Challenges in the harmonisation of global integrated assessment models: A comprehensive methodology to reduce model response heterogeneity

Giarola, Sara; Mittal, Shivika; Vielle, Marc; Perdana, Sigit; Campagnolo, Lorenza; Delpiazzo, Elisa; Bui, Ha; Kraavi, Annela Anger; Kolpakov, A. Yu.; Sognnæs, Ida; Peters, Glen P.; Köberle, Alexandre C.; Grant, Neil; Gambhir, Ajay; Νίκας, Αλέξανδρος; Doukas, Haris; Moreno, Jorge; Ven, Dirk-Jan Van de

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146861

Cited by 41 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite soft harmonization of techno-economic assumptions and applied pre-pandemic energy and climate policies, 52 outcomes from the three employed models differ substantially: the average outcome differences of the same subsidy package are up to 10-fold for emissions (China, United States) and 6-fold for employment (China), while there are also pronounced differences in the optimal technology portfolios (Table 1 For the GEMINI-E3 model, the subsidy budget for onshore and offshore wind is combined.…”

Section: Role Of Model Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…d Although the time horizon of the analysis is limited to 2030, causing the impact of changes in the factors to be small, to account for the impact of technological learning curves on employment, employment factors are assumed to decline proportionally with cost projections for each technology. 17 Technology costs (e.g., CAPEX, OPEX) are harmonized across the three models following the harmonization protocol established in Giarola et al 52 Since each of the country analyses in this study is independent, employment factors for manufacturing and extraction have been corrected for the share of domestic supply. For simplicity, we ignored re-exports of goods, as well as the These multipliers to correct for international trade of fuels and manufacturing products can be found at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6998390, labeled Data S1-S4.…”

Section: Employment Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

COVID-19 recovery packages can benefit climate targets and clean energy jobs, but scale of impacts and optimal investment portfolios differ among major economies

Ven

Νίκας²,

Koasidis³

et al. 2022

One Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Role Of Model Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Employment Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 recovery packages can benefit climate targets and clean energy jobs, but scale of impacts and optimal investment portfolios differ among major economies

Ven

Νίκας²,

Koasidis³

et al. 2022

One Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The baseline emissions are likely lower due in part to the use of updated technology cost assumptions, which reduced baseline emissions in all our models 26 . Despite lower emissions and temperature estimates, however, even our most optimistic scenarios (NDC constrained intensity scenarios) give median global warming in 2100 above 2°C.…”

Section: Global Emissions Outcomes and Temperature Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, regarding future assumptions to be used as inputs necessary for producing model outputs (e.g., socio-economic and techno-economic variables), harmonisation requires that shared assumption databases be used across the models. Here, we used the methodology documented in Giarola et al (2021). We also note that, due to model-specific challenges, we achieved different levels of harmonisation.…”

Section: Ndc Scenariomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A multi-model analysis of long-term emissions and warming implications of current mitigation efforts

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the integrated assessment modelling (IAM) literature focuses on cost-effective pathways towards given temperature goals. Conversely, using seven diverse IAMs we project global energy CO 2 emissions trajectories based on near-term mitigation efforts, and two assumptions on how these efforts continue post-2030. Despite finding a wide range of emissions by 2050, nearly all the scenarios have median warming of less than 3°C in 2100. However, the most optimistic scenario is still insufficient to limit global warming to 2°C. We furthermore highlight key modelling choices inherent to projecting where emissions are headed. First, emissions are more sensitive to the choice of IAM than to the assumed mitigation effort, highlighting the importance of heterogenous model intercomparisons. Differences across models reflect diversity in baseline assumptions and impacts of near-term mitigation efforts. Second, common practice of using economy-wide carbon prices to represent policy exaggerates carbon capture and storage (CCS) use compared to explicitly modelling policies. Ed Summ 2Mitigation pathways tend to focus on an end temperature target and calculate how to keep within these bounds. This work uses seven integrated assessment models to consider current mitigation efforts, and project likely temperature trajectories.

show abstract

Carbon border adjustment mechanism in the transition to net-zero emissions: collective implementation and distributional impacts

Perdana

Vielle

2023

Environ Econ Policy Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As an instrument to minimize carbon leakage, the effects and feasibility of Carbon Border Adjustments Mechanism (CBAM) will depend on multiple design options. While the EU has committed to introducing CBAM as part of its green climate deal, pursuing climate efforts to successfully limit global warming requires a collective implementation involving major emitters China and the US. This paper quantifies the distributional impacts of a joint CBAM implementation of in a climate alliance or a club of the EU, the US, and China. Differing from a myriad of studies that focus on unilateral CBAM, this analysis emphasizes collective implications on leakage, sectoral competitiveness, and welfare by projecting climate neutrality relative to current policies and climate targets. Our findings confirm that coalition reduces leakage, improves production on energy-intensive industries, and increases club’s welfare relative to a non-CBAM and a unilateral implementation. These are in contrast with some unilateral analytical studies, especially for the US. It is further proof of the potential of CBAM as collective instruments to facilitate mitigation and trade competitiveness.

show abstract

Challenges in the harmonisation of global integrated assessment models: A comprehensive methodology to reduce model response heterogeneity

Cited by 41 publications

References 39 publications

COVID-19 recovery packages can benefit climate targets and clean energy jobs, but scale of impacts and optimal investment portfolios differ among major economies

COVID-19 recovery packages can benefit climate targets and clean energy jobs, but scale of impacts and optimal investment portfolios differ among major economies

A multi-model analysis of long-term emissions and warming implications of current mitigation efforts

Carbon border adjustment mechanism in the transition to net-zero emissions: collective implementation and distributional impacts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About