Use este identificador para citar ou linkar para este item:
Registro completo de metadados
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.contributor.authorPhilip Martin Fearnside
dc.description.abstractGlobal warming mitigation calculationsrequire consistent procedures for handlingtime in order to compare `permanent' gainsfrom energy-sector mitigation options with`impermanent' gains from many forest-sectoroptions. A critical part of carbonaccounting methodologies such as thosebased on `ton-years' (the product of thenumber of tons of carbon times the numberof years that each ton is held out of theatmosphere) is definition of a timehorizon, or the time period over whichcarbon impacts and benefits are considered. Here a case is made for using a timehorizon of 100 years. This choice avoidsdistortions created by much longer timehorizons that would lead to decisionsinconsistent with societal behavior inother spheres; it also avoids a rapidincrease in the implied value of time ifhorizons shorter than 100 years are used.Selection of a time horizon affectsdecisions on financial mechanisms andcarbon credit. Simple adaptations canallow a time horizon to be specified andused to calculate mitigation benefits andat the same time reserve a given percentageof weight in decision making forgenerations beyond the end of the timehorizon. The choice of a time horizon willheavily influence whether mitigationoptions such as avoided deforestation areconsidered viable.
dc.subjectAquecimento Global
dc.subjectEfeito Estufa
dc.titleWhy a 100-year time horizon should be used for global warming mitigation calculations
dc.publisher.periodicoMitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change
Aparece nas coleções:Coordenação de Dinâmica Ambiental (CDAM)

Arquivos associados a este item:
Não existem arquivos associados a este item.

Este item está licenciada sob uma Licença Creative Commons Creative Commons