Search

Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

Search Results for All:
(Showing results 1 to 2 of 2)



Multi-Gas Emission Reduction for Climate Change Policy: An Application of Fund

Richard S.J. Tol

Year: 2006
Volume: Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Climate Policy
Number: Special Issue #3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-VolSI2006-NoSI3-11
View Abstract

Abstract:
The costs of greenhouse gas emission reduction with abatement of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are investigated using the FUND model. The central policy scenario keeps anthropogenic radiative forcing below 4.5 Wm2. If COemission reduction were the only possibility to meet this target, 2 the net present value of consumption losses would be $45 trillion; with abatement of the other gases added, costs fall to $33 trillion. The bulk of these costs savings can be ascribed to reductions of nitrous oxide. Because nitrous oxide emission reduction is so much more important than methane emission reduction, the choice of equivalence metric between the greenhouse gases does not matter much. Sensitivity analyses show that the shape of the cost curves for CH4 and N2O emission reductions matter, and that the inclusion of sulphate aerosols makes policy targets substantially harder to achieve. The costs of emission reduction vary greatly with the choice of stabilisation target. A target of 4.5 Wm-2 is not justified by our current knowledge of the damage costs of climate change.



Impacts of Multi-gas Strategies for Greenhouse Gas Emission Abatement: Insights from a Partial Equilibrium Model

Patrick Criqui, Peter Russ and Daniel Deybe

Year: 2006
Volume: Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Climate Policy
Number: Special Issue #3
DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-VolSI2006-NoSI3-12
View Abstract

Abstract:
The Version 5 of the POLES model has been developed for the assessment of multi-gas emission reduction strategies. Abatement options have been introduced for all non-CO2 GHGs in the Kyoto Basket and, for the agricultural sector, Marginal Abatement Cost curves have been derived from the new AGRIPOL model. Combined with an international emission permit scheme that is based on the Soft Landing approach, an emission profile respecting climate targets of 550 ppmv provides a relatively soft constraint case for developing countries. The multi-gas analyses first of all demonstrate the relevance of the approach as changing from a CO2�only to a multi-gas strategy either allows to increase total abatement of 25% for the same Marginal Abatement Cost or to decrease the MAC of approximately 30% for the same total abatement. Not surprisingly however, the impacts on world demand and primary fuel mix are less pronounced in the multi-gas case. This is easily understandable as a counterpart for introducing more margins of freedom in the abatement effort.





Begin New Search
Proceed to Checkout

 

© 2021 International Association for Energy Economics | Privacy Policy | Return Policy