Implications of the international reduction pledges on long-term energy system changes and costs in China and India

Lucas, Paul L.; Shukla, P.R.; Chen, Wenying; Ruijven, Bas van; Dhar, Subash; Elzen, Michel den; Vuuren, Detlef van

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.026

Cited by 40 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Current global and regional studies [13,23,74,94,95] do not expect CCS to be applied in China before 2030 in an appreciable way either. In addition, a number of modelling studies expect the substantial deployment of CCS to take place as early as in the 2030s [12,94].…”

Section: Overall Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They developed long-term energy scenarios, exploring the role played by CCS in a macro-economic optimised environment (for example, in [12][13][14][15][16], which modelled the Chinese energy system; in [17][18][19][20], which analysed China as part of long-term energy scenarios for Asia, and in [8,[21][22][23], which modelled China as one of several regions within world energy models). In addition,…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prospects of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in China’s power sector – An integrated assessment

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of the present article is to conduct an integrated assessment in order to explore whether CCS could be a viable technological option for significantly reducing future CO 2 emissions in China.Methods In this paper, an integrated approach covering five assessment dimensions is chosen.Each dimension is investigated using specific methods (graphical abstract). ResultsThe most crucial precondition that must be met is a reliable storage capacity assessment based on site-specific geological data. Our projection of different trends of coal-based power plant capacities up to 2050 ranges between 34 and 221 Gt of CO 2 that may be captured from coal-fired power plants to be built by 2050. If very optimistic assumptions about the country's CO 2 storage potential are applied, 192 Gt of CO 2 could theoretically be stored as a result of matching these sources with suitable sinks. If a cautious approach is taken, this figure falls to 29 Gt of CO 2 . In practice, this potential will decrease further with the impact of technical, legal, economic and social acceptance factors. Further constraints may be the delayed commercial availability of CCS in China; a significant barrier to achieving the economic viability of CCS due to a currently non-existing nation-wide CO 2 pricing scheme that generates a sufficiently strong price signal; an expected life-cycle reduction rate of the power plant's greenhouse gas emissions of 59 to 60%; and an increase in most other negative environmental and social impacts. Conclusion and practice implicationsMost experts expect a striking dominance of coal-fired power generation in the country's electricity sector, even if the recent trend towards a flattened deployment of coal capacity and reduced annual growth rates of coal-fired generation proves to be true in the future. In order to reduce fossil fuel-related CO 2 emissions to a level that would be consistent with the long-term climate protection target of the international community to

show abstract

Section: Overall Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospects of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in China’s power sector – An integrated assessment

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research has found that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions in Asia 14,15 and Africa 16,17 would increase the cost of kerosene and LPG. However, these studies do not explore compensatory policies that could counteract these effects, and assess only a limited set of climate mitigation scenarios.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy trade-offs between climate mitigation and clean cook-stove access in South Asia

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Household air pollution from traditional cook stoves presents a greater health hazard than any other environmental factor. Despite government e orts to support clean-burning cooking fuels, over 700 million people in South Asia could still rely on traditional stoves in 2030. This number could rise if climate change mitigation e orts increase energy costs. Here we quantify the costs of support policies to make clean cooking a ordable to all South Asians under four increasingly stringent climate policy scenarios. Our most stringent mitigation scenario increases clean fuel costs 38% in 2030 relative to the baseline, keeping 21% more South Asians on traditional stoves or increasing the minimum support policy cost to achieve universal clean cooking by up to 44%. The extent of this increase depends on how policymakers allocate subsidies between clean fuels and stoves. These additional costs are within the range of financial transfers to South Asia estimated in e orts-sharing scenarios of international climate agreements.

show abstract

“…This model indeed adopts a dynamic, multi-region and multi-sector 2 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios that belong to category II aim for a radiative forcing between 3 and 3.5 W/m 2 to a CO 2 -equivalent concentration between 490 and 535 ppm and an increase in the global temperature between 2.4 and 2.8°C above the pre-industrial level. 3 A notable exception is a recent paper by Lucas et al (2013) who find that ''postponing mitigation action increases the lock-in in less energy-efficient technologies and results in much higher cumulative mitigation costs''. But this assessment is run at a 2050 horizon, considers a ?2°C temperature target and adopts bottom-up models that fail to capture the complexity of macroeconomic interplays driven by the adjustment of energy systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Global carbon pricing and the “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities”: the case of China

Hamdi-Chérif

Waisman

2015

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceThis paper analyzes whether using carbon pricing as the major mitigation policy instrument is compatible with the implementation of the “common but differentiated responsibility” principle in a global climate agreement. We focus more specifically on China, a key player in climate negotiations. This is done by adopting the Imaclim-R model to assess the economic effect of carbon pricing on the Chinese economy in different climate architectures which, despite aiming at the same stabilization target, differ in terms of the temporal profile of emission reductions and the regional distribution of efforts (different quota allocation schemes). Model outcomes prove that neither temporal nor regional flexibilities provides a satisfactory answer since the Chinese economy remains significantly hurt at certain time periods. This suggests the recourse to complementary measures to carbon pricing in order to help smoothing the necessary shift toward a low-carbon society. This means in particular that, to build a climate policy architecture that could be compatible with the “common but differentiated responsibility” principle, climate negotiations must go beyond global top-down systems relying on cap-and-trade to include bottom-up measures likely to complement the carbon price and make carbon mitigation acceptable in countries like China. © 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrech

show abstract

Implications of the international reduction pledges on long-term energy system changes and costs in China and India

Cited by 40 publications

References 37 publications

Prospects of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in China’s power sector – An integrated assessment

Prospects of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in China’s power sector – An integrated assessment

Policy trade-offs between climate mitigation and clean cook-stove access in South Asia

Global carbon pricing and the “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities”: the case of China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About