Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Technological feasibility of climate stabilization with GCAM model
Iñigo CAPELLÁN-PÉREZ, UPV/EHU University of Basque Country (Spain) BC3 Basque Center for Climate Change (Spain)
INTRODUCTION & OBJETIVE
The objective of stabilizing climate change “at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” means that global average temperature should not rise more than 2ºC above pre-industrial levels. Meeting low climate stabilization targets will require a very significant and rapid transformation of the energy systems along the world. However, different models propose different solutions (Edenhofer 2010). Thus, we analyze GCAM model mitigation technologies to reach climate stabilization.
The objective of this study is to use the new IPCC scenarios framework with the GCAM climate Integrated Assessment model to analyze the long term implications of climate stabilization policy (< 2ºC in 2100) under different technology options.
METHODOLOGY
GCAM model The GCAM (old MiniCAM (Edmonds, 1985)) is a partial-equilibrium dynamic-recursive model (Economy, Energy and Land-Use) including numerous energy supply technologies, agriculture and land-use model, and a reduced-form climate model.
TECHNOLOGY SCENARIOS
RESULTS
4
2 1
3
5
Integrated Assessment refers to any analysis that incorporates multiple disciplines in order to capture complex interactions between them. Scenario analysis offers an approach to deal with unavoidable uncertainties. IPCC has set a new scenario framework (Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, SSPs) for climate change study focusing into Mitigation/Adaptation and the policies needed to reach the climate objectives (Moss, 2010).
Integrated Assessment Modelling
SSP2 scenario
“Middle of the Road”
OECD
interpretation
GCAM model
Technology mitigation scenarios
Model is solved to reach climate stabilization under different mitigation technologies scenarios.
GCAM is a “high pedigree” model that has participated in every major climate-energy-economics assessment over the last 20 years: •Every EMF study on climate, •Every IPCC assessment (and AR5 in 2014).
GCAM is developed by the Joint Global Change Research Institute (PNNL).
Stabilization scenarios
Global Mean Temperature
Scenario Name Available Mitigation Technologies SSP2_Baseline Baseline scenario without climate policy. SSP2_400ppm Climate policy: all technologies available. SSP2_400ppm_noCCS Climate policy: all technologies except
CCS (Carbon Capture & Storage). SSP2_400_ppm_NuclearFIX Climate policy: all technologies but
freezing nuclear power. SSP2_400ppm_noCCS_NuclearFIX
Climate policy: all technologies except CCS and freezing nuclear power.
Total Primary Energy extraction Electricity generation
Total Primary Energy extraction Electricity generation
Main elements of GCAM model
SSP2
_Bas
elin
e SS
P2_4
00pp
m_n
oC
CS_
Nuc
lear
FIX
SSP2
_400
_ppm
_Nuc
lear
FIX
SSP2
_400
ppm
_ no
CC
S SS
P2_4
00pp
m
SSP2_Baseline
SSP2_400ppm
SSP2_400ppm
_ noC
CS
SSP2_400_ppm_N
uclearFIX SSP2_400ppm
_noC
CS_N
uclearFIX
2. Mitigation costs 1. Energy use
• CCS is a critical mitigation technology to keep low policy costs.
• Nuclear deploys significantly in all scenarios where allowed. However its associated costs are intermediate.
• High afforestation in all scenarios.
• Biomass (3rd generation) expands in all scenarios.
• Other renewable energies are an expensive solution: they only deploy significantly at high carbon prices when the other technologies are restricted.
REFERENCES Moss et al., “The Next Generation of Scenarios for Climate Change Research and Assessment.” Nature 463, no. 7282 (February 11, 2010): 747–756. doi:10.1038/nature08823.
Edenhofer et al., “The Economics of Low Stabilization: Model Comparison of Mitigation Strategies and Costs.” The Energy Journal 31, no. 01 (September 1, 2010). doi:10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-2.
Edmonds, J., and JM Reilly. “Global Energy-Assessing the Future.” Oxford University Press, New York. (1985).
CONCLUSIONs 6