Search Results
Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies
2019, Luderer, Gunnar, Pehl, Michaja, Arvesen, Anders, Gibon, Thomas, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., de Boer, Harmen Sytze, Fricko, Oliver, Hejazi, Mohamad, Humpenöder, Florian, Iyer, Gokul, Mima, Silvana, Mouratiadou, Ioanna, Pietzcker, Robert C., Popp, Alexander, van den Berg, Maarten, van Vuuren, Detlef, Hertwich, Edgar G.
A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy.
Fossil-fueled development (SSP5): An energy and resource intensive scenario for the 21st century
2016, Kriegler, Elmar, Bauer, Nico, Popp, Alexander, Humpenöder, Florian, Leimbach, Marian, Strefler, Jessica, Baumstark, Lavinia, Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon, Hilaire, Jérôme, Klein, David, Mouratiadou, Ioanna, Weindl, Isabelle, Bertram, Christoph, Dietrich, Jan-Philipp, Luderer, Gunnar, Pehl, Michaja, Pietzcker, Robert, Piontek, Franziska, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Biewald, Anne, Bonsch, Markus, Giannousakis, Anastasis, Kreidenweis, Ulrich, Müller, Christoph, Rolinski, Susanne, Schultes, Anselm, Schwanitz, Jana, Stevanovic, Miodrag, Calvin, Katherine, Emmerling, Johannes, Fujimori, Shinichiro, Edenhofer, Ottmar
This paper presents a set of energy and resource intensive scenarios based on the concept of Shared Socio-Economic Pathways (SSPs). The scenario family is characterized by rapid and fossil-fueled development with high socio-economic challenges to mitigation and low socio-economic challenges to adaptation (SSP5). A special focus is placed on the SSP5 marker scenario developed by the REMIND-MAgPIE integrated assessment modeling framework. The SSP5 baseline scenarios exhibit very high levels of fossil fuel use, up to a doubling of global food demand, and up to a tripling of energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions over the course of the century, marking the upper end of the scenario literature in several dimensions. These scenarios are currently the only SSP scenarios that result in a radiative forcing pathway as high as the highest Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP8.5). This paper further investigates the direct impact of mitigation policies on the SSP5 energy, land and emissions dynamics confirming high socio-economic challenges to mitigation in SSP5. Nonetheless, mitigation policies reaching climate forcing levels as low as in the lowest Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP2.6) are accessible in SSP5. The SSP5 scenarios presented in this paper aim to provide useful reference points for future climate change, climate impact, adaption and mitigation analysis, and broader questions of sustainable development.
The CO2 reduction potential for the European industry via direct electrification of heat supply (power-to-heat)
2020, Madeddu, Silvia, Ueckerdt, Falko, Pehl, Michaja, Peterseim, Juergen, Lord, Michael, Kumar, Karthik Ajith, Krüger, Christoph, Luderer, Gunnar
The decarbonisation of industry is a bottleneck for the EU's 2050 target of climate neutrality. Replacing fossil fuels with low-carbon electricity is at the core of this challenge; however, the aggregate electrification potential and resulting system-wide CO2 reductions for diverse industrial processes are unknown. Here, we present the results from a comprehensive bottom-up analysis of the energy use in 11 industrial sectors (accounting for 92% of Europe's industry CO2 emissions), and estimate the technological potential for industry electrification in three stages. Seventy-eight per cent of the energy demand is electrifiable with technologies that are already established, while 99% electrification can be achieved with the addition of technologies currently under development. Such a deep electrification reduces CO2 emissions already based on the carbon intensity of today's electricity (∼300 gCO2 kWhel−1). With an increasing decarbonisation of the power sector IEA: 12 gCO2 kWhel−1 in 2050), electrification could cut CO2 emissions by 78%, and almost entirely abate the energy-related CO2 emissions, reducing the industry bottleneck to only residual process emissions. Despite its decarbonisation potential, the extent to which direct electrification will be deployed in industry remains uncertain and depends on the relative cost of electric technologies compared to other low-carbon options.
REMIND2.1: transformation and innovation dynamics of the energy-economic system within climate and sustainability limits
2021, Baumstark, Lavinia, Bauer, Nico, Benke, Falk, Bertram, Christoph, Bi, Stephen, Gong, Chen Chris, Dietrich, Jan Philipp, Dirnaichner, Alois, Giannousakis, Anastasis, Hilaire, Jerome, Klein, David, Koch, Johannes, Leimbach, Marian, Levesque, Antoine, Madeddu, Silvia, Malik, Aman, Merfort, Anne, Merfort, Leon, Odenweller, Adrian, Pehl, Michaja, Pietzcker, Robert C., Piontek, Franziska, Rauner, Sebastian, Rodrigues, Renato, Rottoli, Marianna, Schreyer, Felix, Schultes, Anselm, Soergel, Bjoern, Soergel, Dominika, Strefler, Jessica, Ueckerdt, Falko, Kriegler, Elmar, Luderer, Gunnar
This paper presents the new and now open-source version 2.1 of the REgional Model of INvestments and Development (REMIND). REMIND, as an integrated assessment model (IAM), provides an integrated view of the global energy–economy–emissions system and explores self-consistent transformation pathways. It describes a broad range of possible futures and their relation to technical and socio-economic developments as well as policy choices. REMIND is a multiregional model incorporating the economy and a detailed representation of the energy sector implemented in the General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS). It uses non-linear optimization to derive welfare-optimal regional transformation pathways of the energy-economic system subject to climate and sustainability constraints for the time horizon from 2005 to 2100. The resulting solution corresponds to the decentralized market outcome under the assumptions of perfect foresight of agents and internalization of external effects. REMIND enables the analyses of technology options and policy approaches for climate change mitigation with particular strength in representing the scale-up of new technologies, including renewables and their integration in power markets. The REMIND code is organized into modules that gather code relevant for specific topics. Interaction between different modules is made explicit via clearly defined sets of input and output variables. Each module can be represented by different realizations, enabling flexible configuration and extension. The spatial resolution of REMIND is flexible and depends on the resolution of the input data. Thus, the framework can be used for a variety of applications in a customized form, balancing requirements for detail and overall runtime and complexity.
Introducing the Open Energy Ontology: Enhancing data interpretation and interfacing in energy systems analysis
2021, Booshehri, Meisam, Emele, Lukas, Flügel, Simon, Förster, Hannah, Frey, Johannes, Frey, Ulrich, Glauer, Martin, Hastings, Janna, Hofmann, Christian, Hoyer-Klick, Carsten, Hülk, Ludwig, Kleinau, Anna, Knosala, Kevin, Kotzur, Leander, Kuckertz, Patrick, Mossakowski, Till, Muschner, Christoph, Neuhaus, Fabian, Pehl, Michaja, Robinius, Martin, Sehn, Vera, Stappel, Mirjam
Heterogeneous data, different definitions and incompatible models are a huge problem in many domains, with no exception for the field of energy systems analysis. Hence, it is hard to re-use results, compare model results or couple models at all. Ontologies provide a precisely defined vocabulary to build a common and shared conceptualisation of the energy domain. Here, we present the Open Energy Ontology (OEO) developed for the domain of energy systems analysis. Using the OEO provides several benefits for the community. First, it enables consistent annotation of large amounts of data from various research projects. One example is the Open Energy Platform (OEP). Adding such annotations makes data semantically searchable, exchangeable, re-usable and interoperable. Second, computational model coupling becomes much easier. The advantages of using an ontology such as the OEO are demonstrated with three use cases: data representation, data annotation and interface homogenisation. We also describe how the ontology can be used for linked open data (LOD).
Short term policies to keep the door open for Paris climate goals
2018, Kriegler, Elmar, Bertram, Christoph, Kuramochi, Takeshi, Jakob, Michael, Pehl, Michaja, Stevanović, Miodrag, Höhne, Niklas, Luderer, Gunnar, Minx, Jan C, Fekete, Hanna, Hilaire, Jérôme, Luna, Lisa, Popp, Alexander, Steckel, Jan Christoph, Sterl, Sebastian, Yalew, Amsalu Woldie, Dietrich, Jan Philipp, Edenhofer, Ottmar
Climate policy needs to account for political and social acceptance. Current national climate policy plans proposed under the Paris Agreement lead to higher emissions until 2030 than cost-effective pathways towards the Agreements' long-term temperature goals would imply. Therefore, the current plans would require highly disruptive changes, prohibitive transition speeds, and large long-term deployment of risky mitigation measures for achieving the agreement's temperature goals after 2030. Since the prospects of introducing the cost-effective policy instrument, a global comprehensive carbon price in the near-term, are negligible, we study how a strengthening of existing plans by a global roll-out of regional policies can ease the implementation challenge of reaching the Paris temperature goals. The regional policies comprise a bundle of regulatory policies in energy supply, transport, buildings, industry, and land use and moderate, regionally differentiated carbon pricing. We find that a global roll-out of these policies could reduce global CO2 emissions by an additional 10 GtCO2eq in 2030 compared to current plans. It would lead to emissions pathways close to the levels of cost-effective likely below 2 °C scenarios until 2030, thereby reducing implementation challenges post 2030. Even though a gradual phase-in of a portfolio of regulatory policies might be less disruptive than immediate cost-effective carbon pricing, it would perform worse in other dimensions. In particular, it leads to higher economic impacts that could become major obstacles in the long-term. Hence, such policy packages should not be viewed as alternatives to carbon pricing, but rather as complements that provide entry points to achieve the Paris climate goals.