Implications of the international reduction pledges on long-term energy system changes and costs in China and India

This paper analyses the impact of postponing global mitigation action on abatement costs and energy systems changes in China and India. It compares energy-system changes and mitigation costs from a global and two national energy-system models under two global emission pathways with medium likelihood...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:

Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:	Energy policy Ročník 63; s. 1032 - 1041
Hlavní autoři:	Lucas, Paul L., Shukla, P.R., Chen, Wenying, van Ruijven, Bas J., Dhar, Subash, den Elzen, Michel G.J., van Vuuren, Detlef P.
Médium:	Journal Article
Jazyk:	angličtina
Vydáno:	Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 01.12.2013 Elsevier Elsevier Science Ltd
Témata:	Abatement Action Air pollution Air pollution caused by fuel industries Ambition Applied sciences Biofuels Biomass energy Capital Capital stock Carbon emissions Carbon sequestration China China (People's Republic) climate Copenhagen pledges Cost Costs Economic change Economic data Economic development Emission measurements Emissions Emissions control Energy energy costs Energy dynamics Energy economics Energy efficiency Energy policy Energy sector Energy. Thermal use of fuels Exact sciences and technology General, economic and professional studies General. Regulations. Norms. Economy Greenhouse effect greenhouse gas emissions Greenhouse gases Impact analysis India issues and policy Methodology. Modelling Mitigation Nuclear energy nuclear power Projections Renewable energy sources Storage Studies Technological change Technology Two degrees China India Denmark, Copenhagen China, People's Rep Energy dynamics Copenhagen pledges Two degrees Script Energetic system Distribution by sources Power production Pollution control Pollution prevention Carbon dioxide CO2 sequestration Energy mix Biofuel Pollutant emission Long term Modeling Forecasting 2050 Constrained optimization Nuclear energy Renewable energy Air pollution Cost analysis Climate policy
ISSN:	0301-4215, 1873-6777
On-line přístup:	Získat plný text
Tagy:	Přidat tag Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!

Popis
Shrnutí:	This paper analyses the impact of postponing global mitigation action on abatement costs and energy systems changes in China and India. It compares energy-system changes and mitigation costs from a global and two national energy-system models under two global emission pathways with medium likelihood of meeting the 2°C target: a least-cost pathway and a pathway that postpones ambitious mitigation action, starting from the Copenhagen Accord pledges. Both pathways have similar 2010–2050 cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis shows that postponing mitigation action increases the lock-in in less energy efficient technologies and results in much higher cumulative mitigation costs. The models agree that carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear energy are important mitigation technologies, while the shares of biofuels and other renewables vary largely over the models. Differences between India and China with respect to the timing of emission reductions and the choice of mitigation measures relate to differences in projections of rapid economic change, capital stock turnover and technological development. Furthermore, depending on the way it is implemented, climate policy could increase indoor air pollution, but it is likely to provide synergies for energy security. These relations should be taken into account when designing national climate policies. •We analyze long-term impacts of the international pledges for China and India.•We compare a least-cost pathway with a pathway starting from the Copenhagen pledges.•Postponing mitigation action implies much higher cumulative mitigation costs.•Postponing increases fossil fuel dependence and requires deeper long-term reductions.•Countries differ mainly due to different periods of rapid economic change.
Bibliografie:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.026 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-2
ISSN:	0301-4215 1873-6777
DOI:	10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.026