The Triptych approach revisited: A staged sectoral approach for climate mitigation

Energy Policy

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 1107-1124

  den Elzen, Michel ^a   Höhne, Niklas ^b   Moltmann, Sara ^b  

^a PBL NETHERLANDS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY   (Netherlands)

^b Ecofys Germany GmbH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Climate change; Emissions; Future commitments; Post 2012 regimes; Sectoral targets; UNFCCC

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

EMISSION ALLOWANCES; EMISSION REDUCTIONS;

ENERGY POLICY;

EID: 39149086652     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.11.026     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Aldy J.E., Ashton J., Baron R., Bodansky D., Charnovitz S., Diringer E., Heller T.C., Pershing J., Shukla P.R., Tubiana L., Tudela F., and Wang X. Beyond Kyoto, Advancing the International Effort Against Climate Change (2003), Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, VA, USA
2. Bajpai A., Ekane N., Wang X., and Liu X. A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of a Wooden House and a Brick House (2005), The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Stockholm, Sweden
3. Baumert K., and Winkler H. Sustainable development. Policies and measures and international climate agreements. In: Bradley R., and Baumert K. (Eds). Growing in the Greenhouse: Protecting the Climate by Putting Development First (2005), World Resource Institute (WRI), Washington, DC, USA
4. Blanchard, S., Reppe, P., 1998. Life cycle analysis of a residential home in Michigan. Master Thesis, University of Michigan, MI, USA.
5. 2 emission reduction among European Union member states. Discussion paper, Informal Workshop for the European Union Ad Hoc Group on Climate. Department of Science, Technology and Society, Utrecht University, Zeist, the Netherlands.
6. Blok K., Höhne N., Torvanger A., and Janzic R. Towards a Post-2012 Climate Change Regime (2005), 3E nv, Brussels, Belgium. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/ 〈www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/〉
7. Bodansky D. International Climate Efforts Beyond 2012: A Survey of Approaches (2004), Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, VA, USA. http://www.pewclimate.org 〈www.pewclimate.org〉
8. Delhotal K.C., De la Chesnaye F.C., Gardiner A., Bates J., and Sankovski A. Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from waste, energy and industry. The Energy Journal, Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Climate Policy (Special Issue no. 3) (2006) 89-103
9. den Elzen M.G.J. Exploring climate regimes for differentiation of future commitments to stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations. Integrated Assessment 3 4 (2002) 343-359
10. den Elzen, M.G.J., 2005. Analysis of future commitments and costs of countries for the "South-North Dialogue". Proposal using the FAIR 2.1 world model. MNP-Report 728001032, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven, The Netherlands. 〈www.mnp.nl/en〉.
11. den Elzen M.G.J., and Lucas P. The FAIR model: a tool to analyse environmental and costs implications of climate regimes. Environmental Modeling and Assessment 10 2 (2005) 115-134
12. den Elzen, M.G.J., Höhne, N., Lucas, P., Moltmann, S., Kuramochi, T., 2007a. The Triptych approach revisited: a staged sectoral approach for climate mitigation. MNP Report 500114008/2007, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
13. den Elzen M.G.J., Höhne N., Brouns B., Winkler H., and Ott HE. Differentiation of countries' post-2012 mitigation commitments under the "South-North Dialogue" Proposal. Environmental Science & Policy 10 (2007) 185-203
14. Graus W., Harmelink M., and Hendriks C. Marginal GHG-Abatement Curves for Agriculture (2004), Ecofys, Utrecht, the Netherlands
15. Groenenberg, H., 2002. Development and Convergence: a bottom-up analysis for the differentiation of future commitments under the Climate convention. Ph.D. Thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
16. Groenenberg H., Phylipsen D., and Blok K. Differentiating commitments world wide: global differentiation of GHG emissions reductions based on the Triptych approach-a preliminary assessment. Energy Policy 29 (2001) 1007-1030
17. Groenenberg H., Blok K., and van der Sluijs J.P. Global Triptych: a bottom-up approach for the differentiation of commitments under the Climate Convention. Climate Policy 4 (2004) 153-175
18. Höhne, N., 2005. What is next after the Kyoto Protocol? Assessment of options for international climate policy post 2012. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
19. Höhne, N., Moltmann, S., 2007. Linking national climate and sustainable development policies with the post-2012 climate regime. Proposals in the Energy Sector for Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, South Africa and South Korea. PECSDE061619, Ecofys, Cologne, Germany.
20. Höhne, N., Phylipsen, D., Ullrich, S., Blok, K., 2005. Options for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, research report for the German Federal Environmental Agency. Climate Change 02/05, ISSN 1611-8855, Available at ECOFYS Gmbh, Berlin, Germany 〈www.umweltbundesamt.de〉.
21. Höhne N., den Elzen M.G.J., and Weiss M. Common but differentiated convergence (CDC), a new conceptual approach to long-term climate policy. Climate Policy 6 2 (2006) 181-199
22. Höhne N., Moltmann S., Lahme E., Worrell E., and Graus W. Emission reduction potential under a sectoral approach post 2012 (2006), Ecofys, Cologne, Germany (DM70210)
23. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2004 (2004), International Energy Agency, Paris, France
24. 2 emissions from fuel combustion 1971-2003, 2005 ed. (2005), International Energy Agency, Paris, France ISBN: 9 92-64-10891-2 (paper) 92-64-10893-9 (CD ROM).
25. IMAGE-team, 2001. The IMAGE 2.2 Implementation of the SRES Scenarios. A Comprehensive Analysis of Emissions, Climate Change and Impacts in the 21st Century. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven, the Netherlands (CD-ROM publication 481508018).
26. IPCC, 2001. Climate change 2001. The science of climate change. IPCC Assessment Reports. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 1-18.
27. Kuramochi T. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Based on a Bottom-up Approach: Focus on Industrial Energy Efficiency Benchmarking and Future Industrial Activity Indicators (2006), University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
28. 2 greenhouse gases. Environmental Science & Policy 10 2 (2007) 85-103
29. Nakicenovic, N., et al., 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. IPCC Special Reports. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
30. Ogonowski M., Houdashelt M., Schmidt J., Lee J., and Helme N. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in Brazil, China and India: Scenarios and Opportunities Through 2025 (2006), Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP), Washington, DC, USA
31. Olivier J.G.J., Van Aardenne J.A., Dentener F., Pagliari V., Ganzeveld L.N., and Peters J.A.H.W. Recent trends in global greenhouse gas emissions: regional trends and spatial distribution of key sources. Environmental Sciences 2 2-3 (2005) 81-100
32. Ott HE., Brouns B., Sterk W., and Wittneben B. It takes two to Tango-climate policy at COP 10 in Buenos Aires and beyond. Journal of European Environmental & Planning Law 2 84-91 (2005)
33. Pan, J., Zhu, X., 2006. Modeling energy requirements for basic needs satisfaction. The case of China: priorities, trends and the future, Third BASIC-Project Meeting, 17-18 February 2006, Beijing, China.
34. Phylipsen G.J.M., Bode J.W., Blok K., Merkus H., and Metz B. A Triptych sectoral approach to burden differentiation; GHG emissions in the European bubble. Energy Policy 26 12 (1998) 929-943
35. Pitcher H. Review of Downscaled Datasets Provided by CIESIN (2004), Joint Global Change Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA
36. Ringius L. Differentiation, leaders, and fairness: negotiating climate commitments in the European Union. International Negotiation 4 2 (1999)
37. Schwarz H.G. Modernisation of existing and new construction of power plants in Germany: results of an optimisations model. Energy Economics 27 1 (2005) 113-137
38. Torvanger A., and Godal O. An evaluation of pre-Kyoto differentiation proposals for national greenhouse gas abatement targets. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 4 (2004) 65-91
39. UN. World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision (2004), United Nations Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, New York
40. UNFCCC, 1992. United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate, United Nations, New York, USAChange 〈http://www.unfccc.int/resources〉.
41. 2 Greenhouse Gases (2006), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA
42. van Vuuren D.P., den Elzen M.G.J., Eickhout B., Lucas P.L., Strengers B.J., and Ruijven B. Stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations. Assessment of different strategies and costs using an integrated assessment framework. Climatic Change 81 (2007) 119-159
43. van Vuuren D.P., Lucas P.L., and Hilderink H. Downscaling drivers of global environmental change scenarios: enabling use of the IPCC SRES scenarios at the national and grid level. Global Environmental Change 17 (2007) 114-130
44. van Vuuren D.P., Weyant J.P., and de la Chesnaye F.C. Multi-gas scenarios to stabilise radiative forcing. Energy Economics 28 (2006) 102-120
45. WBGU. Climate Protection Strategies for the 21st Century. Kyoto and Beyond (2003), German Advisory Council on Global Change, Berlin
46. Winkler H., Spalding-Fecher R., Mwakasonda S., and Davidson O. Sustainable development policies and measures: starting from development to tackle climate change. In: Baumert K.A., Blanchard O., Llose L., and Perkaus J.F. (Eds). Options for Protecting the Climate (2002), WRI, Washington, DC 61-87
47. World Bank. World Bank Development Indicators 2004 (2004), Oxford University Press, New York, USA