Susanne Vedel Jørgensen

TL;DR: In this article, the authors have developed robust methods to account for the benefits, if any, of sequestration and temporary storage and release of biogenic carbon, but there is still no overall consensus on the most appropriate ways of considering and quantifying it.

TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review of available midpoint metrics (i.e., using an indicator situated in the middle of the cause-effect chain from emissions to climate change) for well-mixed greenhouse gases and near-term climate forcers based on the current literature is performed.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue for an active consideration of these aspects to bridge the gap between climate impact methods used in environmental impact analysis and climate science, and argue that failure to acknowledge the complexity of climate change drivers and the spatial and temporal heterogeneities of their climate system responses can lead to the deployment of suboptimal and potentially even counterproductive, mitigation strategies.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors introduce the climate tipping impact category, which represents the Climate tipping potential (CTP) of GHG emissions relative to a climatic target level, which is defined as the emission's impact divided by the capacity of the atmosphere for absorbing the impact without exceeding the target level.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors assess the consequences of using such approaches that disregard the long timescale on which complete removal of atmospheric CO2 occurs, and make an assessment on what are relevant timescales to consider when including the value of temporary carbon storage in carbon footprinting, and illustrate how the use of the 100-year accounting period can cause long-term global warming impacts to be hidden by short-term storage solutions that may not offer real longterm climate change mitigation.