Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item
    Making or breaking climate targets: The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2014) Kriegler, Elmar; Riahi, Keywan; Bauer, Nico; Schwanitz, Valeria Jana; Petermann, Nils; Bosetti, Valentina; Marcucci, Adriana; Otto, Sander; Paroussos, Leonidas; Rao, Shilpa; Currás, Tabaré Arroyo; Ashina, Shuichi; Bollen, Johannes; Eom, Jiyong; Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem; Longden, Thomas; Kitous, Alban; Méjean, Aurélie; Sano, Fuminori; Schaeffer, Michiel; Wada, Kenichi; Capros, Pantelis; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Edenhofer, Ottmar
    This study explores a situation of staged accession to a global climate policy regime from the current situation of regionally fragmented and moderate climate action. The analysis is based on scenarios in which a front runner coalition – the EU or the EU and China – embarks on immediate ambitious climate action while the rest of the world makes a transition to a global climate regime between 2030 and 2050. We assume that the ensuing regime involves strong mitigation efforts but does not require late joiners to compensate for their initially higher emissions. Thus, climate targets are relaxed, and although staged accession can achieve significant reductions of global warming, the resulting climate outcome is unlikely to be consistent with the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees. The addition of China to the front runner coalition can reduce pre-2050 excess emissions by 20–30%, increasing the likelihood of staying below 2 degrees. Not accounting for potential co-benefits, the cost of front runner action is found to be lower for the EU than for China. Regions that delay their accession to the climate regime face a trade-off between reduced short term costs and higher transitional requirements due to larger carbon lock-ins and more rapidly increasing carbon prices during the accession period.
  • Item
    Locked into Copenhagen pledges - Implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2013) Riahi, Keywan; Kriegler, Elmar; Johnson, Nils; Bertram, Christoph; den Elzen, Michel; Eom, Jiyong; Schaeffer, Michiel; Edmonds, Jae; Isaac, Morna; Krey, Volker; Longden, Thomas; Luderer, Gunnar; Méjean, Aurélie; McCollum, David L.; Mima, Silvana; Turton, Hal; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Wada, Kenichi; Bosetti, Valentina; Capros, Pantelis; Criqui, Patrick; Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem; Kainuma, Mikiko; Edenhofer, Ottmar
    This paper provides an overview of the AMPERE modeling comparison project with focus on the implications of near-term policies for the costs and attainability of long-term climate objectives. Nine modeling teams participated in the project to explore the consequences of global emissions following the proposed policy stringency of the national pledges from the Copenhagen Accord and Cancún Agreements to 2030. Specific features compared to earlier assessments are the explicit consideration of near-term 2030 emission targets as well as the systematic sensitivity analysis for the availability and potential of mitigation technologies. Our estimates show that a 2030 mitigation effort comparable to the pledges would result in a further “lock-in” of the energy system into fossil fuels and thus impede the required energy transformation to reach low greenhouse-gas stabilization levels (450 ppm CO2e). Major implications include significant increases in mitigation costs, increased risk that low stabilization targets become unattainable, and reduced chances of staying below the proposed temperature change target of 2 °C in case of overshoot. With respect to technologies, we find that following the pledge pathways to 2030 would narrow policy choices, and increases the risks that some currently optional technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) or the large-scale deployment of bioenergy, will become “a must” by 2030.
  • Item
    Mid- and long-term climate projections for fragmented and delayed-action scenarios
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2013) Schaeffer, Michiel; Gohar, Laila; Kriegler, Elmar; Lowe, Jason; Riahi, Keywan; van Vuuren, Detlef
    This paper explores the climate consequences of “delayed near-term action” and “staged accession” scenarios for limiting warming below 2 °C. The stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels requires a large-scale transformation of the energy system. Depending on policy choices, there are alternative pathways to reach this objective. An “optimal” path, as emerging from energy-economic modeling, implies immediate action with stringent emission reductions, while the currently proposed international policies translate into reduction delays and higher near-term emissions. In our delayed action scenarios, low stabilization levels need thus to be reached from comparatively high 2030 emission levels. Negative consequences are higher economic cost as explored in accompanying papers and significantly higher mid-term warming, as indicated by a rate of warming 50% higher by the 2040s. By contrast, both mid- and long-term warming are significantly higher in another class of scenarios of staged accession that lets some regions embark on emission reductions, while others follow later, with conservation of carbon-price pathways comparable to the optimal scenarios. Not only is mid-term warming higher in staged accession cases, but the probability to exceed 2 °C in the 21st century increases by a factor of 1.5.
  • Item
    Diagnostic indicators for integrated assessment models of climate policy
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2014) Kriegler, Elmar; Petermann, Nils; Krey, Volker; Schwanitz, Valeria Jana; Luderer, Gunnar; Ashina, Shuichi; Bosetti, Valentina; Eom, Jiyong; Kitous, Alban; Méjean, Aurélie; Paroussos, Leonidas; Sano, Fuminori; Turton, Hal; Wilson, Charlie; Van Vuuren, Detlef P.
    Integrated assessments of how climate policy interacts with energy-economy systems can be performed by a variety of models with different functional structures. In order to provide insights into why results differ between models, this article proposes a diagnostic scheme that can be applied to a wide range of models. Diagnostics can uncover patterns of model behavior and indicate how results differ between model types. Such insights are informative since model behavior can have a significant impact on projections of climate change mitigation costs and other policy-relevant information. The authors propose diagnostic indicators to characterize model responses to carbon price signals and test these in a diagnostic study of 11 global models. Indicators describe the magnitude of emission abatement and the associated costs relative to a harmonized baseline, the relative changes in carbon intensity and energy intensity, and the extent of transformation in the energy system. This study shows a correlation among indicators suggesting that models can be classified into groups based on common patterns of behavior in response to carbon pricing. Such a classification can help to explain variations among policy-relevant model results.
  • Item
    Carbon leakage in a fragmented climate regime: The dynamic response of global energy markets
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2013) Arroyo-Currás, Tabaré; Bauer, Nico; Kriegler, Elmar; Schwanitz, Valeria Jana; Luderer, Gunnar; Aboumahboub, Tino; Giannousakis, Anastasis; Hilaire, Jérôme
    As a global climate agreement has not yet been achieved, a variety of national climate policy agendas are being pursued in different parts of the world. Regionally fragmented climate policy regimes are prone to carbon leakage between regions, which has given rise to concerns about the environmental effectiveness of this approach. This study investigates carbon leakage through energy markets and the resulting macro-economic effects by exploring the sensitivity of leakage to the size and composition of pioneering regions that adopt ambitious climate action early on. The study uses the multi-regional energy–economy–climate model REMIND 1.5 to analyze the implications of Europe, China and the United States taking unilateral or joint early action. We find that carbon leakage is the combined effect of fossil fuel and capital market re-allocation. Leakage is limited to 15% of the emission reductions in the pioneering regions, and depends on the size and composition of the pioneering coalition and the decarbonization strategy in the energy sector. There is an incentive to delay action to avoid near-term costs, but the immediate GDP losses after acceding to a global climate regime can be higher in the case of delayed action compared to early action. We conclude that carbon leakage is not a strong counter-argument against early action by pioneers to induce other regions to adopt more stringent mitigation.