Parties need to agree upon common data, standards, supporting theories and methodologies. This annex summarizes a set of agreed upon conventions and methodologies. These include the establishment of metrics, determination of a base year, definitions of methodologies and consistency of protocols that permit a legitimate comparison between alternative types of energy in the context of climate change phenomena. This section defines or describes these fundamental definitions and concepts as used throughout this report, recognizing that the literature often uses inconsistent definitions and assumptions.
This report communicates uncertainty where relevant, for example, by showing the results of sensitivity analyses and by quantitatively presenting ranges in cost numbers as well as ranges in the scenario results. This report does not apply formal IPCC uncertainty terminology because at the time of approval of this report, IPCC uncertainty guidance was in the process of being revised.
Metrics for analysis in this report
A number of metrics can simply be stated or are relatively easy to define. Annex II provides the set of agreed upon metrics. Those which require further description are found below. The units used and basic parameters pertinent to the analysis of each RE type in this report include:
International System of Units (SI) for standards and units
Metric tonnes (t) CO2, CO2eq
Primary energy values in exajoules (EJ)
IEA energy conversion factors between physical and energy units
Capacity: GW thermal (GWt), GW electricity (GWe)
Wind energy offers significant potential for near-term (2020) and long-term (2050) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions. A number of different wind energy technologies are available across a range of applications, but the primary use of wind energy of relevance to climate change mitigation is to generate electricity from larger, grid-connected wind turbines, deployed either on- or offshore. Focusing on these technologies, the wind power capacity installed by the end of 2009 was capable of meeting roughly 1.8% of worldwide electricity demand, and that contribution could grow to in excess of 20% by 2050 if ambitious efforts are made to reduce GHG emissions and to address the other impediments to increased wind energy deployment. Onshore wind energy is already being deployed at a rapid pace in many countries, and no insurmountable technical barriers exist that preclude increased levels of wind energy penetration into electricity supply systems. Moreover, though average wind speeds vary considerably by location, ample technical potential exists in most regions of the world to enable significant wind energy deployment. In some areas with good wind resources, the cost of wind energy is already competitive with current energy market prices, even without considering relative environmental impacts. Nonetheless, in most regions of the world, policy measures are still required to ensure rapid deployment. Continued advances in on- and offshore wind energy technology are expected, however, further reducing the cost of wind energy and improving wind energy's GHG emissions reduction potential.
Historically, economic development has been strongly correlated with increasing energy use and growth of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Renewable energy (RE) can help decouple that correlation, contributing to sustainable development (SD). In addition, RE offers the opportunity to improve access to modern energy services for the poorest members of society, which is crucial for the achievement of any single of the eight Millennium Development Goals.
Theoretical concepts of SD can provide useful frameworks to assess the interactions between SD and RE. SD addresses concerns about relationships between human society and nature. Traditionally, SD has been framed in the three-pillar model—Economy, Ecology, and Society—allowing a schematic categorization of development goals, with the three pillars being interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Within another conceptual framework, SD can be oriented along a continuum between the two paradigms of weak sustainability and strong sustainability. The two paradigms differ in assumptions about the substitutability of natural and human-made capital. RE can contribute to the development goals of the three-pillar model and can be assessed in terms of both weak and strong SD, since RE utilization is defined as sustaining natural capital as long as its resource use does not reduce the potential for future harvest.
Allegory flourished in premodern Islamic literatures. Remarkably, however, neither premodern nor modern literary historians devote independent discussions to the genre per se, or even include the term in their indices. Allegorical praxis is simply treated under other generic categories, such as the mystical tale, the philosophical visionary recital, the poetic romance, or scriptural and textual commentary. Discussion here therefore requires drawing together variegated strands of literary practice to portray the history and development of allegory in Arabic, Persian, and Ottoman Turkish literatures, which are the major literary traditions of Islamic culture. Other Islamic literatures exist, in Urdu, Malay, and Swahili, for example, yet neither space nor scope of personal expertise allows their treatment here. Allegory in Islamic literatures as a developed literary practice begins at the turn of the eleventh century, four centuries after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Yet allegory draws on earlier periods for crucial constituent narrative forms, topics, themes, source materials, and interpretational frameworks. An initial overview of relevant influences will clarify later developments.
The Qur’an influences allegorical practice in Islamic literatures in three significant ways. First, it dramatically emphasizes the existential and experiential duality that informs all allegorical writing. The Qur’an finds humans immersed in the immediate pleasures of corporeal sensation and worldly ambition. It calls on them to transcend these alluring earthly attachments and return to the “rightly guided path.” Humans, it states, must reorder their lives. Through divine mercy, God sends both prophets and revelation to guide this change in human orientation, with Muhammad being the last of such prophets and the Qur’an the final revelation.
Happy Outlook for Imminent Perpetual Peace From the Lowest Level of Man's Living Nature to his Highest, that of Philosophy
Chrysippus says, in his pithy Stoic way: “Nature has given the pig a soul, instead of salt, so that he should not become rotten.” Now this is the lowest level of man's nature, prior to all cultivation, namely that of mere animal instinct. But it seems as if here the philosopher has thrown a prophetic glance into the physiological systems of our own day; save only that now, instead of the word ‘soul’, we have taken to using that of living force (and rightly so, since from an effect we can certainly infer to the force that produces it, but not forthwith to a substance specially adapted to this type of effect); we locate life, therefore, in the action of animating forces (life-impulse) and the ability to react to them (living-capacity), and call that man healthy in whom a proportionate stimulus produces neither an excessive nor an altogether too small effect: while conversely, the animalic operation of nature will pass over into a chemical one, which has decay as its consequence, so that it is not (as used to be thought) decay that must follow from and after death, but death that must follow from the preceding decay.
The Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics is the preeminent synopsis in the history of philosophy. Kant completed it about fifteen months after the Critique of Pure Reason was published. He wanted to present his critical philosophy concisely and accessibly, for “future teachers” of metaphysics. He also wanted to convince his fellow metaphysicians “that it is unavoidably necessary to suspend their work for the present,” until they have determined “whether such a thing as metaphysics is even possible at all” (4:255). Although the Critique “always remains the foundation to which the Prolegomena refer only as preparatory exercises” (4:261), Kant nonetheless hoped that the shorter work would be used to assess the critical philosophy “piece by piece from its foundation,” serving “as a general synopsis, with which the work itself could then be compared on occasion” (4:380).
In the Prolegomena, Kant distilled his critical inquiry into the General Question, “Is metaphysics possible at all?” (4:271), which he in turn interpreted as a question about the possibility of synthetic a priori cognition (4:275–6), or cognition through pure reason (that is, independent of sensory experience). To answer the General Question, Kant first asked how synthetic a priori cognition is possible in two areas where he considered it actual: pure mathematics and pure natural science. He found that this possibility (and actuality) could be explained only by positing cognitive structures that the subject brings to cognition, as forms of sensory intuition and categories of the understanding.
Within a few years of the publication of his Critique of Pure Reason in 1781, Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) was recognized by his contemporaries as one of the seminal philosophers of modern times – indeed as one of the great philosophers of all time. This renown soon spread beyond German-speaking lands, and translations of Kant's work into English were published even before 1800. Since then, interpretations of Kant's views have come and gone and loyalty to his positions has waxed and waned, but his importance has not diminished. Generations of scholars have devoted their efforts to producing reliable translations of Kant into English as well as into other languages.
There are four main reasons for the present edition of Kant's writings:
Completeness. Although most of the works published in Kant's lifetime have been translated before, the most important ones more than once, only fragments of Kant's many important unpublished works have ever been translated. These include the Opus postumum, Kant's unfinished magnum opus on the transition from philosophy to physics; transcriptions of his classroom lectures; his correspondence; and his marginalia and other notes. One aim of this edition is to make a comprehensive sampling of these materials available in English for the first time.
Von einem neuerdings erhobenen vornehmen Ton in der Philosophie was first published in May, 1796, in the Berlinische Monatsschrift 27, 387–426. It was the opening shot in a controversy that later drew in a number of other writers, and to which Kant was to contribute a second essay: Verkündigung des nahen Abschlusses eines Traktats zum ewigen Frieden in der Philosophie, which appeared in December of that year (BM 28, 485–504). In the meantime, a side-dispute had also broken out with the mathematician J. A. H. Reimarus, over an allusion to Pythagorean triangles in the first essay; it led Kant to pen a brief explanation: Ausgleichung eines auf Missverstand beruhenden mathematischen Streits, which was printed in the August, 1796, number of the same journal. It had nothing to do with the main issues in contention, and in some editions of Kant's works has become detached from its context, to lead a separate existence of its own. It has here been inserted in its proper place.
Kant's attack on fine airs in philosophy, and the “proclamation of peace” that succeeded it, are primarily directed at the writings of Johann Georg Schlosser, a retired administrator and gentleman-amateur in philosophy, who happened also to be Goethe's brother-in-law. Having published, in 1795, a translation of Plato's letters, Schlosser had joined forces with another amateur Platonist, translator, and poetical light of the Göttinger Dichterbund, Count Friedrich Leopold zu Stolberg (1750–1819).
In an essay in the Berliner Monatsschrift (May 1796, pp. 395–96), among other examples of the fanaticism that may be induced by attempts to philosophize about mathematical objects, I also attributed to the Pythagorean number-mystic the question: “Why is it that the ratio of the three sides of a right-angled triangle can only be that of the numbers 3, 4, and 5?” I had thus taken this proposition to be true; but Professor Reimarus refutes it, and shows (Berliner Monatsschrift, August, no. 6) that many numbers, other than those mentioned, can stand in the ratio in question.
So nothing seems clearer than that we find ourselves embroiled in a truly mathematical dispute (of a kind that is, in general, almost unheard of). But this quarrel amounts only to a misunderstanding. Each party takes the expression in a different sense; so soon as a mutual understanding is reached, the dispute vanishes, and both sides are correct. Now proposition and counter-proposition are related as follows:
R. says (or at least thinks his proposition thus): “In the infinite multitude of all possible numbers (considered at large) there exist, in regard to the sides of the right-angled triangle, more ratios than that of the numbers 3, 4, and 5.”
The Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft (hereinafter: Metaphysical Foundations) first appeared in 1786 (with second and third printings in 1787 and 1800 respectively). This work thus belongs to the most creative decade of Kant's so-called critical period: the decade of the first edition of the Critique of Pure Reason (1781), the Prolegomena (1783), the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), the second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason (1787), the Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and finally the Critique of Judgement (1790). Until very recently, however, the Metaphysical Foundations has had by far the least impact of any of these works, and has accordingly attracted the least amount of scholarly attention. Both the content and the form of the work have contributed to this situation. For, on the one hand, the Metaphysical Foundations is concerned with relatively specialized questions belonging to natural philosophy and even to physics: questions about the character and behavior of attractive and repulsive forces, for example, or about impact and the communication of motion. And, on the other hand, it is written in an inhospitable and forbidding style – organized in quasi-mathematical fashion into definitions (“explications”), propositions, proofs, remarks, and so on. In both of these respects the Metaphysical Foundations is more akin to some of Kant's precritical writings on natural philosophy – especially the Physical Monadology (1756) – than to the great works of the critical period.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.