Preface and introduction to EMF 27

Weyant, John P.; Kriegler, Elmar

doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1102-7

Cited by 57 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the past, such studies generally considered rather idealized conditions such as full participation of all regions and sectors in climate policy. However, more recently, models have also studied the achievability of the 2 C target under less idealized circumstances assuming limits in technology availability or reduced participation in international climate policy (Clarke et al, 2009;Kriegler et al, 2013b;Riahi et al, 2015;Weyant and Kriegler, 2014). Even in those cases, most models still identify scenarios that reduce emissions in line with the 2 C target.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing future patterns of energy system change in 2 °C scenarios with historically observed rates of change

Sluisveld

Harmsen

Bauer

et al. 2015

Global Environmental Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThis paper systematically compares modeled rates of change provided by global integrated assessment models aiming for the 2 C objective to historically observed rates of change. Such a comparison can provide insights into the difficulty of achieving such stringent climate stabilization scenarios. The analysis focuses specifically on the rates of change for technology expansion and diffusion, emissions and energy supply investments. The associated indicators vary in terms of system focus (technology-specific or energy system wide), temporal scale (timescale or lifetime), spatial scale (regional or global) and normalization (accounting for entire system growth or not). Although none of the indicators provide conclusive insights as to the achievability of scenarios, this study finds that indicators that look into absolute change remain within the range of historical growth frontiers for the next decade, but increase to unprecedented levels before mid-century. Indicators that take into account or normalize for overall system growth find future change to be broadly within historical ranges. This is particularly the case for monetary-based normalization metrics like GDP compared to energy-based normalization metrics like primary energy. By applying a diverse set of indicators alternative, complementary insights into how scenarios compare with historical observations are acquired but they do not provide further insights on the possibility of achieving rates of change that are beyond current day practice.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing future patterns of energy system change in 2 °C scenarios with historically observed rates of change

Sluisveld

Harmsen

Bauer

et al. 2015

Global Environmental Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies at the global level (such as in Krey et al, 2014;Weyant and Kriegler, 2014) and regional level (Calvin et al, 2012;Clarke et al, 2012, for Asia;Clarke et al, 2014aClarke et al, , 2014bFawcett et al, 2014, for the USA; Knopf et al, 2013, for Europe) come to the same conclusion in this respect. For large-scale low-CO 2 electricity generation, renewables like solar and wind energy dominate the present view of many analysts on future global energy systems.…”

Section: Discussion Conclusion and Policy And Strategy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…renewables versus nuclear energy in this respect, see Macknick (2011). Weyant and Kriegler, 2014). The reason that EPPA and Phoenix do not increase their electricity generation as much as the other models is again that these CGE models have substantially lower overall energy demand, induced by sizeable losses in GDP, which is matched by relatively high CO 2 prices (see Fig.…”

Section: Electricity Productionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Given our focus on Latin America, our work also pertains to the UN's Sustainable Energy for All initiative (UN, 2012), even while we here do not explicitly nor extensively assess energy transformation in relation to economic development. Technology transformation pathways have recently been studied in a number of publications, both at the global level (such as in Krey et al, 2014;Weyant and Kriegler, 2014) and regional level (Calvin et al, 2012;Clarke et al, 2012, for Asia;Clarke et al, 2014aClarke et al, , 2014bFawcett et al, 2014, for the USA; Knopf et al, 2013, for Europe). In this paper we attempt to put our work on energy technology transitions in Latin America into a broader perspective, by comparing it to the existing literature on the subject matter and by reflecting on questions like how the decarbonization scenarios presented here differ from (or are similar to) those reported in the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Energy technology roll-out for climate change mitigation: A multi-model study for Latin America

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy Technology Roll-Out for Climate Change Mitigation: A Multi-Model Study for Latin America van der Zwaan, B.; Kober, T.; Calderon, S. ; Clarke, L.; Daenzer, K. ; Kitous, A.; Labriet, M. ; Lucena, A.F.P.; Octaviano, C.; Di Sbroiavacca, N. Published in: Energy Economics DOI:10.1016/j.eneco. 2015.11.019 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): van der Zwaan, B., Kober, T., Calderon, S., Clarke, L., Daenzer, K., Kitous, A., ... Di Sbroiavacca, N. (2016 General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. In this paper we investigate opportunities for energy technology deployment under climate change mitigation efforts in Latin America. Through several carbon tax and CO 2 abatement scenarios until 2050 we analyze what resources and technologies, notably for electricity generation, could be cost-optimal in the energy sector to significantly reduce CO 2 emissions in the region. By way of sensitivity test we perform a cross-model comparison study and inspect whether robust conclusions can be drawn across results from different models as well as different types of models (general versus partial equilibrium). Given the abundance of biomass resources in Latin America, they play a large role in energy supply in all scenarios we inspect. This is especially true for stringent climate policy scenarios, for instance because the use of biomass in power plants in combination with CCS can yield negative CO 2 emissions. We find that hydropower, which today contributes about 800 TWh to overall power production in Latin America, could be significantly expanded to meet the climate policies we investigate, typically by about 50%, but potentially by as much as 75%. According to all models, electricity generation increases exponentially with a two-to three-fold expansion between 2010 and 2050. We find that in our climate policy scenarios renewable energy overall expands typically at double-digit growth rates annually, but there is substantial spread in model results for specific options such as wind and solar power: the climate policies that we simulate raise wind power in 2050 on average to half the production level that hydropower provides today, while they raise solar power to either a substantially higher or a much lower level than hydropower supplies at present, ...

show abstract

“…Besides SSP-related studies, several articles have studied the impact of societal change on climate change mitigation by looking at, for example, technological change [7,8], lifestyle change [9][10][11][12][13], energy efficiency [14][15][16] and biomass [17][18][19]. The EMF27 study employed scenarios focusing on technology variations, including energy-intensity improvement, technology availability and constraints [20]. Several papers emerging from EMF27 found that the mitigation costs could be dramatically reduced by technological innovation [21][22][23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socioeconomic factors and future challenges of the goal of limiting the increase in global average temperature to 1.5 °C

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Paris Agreement has confirmed that the ultimate climate policy goal is to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 C. Moving the goal from 2 C to 1.5 C calls for much more concerted effort, and presents greater challenges and costs. This study uses an Asia-Pacific Integrated Model/Computable General Equilibrium (AIM/CGE) to evaluate the role of socioeconomic factors (e.g. technological cost and energy demand assumptions) in changing mitigation costs and achieving the 1.5C and 2 C goals, and to identify the channels through which socioeconomic factors affect mitigation costs. Four families of socioeconomic factors were examined, namely low-carbon energy-supply technologies, end-use energy-efficiency improvements, lifestyle changes and biomass-technology promotion (technology cost reduction and social acceptance promotion). The results show that technological improvement in low-carbon energy-supply technologies is the most important factor in reducing mitigation costs. Moreover, under the constraints of the 1.5 C goal, the relative effectiveness of other socioeconomic factors, such as energy efficiency improvement, lifestyle changes and biomassrelated technology promotion, becomes more important in decreasing mitigation cost in the 1.5 C scenarios than in the 2 C scenarios.

show abstract

Preface and introduction to EMF 27

Cited by 57 publications

References 23 publications

Comparing future patterns of energy system change in 2 °C scenarios with historically observed rates of change

Comparing future patterns of energy system change in 2 °C scenarios with historically observed rates of change

Energy technology roll-out for climate change mitigation: A multi-model study for Latin America

Socioeconomic factors and future challenges of the goal of limiting the increase in global average temperature to 1.5 °C

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About