1. Some more thoughts on extreme scenarios (rdcu.be/b1OcE)
Is a call for more extreme scenarios actually a call for probabilistic assessments of scenarios?
(because it requires defining "extreme")
Is a call for more extreme scenarios actually a call for probabilistic assessments of scenarios?
(because it requires defining "extreme")
2. SR15 removed “higher overshoot” scenarios from many of the statistics, but didn’t remove the LED scenario (referred to as extreme in the Comment).
Why did sr15 not remove scenarios with low/high coal, oil, gas, solar, etc? Were subjective choices made behind closed doors?
Why did sr15 not remove scenarios with low/high coal, oil, gas, solar, etc? Were subjective choices made behind closed doors?
3. SR15 also removed 24 of 47 GCAM scenarios because of negative AFOLU in 2020.
Were scenarios also removed because of unusual short-term behaviour in coal, oil, gas?
For example, what about the illustrative scenario with the crazy oil? (also GCAM).
Were scenarios also removed because of unusual short-term behaviour in coal, oil, gas?
For example, what about the illustrative scenario with the crazy oil? (also GCAM).
4. When scenario ensembles are made, to get % reduction in 2030, should the extreme scenarios be removed? Should model overrepresentation be corrected? Should models be weighted on performance?
5. The Nature Energy comment makes good points about extreme scenarios, but should it force modellers to face some (long overdue) questions on outliers & ensembles?
Are they in fact implicitly calling more probabilistic approaches (judging likelihood)?
rdcu.be/b1OcE
Are they in fact implicitly calling more probabilistic approaches (judging likelihood)?
rdcu.be/b1OcE
