Jorgen Finstad

Norwegian. Interested in energy, sustainability transitions, decarbonization, and climate change.

[INTRANSIT @INTRANSITCentre]

Digitalization and sustainability, multi-system interactions, incumbent perspectives, new methods in transition studies - just some of the topics INTRANSITers are presenting at #IST2021 ! Check out all our contributions here: https://t.co/6eaPuncUKZ. See you @ist_strn!

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

Agreed! Really interesting work @Bankfieldbecky! What a strange organism we are. Our day-to-day fears of being viewed as 'zealots' - of standing out, of change - can outweigh our willingness to act on what we know is an enormous, devastating, and immediate challenge.

[I'm @Ketanjoshi.co on Bluesky @KetanJ0]

Hey everyone, this extract from @Bankfieldbecky's new book is an absolute must-read. It's on UK climate politics but I guarantee everyone in every country will recognise the duality being discussed here. Very excited to read the whole book later:

https://t.co/A64SOBhH2d

[Zeke Hausfather @hausfath]

Carbon cycle feedbacks are a large – but under-appreciated – source of uncertainty the future climate. Including these uncertainties could result in up to 25% more warming than in the main IPCC projections, as @richardabetts and I explore at @CarbonBrief https://t.co/R9zS7Ek5eJ

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@DrSimEvans Am I right in assuming only one of those scenarios has a (total) CCS capacity of less than ~1.4 Gt/yr in 2050?

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

Phenomenal article!

Especially like the point about shifting focus towards identifying solutions which are "“robust” across many possible futures, rather than optimal under a single future."

[Kate Dooley @katedooley0]

New paper 'Decision making in contexts of deep uncertainty' questing the role of IAMs in climate policy
https://t.co/RRndK8JeVH

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@Peters_Glen @KevinClimate My conclusion from yr thread and Kevin's tweet: A problem with current mitigation scenarios is that you can attack 'all' of them for the same reasons (CDR, dsc rate, etc). If they were speculative in different ways you could at least compare across the various speculative factors

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@iastruthers @keelingcurve @clequere Hmm. Sure you read the table right? It shows 'Absolute Annual Change' in GtCO2/yr. Haven't done the calculations, but don't think those 2020-2030 numbers would be too far off from yr calculations?

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@iastruthers @keelingcurve @clequere Some relevant discussion on that here (SR15, ch. 2, p. 121-123. See bottom of p. 123 for ramp-up rates.)

tl;dr: Yes. Most use BECCS, some use afforestation, some use both. The ones without either "rely on CDR through considerable net negative CO2 emissions in the AFOLU sector".

[Jessica Jewell 💙💛 @jessicadjewell]

We know how to save the climate in mathematical models but is it possible in the real world? @acherp & I propose a new method to explore feasibility of climate mitigation @WIREs_Reviews https://t.co/awki70mfKp, a sequel to my exchange w/ @KevinClimate https://t.co/FVmijFAY5L. /1

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

The four 'different' pathways which show how 'different' strategies have 'different' outcomes. In which GDP increase between 2020-2100 range from 400% (2.03%/yr) - 842% (2.84%/yr). Perhaps time to explore other differences than the choice of CDR?

https://t.co/w3TMaExkcN

[Glen Peters @Peters_Glen]

The #IPCC 1.5°C Special Report #SR15 used four illustrative pathways that varied by BECCS.

They all have considerable land-use change: 1500 million hectares is 4.5 India's!

If they don't have large-scale BECCS, they have large-scale afforestation. Land impacts unavoidable.

1/

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@Ninad_Bondre That's not to say these solutions are guaranteed to be more feasible. But if mitigation science aims to offer information on the ‘best’ policy for mitigation it has to diversify its exploration of solutions, so those of us interested in 'real-world feasibility' can compare them.

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@Ninad_Bondre Agree entirely, entirely. IAM approaches need to be supplemented with insights from social sciences. And mitigation science need to explore a wider set of solutions based on a wider set of assumptions - including assumptions which fall outside current socio-economic rationales.

[Glen Peters @Peters_Glen]

8. As Rob Socolow apparently said: “What's fair is no longer safe. And what's safe is no longer fair”
https://t.co/Cgvk8u7iyv

These issues need much more discussion & debate, otherwise we will be back here in 10 years wondering why emissions kept rising...

/END

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@AarneGranlund Think you might enjoy this one:
https://t.co/3jM2pmwdIk

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@AarneGranlund @DianaUrge @acherp @mammuthus @jessicadjewell @KevinClimate @RadReduction @ExtinctionR @IPCC_CH @robbie_andrew Table 2 in nature article (same as in CB article) answers half of what I was pondering, but not entirely. Was trying to figure out how much comes from electrification, how much from efficiency improvements in end-use products etc. Don't have the brain for it today tho :-p

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@DianaUrge @AarneGranlund @acherp @mammuthus @jessicadjewell @KevinClimate @RadReduction @ExtinctionR @IPCC_CH @robbie_andrew @NatureEnergyJnl Ah - I've read it a long time ago, I'll have a second look. Thanks for reminding me.

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@DianaUrge @AarneGranlund @acherp @mammuthus @jessicadjewell @KevinClimate @RadReduction @ExtinctionR @IPCC_CH @robbie_andrew Slightly to the side, but do you know if there's a way to see the energy efficiency improvements in LED? Not changes in energy demand but in efficiency?

[Jorgen Finstad @jorgenfin]

@AarneGranlund @DianaUrge @acherp @mammuthus @jessicadjewell @KevinClimate @RadReduction @ExtinctionR @IPCC_CH @robbie_andrew Think the key message anyone will get from reading up on CDR is: WE. NEED. TO. CUT. EMISSIONS. NOW.