Robustness of climate metrics under climate policy ambiguity

A wide array of alternatives has been proposed as the common metrics with which to compare the climate impacts of different emission types. Different physical and economic metrics and their parameterizations give diverse weights between e.g. CH₄ and CO₂, and fixing the metric from one perspective makes it sub-optimal from another. As the aims of global climate policy involve some degree of ambiguity, it is not possible to determine a metric that would be optimal and consistent with all policy aims. This paper evaluates the cost implications of using predetermined metrics in cost-efficient mitigation scenarios. Three formulations of the 2°C target, including both deterministic and stochastic approaches, shared a wide range of metric values for CH₄ with which the mitigation costs are only slightly above the cost-optimal levels. Therefore, although ambiguity in current policy might prevent us from selecting an optimal metric, it can be possible to select robust metric values that perform well with multiple policy targets.