Figure 3.25: Relationship between the cost of mitigation and long-term stabilization targets (radiative forcing compared to pre-industrial level, W/m² and CO₂-eq concentrations).

Notes: These panels show costs measured as a % loss of GDP (top), net present value of cumulative abatement costs (middle), and carbon price (bottom). The left-hand panels give costs for 2030, the middle panel for 2050, and the right-hand panel for 2100 repectively. Individual coloured lines denote selected studies with representative cost dynamics from very high to very low cost estimates. Scenarios from models sharing similar baseline assumptions are shown in the same colour. The grey-shaded range represents the 80th percentile of the TAR and post-TAR scenarios. NPV calculations are based on a discount rate of 5%. Solid lines show representative scenarios considering all radiatively active gases. CO₂ stabilization scenarios are added based on the relationship between CO₂ concentration and the radiative forcing targets shown in Figure 3.16. Dashed lines represent multi-gas scenarios, where the target is defined by the six Kyoto gases (other multi-gas scenarios consider all radiatively active gases).

Data sources: CCSP scenarios (USCCSP, 2006); IMCP scenarios (Edenhofer et al., 2006); Post-SRES (PS) scenarios (Morita et al., 2001); Azar et al., 2006; Riahi et al., 2006; Van Vuuren et al., 2007.