The Distribution of the Major Economies' Effort in the Durban Platform Scenarios

The feasibility of achieving climate stabilization consistent with the objective of 2 degrees C is heavily influenced by how the effort in terms of mitigation and economic resources will be distributed among the major economies. This paper provides a multi-model quantification of the mitigation commitment in ten major regions of the world for a diversity of allocation schemes. Our results indicate that a policy with uniform carbon pricing and no transfer payments would yield an uneven distribution of policy costs, which would be lower than the global average for OECD countries, higher for developing economies and the highest, for energy exporters. We show that a resource sharing scheme based on long-term convergence of per capita emissions would not resolve the issue of cost distribution. An effort sharing scheme which equalizes regional policy costs would yield an allocation of allowances comparable with the ones proposed by the Major Economies. Under such a scheme, emissions would peak between 2030 and 2045 for China and remain rather flat for India. In all cases, a very large international carbon market would be required

Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models

Integrated assessment models can help in quantifying the implications of international climate agreements and regional climate action. This paper reviews scenario results from model intercomparison projects to explore different possible outcomes of post-2020 climate negotiations, recently announced pledges and their relation to the 2 °C target. We provide key information for all the major economies, such as the year of emission peaking, regional carbon budgets and emissions allowances. We highlight the distributional consequences of climate policies, and discuss the role of carbon markets for financing clean energy investments, and achieving efficiency and equity

Decarbonization of Australia’s energy system: Integrated modeling of the transformation of electricity, transportation, and industrial sectors

To achieve the Paris Agreement’s long-term temperature goal, current energy systems must be transformed. Australia represents an interesting case for energy system transformation modeling: with a power system dominated by fossil fuels and, specifically, with a heavy coal component, there is at the same time a vast potential for expansion and use of renewables. We used the multi-sectoral Australian Energy Modeling System (AUSeMOSYS) to perform an integrated analysis of implications for the electricity, transport, and selected industry sectors to the mid-century. The state-level resolution allows representation of regional discrepancies in renewable supply and the quantification of inter-regional grid extensions necessary for the physical integration of variable renewables. We investigated the impacts of different CO2 budgets and selected key factors on energy system transformation. Results indicate that coal-fired generation has to be phased out completely by 2030 and a fully renewable electricity supply achieved in the 2030s according to the cost-optimal pathway implied by the 1.5 °C Paris Agreement-compatible carbon budget. Wind and solar PV can play a dominant role in decarbonizing Australia’s energy system with continuous growth of demand due to the strong electrification of linked energy sectors

A Cross-Model Comparison of Global Long-Term Technology Diffusion under a 2 Degree C Climate Change Control Target

We investigate the long-term global energy technology diffusion patterns required to reach a stringent climate change target with a maximum average atmospheric temperature increase of 2 degrees C. If the anthropogenic temperature increase is to be limited to 2 degrees C, total CO2 emissions have to be reduced massively, so as to reach substantial negative values during the second half of the century. Particularly power sector CO2 emissions should become deeply negative from around 2050 onwards in order to compensate for GHG emissions in other sectors where abatement is more costly. The annual additional capacity deployment intensity (expressed in GW/yr) for solar and wind energy until 2030 needs to be around that recently observed for coal-based power plants, and will have to be several times higher in the period 2030-2050. Relatively high agreement exists in terms of the aggregated low-carbon energy system cost requirements on the supply side until 2050, which amount to about 50 trillion US$

A cross-model comparison of global long-term technology diffusion under a 2 degrees C climate change control target. Special Issue on Implementing Climate Policies in the Major Economies: An Assessment of Durban Platform Architectures — Results from the LIMITS Project

We investigate the long-term global energy technology diffusion patterns required to reach a stringent climate change target with a maximum average atmospheric temperature increase of 2 degrees C. If the anthropogenic temperature increase is to be limited to 2 degrees C, total CO2 emissions have to be reduced massively, so as to reach substantial negative values during the second half of the century. Particularly power sector CO2 emissions should become negative from around 2050 onwards according to most models used for this analysis in order to compensate for GHG emissions in other sectors where abatement is more costly. The annual additional capacity deployment intensity (expressed in GW/yr) for solar and wind energy until 2030 needs to be around that recently observed for coal-based power plants, and will have to be several times higher in the period 2030.2050. Relatively high agreement exists across models in terms of the aggregated low-carbon energy system cost requirements on the supply side until 2050, which amount to about 50 trillion US$

What Does the 2 Degree C Target Imply for a Global Climate Agreement in 2020? The LIMITS Study on Durban Platform Scenarios

This paper provides a novel and comprehensive model-based assessment of possible outcomes of the Durban Platform negotiations with a focus on emissions reduction requirements, the consistency with the 2 degrees C target and global economic impacts. The Durban Action scenarios investigated in the LIMITS study -- all assuming the implementation of comprehensive global emission reductions after 2020, but assuming different 2020 emission reduction levels as well as different long-term concentration targets -- exhibit a probability of exceeding the 2 degrees C limit of 20-40% when reaching 450 (450-480) ppm CO2e, and 35-55% when reaching 500 (480-520) ppm CO2e in 2100. Forcing and temperature show a peak and decline pattern for both targets. Consistency of the resulting temperature trajectory with the 2 degrees C target is a societal choice, and may be based on the maximum exceedance probability at the time of the peak and the long run exceedance probability, e.g. in the year 2100. The challenges of implementing a long term target after a period of fragmented near-term climate policy can be significant as reflected in steep reductions of emissions intensity and transitional and long term economic impacts. In particular, the challenges of adopting the target are significantly higher in 2030 than in 2020, both in terms of required emissions intensity decline rates and economic impacts. We conclude that an agreement on comprehensive emissions reductions to be implemented from 2020 onwards has particular significance for meeting long term climate policy objectives

The distribution of the major economies' effort in the Durban Platform scenarios. Special Issue on Implementing Climate Policies in the Major Economies: An Assessment of Durban Platform Architectures — Results from the LIMITS Project

The feasibility of achieving climate stabilization consistent with the objective of 2 degrees C is heavily influenced by how the effort in terms of mitigation and economic resources will be distributed among the major economies. This paper provides a multi-model quantification of the mitigation commitment in 10 major regions of the world for a diversity of allocation schemes. Our results indicate that a policy with uniform carbon pricing and no transfer payments would yield an uneven distribution of policy costs, which would be lower than the global average for OECD countries, higher for developing economies and the highest, for energy exporters. We show that a resource sharing scheme based on long-term convergence of per capita emissions would not resolve the issue of cost distribution. An effort sharing scheme which equalizes regional policy costs would yield an allocation of allowances comparable with the ones proposed by the Major Economies. Under such a scheme, emissions would peak between 2030 and 2045 for China and remain rather flat for India. In all cases, a very large international carbon market would be required

Comparison and interactions between the long-term pursuit of energy independence and climate policies

Ensuring energy security and mitigating climate change are key energy policy priorities. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III report emphasized that climate policies can deliver energy security as a co-benefit, in large part through reducing energy imports. Using five state-of-the-art global energy-economy models and eight long-term scenarios, we show that although deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions would reduce energy imports, the reverse is not true: ambitious policies constraining energy imports would have an insignificant impact on climate change. Restricting imports of all fuels would lower twenty-first-century emissions by only 2–15% against the Baseline scenario as compared with a 70% reduction in a 450 stabilization scenario. Restricting only oil imports would have virtually no impact on emissions. The modelled energy independence targets could be achieved at policy costs comparable to those of existing climate pledges but a fraction of the cost of limiting global warming to 2 ∘C