The Arctic is a vital region that helps preserve the balance of the global climate. The Arctic environment is particularly sensitive to short-lived climate pollutants, such as black carbon, which is the most light-absorbing component of particulate matter. Ambitious policy action to reduce air pollution would therefore reduce the negative environmental, health and economic impacts of air pollution, while slowing down climate change by reducing emissions of short-lived climate pollutants.Due to their proximity to the Arctic region, a central role in reducing air pollution in the Arctic is played by Arctic Council countries, namely Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden, and the United States. Arctic Council countries have affirmed their support to collectively bring black carbon emissions down by 25-33% by 2025 from 2013 levels. Ambitious policy action to reduce air pollution in Arctic Council countries would help achieve this target.This paper presents a quantitative assessment of the environmental, health and economic consequences of ambitious policy action to reduce air pollution in Arctic Council countries. The scenario analysis is based on a suite of modelling tools to project the impacts of increasingly ambitious policies up to 2050. The paper compares a business-as-usual scenario with policy scenarios in which Arctic Council countries, and other regional groupings, adopt the best available techniques to reduce air pollutant emissions, including end-of-pipe technologies, the use of cleaner fuels, and measures to reduce emissions in the agricultural sector.The modelling shows that these policies could substantially curb emissions of several air pollutants, including bringing black carbon emissions well below the collective target. The benefits would include better air quality, and reductions in air pollution-related premature deaths and illnesses. The costs of achieving the emission reductions would be offset by the economic benefits resulting from improved human and environmental health.

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is a lively field of research, and data and models are continuously improved in terms of impact pathways covered, reliability, and spatial detail. However, many of these advancements are scattered throughout the scientific literature, making it difficult for practitioners to apply the new models. Here, we present the LC-IMPACT method that provides characterization factors at the damage level for 11 impact categories related to three areas of protection (human health, ecosystem quality, natural resources). Human health damage is quantified as disability adjusted life years, damage to ecosystem quality as global species extinction equivalents (based on potentially disappeared fraction of species), and damage to mineral resources as kilogram of extra ore extracted. Seven of the impact categories include spatial differentiation at various levels of spatial scale. The influence of value choices related to the time horizon and the level of scientific evidence of the impacts considered is quantified with four distinct sets of characterization factors. We demonstrate the applicability of the proposed method with an illustrative life cycle assessment example of different fuel options in Europe (petrol or biofuel). Differences between generic and regionalized impacts vary up to two orders of magnitude for some of the selected impact categories, highlighting the importance of spatial detail in LCIA. This article met the requirements for a gold - gold JIE data openness badge described at.

This edition of the Global Energy and Climate Outlook (GECO) analyses the role of electrification in global transition pathways to a low Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions economy. Electricity is found to be an increasingly important energy carrier in final energy consumption already in the absence of stronger climate policies than those currently in place (Reference scenario), while enhanced electrification of final energy demand is a crucial element of the 2°C temperature change scenario, paving the way to climate neutrality. The 2°C target could be achieved by simultaneously transforming various elements of the energy system: shifting final energy demand from mainly fossil fuels towards electricity and low-carbon synthetic fuels mainly derived from electricity; decarbonising power generation; increasing energy efficiency in end-uses, which is favoured by further electrification; and mobilising novel options to better accommodate high shares of intermittent renewable electricity sources, such as demand-side load management and power storage. This report further shows that the 2°C target is technically possible at relatively low cost for the overall economy (global GDP reduction below 1% across all sensitivities compared to Reference in 2050). This would also bring along co-benefits for air quality. In order to explore the role that electrification can play as an emissions mitigation option, a number of sensitivity variants on key parameters impacting the energy system - energy prices, cost of technologies, non-economic drivers related to behaviour and policy - are conducted. The role of electricity is examined by large sector (industry, transport, buildings, power generation), with a particular regional focus on the EU and China and a sectoral focus on road transport electrification.