WG: ‘Plausible’ energy scenarios?! How users of scenarios assess uncertain futures - new open access paper

Skip to first unread message

Berit Müller

Mar 3, 2021, 6:33:45 AMMar 3
to openmod-i...@googlegroups.com

I forward this announcement from one community to the other because I think it could be quite interesting for the openmods.

Best regards



Von: Energy and Social Science Network (EASSN) Announcement List <EA...@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> Im Auftrag von Schmidt-Scheele, Ricarda
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 3. März 2021 11:08
Betreff: ‘Plausible’ energy scenarios?! How users of scenarios assess uncertain futures - new open access paper


Dear network members, 


the energy transition literature is rich in scenario studies that produce 'plausible' pathways to inform policy and decision-making. Yet, insights into what plausibility really means and how it is assessed, particularly by the scenario users, remains largely underexplored. 


I am very happy to share my latest article that seeks to address this conceptual gap: 


I hope the study will be relevant for your work. 


Please do share far and wide - the article is open access. 






Dr. Ricarda Schmidt-Scheele
Postdoctoral Researcher 


ZIRIUS Center for Interdisciplinary Risk and Innovation Studies
University of Stuttgart
Seidenstr. 36
70174 Stuttgart
Tel: 0711 685-83973



*** New Publications ***

Schmidt-Scheele, R. 2020: Plausible energy scenarios?! How users of scenarios assess uncertain futures. Energy Strategy Reviews, 32: 100571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2020.100571 


Schmidt-Scheele, R. 2020: The Plausibility of Future Scenarios: Conceptualising an Unexplored Criterion in Scenario Planning.



To unsubscribe from the EASSN list, click the following link:

Robbie Morrison

Mar 3, 2021, 6:59:41 AMMar 3
to openmod-i...@googlegroups.com, Ricarda Schmidt-Scheele (Uni Stuttgart)

Hi Berit, Ricarda, all

This short and sharp article in The Guardian today follows on from the Schmidt-Scheele theme, but from the other side of the fence — namely intentional abuse:

Simon Lewis is professor of global change science at University College London and University of Leeds:

Simon identifies three net‑zero "deceptions":

  1. over-reliance on NET (negative‑emissions technologies) to preserve the status quo — including questionable land availability and deployment of unproven technologies (example Shell)
  2. offsetting against notional emissions trajectories instead of removing carbon from the atmosphere (example Mark Carney and Brookfield Asset Management)
  3. fraudulent additionality claims in commercial carbon offset markets (example Total)

He argues that urgent discussion is needed about what exactly comprises a "residual emission" that requires offsetting.

Energy modelers are (hopefully) not going to be contributing to these deceptions, but our work is nonetheless being increasingly thrust into this wider and rougher policy debate.

@berit: thanks for cross‑posting

with best wishes, Robbie

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "openmod initiative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openmod-initiat...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/AM9PR10MB418450B23C1292D68752C64B99989%40AM9PR10MB4184.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.
Robbie Morrison
Address: Schillerstrasse 85, 10627 Berlin, Germany
Phone: +49.30.612-87617
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages