The Earth We are Creating

Patrick Moriarty; Damon Honnery; Patrick Moriarty; Damon Honnery

doi:10.3934/energy.2014.2.158

AIMS Energy

2014, Volume 2, Issue 2: 158-171. doi: 10.3934/energy.2014.2.158

Previous Article Next Article

Review Special Issues

The Earth We are Creating

Patrick Moriarty ^{1
,
,},
Damon Honnery ²

1.
Department of Design, Monash University-Caulfield Campus, 900 Dandenong Rd, Caulfield East, Victoria 3145, Australia;
2.
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Monash University-Clayton Campus, P.O Box 31, Victoria 3800, Australia

Received: 26 March 2014 Accepted: 22 April 2014 Published: 26 April 2014

Over the past decade, a number of Earth System scientists have advocated that we need a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene, to describe the changes to Earth that have occurred since the 1800s. The preceding epoch, the Holocene (the period from the end of Earth's last glaciation about 12 millennia ago), has offered an unusually stable physical environment for human civilisations. In the new Anthropocene epoch, however, we can no longer count on this climate stability which we have long taken for granted. Paradoxically, it is our own actions that are undermining this stability—for the first time in history, human civilisation is now capable of decisively influencing the energy and material flows of our planet. Particularly since the 1950s, under the twin drivers of growth in population and per capita income, we have seen unprecedented growth in oil use and energy use overall, vehicle numbers, air travel and so on. This unprecedented growth has resulted in us heading toward physical thresholds or tipping points in a number of areas, points that once crossed could irreversibly lead to structural change in vital Earth systems such as climate or ecosystems. We may have already passed three limits: climate change; rate of biodiversity loss; and alterations to the global nitrogen and phosphorus cycles. The solutions usually proposed for our predicament are yet more technical fixes, often relying on greater use of the Earth's ecosystems, biomass for bioenergy being one example of this, and one we explore in this paper. We argue that these are unlikely to work, and will merely replace one set of problems by another. We conclude that an important approach for achieving a more sustainable and equitable world is to reorient our future toward satisfying the basic human needs of all humanity, and at the same time minimising both our use of non-renewable resources and pollution of the Earth's soil, air and water.

Keywords:

Citation: Patrick Moriarty, Damon Honnery. The Earth We are Creating[J]. AIMS Energy, 2014, 2(2): 158-171. doi: 10.3934/energy.2014.2.158

Related Papers:

[1]	Xiaoxue Zhao, Zhuchun Li . Synchronization of a Kuramoto-like model for power grids with frustration. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2020, 15(3): 543-553. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2020030
[2]	Tingting Zhu . Synchronization of the generalized Kuramoto model with time delay and frustration. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(4): 1772-1798. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023077
[3]	Seung-Yeal Ha, Yongduck Kim, Zhuchun Li . Asymptotic synchronous behavior of Kuramoto type models with frustrations. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2014, 9(1): 33-64. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2014.9.33
[4]	Tingting Zhu . Emergence of synchronization in Kuramoto model with frustration under general network topology. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2022, 17(2): 255-291. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2022005
[5]	Seung-Yeal Ha, Jaeseung Lee, Zhuchun Li . Emergence of local synchronization in an ensemble of heterogeneous Kuramoto oscillators. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2017, 12(1): 1-24. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2017001
[6]	Seung-Yeal Ha, Jeongho Kim, Jinyeong Park, Xiongtao Zhang . Uniform stability and mean-field limit for the augmented Kuramoto model. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2018, 13(2): 297-322. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2018013
[7]	Seung-Yeal Ha, Hansol Park, Yinglong Zhang . Nonlinear stability of stationary solutions to the Kuramoto-Sakaguchi equation with frustration. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2020, 15(3): 427-461. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2020026
[8]	Seung-Yeal Ha, Se Eun Noh, Jinyeong Park . Practical synchronization of generalized Kuramoto systems with an intrinsic dynamics. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2015, 10(4): 787-807. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2015.10.787
[9]	Vladimir Jaćimović, Aladin Crnkić . The General Non-Abelian Kuramoto Model on the 3-sphere. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2020, 15(1): 111-124. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2020005
[10]	Young-Pil Choi, Seung-Yeal Ha, Seok-Bae Yun . Global existence and asymptotic behavior of measure valued solutions to the kinetic Kuramoto--Daido model with inertia. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2013, 8(4): 943-968. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2013.8.943

Abstract

1. Introduction

Synchronization in complex networks has been a focus of interest for researchers from different disciplines[1,2,4,8,15]. In this paper, we investigate synchronous phenomena in an ensemble of Kuramoto-like oscillators which is regarded as a model for power grid. In [9], a mathematical model for power grid is given by

$\begin{equation} P_{source}^{i} = I\ddot{\theta}_{i}\dot{\theta}_{i}+K_{D}(\dot{\theta}_{i})^2-\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}a_{il}\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}),\quad i = 1,2,\dots,N, \end{equation}$ $

(1)

where $ P_{source}^{i}>0 $ is power source (the energy feeding rate) of the $ i $th node, $ I\ge 0 $ is the moment of inertia, $ K_{D}>0 $ is the ratio between the dissipated energy by the turbine and the square of the angular velocity, and $ a_{il}>0 $ is the maximum transmitted power between the $ i $th and $ l $th nodes. The phase angle $ \theta_{i} $ of $ i $th node is given by $ \theta_i(t) = \Omega t+\tilde\theta_i(t) $ with a standard frequency $ \Omega $ (50 or 60 Hz) and small deviations $ \tilde\theta_i(t) $. Power plants in a big connected network should be synchronized to the same frequency. If loads are too strong and unevenly distributed or if some major fault or a lightening occurs, an oscillator (power plant) may lose synchronization. In that situation the synchronization landscape may change drastically and a blackout may occur. The transient stability of power grids can be regarded as a synchronization problem for nonstationary generator rotor angles aiming to restore synchronism subject to local excitations. Therefore, the region of attraction of synchronized states is a central problem for the transient stability.

By denoting $ \omega_{i} = \frac{P_{source}^{i}}{K_{D}} $ and assuming $ \frac{a_{il}}{K_{D}} = \frac{K}{N} \,(\forall i,l\in\{1,2,\dots,N\}) $ and $ I = 0 $ in (1), Choi et. al derived a Kuramoto-like model for the power grid as follows [5]:

$\begin{equation} (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2 = \omega_{i}+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}),\quad \dot{\theta}_{i} > 0,\quad i = 1,2,\dots,N. \end{equation}$ $

(2)

Here, the setting $ \dot{\theta}_{i}>0 $ was made in accordance to the observation in system (1) that the grid is operating at a frequency close to the standard frequency with small deviations. In order to ensure that the right-hand side of (2) is positive, it is reasonable to assume that $ \omega_{i}>K,\; i = 1,2,\dots,N $. This model can be used to understand the emergence of synchronization in networks of oscillators. As far as the authors know, there are few analytical results. In [5], the authors considered this model with identical natural frequencies and prove that complete phase synchronization occurs if the initial phases are distributed inside an arc with geodesic length less than $ \pi/2 $.

If $ (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2 $ in (2) is replaced by $ \dot{\theta}_{i} $, the model is the famous Kuramoto model [13]; for its synchronization analysis we refer to [3,6,10], etc. Sakaguchi and Kuramoto [16] proposed a variant of the Kuramoto model to describe richer dynamical phenomena by introducing a phase shift (frustration) in the coupling function, i.e., by replacing $ \sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}) $ with $ \sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}+\alpha) $. They inferred the need of $ \alpha $ from the empirical fact that a pair of oscillators coupled strongly begin to oscillate with a common frequency deviating from the simple average of their natural frequencies. Some physicists also realized via many experiments that the emergence of the phase shift term requires larger coupling strength $ K $ and longer relaxation time to exhibit mutual synchronization compared to the zero phase shift case. This is why we call the phase shift a frustration. The effect of frustration has been intensively studied, for example, [11,12,14]. In power grid model using Kuramoto oscillators, people use the phase shift to depict the energy loss due to the transfer conductance [7]. In this paper, we will incorporate the phase shift term in (2) and study the Kuramoto-like model with frustration $ \alpha\in(-\frac{\pi}{4},\frac{\pi}{4}) $:

$\begin{equation} (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2 = \omega_{i}+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}+\alpha),\quad \dot{\theta}_{i} > 0,\quad i = 1,2,\dots,N. \end{equation}$ $

(3)

We will find a trapping region such that any nonstationary state located in this region will evolve to a synchronous state.

The contributions of this paper are twofold: First, for identical oscillators without frustration, we show that the initial phase configurations located in the half circle will converge to complete phase and frequency synchronization. This extends the analytical results in [5] in which the initial phase configuration for synchronization needs to be confined in a quarter of circle. Second, we consider the nonidentical oscillators with frustration and present a framework leading to the boundness of the phase diameter and complete frequency synchronization. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first result for the synchronization of (3) with nonidentical oscillators and frustration.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall the definitions for synchronization and summarize our main results. In Section 3, we give synchronization analysis and prove the main results. Finally, Section 4 is devoted to a concluding summary.

Notations. We use the following simplified notations throughout this paper:

$\begin{align*} &\nu_{i}: = \dot{\theta}_{i},\; i = 1,2,\dots,N,\;{\omega: = (\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\dots,\omega_{N})},\\ &\bar{\omega}: = \max\limits_{1\le i\le N}\omega_{i}, \; \underline{\omega}: = \min\limits_{1\le i\le N}\omega_{i}, \; { D(\omega): = \bar{\omega}-\underline{\omega}},\\ & \theta_{M}: = \max\limits_{1\le i\le N}\theta_{i},\; \theta_{m}: = \min\limits_{1\le i\le N}\theta_{i},\; D(\theta): = \theta_{M}-\theta_{m},\\ & \nu_{M}: = \max\limits_{1\le i\le N}\nu_{i},\; \nu_{m}: = \min\limits_{1\le i\le N}\nu_{i},\; D(\nu): = \nu_{M}-\nu_{m},\\ & {\theta_{M}^\nu\in\{\theta_{j}| \nu_{j} = \nu_{M}\},\; \theta_{m}^\nu\in\{\theta_{j}| \nu_{j} = \nu_{m}\}}. \end{align*}$ $

2. Preliminaries

In this paper, we consider the system

$\begin{align} \begin{aligned} (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2& = \omega_{i}+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}+\alpha),\quad \dot{\theta}_{i} > 0,\quad \alpha\in(-\frac{\pi}{4},\frac{\pi}{4}),\\ \theta_i(0)& = \theta_i^0,\quad \quad i = 1,2,\dots,N. \end{aligned} \end{align}$ $

(4)

Next we introduce the concepts of complete synchronization and conclude this introductory section with the main result of this paper.

Definition 2.1. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a dynamical solution to the system (4). We say

1. it exhibits asymptotically complete phase synchronization if

$\begin{equation*} \lim\limits_{t\to \infty}(\theta_{i}(t)-\theta_{j}(t)) = 0, \; \forall i\ne j. \end{equation*}$ $

2. it exhibits asymptotically complete frequency synchronization if

$\begin{equation*} \lim\limits_{t\to \infty}({\dot \theta}_{i}(t)-{\dot \theta}_{j}(t)) = 0, \; \forall i\ne j. \end{equation*}$ $

For identical oscillators without frustration, we have the following result.

Theorem 2.2. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4) with $ \alpha = 0,\omega_{i} = \omega_0,i = 1,2,\dots,N $ and $ \omega_0>K $. If the initial configuration

$\begin{equation*} \theta^0\in \mathcal{A}: = \{\theta\in[0,2\pi)^N:\; D(\theta) < \pi\}, \end{equation*}$ $

then there exits $ \lambda_1,\lambda_2>0 $ and $ t_{0}>0 $ such that

$\begin{equation} D(\theta(t))\le D(\theta^0)e^{-\lambda_1 t},\;\,\,\,t\ge 0. \end{equation}$ $

(5)

and

$\begin{equation} D(\nu(t))\le D(\nu(t_{0}))e^{-\lambda_2(t-t_{0})},\;\,\,\,t\ge t_{0}. \end{equation}$ $

(6)

Next we introduce the main result for nonidentical oscillators with frustration. For $ \bar{\omega}< \frac{1}{2\sin^2|\alpha|} $, we set

$ K_{c}: = \frac{D({\omega})\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}}{1-\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}\sin|\alpha|} > 0. $

For suitable parameters, we denote by $ D_{1}^{\infty} $ and $ D_{*}^{\infty} $ the two angles as follows:

$\begin{align*} &\sin D_{1}^{\infty} = \sin D_{*}^{\infty}: = \frac{\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}(D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|)}{K\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}},\quad 0 < D_{1}^{\infty} < \frac{\pi}{2} < D_{*}^{\infty} < \pi. \end{align*}$ $

Theorem 2.3. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4) with $ K>K_{c} $ and $ [\underline{\omega},\bar{\omega}]\subset \left[K+1,\frac{1}{2\sin^2|\alpha|}\right) $. If

$\begin{equation*} \theta^0\in \mathcal{B}: = \{\theta\in[0,2\pi)^N\;|\; D(\theta) < D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|\}, \end{equation*}$ $

then for any small $ \varepsilon>0 $ with $ D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon<\frac{\pi}{2} $, there exists $ \lambda_{3}>0 $ and $ T>0 $ such that

$\begin{equation} D(\nu(t))\le D(\nu(T))e^{-\lambda_{3}(t-T)},\;t\ge T. \end{equation}$ $

(7)

Remark 1. If the parametric conditions in Theorem 2.3 are fulfilled, the reference angles $ D_{1}^{\infty} $ and $ D_{*}^{\infty} $ are well-defined. Indeed, because $ K>K_{c} $ and $ \bar{\omega}<\frac{1}{2\sin^2 |\alpha|} $, we have

$\begin{equation*} \frac{D({\omega})\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}}{1-\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}\sin |\alpha|} < K,\qquad 1-\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}\sin |\alpha| > 0. \end{equation*}$ $

This implies

$\begin{equation*} \frac{\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}(D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|)}{K} < 1. \end{equation*}$ $

Then, by $ \underline{\omega}\ge K+1 $ and $ K\le \bar{\omega} $ we obtain

$\begin{align*} \sin D_{1}^{\infty} = \sin D_{*}^{\infty}: = \frac{\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}(D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|)}{K\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}\le \frac{\sqrt{2\bar{\omega}}(D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|)}{K} < 1. \end{align*}$ $

Remark 2. In order to make $ 1<K+1<\frac{1}{2\sin^2|\alpha|} $, it is necessary to assume $ \alpha\in \left(-\frac{\pi}{4},\frac{\pi}{4}\right) $. This is the reason for the setting $ \alpha\in \left(-\frac{\pi}{4},\frac{\pi}{4}\right) $.

3. Synchronization analysis

3.1. Synchronization estimates: Identical oscillators without frustration

In this subsection we consider the system (4) with identical natural frequencies and zero frustration:

$\begin{equation} (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2 = \omega_0+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}),\quad \dot{\theta}_{i} > 0,\quad i = 1,2,\dots,N. \end{equation}$ $

(8)

To obtain the complete synchronization, we need to derive a trapping region. We start with two elementary estimates for the transient frequencies.

Lemma 3.1. Suppose $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (8), then for any $ i,j\in\{1,2,\dots,N\}, $ we have

$\begin{equation*} (\dot{\theta}_{i}-\dot{\theta}_{j})(\dot{\theta}_{i}+\dot{\theta}_{j}) = \frac{2K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\frac{\theta_{i}+\theta_{j}}{2})\sin\frac{\theta_{j}-\theta_{i}}{2}. \end{equation*}$ $

Proof. It is immediately obtained by (8).

Lemma 3.2. Suppose $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (8) and $ \Omega>K $, then we have

$\begin{equation*} \dot{\theta}_{i}\le \sqrt{\omega_0+K}. \end{equation*}$ $

Proof. It follows from (8) and $ \dot{\theta}_{i}>0 $ that we have

$\begin{equation*} (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2 = \omega_0+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i})\le \omega_0 +K. \end{equation*}$ $

Next we give an estimate for trapping region and prove Theorem 2.2. For this aim, we will use the time derivative of $ D(\theta(t)) $ and $ D(\nu(t)) $. Note that $ D(\theta(t)) $ is Lipschitz continuous and differentiable except at times of collision between the extremal phases and their neighboring phases. Therefore, for the collision time $ t $ at which $ D(\theta(t)) $ is not differentiable, we can use the so-called Dini derivative to replace the classic derivative. In this manner, we can proceed the analysis with differential inequality for $ D(\theta(t)) $. For $ D(\nu(t)) $ we can proceed in the similar way. In the following context, we will always use the notation of classic derivative for $ D(\theta(t)) $ and $ D(\nu(t)) $.

Lemma 3.3. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (8) and $ \Omega>K $. If the initial configuration $ \theta(0)\in \mathcal{A} $, then $ \theta(t)\in \mathcal{A},\; t\ge 0 $.

Proof. For any $ \theta^0\in \mathcal A $, there exists $ D^\infty\in (0,\pi) $ such that $ D(\theta^0)<D^{\infty} $. Let

$\begin{align*} \mathcal T: = \left\{T\in[0,+\infty)\,\Big|\,D(\theta(t)) < D^{\infty}, \,\, \forall \,t\in [0,T) \right\}. \end{align*}$ $

Since $ D(\theta^0)<D^{\infty} $, and $ D(\theta(t)) $ is a continuous function of $ t $, there exists $ \eta>0 $ such that

$\begin{equation*} D(\theta(t)) < D^{\infty},\;t\in[0,\eta). \end{equation*}$ $

Therefore, the set $ \mathcal T $ is not empty. Let $ T^*: = \sup \mathcal T. $ We claim that

$\begin{equation} T^* = \infty. \end{equation}$ $

(9)

Suppose to the contrary that $ T^*<\infty $. Then from the continuity of $ D(\theta(t)) $, we have

$\begin{align*} D(\theta(t)) < D^{\infty},\;t\in[0,T^*),\quad D(\theta(T^*)) = D^{\infty}. \end{align*}$ $

We use Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 3.2 to obtain

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}&D(\theta(t))^2 = D(\theta(t))\frac{d}{dt}D(\theta(t)) = \left(\theta_{M}-\theta_{m}\right)\left(\dot{\theta}_{M}-\dot{\theta}_{m}\right) \\ & = \left(\theta_{M}-\theta_{m}\right)\frac{1}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}\frac{2K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos\left(\theta_{l}-\frac{\theta_{M}+\theta_{m}}{2}\right)\sin\left(\frac{\theta_{m}-\theta_{M}}{2}\right)\\ &\le \left(\theta_{M}-\theta_{m}\right)\frac{1}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}\frac{2K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}\sin\left(\frac{\theta_{m}-\theta_{M}}{2}\right)\\ &\le \left(\theta_{M}-\theta_{m}\right)\frac{1}{\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N} \cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}\sin\left(\frac{\theta_{m}-\theta_{M}}{2}\right)\\ & = -\frac{2K\cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}}{\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}\frac{D(\theta)}{2}\sin\frac{D(\theta)}{2}\\ &\le -\frac{K\cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}}{\pi\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}D(\theta)^2, \; t\in[0,T^*). \end{align*}$ $

Here we used the relations

$\begin{equation*} -\frac{D^{\infty}}{2} < -\frac{D(\theta)}{2}\le \frac{\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}}{2}\le 0 \le \frac{\theta_{l}-\theta_{m}}{2}\le \frac{D(\theta)}{2} < \frac{D^{\infty}}{2} \end{equation*}$ $

and

$\begin{equation*} x\sin x\ge \frac{2}{\pi}x^2,\; x\in\left[-\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}\right]. \end{equation*}$ $

Therefore, we have

$\begin{equation} \frac{d}{dt}D(\theta)\le -\frac{K\cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}}{\pi\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}D(\theta), \; t\in[0,T^*), \end{equation}$ $

(10)

which implies that

$\begin{align*} D(\theta(T^*))\le D(\theta^0)e^{-\frac{K\cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}}{\pi\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}T^*} < D(\theta^0) < D^{\infty}. \end{align*}$ $

This is contradictory to $ D(\theta(T^*)) = D^{\infty}. $ The claim (9) is proved, which yields the desired result.

Now we can give a proof for Theorem 2.2.

Proof of Theorem 2.2.. According to Lemma 3.3, we substitute $ T^* = \infty $ into (10), then (5) is proved with $ \lambda_1 = \frac{K\cos\frac{D^{\infty}}{2}}{\pi\sqrt{\omega_0+K}} $.

On the other hand, by (5) there exist $ t_{0} $ and $ \delta (0<\delta<\frac{\pi}{2}) $ such that $ D(\theta(t))\le \delta $ for $ t\ge t_{0} $. Now we differentiate (8) to find

$\begin{equation*} \dot{\nu}_{i} = \frac{K}{2N\nu_{i}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i})(\nu_{l}-\nu_{i}). \end{equation*}$ $

Using Lemma 3.2, we now consider the temporal evolution of $ D(\nu(t)) $:

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{dt}&D(\nu) = \dot{\nu}_{M}-\dot{\nu}_{m}\\ & = \frac{K}{2N\nu_{M}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}^{\nu})(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M})-\frac{K}{2N\nu_{m}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m}^{\nu})(\nu_{l}-\nu_{m})\\ &\le\frac{K\cos\delta}{2N\nu_{M}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M})-\frac{K\cos\delta}{2N\nu_{m}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}(\nu_{l}-\nu_{m})\\ &\le \frac{K}{2N}\frac{\cos\delta}{\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M})-\frac{K}{2N}\frac{\cos\delta}{\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}(\nu_{l}-\nu_{m})\\ & = \frac{K\cos\delta}{2N\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M}-\nu_{l}+\nu_{m})\\ & = -\frac{K\cos\delta}{2\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}D(\nu),\;t\ge t_{0}. \end{align*}$ $

This implies that

$\begin{equation*} D(\nu(t))\le D(\nu(t_{0}))e^{-\frac{K\cos\delta}{2\sqrt{\omega_0+K}}(t-t_{0})},\;\,\,\,t\ge t_{0}, \end{equation*}$ $

and proves (6) with $ \lambda_2 = \frac{K\cos\delta}{2\sqrt{\omega_0+K}} $.

Remark 3. Theorem 2.2 shows, as long as the initial phases are confined inside an arc with geodesic length strictly less than $ \pi $, complete phase synchronization occurs exponentially fast. This extends the main result in [5] where the initial phases for synchronization need to be confined in an arc with geodesic length less than $ \pi/2 $.

3.2. Synchronization estimates: Nonidentical oscillators with frustration

In this subsection, we prove the main result for nonidentical oscillators with frustration.

Lemma 3.4. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4), then for any $ i,j\in\{1,2,\dots,N\}, $ we have

$\begin{equation*} (\dot{\theta}_{i}-\dot{\theta}_{j})(\dot{\theta}_{i}+\dot{\theta}_{j})\le D({\omega})+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}+\alpha)-\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{j}+\alpha)\right]. \end{equation*}$ $

Proof. By (4) and for any $ i,j\in\{1,2,\dots,N\} $

$\begin{equation*} (\dot{\theta}_{i}-\dot{\theta}_{j})(\dot{\theta}_{i}+\dot{\theta}_{j}) = (\dot\theta_{i})^2-(\dot\theta_{j})^2, \end{equation*}$ $

the result is immediately obtained.

Lemma 3.5. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4) and $ \underline{\omega}\ge K+1 $, then we have

$\begin{equation*} \dot{\theta}_{i}\in \left[\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}, \sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}\right],\quad \forall i = 1,2,\dots,N. \end{equation*}$ $

Proof. From (4), we have

$\begin{equation*} \underline{\omega}-K\le (\dot{\theta}_{i})^2 \le \bar{\omega}+K,\quad \forall i = 1,2,\dots,N, \end{equation*}$ $

and also because $ \dot{\theta}_{i}>0 $. The following lemma gives a trapping region for nonidentical oscillators.

Lemma 3.6. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4) with $ K>K_{c} $ and $ [\underline{\omega},\bar{\omega}]\subset [K+1,\frac{1}{2\sin^2|\alpha|}) $. If the initial configuration $ \theta^0\in \mathcal{B} $, then $ \theta(t)\in \mathcal{B} $ for $ t\ge 0. $

Proof. We define the set $ \mathcal T $ and its supremum:

$\begin{align*} \mathcal T: = \left\{T\in[0,+\infty)\,\Big|\,D(\theta(t)) < D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|, \,\, \forall \,t\in [0,T) \right\},\quad T^*: = \sup \mathcal T. \end{align*}$ $

Since $ \theta^0\in \mathcal{B} $, and note that $ D(\theta(t)) $ is a continuous function of $ t $, we see that the set $ \mathcal T $ is not empty and $ T^* $ is well-defined. We now claim that

$\begin{align*} T^* = \infty. \end{align*}$ $

Suppose to the contrary that $ T^*<\infty $. Then from the continuity of $ D(\theta(t)) $, we have

$\begin{align*} D(\theta(t)) < D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|,\;t\in[0,T^*),\quad D(\theta(T^*)) = D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|. \end{align*}$ $

We use Lemma 3.4 to obtain

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}&D(\theta)^2 = D(\theta)\frac{d}{dt}D(\theta) = D(\theta)\left(\dot{\theta}_{M}-\dot{\theta}_{m}\right) \\ \le &D(\theta)\frac{1}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}} \underbrace{\left[D({\omega})+\frac{K}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left(\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}+\alpha)-\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m}+\alpha)\right)\right]}_{I}. \end{align*}$ $

For $ I $, we have

$\begin{align*} I = D({\omega})&+\frac{K\cos\alpha}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M})-\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m})\right]\\ & +\frac{K\sin\alpha}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M})-\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m})\right]. \end{align*}$ $

We now consider two cases according to the sign of $ \alpha $.

(1) $ \alpha\in[0,\frac{\pi}{4}). $ In this case, we have

$\begin{align*} I&\le D({\omega})+\frac{K\cos\alpha\sin D(\theta)}{ND(\theta)}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M})-(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m})\right]\\ &\quad +\frac{K\sin\alpha}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[1-\cos D(\theta)\right]\\ & = D({\omega})-K\left[\sin(D(\theta)+\alpha)-\sin\alpha\right]\\ & = D({\omega})-K\left[\sin(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)-\sin|\alpha|\right]. \end{align*}$ $

(2) $ \alpha\in(-\frac{\pi}{4},0). $ In this case, we have

$\begin{align*} I&\le D({\omega})+\frac{K\cos\alpha\sin D(\theta)}{ND(\theta)}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M})-(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m})\right]\\ &\quad +\frac{K\sin\alpha}{N}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\left[\cos D(\theta)-1\right]\\ & = D({\omega})-K\left[\sin(D(\theta)-\alpha)+\sin\alpha\right]\\ & = D({\omega})-K\left[\sin(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)-\sin|\alpha|\right]. \end{align*}$ $

Here we used the relations

$\begin{equation*} \frac{\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M})}{\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}}, \,\,\,\frac{\sin(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m})}{\theta_{l}-\theta_{m}}\ge\frac{\sin D(\theta)}{D(\theta)}, \end{equation*}$ $

and

$\begin{equation*} \cos D(\theta)\leq \cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}),\,\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m})\le 1, \quad l = 1,2,\dots,N. \end{equation*}$ $

Since $ D(\theta(t))+|\alpha|<D_{*}^{\infty}<\pi $ for $ t\in[0,T^*), $ we obtain

$\begin{align} I&\le D({\omega})-K\left[\sin(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)-\sin|\alpha|\right] \end{align}$ $

(11)

$\begin{align} &\le D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|-K\frac{\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{D_{*}^{\infty}}(D(\theta)+|\alpha|) . \end{align}$ $

(12)

By (12) and Lemma 3.5 we have

$\begin{align*} &\quad \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}D(\theta)^2\\&\le D(\theta)\frac{1}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}\left(D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|-K\frac{\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{D_{*}^{\infty}}(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)\right)\\ & = \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}D(\theta)-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{D_{*}^{\infty}(\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m})}D(\theta)(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)\\ &\le \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}D(\theta)-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{D_{*}^{\infty}2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}D(\theta)(D(\theta)+|\alpha|),\;\,\, t\in[0,T^*). \end{align*}$ $

Then we obtain

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{dt}D(\theta)\le \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2D_{*}^{\infty}\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}(D(\theta)+|\alpha|),\; t\in[0,T^*), \end{align*}$ $

i.e.,

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{dt}(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)&\le \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2D_{*}^{\infty}\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)\\ & = \frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2D_{*}^{\infty}\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}(D(\theta)+|\alpha|),\; t\in[0,T^*). \end{align*}$ $

Here we used the definition of $ \sin D_{*}^{\infty} $. By Gronwall's inequality, we obtain

$\begin{equation*} D(\theta(t))+|\alpha|\le D_{*}^{\infty}+(D(\theta^0)+|\alpha|-D_{*}^{\infty})e^{-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2D_{*}^{\infty}\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}t},\; t\in[0,T^*), \end{equation*}$ $

Thus

$\begin{equation*} D(\theta(t))\le (D(\theta^0)+|\alpha|-D_{*}^{\infty})e^{-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2D_{*}^{\infty}\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}t}+D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|,\; t\in[0,T^*). \end{equation*}$ $

Let $ t\to T^{*-} $ and we have

$\begin{align*} D(\theta(T^*))\le (D(\theta^0)+|\alpha|-D_{*}^{\infty})e^{-\frac{K\sin D_{*}^{\infty}}{2D_{*}^{\infty}\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}T^*}+D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha| < D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|, \end{align*}$ $

which is contradictory to $ D(\theta(T^*)) = D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|. $ Therefore, we have

$\begin{align*} T^* = \infty. \end{align*}$ $

That is,

$\begin{equation*} D(\theta(t))\le D_{*}^{\infty}-|\alpha|,\; \,\,\, \forall\, t\ge 0. \end{equation*}$ $

Lemma 3.7. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4) with $ K>K_{c} $ and $ [\underline{\omega},\bar{\omega}]\subset [K+1,\frac{1}{2\sin^2|\alpha|}) $. If the initial configuration $ \theta(0)\in \mathcal{B} $, then

$\begin{equation*} \frac{d}{dt}D(\theta(t))\le \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}-\frac{K}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}\sin (D(\theta)+|\alpha|),\,\,\,\;t\ge 0. \end{equation*}$ $

Proof. It follows from (11) and Lemma 3.5, Lemma 3.6 and that we have

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}D(\theta)^2& = D(\theta)\frac{d}{dt}D(\theta)\\ &\le D(\theta)\frac{1}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}\left[D({\omega})-K\left(\sin(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)-\sin|\alpha|\right)\right]\\ & = \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}D(\theta)-\frac{K\sin(D(\theta)+|\alpha|)}{{\dot{\theta}_{M}+\dot{\theta}_{m}}}D(\theta)\\ &\le\frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}D(\theta)-\frac{K\sin (D(\theta)+|\alpha|)}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}D(\theta),\;\,\,\,t\ge 0. \end{align*}$ $

The proof is completed.

Lemma 3.8. Let $ \theta: = (\theta_{1},\theta_{2},\dots,\theta_{N}) $ be a solution to the coupled system (4) with $ K>K_{c} $ and $ [\underline{\omega},\bar{\omega}]\subset [K+1,\frac{1}{2\sin^2|\alpha|}) $. If the initial configuration $ \theta(0)\in \mathcal{B} $, then for any small $ \varepsilon>0 $ with $ D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon<\frac{\pi}{2} $, there exists some time $ T>0 $ such that

$\begin{equation*} D(\theta(t)) < D_{1}^{\infty}-|\alpha|+\varepsilon,\;\quad t\ge T. \end{equation*}$ $

Proof. Consider the ordinary differential equation:

$\begin{equation} \dot{y} = \frac{D({\omega})+K\sin|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{\underline{\omega}-K}}-\frac{K}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}\sin y,\qquad y(0) = y^0\in [0,D_{*}^{\infty}). \end{equation}$ $

(13)

It is easy to find that $ y_{*} = D_{1}^{\infty} $ is a locally stable equilibrium of (13), while $ y_{**} = D_{*}^{\infty} $ is unstable. Therefore, for any initial data $ y^0 $ with $ 0<y^0<D_{*}^{\infty} $, the trajectory $ y(t) $ monotonically approaches $ y_{*} $. Then, for any $ \varepsilon>0 $ with $ D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon<\frac{\pi}{2} $, there exists some time $ T>0 $ such that

$\begin{equation*} |y(t)-y_{*}| < \varepsilon,\;\quad t\ge T. \end{equation*}$ $

In particular, $ y(t) <y_*+\varepsilon $ for $ t\ge T. $ By Lemma 3.7 and the comparison principle, we have

$\begin{equation*} D(\theta(t))+|\alpha| < D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon,\;\quad t\ge T, \end{equation*}$ $

which is the desired result.

Remark 4. Since

$\begin{align*} \sin D_{1}^{\infty}\ge \frac{D({\omega})}{K}+\sin|\alpha| > \sin|\alpha|, \end{align*}$ $

we have $ D_{1}^{\infty}>|\alpha| $.

Proof of Theorem 2.3. It follows from Lemma 3.8 that for any small $ \varepsilon>0 $, there exists some time $ T>0 $ such that

$\begin{equation*} \sup\limits_{t\ge T} D(\theta(t)) < D_{1}^{\infty}-|\alpha|+\varepsilon < \frac{\pi}{2}. \end{equation*}$ $

We differentiate the equation (4) to find

$\begin{equation*} \dot{\nu}_{i} = \frac{K}{2N\nu_{i}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{i}+\alpha)(\nu_{l}-\nu_{i}),\quad \nu_{i} > 0. \end{equation*}$ $

We now consider the temporal evolution of $ D(\nu(t)) $:

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{dt}&D(\nu) = \dot{\nu}_{M}-\dot{\nu}_{m}\\ = &\frac{K}{2N\nu_{M}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}^\nu+\alpha)(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M})-\frac{K}{2N\nu_{m}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m}^\nu+\alpha)(\nu_{l}-\nu_{m})\\ \le&\frac{K}{2N\nu_{M}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon)(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M})-\frac{K}{2N\nu_{m}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}\cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon)(\nu_{l}-\nu_{m})\\ \le& \frac{K\cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon)}{2N\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}\sum\limits_{l = 1}^{N}(\nu_{l}-\nu_{M}-\nu_{l}+\nu_{m})\\ = &-\frac{K\cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon)}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}D(\nu),\;\quad t\ge T, \end{align*}$ $

where we used

$\begin{align*} \cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{M}^\nu+\alpha),\, \cos(\theta_{l}-\theta_{m}^\nu+\alpha)\ge \cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon),\quad \text{and}\quad \nu_{M},\, \nu_{m}\le \sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}. \end{align*}$ $

Thus we obtain

$\begin{equation*} D(\nu(t))\le D(\nu(T))e^{-\frac{K\cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon)}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}}(t-T)},\;t\ge T, \end{equation*}$ $

and proves (7) with $ \lambda_{3} = \frac{K\cos(D_{1}^{\infty}+\varepsilon)}{2\sqrt{\bar{\omega}+K}} $.

4. Conclusions

In this paper, we presented synchronization estimates for the Kuramoto-like model. We show that for identical oscillators with zero frustration, complete phase synchronization occurs exponentially fast if the initial phases are confined inside an arc with geodesic length strictly less than $ \pi $. For nonidentical oscillators with frustration, we present a framework to guarantee the emergence of frequency synchronization.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her comments which helped us to improve this paper.

References

[1]	Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, et al. (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461: 472-475. doi: 10.1038/461472a
[2]	Steffen W, Grinevald J, Crutzen P, et al. (2011) The Anthropocene: conceptual and historical perspectives. Phil Trans Roy Soc A 369: 842-867. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2010.0327
[3]	BP (2013) BP Statistical Review Of World Energy London: BP.
[4]	United Nations (UN) (2012) World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision. Accessed on 20 March 2014 at (http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Excel-Data/population.htm).
[5]	Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2011) International Energy Outlook 2011. US Dept. of Energy. Available at (http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2011).pdf).
[6]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2011) Rise and Fall of the Carbon Civilisation. London: Springer.
[7]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2014) Reconnecting technology with human welfare. Futures 55: 32-40. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2013.12.003
[8]	Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, et al. (eds) Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Cambridge, UK: CUP.
[9]	Maddison A (2010) Statistics on world population, GDP and per capita GDP, 1-2006 AD. Accessed on 22 March 2014 at (http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/).
[10]	Smil V (2002) The Earth’s Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics and Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[11]	Nicol S (2011) Givers of life. New Sci 9 July: 36-39.
[12]	Barnosky AD, Matzke N, Tomiya1 S (2011) Has the Earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived? Nature 471: 51-57. doi: 10.1038/nature09678
[13]	Heinberg R (2007) Peak Everything: Waking up to the Century of Decline in Earth’s Resources. Forest Row, UK: Clairview.
[14]	Campbell CJ (2013) Recognising the second half of the oil age. Environ Innovation Soc Transitions 9: 13-17. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2013.08.004
[15]	Wikipedia (2014) Catastrophism. Accessed on 20 March 2014 at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophists).
[16]	Gould SJ, Eldridge N (1993) Punctuated equilibrium comes of age. Nature 366: 223-226. doi: 10.1038/366223a0
[17]	Velders GJM, Fahey DW, Daniel JS et al. (2009) The large contribution of projected HFC emissions to future climate forcing. Proc Nat Acad Sci 106: 10949-10954. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0902817106
[18]	Laurance W (2008) Tipping the balance. The Ecologist 38(6): 37-41.
[19]	Ditlevsen PD, Johnsen SJ (2010) Tipping points: Early warning and wishful thinking. Geophys Res Lett 37: 19703.
[20]	Tierney K (2008) Hurricane in New Orleans? Who knew? Anticipating Katrina and its devastation. Sociol Inquiry 78(2): 179-183.
[21]	Brulle RJ (2014) Institutionalizing delay: Foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations. Clim Change DOI 10.1007/s10584-013-1018-7.
[22]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2010) A human needs approach to reducing atmospheric carbon. Energy Policy 38(2): 695-700.
[23]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2011) Is there an optimum level for renewable energy? Energy Policy 39: 2748-2753. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.02.044
[24]	Van Vuuren DP, Stehfest E, den Elzen MGJ, et al. (2011) RCP2.6: Exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2 ℃. Clim Change 109: 95-116.
[25]	Dittmar M (2013) The end of cheap uranium. Sci Total Environ 461: 792-798.
[26]	Searle SY, Malins CJ (2014) Will energy crop yields meet expectations? Biomass Bioenergy Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.01.001.
[27]	Keller DP, Feng EY, Oschlies A (2014) Potential climate engineering effectiveness and side effects during a high carbon dioxide-emission scenario. Nature Comm 5: 1-11
[28]	Van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, et al. (2011) The representative concentration pathways: An overview. Clim Change 109: 5-31. doi: 10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z
[29]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2007) Bioenergy: problems and prospects. Int J Global Energy Issues 27: 231-249. doi: 10.1504/IJGEI.2007.013657
[30]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2009) What energy levels can the Earth sustain? Energy Policy 37: 2469–2474.
[31]	Van Vuuren DP, Sebastiaan D, van Ruijven BJ, et al (2013) The role of negative CO₂ emissions for reaching 2 ℃—insights from integrated assessment modelling. Clim Change 118: 15-27. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0680-5
[32]	Krausmann F, Erb KH, Gringrich S, et al. (2013) Global human appropriation of net primary production doubled in the 20th century. PNAS 110: 10324-10329. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211349110
[33]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2012) What is the global potential for renewable energy? Renew Sus Energy Rev 16: 244-252. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.151
[34]	Moriarty P, Honnery D (2012) Preparing for a low-energy future. Futures 44: 883-892. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2012.08.002
[35]	Hansen J, Sato M, Kharecha P, et al. (2011) Earth's energy imbalance and implications. Available at: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1105/1105.1140.pdf.
[36]	Roe G (2010) Knowability and no ability in climate projections. Available at: http://earthweb.ess.washington.edu/roe/GerardWeb/Publications_files/Roe_Knowability_EPA.pdf.
[37]	Kitzes J, Wackernagel M, Loh J, et al. (2008) Shrink and share: Humanity's present and future Ecological Footprint. Phil Trans Roy Soc B 363: 467-475. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2164

This article has been cited by:

1.	Sha Xu, Xiaoyue Huang, Hua Zhang, 2024, Synchronization of a Kuramoto-like Model with Time Delay and Phase Shift, 978-9-8875-8158-1, 5299, 10.23919/CCC63176.2024.10662837
2.	Sun-Ho Choi, Hyowon Seo, Inertial power balance system with nonlinear time-derivatives and periodic natural frequencies, 2024, 129, 10075704, 107695, 10.1016/j.cnsns.2023.107695

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2014 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

AIMS Energy

1.8 3.8

Metrics

Article views(6397) PDF downloads(1459) Cited by(3)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

AIMS Energy

The Earth We are Creating

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Preliminaries

3. Synchronization analysis

3.1. Synchronization estimates: Identical oscillators without frustration

3.2. Synchronization estimates: Nonidentical oscillators with frustration

4. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Preliminaries

3. Synchronization analysis

3.1. Synchronization estimates: Identical oscillators without frustration

3.2. Synchronization estimates: Nonidentical oscillators with frustration

4. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

AIMS Energy

The Earth We are Creating

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Preliminaries

3. Synchronization analysis

3.1. Synchronization estimates: Identical oscillators without frustration

3.2. Synchronization estimates: Nonidentical oscillators with frustration

4. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Preliminaries

3. Synchronization analysis

3.1. Synchronization estimates: Identical oscillators without frustration

3.2. Synchronization estimates: Nonidentical oscillators with frustration

4. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References