Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byCornelia Perkins Modified over 9 years ago
1
Leading Partners in Science Cost-effectiveness and implications of GWPs and GTPs under alternative policy goals Andy Reisinger 1 Keywan Riahi 2 Oscar van Vliet 2 1 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre 2 International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Manuscript submitted to Climatic Change Work funded by NZ Ministry of Agriculture and various EU-FP7 programs Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |1
2
Leading Partners in Science In a nutshell 100-year GWPs are not a cost-effective way of comparing GHGs if the main policy goal is to limit long-term climate change. Few studies have explored the cost and climate policy implications if other physically-based metrics were to replace GWPs. 1.Determine the global cost-effectiveness of different metrics for the main policy goal of limiting radiative forcing in 2100 to 450 or 550ppm CO 2 -equivalent 2.Evaluate influence of metrics on additional policy goals (realised warming, GDP, timing of CO 2 emissions peak) Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |2
3
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |3 Evaluated alternative metrics: GWPs, fixed and time-dependent GTPs CH 4 N 2 O
4
Leading Partners in Science Sensitivity tests: technology/policy assumptions Assumed policy goal is to limit radiative forcing in 2100: 450 ppm CO 2 -eq (~2.7 Wm -2 ) 550 ppm CO 2 -eq (~3.8 Wm -2 ) Rate of improvement of agricultural mitigation potential No improvement / rapid improvement Additional technology from 2030 or 2070 to mitigate CH 4 from enteric fermentation Policy treatment of agricultural GHG emissions Fully included in global mitigation efforts / fully excluded / excluded until 2050 Use integrated assessment model MESSAGE to determine cost-minimising abatement pathways over 21 st century Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |4
5
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |5 Radiative forcing paths – all metrics/assumptions
6
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |6 Global agricultural marginal abatement costs from Beach et al. (2008) CO 2 and CH 4 emissions – all metrics/assumptions
7
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |7 fixed 100-year GTPs: less CH 4 mitigation time-dependent GTPs: less CH 4 mitigation initially, more CH 4 mitigation by 2100 Global agricultural marginal abatement costs from Beach et al. (2008) CH 4 emissions – detailed examples
8
Leading Partners in Science Global agricultural CH 4 emission pathways 8 MESSAGE results 450ppm 550ppm Global net costs CH 4 mitigation determines ‘atmospheric space’ for CO 2 emissions and hence total mitigation costs
9
Leading Partners in Science Global agricultural CH 4 emission pathways 9 Global discounted net present value mitigation costs (2010-2100) Example for 550ppm CO 2 -eq stabilisation
10
Leading Partners in Science Global cost-effectiveness of metrics Fixed GTPs result in higher CO 2 prices and higher total mitigation costs than GWPs, but lower prices/costs on CH 4 Time-dependent GTPs (focusing on year 2100) result in lower CO 2 prices and lower total mitigation costs than GWPs; prices and costs for CH 4 are lower initially but (much) higher later Assumptions about agriculture mitigation potential have a larger effect on global costs than alternative metrics Different long-term stabilisation targets have a much larger effect than alternative metrics Excluding agriculture globally is by far the most costly ‘metric’ Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |10
11
Leading Partners in Science What about other relevant policy goals? Realised amount of warming and overshoot GDP impacts Timing of cost-effective CO 2 emissions peak Regional implications Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |11
12
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |12 Global agricultural marginal abatement costs from Beach et al. (2008) Realised warming – rate and peak Peak: 2-2.25°C Rate (2020-2050): 0.2-0.26°C / decade Most of the differences are due to alternative assumptions, not alternative metrics Peak: 2-2.25°C Rate (2020-2050): 0.2-0.26°C / decade Most of the differences are due to alternative assumptions, not alternative metrics
13
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |13 Global agricultural marginal abatement costs from Beach et al. (2008) GDP impacts Time-dependent GTPs result in lower aggregate costs, but greater GDP losses relative to BAU towards 2100 than GWPs
14
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |14 Global agricultural marginal abatement costs from Beach et al. (2008) Timing of cost-effective CO 2 emissions peak Different metrics and assumptions allow the CO 2 emissions peak to be delayed by almost 15 years But most of the delay comes from different assumptions; metrics have a smaller influence Different metrics and assumptions allow the CO 2 emissions peak to be delayed by almost 15 years But most of the delay comes from different assumptions; metrics have a smaller influence All pathways shown result in radiative forcing of 450ppm CO2-eq in 2100, but the timing of CO 2 mitigation differs due to metrics and other assumptions
15
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |15 Conclusions GWPs are not the most cost-effective metric to compare GHGs IF the main goal is to limit long-term radiative forcing in 2100, and to do so via cost-minimising global abatement pathways Fixed 100-year GTPs are even less cost-effective (+ 5 to 10%) time-dependent GTPs would be more cost-effective (- 4 to 5%) Cost implications of alternative metrics: smaller than alternative assumptions about future agricultural mitigation potential, and much smaller than choices of long-term target Other policy goals: different equivalent metrics do not result in equivalent other environmental outcomes – but differences are again smaller than those arising from other assumptions Regional implications: regional effect of metrics on production systems and land-use change – see second presentation please!
16
Leading Partners in Science Copyright © 2010 New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre19 OCTOBER 2015 |16 Questions to the policy community How important is it for the policy process to have a metric that is optimal for a particular policy goal but, almost by definition, will do a poorer job for other policy goals? How sustainable is the implementation of a metric that implies escalating cost of CH 4 emissions globally? What are the social/policy benefits and costs of continuously updating a metric to achieve optimality (however defined)? Are tests of metrics useful that assume full global and sectoral participation at full price levels? What are the implications of different metrics for regional and sectoral engagement to climate change?
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc.
All rights reserved.