List of figures xix7.12 From Gates, D. M. 1993.Climate Change and its Biological Consequences.
Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates Inc., p. 63. 172
7.13 Data from Bugmann, H. quoted in Miko U. F.et al. 1996. Climate change impacts on
forests. In Watson, R.et al. (eds.) 1996.Climate Change 1995. Impacts, Adaptation
and Mitigation of Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Chapter 1. 174
8.1 Daisyworld after Lovelock, J. E., 1988. The Ages of Gaia. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 203
8.2 From Lovelock, J. E. 1988.The Ages of Gaia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 82. 203
9.1 Figure 13.2 from Mearns, L. O., Hulme, M.et al. 2001. Climate scenario
development. In Houghton, J. T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., Noguer, M., van der Linden,
P. J., Dai, X., Maskell, K., Johnson,C. A. (eds.)Climate Change 2001: The Scientific
Basis.Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, Chapter 13. 219
9.2 ENVISAT showing the instruments included in its payload. From European Space
Agency. 224
9.3 From Munasinghe, M.et al. 1996. Applicability of techniques of cost-benefit analysis
to climate change. In Bruce, J., Hoesung Lee, Haites, E. (eds.) 1996.Climate Change
1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, Chapter 5. 233
9.4 Figure SPM-9 from Watson, R.T.et al. 2001.Climate Change 2001: Synthesis
Report.Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Third Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge:Cambridge University
Press. 235
10.1 Figure SPM 6 from The summary for policymakers. In Watson, R.et al. (eds.) 2001.
Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report.Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III
to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. These profiles are known as WRE profiles
after Wigley, Richels and Edmonds who suggested them. Rather than immediately
reducing from ‘business-as-usual’ scenarios such as A2, they follow those profiles for
the first few decades of the twenty-first century before the reduction starts. 256
10.2 From Grubb, M. 2003. The economics of the Kyoto Protocol.World Economics, 3 ,
p. 145. 258
10.3 From the Global Commons Institute, Illustrating their ‘Contraction and Convergence’
proposal for achieving stabilisation of carbon dioxide concentration. 262
11.1 Adapted and updated from Davis, G. R. 1990. Energy for planet Earth.Scientific
American, 263 , September, pp. 21–7. 269
11.2 Figure 7.5 from Watson, R.et al.(eds.) 2001.Climate Change 2001: Synthesis
Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Third Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 271
11.3 From Goldemberg, J. (ed.)World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of
Sustainability. United Nations Development programme (UNDP), United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA) and World Energy Council