes a transition to a global climate regime between 2030 and 2050. We assume that the ensuing regime involves strong mitigation efforts but does not require late joiners to compensate for their initially higher emissions. Thus, climate targets are relaxed, and although staged accession can achieve significant reductions of global warming, the resulting climate outcome is unlikely to be consistent with the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees. The addition of China to the front runner coalition can reduce pre-2050 excess emissions by 20-30%, increasing the likelihood of staying below 2 degrees. Not accounting for potential co-benefits, the cost of front runner action is found to be lower for the EU than for China. Regions that delay their accession to the climate regime face a trade-off between reduced short term costs and higher transitional requirements due to larger carbon lock-ins and more rapidly increasing carbon prices during the accession period

19 August 2017 in Climatic Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
AMAdriana Marcucci
Adriana Marcucci
SKSocrates Kypreos
Socrates Kypreos
EPEvangelos Panos
Evangelos Panos

1 September 2015 in Energy Economics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AMAdriana Marcucci
Adriana Marcucci
Panagiotis FragkosPanagiotis Fragkos
Panagiotis Fragkos

1 January 2015 in Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AMAdriana Marcucci
Adriana Marcucci
HTHal Turton
Hal Turton

19 January 2016 in Climatic Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MHMathijs J. H. M. Harmsen
Mathijs J. H. M. Harmsen
MBMaarten van Den Berg
Maarten van Den Berg
VKVolker Krey
Volker Krey
GLGunnar Luderer
Gunnar Luderer
AMAdriana Marcucci
Adriana Marcucci
DVDetlef P. Van Vuuren
Detlef P. Van Vuuren

7 September 2015 in Climatic Change
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MHMathijs J. H. M. Harmsen
Mathijs J. H. M. Harmsen
DVDetlef P van Vuuren
Detlef P van Vuuren
MBMaarten van Den Berg
Maarten van Den Berg
AHAndries F Hof
Andries F Hof
CHChris Hope
Chris Hope
MSMichiel Schaeffer
Michiel Schaeffer
This study aims to create insight in how Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) perform in describing the climate forcing by non-CO2 gases and aerosols. The simple climate models (SCMs) included in IAMs have been run with the same prescribed anthropogenic emission pathways and compared to analyses with complex earth system models (ESMs) in terms of concentration and radiative forcing levels. In our comparison, particular attention was given to the short-lived forcers' climate effects. In general, SCMs show forcing levels within the expert model ranges. However, the more simple SCMs seem to underestimate forcing differences between baseline and mitigation scenarios because of omission of ozone, black carbon and/or indirect methane forcing effects. Above all, results also show that among IAMs there is a significant spread (0.74 W/m2 in 2100) in non-CO2 forcing projections for a 2.6 W/m2 mitigation scenario, mainly due to uncertainties in the indirect effects of aerosols. This has large implications for determining optimal mitigation strategies among IAMs with regard to required CO2 forcing targets and policy costs.