Evaluating cost-effective strategies for meeting regional CO2 targets

Global Environmental Change

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 359-373

  Bollen, J C ^a   Toet, A M C ^a   De Vries, H J M ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS; CLIMATE PROTOCOL; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EMISSION REDUCTION; EMISSIONS CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; GREENHOUSE GAS; IMAGE 2 MODEL; REGIONAL TARGET;

EID: 0030301221     PISSN: 09593780     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-3780(96)00027-1     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Annex 1 includes the OECD, Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union
2. IPCC, Climate Change 1994, Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and an Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Scenarios, University Press, Cambridge, 1995
3. EMF (Energy Modelling Forum), Reducing Global Carbon Emissions -Costs and Policy Options, EMF-12, Stanford University, Stanford, 1993
4. A B Lovins and L H Lovins, 'Least-Cost Climatic Stabilization', Annual Review of Energy and Environment, No 16, 1991, pp 433-451;
5. D W Jorgenson and P J Wilcoxen, 'The cost of controlling carbon dioxide emissions', Paper presented at the Workshop Economics/Energy/ Environment, Model Climate Policy Analysis, Washington, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 1990;
6. 2 Emissions, Volume I, Netherlands Energy Research Foundation ECN, 1993;
7. T B Johansson, H Kelly, A K N Reddy and R H Williams (eds) Renewable Energy: Sources for Fuels and Electricity, Island Press, Washington DC, 1993;
8. K Blok, E Worrell, RAW Albers, RAF Culenaere and W C Turkenburg, The cost effectiveness of energy conservation from the point of view of carbon dioxide reduction', Paper presented at 13th World Energy Engineering Congress, University of Utrecht, Department of Science, Technology and Society, 1990;
9. An extensive literature survey can be found in J C Hourcade, K Halsnaes, M Jaccard, W D Montgomery, R Richels, J Robinson, P R Shukla, P Sturm, W Chandler, O Davidson, J Edmonds, D Finon, K Hogan, F Krause, A Kolesov, E La Rovere, P Nastari, A Pegov, K Richards, L Schrattenholzer, R Shackleton, Y Sokona, A Tudini and J Weyant. A review of mitigation cost studies. In: J P Bruce, H Lee and E F Haites (eds), Climate Change 1995. Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 297-366, 1996
10. M Grubb, T Chapuis, and M H Duong, The economics of changing course, implications of adaptability and inertia for optimal climate policy', Energy Policy, Vol 23, No 4/5, 1995, pp 417-432
11. G Klaassen, 'Joint implementation in the second sulfur protocol: a tempest in a teapot', Background Paper presented at the UN/ECE Task Force on Economic Aspects of Abatement Strategies, 12-13 May, London, 1994
12. T Morita, Y Matsuoka and M Kaiuma, Long Term Global Scenarios Based on the AIM Model, Asian-Pacific Integrated Model (AIM) Interim Paper, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan, October 1995
13. T Jackson, 'Joint Implementation and the cost-effectiveness under the Framework Convention on Climate Change', Energy continued from page 360 Policy, Vol 23, No 2, 1995, pp 117-138;
14. Kram, Annual Review of Energy and Environment, op cit, Ref 4
15. J Alcamo, G J J Kreileman, J C Bollen, G J van den Born, R G Gerlagh, M S Krol, A M C Toet and H J M de Vries, 'Baseline scenarios of global environmental change', this issue
16. J Alcamo, G J J Kreileman, R Leemans (eds.), this issue
17. The EE model is a submodel of the IMAGE 2.1 model. The previous version of the model, IMAGE 2.0, and its purpose is comprehensively documented in J Alcamo, (ed) 'IMAGE 2.0, Integrated modelling of Global Climate Change', reprinted from Water, Air and Soil Pollution, Vol 76, Nos 1-2, 1994.
18. The Energy Economy (EE) model which is usedforthe analysis presented in this paper is extensively described in J C Bollen, A M C Toet, H J M de Vries and R A van den Wijngaart, Modelling Regional Energy Use for Evaluating Global Climate Scenarios, RIVM Report 481507010, RIVM, Bilthoven, September 1995, in which the model calibration procedure is laid out as well as the models' behaviour against 1970-1990 data. The EE model calculates for 13 world regions the demand for end use energy, based on exogenous scenario assumptions on GDP and other economic indicators. End use energy demand is translated into (1) secondary and (2) primary energy use for six energy carriers. The demand for these energy carriers is used to calculate emissions of greenhouse gases. Emission pathways are fed into the integrated framework of the IMAGE 2.1 model
19. This is especially relevant for Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries which are in transition towards market economies. They have energy intensities that are 100-200% higher than in Western European countries. It may be expected that there will be a sharp decline in sectoral energy intensities (see World Bank, Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe, Version 31 March 1993, document presented at the ministerial conference at Washington, D.C., 1-3 April, Washington, D.C., 1993;
20. J C Bollen, J-P Hettelingh, and R J M Maas, Scenarios for Economy and Environment in Central and Eastern Europe, RIVM Report, RIVM, Bilthoven, 1993). In this analysis it is assumed for Eastern Europe and the CIS region that marginal energy intensities converge to values that prevail in Western Europe because of the equilibration of energy prices to world market levels. This implies that because of a decline in production combined with early scrapping of old and relatively inefficient capital equipment there will be fast penetration of capital equipment with low energy intensities and hence a relatively fast decline of the overall energy intensity. This means that the AEEI is significantly higher in CEE after the recession than in Western Europe
21. For electricity generation, market shares for fuels are exogenously specified as time series
22. he assumption that a retrofit fuel switch is not an option is not fully realistic, especially in case of severe price fluctuations (1979-1986 period). Supply side dynamics and retrofit options as dexcribed in H J M de Vries and R A van den Wijngaart, The Targets/IMage 1.0-Energy (TIME) Model, RIVM Report No. 461502000, RIVM, Bilthoven, October 1995 will be included in a next version of the model
23. J F Clark and J A Edmonds, 'Modelling energy technologies in a competitive market', Energy Economics, April, 1993
24. E Moxnes, Interfuel Substitution in OECD-European Electricity Production, CMI Working Paper, Chr Michelsen Institute, Centre for Petroleum Economics, Fantoft, Norway, 1989
25. This differs slightly from the so-called price elasticity. The price elasticity is defined as the percentage change of energy demand given the percentage change of the end use energy cost prices whereas the PIEEI is defined as the reduction of the unabated energy intensity given the prevailing end use energy cost
26. If PIEEI is equal to x% in year t this means that the energy intensity has been reduced by x% because of prevailing cost levels and characteristics of the investment cost function in year t
27. Ironically, with falling end use energy costs and rising incomes, the energy intensity may increase precisely because the higher energy efficiency of capital goods induces more demand. This may be caused by consumption of goods requiring more end use energy or less efficient management practices
28. Alcamo et al, Baseline Scenarios of Global Environmental Change, op cit, Ref 9
29. Blok et al, 13th World Energy Engineering Congress, op cit, Ref 4
30. The cost curves from EPRI and RMI have been slightly adjusted: only those measures are considered which have positive net marginal investment costs. They can be found in A P Fickett, C W Gellings, and A B Lovins, 'Efficient Use of Electricity', Scientific American, Vol 263, No 3, pp 28-37, 1990
31. J C Bollen, O J Kuik, J G van Minnen, A M C Toet and M Bennis, A Framework for the Assessment of the Global Potential of Joint Implementation, RIVM Report 481507010, RIVM/IVM, Bilthoven, September 1995
32. The Annex 1 group (called that because they are listed in Annex 1 of the Framework Climate Change Convention) includes the IMAGE-regions Canada, USA, WE, EEU, CIS, Oceania and Japan
33. It is not clear how cost savings due to energy conservation of the demand side for the short-term interfere with capacity planning of large power plants with lifetimes of more than 40 years. See de Vries and van den Wijngaart, The Targets/IMage 1.0-Energy (TIME) Model, op cit, Ref 14 for an integrated analysis at the world level
34. Alcamo et al, Baseline Scenarios of Global Environmental Change, op cit, Ref 9
35. World Bank, Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe, Version 31 March 1993, op cit, Ref 12
36. This is to be compared with about US$400 bn world-wide investment costs in 1990 in energy supply, see World Energy Council (WEC) and Institute for Applied System Analysis (IIASA), Global Energy Perspectives to 2050 and Beyond, World Energy Council, London, 1995;
37. H J M de Vries and M Janssen, Global Energy Futures: An Integrated Perspective with the TIME-Model, RIVM Report (in press), RIVM, Bilthoven, version 20 May 1996
38. Alcamo et al, Baseline Scenarios of Global Environmental Change, op cit, Ref 9
39. de Vries and van den Wijngaart, The Targets/IMage 1.0-Energy (TIME) Model, op cit, Ref 14;
40. de Vries and Janssen, Global Energy Futures: An Integrated Perspective with the TIME-Model, op cit, Ref 28