This paper provides a novel and comprehensive model-based assessment of possible outcomes of the Durban Platform negotiations with a focus on emissions reduction requirements, the consistency with the 2°C target and global economic impacts. The Durban Platform scenarios investigated in the LIMITS study — all assuming the implementation of comprehensive global emission reductions after 2020, but assuming different 2020 emission reduction levels as well as different long-term concentration targets — exhibit a probability of exceeding the 2°C limit of 22–41% when reaching 450 (450–480) ppm CO 2 e , and 35–59% when reaching 500 (480–520) ppm CO 2 e in 2100. Forcing and temperature show a peak and decline pattern for both targets. Consistency of the resulting temperature trajectory with the 2°C target is a societal choice, and may be based on the maximum exceedance probability at the time of the peak and the long run exceedance probability, e.g., in the year 2100. The challenges of implementing a long-term target after a period of fragmented near-term climate policy can be significant as reflected in steep reductions of emissions intensity and transitional and long-term economic impacts. In particular, the challenges of adopting the target are significantly higher in 2030 than in 2020, both in terms of required emissions intensity decline rates and economic impacts. We conclude that an agreement on comprehensive emissions reductions to be implemented from 2020 onwards has particular significance for meeting long-term climate policy objectives.
In this article we analyze how passenger car transportation in Europe may change this century under permanent high oil prices and stringent climate control policy. We focus on electricity and hydrogen as principal candidate energy carriers, because these two options are increasingly believed to become the long-term competitors in the transport sector. We complement a concise stylistic analysis with an in-depth investigation performed with the energy system optimization model TIAM-ECN, which we ran only for the European regions for this study. This bottom-up model, belonging to the TIMES family, has been adapted for the purpose of researching-amongst others-the transport sector. We particularly inspect the use of passenger cars and find that, if oil prices amount to 100-150 $/bl during the remainder of the century, the transport sector could be little affected in the sense that it may continue to rely predominantly on (liquid or gaseous) fossil fuels: our model suggests that it could be optimal to start replacing gasoline and diesel by natural gas around the middle of the century if sufficient oil and gas reserves are available within this price range. If the European Commission achieves implementing its ambitious carbon mitigation plan, however, a massive restructuring of the transport sector away from fossil fuels could take place, which in three decades would transform it to broadly rely on hydrogen as main energy carrier according to our model runs. Under a broad set of sensitivity scenarios with varying assumptions regarding our most important modeling parameters, we find that if battery costs are reduced by at least 60% in comparison to our reference cost decline path, the passenger car sector could predominantly run on electricity from around 2050.
We investigate the long-term global energy technology diffusion patterns required to reach a stringent climate change target with a maximum average atmospheric temperature increase of 2°C. If the anthropogenic temperature increase is to be limited to 2°C, total CO 2 emissions have to be reduced massively, so as to reach substantial negative values during the second half of the century. Particularly power sector CO 2 emissions should become negative from around 2050 onwards according to most models used for this analysis in order to compensate for GHG emissions in other sectors where abatement is more costly. The annual additional capacity deployment intensity (expressed in GW/yr) for solar and wind energy until 2030 needs to be around that recently observed for coal-based power plants, and will have to be several times higher in the period 2030–2050. Relatively high agreement exists across models in terms of the aggregated low-carbon energy system cost requirements on the supply side until 2050, which amount to about 50 trillion US$.
In this article we explore regional burden-sharing regimes for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission reduction obligations needed to reach a 2 C long-term global climate change control target by performing an integrated energy-economy-climate assessment with the bottom-up TIAM-ECN model. Our main finding is that, under a burden-sharing scheme based on the allowed emissions per capita, the sum of merchandized carbon certificates yields about 2000 billion US$/yr worth of inter-regional trade around 2050, with China and Latin America the major buyers, respectively Africa, India, and other Asia the main sellers. Under a burdensharing regime that aims at equal cost distribution, the aggregated amount of transacted carbon certificates involves less than 500 billion US$/yr worth of international trade by 2050, with China and other Asia representing the vast majority of selling capacity. Restrictions in the opportunities for international certificate trade can have significant short-to mid-term impact, with an increase in global climate policy costs of up to 20%. This paper is complementary to, and an extension of another article on burden-sharing in this special issue, which unlike ours takes a cross-model perspective rather than a single-model view (see Tavoni et al., 2013). Our article reports results from the TIAM-ECN model only, and puts sensitivity analyses with this model at the center stage. Moreover, our paper investigates the effects of possible limitations in international carbon permit trade. For details on the set-up and definition of scenarios analyzed in our study we refer to Kriegler et al. (2013) of this special issue. 1 See www.feem-project.net/limits. T. Kober, B. C. C. van der Zwaan & H. R€ osler 1440001-2 Clim. Change Econ. 2014.05. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com by CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG on 02/07/15. For personal use only. 2 TIMES is the acronym for The Integrated MARKAL-EFOM System, a model generator inspired by two bottom-up energy system models: The MARket Allocation model (MARKAL) and Energy Flow Optimization Model (EFOM). TIAM is a global TIMES-based model developed under the ETSAP (Energy Technology Systems Analysis Program) implementing agreement of the Internatioal Energy Agency (IEA). For further general model descriptions, we refer to London (
Attaining deep greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions in industry in order to support a stringent climate change control target will be difficult without recourse to CO 2 capture and storage (CCS). Using the insights from a long-term bottom-up energy systems model, and undertaking a sectoral assessment, we investigated the importance of CCS in the industrial sector. Under climate policy aimed at limiting atmospheric concentration of GHGs to 650 ppm CO 2 e, costs could increase fivefold when CCS is excluded from the portfolio of mitigation option measures in the industry sector as compared to when CCS is excluded in the power sector. This effect is driven largely by the lack of alternatives for deep emission reductions in industry. Our main policy conclusion is that a broader recognition of CCS in industrial applications in both current policy discussions and research, development, and demonstration funding programmes is justified. In recognition of the heterogeneity of the many types of industrial production processes, the size and location of industrial CO 2 sources, the specific need for CCS-retrofitting, and the exposure of most industrial sectors to international trade, policies aimed at supporting CCS must distinguish between the different challenges faced by the power and industrial sectors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.