The economics of decarbonizing the energy system—results and insights from the RECIPE model intercomparison

This paper synthesizes the results from the model intercomparison exercise among regionalized global energy-economy models conducted in the context of the RECIPE project. The economic adjustment effects of long-term climate policy are investigated based on the cross-comparison of the intertemporal optimization models ReMIND-R and WITCH as well as the recursive dynamic computable general equilibrium model IMACLIM-R. A number of robust findings emerge. If the international community takes immediate action to mitigate climate change, the costs of stabilizing atmospheric CO₂ concentrations at 450?ppm (roughly 530?C550?ppm-e) discounted at 3% are estimated to be 1.4% or lower of global consumption over the twenty-first century. Second best settings with either a delay in climate policy or restrictions to the deployment of low-carbon technologies can result in substantial increases of mitigation costs. A delay of global climate policy until 2030 would render the 450?ppm target unachievable. Renewables and CCS are found to be the most critical mitigation technologies, and all models project a rapid switch of investments away from freely emitting energy conversion technologies towards renewables, CCS and nuclear. Concerning end use sectors, the models consistently show an almost full scale decarbonization of the electricity sector by the middle of the twenty-first century, while the decarbonization of non-electric energy demand, in particular in the transport sector remains incomplete in all mitigation scenarios. The results suggest that assumptions about low-carbon alternatives for non-electric energy demand are of key importance for the costs and achievability of very low stabilization scenarios.     

Harmonization vs. fragmentation: overview of climate policy scenarios in EMF27

This paper synthesizes results of the multi-model Energy Modeling Forum 27 (EMF27) with a focus on climate policy scenarios. The study included two harmonized long-term climate targets of 450 ppm CO₂-e (enforced in 2100) and 550 pm CO₂-e (not-to-exceed) as well as two more fragmented policies based on national and regional emissions targets. Stabilizing atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 and 550 ppm CO₂-e requires a dramatic reduction of carbon emissions compared to baseline levels. Mitigation pathways for the 450 CO₂-e target are largely overlapping with the 550 CO₂-e pathways in the first half of the century, and the lower level is achieved through rapid reductions in atmospheric concentrations in the second half of the century aided by negative anthropogenic carbon flows. A fragmented scenario designed to extrapolate current levels of ambition into the future falls short of the emissions reductions required under the harmonized targets. In a more aggressive scenario intended to capture a break from observed levels of stringency, emissions are still somewhat higher in the second half due to unabated emissions from non-participating countries, emphasizing that a phase-out of global emissions in the long term can only be reached with full global participation. A key finding is that a large range of energy-related CO₂ emissions can be compatible with a given long-term target, depending on assumptions about carbon cycle response, non-CO₂ and land use CO₂ emissions abatement, partly explaining the spread in mitigation costs.     

Implications of weak near-term climate policies on long-term mitigation pathways

While the international community has agreed on the long-term target of limiting global warming to no more than 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, only a few concrete climate policies and measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have been implemented. We use a set of three global integrated assessment models to analyze the implications of current climate policies on long-term mitigation targets. We define a weak-policy baseline scenario, which extrapolates the current policy environment by assuming that the global climate regime remains fragmented and that emission reduction efforts remain unambitious in most of the world’s regions. These scenarios clearly fall short of limiting warming to 2 °C. We investigate the cost and achievability of the stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 ppm CO₂e by 2100, if countries follow the weak policy pathway until 2020 or 2030 before pursuing the long-term mitigation target with global cooperative action. We find that after a deferral of ambitious action the 450 ppm CO₂e is only achievable with a radical up-scaling of efforts after target adoption. This has severe effects on transformation pathways and exacerbates the challenges of climate stabilization, in particular for a delay of cooperative action until 2030. Specifically, reaching the target with weak near-term action implies (a) faster and more aggressive transformations of energy systems in the medium term, (b) more stranded investments in fossil-based capacities, (c) higher long-term mitigation costs and carbon prices and (d) stronger transitional economic impacts, rendering the political feasibility of such pathways questionable.     

Designing policy for deployment of CCS in industry

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 CO₂ 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 CO₂e, 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 CO₂ 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.     

The effect of global climate change, population distribution, and climate mitigation on building energy use in the U.S. and China

Climate change will affect the energy system in a number of ways, one of which is through changes in demands for heating and cooling in buildings. Understanding the potential effect of climate change on heating and cooling demands requires taking into account not only the manner in which the building sector might evolve over time, but also important uncertainty about the nature of climate change itself. In this study, we explore the uncertainty in climate change impacts on heating and cooling requirement by constructing estimates of heating and cooling degree days (HDD/CDDs) for both reference (no-policy) and 550 ppmv CO₂ concentration pathways built from three different Global Climate Models (GCMs) output and three scenarios of gridded population distribution. The implications that changing climate and population distribution might have for building energy consumption in the U.S. and China are then explored by using the results of HDD/CDDs as inputs to a detailed, building energy model, nested in the long-term global integrated assessment framework, Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM). The results across the modeled changes in climate and population distributions indicate that unabated climate change would cause building sector’s final energy consumption to decrease modestly (6 % decrease or less depending on climate models) in both the U.S. and China by the end of the century as decreased heating consumption more than offsets increased cooling using primarily electricity. However, global climate change virtually has negligible effect on total CO₂ emissions in the buildings sector in both countries. The results also indicate more substantial implications for the fuel mix with increases in electricity and decreases in other fuels, which may be consistent with climate mitigation goals. The variation in results across all scenarios due to variation of population distribution is smaller than variation due to the use of different climate models.     

Bioenergy in energy transformation and climate management

This study explores the importance of bioenergy to potential future energy transformation and climate change management. Using a large inter-model comparison of 15 models, we comprehensively characterize and analyze future dependence on, and the value of, bioenergy in achieving potential long-run climate objectives. Model scenarios project, by 2050, bioenergy growth of 1 to 10 % per annum reaching 1 to 35 % of global primary energy, and by 2100, bioenergy becoming 10 to 50 % of global primary energy. Non-OECD regions are projected to be the dominant suppliers of biomass, as well as consumers, with up to 35 % of regional electricity from biopower by 2050, and up to 70 % of regional liquid fuels from biofuels by 2050. Bioenergy is found to be valuable to many models with significant implications for mitigation and macroeconomic costs of climate policies. The availability of bioenergy, in particular biomass with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS), notably affects the cost-effective global emissions trajectory for climate management by accommodating prolonged near-term use of fossil fuels, but with potential implications for climate outcomes. Finally, we find that models cost-effectively trade-off land carbon and nitrous oxide emissions for the long-run climate change management benefits of bioenergy. The results suggest opportunities, but also imply challenges. Overall, further evaluation of the viability of large-scale global bioenergy is merited.     

Climate change mitigation: trade-offs between delay and strength of action required

Climate change mitigation via a reduction in the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the principle requirement for reducing global warming, its impacts, and the degree of adaptation required. We present a simple conceptual model of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions to highlight the trade off between delay in commencing mitigation, and the strength of mitigation then required to meet specific atmospheric CO₂ stabilization targets. We calculate the effects of alternative emission profiles on atmospheric CO₂ and global temperature change over a millennial timescale using a simple coupled carbon cycle-climate model. For example, if it takes 50 years to transform the energy sector and the maximum rate at which emissions can be reduced is ?2.5% $\text{year}^{-1}$ , delaying action until 2020 would lead to stabilization at 540 ppm. A further 20 year delay would result in a stabilization level of 730 ppm, and a delay until 2060 would mean stabilising at over 1,000 ppm. If stabilization targets are met through delayed action, combined with strong rates of mitigation, the emissions profiles result in transient peaks of atmospheric CO₂ (and potentially temperature) that exceed the stabilization targets. Stabilization at 450 ppm requires maximum mitigation rates of ?3% to ?5% $\text{year}^{-1}$ , and when delay exceeds 2020, transient peaks in excess of 550 ppm occur. Consequently tipping points for certain Earth system components may be transgressed. Avoiding dangerous climate change is more easily achievable if global mitigation action commences as soon as possible. Starting mitigation earlier is also more effective than acting more aggressively once mitigation has begun.     

Nuclear energy response in the EMF27 study

The nuclear energy response for mitigating global climate change across 18 participating models of the EMF27 study is investigated. Diverse perspectives on the future role of nuclear power in the global energy system are evident in the broad range of nuclear power contributions from participating models of the study. In the Baseline scenario without climate policy, nuclear electricity generation and shares span 0–66 EJ/year and 0–25 % in 2100 for all models, with a median nuclear electricity generation of 39 EJ/year (1,389 GWe at 90 % capacity factor) and median share of 9 %. The role of nuclear energy increased under the climate policy scenarios. The median of nuclear energy use across all models doubled in the 450 ppm CO₂e scenario with a nuclear electricity generation of 67 EJ/year (2,352 GWe at 90 % capacity factor) and share of 17 % in 2100. The broad range of nuclear electricity generation (11–214 EJ/year) and shares (2–38 %) in 2100 of the 450 ppm CO₂e scenario reflect differences in the technology choice behavior, technology assumptions and competitiveness of low carbon technologies. Greater clarification of nuclear fuel cycle issues and risk factors associated with nuclear energy use are necessary for understanding the nuclear deployment constraints imposed in models and for improving the assessment of the nuclear energy potential in addressing climate change.     

Impacts of different diffusion scenarios for mitigation technology options and of model representations regarding renewables intermittency on evaluations of CO2 emissions reductions

This paper evaluated the impacts of climate change mitigation technology options on CO₂ emission reductions and the effects of model representations regarding renewable intermittency on the assessment of reduction by using a world energy systems model. First, different diffusion scenarios for carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS), nuclear power, and wind power and solar PV are selected from EMF27 scenarios to analyze their impacts on CO₂ emission reductions. These technologies are important for reducing CO₂ intensity of electricity, and the impacts of their diffusion levels on mitigation costs are significant, according to the analyses. Availability of CCS in particular, among the three kinds of technologies, has a large impact on the marginal CO₂ abatement cost. In order to analyze effects of model representations regarding renewables intermittency, four different representations are assumed within the model. A simplistic model representation that does not take into consideration the intermittency of wind power and solar PV evaluates larger contributions of the energy sources than those evaluated by a model representation that takes intermittency into consideration. Appropriate consideration of renewables intermittency within global energy systems models will be important for realistic evaluations of climate change mitigation scenarios.     

The value of bioenergy in low stabilization scenarios: an assessment using REMIND-MAgPIE

This study investigates the use of bioenergy for achieving stringent climate stabilization targets and it analyzes the economic drivers behind the choice of bioenergy technologies. We apply the integrated assessment framework REMIND-MAgPIE to show that bioenergy, particularly if combined with carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a crucial mitigation option with high deployment levels and high technology value. If CCS is available, bioenergy is exclusively used with CCS. We find that the ability of bioenergy to provide negative emissions gives rise to a strong nexus between biomass prices and carbon prices. Ambitious climate policy could result in bioenergy prices of 70 $/GJ (or even 430 $/GJ if bioenergy potential is limited to 100 EJ/year), which indicates a strong demand for bioenergy. For low stabilization scenarios with BECCS availability, we find that the carbon value of biomass tends to exceed its pure energy value. Therefore, the driving factor behind investments into bioenergy conversion capacities for electricity and hydrogen production are the revenues generated from negative emissions, rather than from energy production. However, in REMIND modern bioenergy is predominantly used to produce low-carbon fuels, since the transport sector has significantly fewer low-carbon alternatives to biofuels than the power sector. Since negative emissions increase the amount of permissible emissions from fossil fuels, given a climate target, bioenergy acts as a complement to fossils rather than a substitute. This makes the short-term and long-term deployment of fossil fuels dependent on the long-term availability of BECCS.     

All adrift: aviation,shipping, and climate change policy

All sectors face decarbonization for a 2 °C temperature increase to be avoided. Nevertheless, meaningful policy measures that address rising CO₂ from international aviation and shipping remain woefully inadequate. Treated with a similar approach within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), they are often debated as if facing comparable challenges, and even influence each others’ mitigation policies. Yet their strengths and weaknesses have important distinctions. This article sheds light on these differences so that they can be built upon to improve the quality of debate and ensuing policy development. The article quantifies ‘2 °C’ pathways for these sectors, highlighting the need for mitigation measures to be urgently accelerated. It reviews recent developments, drawing attention to one example where a change in aviation mitigation policy had a direct impact on measures to cut CO₂ from shipping. Finally, the article contrasts opportunities and barriers towards mitigation. The article concludes that there is a portfolio of opportunities for short- to medium-term decarbonization for shipping, but its complexity is its greatest barrier to change. In contrast, the more simply structured aviation sector is pinning too much hope on emissions trading to deliver CO₂ cuts in line with 2 °C. Instead, the solution remains controversial and unpopular – avoiding 2 °C requires demand management.

Policy relevance

The governance arrangements around the CO₂ produced by international aviation and shipping are different from other sectors because their emissions are released in international airspace and waters. Instead, through the Kyoto Protocol, the International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) were charged with developing policies towards mitigating their emissions. Slow progress to date, coupled with strong connections with rapidly growing economies, has led to the CO₂ from international transport growing at a higher rate than the average rate from all other sectors. This article considers this rapid growth, and the potential for future CO₂ growth in the context of avoiding a 2 °C temperature rise above pre-industrial levels. It explores similarities and differences between these two sectors, highlighting that a reliance on global market-based measures to deliver required CO₂ cuts will likely leave both at odds with the overarching climate goal.     

Global fossil energy markets and climate change mitigation – an analysis with REMIND

We analyze the dynamics of global fossil resource markets under different assumptions for the supply of fossil fuel resources, development pathways for energy demand, and climate policy settings. Resource markets, in particular the oil market, are characterized by a large discrepancy between costs of resource extraction and commodity prices on international markets. We explain this observation in terms of (a) the intertemporal scarcity rent, (b) regional price differentials arising from trade and transport costs, (c) heterogeneity and inertia in the extraction sector. These effects are captured by the REMIND model. We use the model to explore economic effects of changes in coal, oil and gas markets induced by climate-change mitigation policies. A large share of fossil fuel reserves and resources will be used in the absence of climate policy leading to atmospheric GHG concentrations well beyond a level of 550 ppm CO₂-eq. This result holds independently of different assumptions about energy demand and fossil fuel availability. Achieving ambitious climate targets will drastically reduce fossil fuel consumption, in particular the consumption of coal. Conventional oil and gas as well as non-conventional oil reserves are still exhausted. We find the net present value of fossil fuel rent until 2100 at 30tril.US$ with a large share of oil and a small share of coal. This is reduced by 9 and 12tril.US$ to achieve climate stabilization at 550 and 450 ppm CO₂-eq, respectively. This loss is, however, overcompensated by revenues from carbon pricing that are 21 and 32tril.US$, respectively. The overcompensation also holds under variations of energy demand and fossil fuel supply.     

Can radiative forcing be limited to 2.6 Wm−2 without negative emissions from bioenergy AND CO2 capture and storage?

Combining bioenergy and carbon dioxide (CO₂) capture and storage (CCS) technologies (BECCS) has the potential to remove CO₂ from the atmosphere while producing useful energy. BECCS has played a central role in scenarios that reduce climate forcing to low levels such as 2.6 Wm^?2. In this paper we consider whether BECCS is essential to limiting radiative forcing (RF) to 2.6 Wm^?2 by 2100 using the Global Change Assessment Model, a closely coupled model of biogeophysical and human Earth systems. We show that BECCS can potentially reduce the cost of limiting RF to 2.6 Wm^?2 by 2100 but that a variety of technology combinations that do not include BECCS can also achieve this goal, under appropriate emissions mitigation policies. We note that with appropriate supporting land-use policies terrestrial sequestration could deliver carbon storage ranging from 200 to 700 PgCO₂-equiavalent over the 21st century. We explore substantial delays in participation by some geopolitical regions. We find that the value of BECCS is substantially higher under delay and that delay results in higher transient RF and climate change. However, when major regions postponed mitigation indefinitely, it was impossible to return RF to 2.6 Wm^?2 by 2100. Neither finite land resources nor finite potential geologic storage capacity represented a meaningful technical limit on the ability of BECCS to contribute to emissions mitigation in the numerical experiments reported in this paper.     

The role of renewable energy in climate stabilization: results from the EMF27 scenarios

This paper uses the EMF27 scenarios to explore the role of renewable energy (RE) in climate change mitigation. Currently RE supplies almost 20 % of global electricity demand. Almost all EMF27 mitigation scenarios show a strong increase in renewable power production, with a substantial ramp-up of wind and solar power deployment. In many scenarios, renewables are the most important long-term mitigation option for power supply. Wind energy is competitive even without climate policy, whereas the prospects of solar photovoltaics (PV) are highly contingent on the ambitiousness of climate policy. Bioenergy is an important and versatile energy carrier; however—with the exception of low temperature heat—there is less scope for renewables other than biomass for non-electric energy supply. Despite the important role of wind and solar power in climate change mitigation scenarios with full technology availability, limiting their deployment has a relatively small effect on mitigation costs, if nuclear and carbon capture and storage (CCS)—which can serve as substitutes in low-carbon power supply—are available. Limited bioenergy availability in combination with limited wind and solar power by contrast, results in a more substantial increase in mitigation costs. While a number of robust insights emerge, the results on renewable energy deployment levels vary considerably across the models. An in-depth analysis of a subset of EMF27 reveals substantial differences in modeling approaches and parameter assumptions. To a certain degree, differences in model results can be attributed to different assumptions about technology costs, resource potentials and systems integration.     

Climate benefits of changing diet

Climate change mitigation policies tend to focus on the energy sector, while the livestock sector receives surprisingly little attention, despite the fact that it accounts for 18% of the greenhouse gas emissions and for 80% of total anthropogenic land use. From a dietary perspective, new insights in the adverse health effects of beef and pork have lead to a revision of meat consumption recommendations. Here, we explored the potential impact of dietary changes on achieving ambitious climate stabilization levels. By using an integrated assessment model, we found a global food transition to less meat, or even a complete switch to plant-based protein food to have a dramatic effect on land use. Up to 2,700 Mha of pasture and 100 Mha of cropland could be abandoned, resulting in a large carbon uptake from regrowing vegetation. Additionally, methane and nitrous oxide emission would be reduced substantially. A global transition to a low meat-diet as recommended for health reasons would reduce the mitigation costs to achieve a 450 ppm CO₂-eq. stabilisation target by about 50% in 2050 compared to the reference case. Dietary changes could therefore not only create substantial benefits for human health and global land use, but can also play an important role in future climate change mitigation policies.     

Renewable and low-carbon energies as mitigation options of climate change for China

This article discusses how renewable and low-carbon energies can serve as mitigation options of climate change in China’s power sector. Our study is based on scenarios developed in PowerPlan, a bottom-up model simulating a countries’ power sector and its emissions. We first adjusted the model to China’s present-day economy and power sector. We then developed different scenarios based on story lines for possible future developments in China. We simulated China’s carbon-based electricity production system of today and possible future transitions towards a low-carbon system relying on renewable and low-carbon energies. In our analysis, we compare the business-as-usual scenarios with more sustainable energy scenarios. We found that by increasing the share of renewable and nuclear energies to different levels, between 17% and 57% of all CO₂ emissions from the power sector could be avoided by 2030 compared to the business-as-usual scenario. We also found that electricity generation costs increase when more sustainable power plants are installed. As a conclusion, China has two options: choosing for high climate change mitigation and high costs or choosing for moderate climate change mitigation and moderate costs. In case high climate change mitigation will be chosen, development assistance is likely to be needed to cover the costs.     

Carbon Capture and Storage From Fossil Fuels and Biomass – Costs and Potential Role in Stabilizing the Atmosphere

The capture and storage of CO₂ from combustion of fossil fuels is gaining attraction as a means to deal with climate change. CO₂ emissions from biomass conversion processes can also be captured. If that is done, biomass energy with CO₂ capture and storage (BECS) would become a technology that removes CO₂ from the atmosphere and at the same time deliver CO₂-neutral energy carriers (heat, electricity or hydrogen) to society. Here we present estimates of the costs and conversion efficiency of electricity, hydrogen and heat generation from fossil fuels and biomass with CO₂ capture and storage. We then insert these technology characteristics into a global energy and transportation model (GET 5.0), and calculate costs of stabilizing atmospheric CO₂ concentration at 350 and 450 ppm. We find that carbon capture and storage technologies applied to fossil fuels have the potential to reduce the cost of meeting the 350 ppm stabilisation targets by 50% compared to a case where these technologies are not available and by 80% when BECS is allowed. For the 450 ppm scenario, the reduction in costs is 40 and 42%, respectively. Thus, the difference in costs between cases where BECS technologies are allowed and where they are not is marginal for the 450 ppm stabilization target. It is for very low stabilization targets that negative emissions become warranted, and this makes BECS more valuable than in cases with higher stabilization targets. Systematic and stochastic sensitivity analysis is performed. Finally, BECS opens up the possibility to remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. But this option should not be seen as an argument in favour of doing nothing about the climate problem now and then switching on this technology if climate change turns out to be a significant problem. It is not likely that BECS can be initiated sufficiently rapidly at a sufficient scale to follow this path to avoiding abrupt and serious climate changes if that would happen.     

Vulnerability and adaptability of wheat production in different climatic zones of Pakistan under climate change scenarios

Ten wheat production sites of Pakistan were categorized into four climatic zones i.e. arid, semi-arid, sub-humid and humid to explore the vulnerability of wheat production in these zones to climate change using CSM-Cropsim-CERES-Wheat model. The analysis was based on multi-year (1971–2000) crop model simulation runs using daily weather series under scenarios of increased temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration (CO₂) along with two scenarios of water management. Apart from this, sowing date as an adaptation option to offset the likely impacts of climate change was also considered. Increase in temperature resulted in yield declines in arid, semi-arid and sub-humid zone. But the humid zone followed a positive trend of gain in yield with rise in temperature up to 4°C. Within a water regime, increase in CO₂ concentration from 375 to 550 and 700 ppm will exert positive effect on gain in wheat yield but this positive effect is significantly variable in different climatic zones under rainfed conditions than the full irrigation. The highest response was shown by arid zone followed by semi-arid, sub-humid and humid zones. But if the current baseline water regimes (i.e. full irrigation in arid and semi-arid zones and rainfed in sub-humid and humid zones) persist in future, the sub-humid zone will be most benefited in terms of significantly higher percent gain in yield by increasing CO₂ level, mainly because of its rainfed water regime. Within a CO₂ level the changes in water supply from rainfed to full irrigation shows an intense degree of responsiveness in terms of yield gain at 375 ppm CO₂ level compared to 550 and 700 ppm. Arid and semi-arid zones were more responsive compared to sub-humid and humid zones. Rise in temperature reduced the length of crop life cycle in all areas, though at an accelerated rate in the humid zone. These results revealed that the climatic zones have shown a variable intensity of vulnerability to different scenarios of climate change and water management due to their inherent specific and spatial climatic features. In order to cope with the negative effects of climate change, alteration in sowing date towards cooler months will be an appropriate response by the farmers.     

Role of energy efficiency in climate change mitigation policy for India: assessment of co-benefits and opportunities within an integrated assessment modeling framework

Addressing the challenges of global warming requires interventions on both the energy supply and demand side. With the supply side responses being thoroughly discussed in the literature, our paper focuses on analyzing the role of end use efficiency improvements for Indian climate change mitigation policy and the associated co-benefits, within the integrated assessment modeling framework of Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM). Six scenarios are analyzed here in total- one no climate policy and two climate policy cases, and within each of these one scenario with reference end use energy technology assumptions and another with advance end use energy technology assumptions has been analyzed. The paper has some important insights. Final energy demand and emissions in India are significantly reduced with energy efficiency improvements, and the role of this policy is important especially for the building and transportation sector under both reference and climate policy scenarios. Though energy efficiency policy should be an integral part of climate policy, by itself it is not sufficient for achieving mitigation targets, and a climate policy is necessary for achieving mitigation goals. There are significant co-benefits of energy efficiency improvements. Energy security for India is improved with reduced oil, coal and gas imports. Significant reduction in local pollutant gases is found which is important for local health concerns. Capital investment requirement for Indian electricity generation is reduced, more so for the climate policy scenarios, and finally there are significant savings in terms of reduced abatement cost for meeting climate change mitigation goals.     

Reductions of greenhouse gas emissions in Annex I and non-Annex I countries for meeting concentration stabilisation targets

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Working Group III, summarises in Box 13.7 the required emission reduction ranges in Annex I and non-Annex I countries as a group, to achieve greenhouse gas concentration stabilisation levels between 450 and 650 ppm CO₂-eq. The box summarises the results of the IPCC authors’ analysis of the literature on the regional allocation of the emission reductions. The box states that Annex I countries as a group would need to reduce their emissions to below 1990 levels in 2020 by 25% to 40% for 450 ppm, 10% to 30% for 550 ppm and 0% to 25% for 650 ppm CO₂-eq, even if emissions in developing countries deviate substantially from baseline for the low concentration target. In this paper, the IPCC authors of Box 13.7 provide background information and analyse whether new information, obtained after completion of the IPCC report, influences these ranges. The authors concluded that there is no argument for updating the ranges in Box 13.7. The allocation studies, which were published after the writing of the IPCC report, show reductions in line with the reduction ranges in the box. From the studies analysed, this paper specifies the “substantial deviation” or “deviation from baseline” in the box: emissions of non-Annex I countries as a group have to be below the baseline roughly between 15% to 30% for 450 ppm CO₂-eq, 0% to 20% for 550 ppm CO₂-eq and from 10% above to 10% below the baseline for 650 ppm CO₂-eq, in 2020. These ranges apply to the whole group of non-Annex I countries and may differ substantially per country. The most important factor influencing these ranges above, for non-Annex I countries, and in the box, for Annex I countries, is new information on higher baseline emissions (e.g. that of Sheehan, Climatic Change, 2008, this issue). Other factors are the assumed global emission level in 2020 and assumptions on land-use change and forestry emissions. The current, slow pace in climate policy and the steady increase in global emissions, make it almost unfeasible to reach relatively low global emission levels in 2020 needed to meet 450 ppm CO₂-eq, as was first assumed feasible by some studies, 5 years ago.