Assessment of greenhouse gas emissions Veronika Wille Institut fr - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

Assessment of greenhouse gas emissions

Veronika Wille

Institut für Energiewirtschaft und Rationelle Energieanwendung, Universität Stuttgart

INSTREAM Workshop: Sustainability Indicators for Policy Making Green Growth and Green innovation

• 07. July 2011 in Berlin

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 2

Outline

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Indicators and their performance

i. GHG emissions

• ii. Distance to target
• iii. Costs distance to target
• iv. Damage costs
• 3. Conclusion

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 3

GHG emissions

• In a first stage, all annual emissions of substances to the atmosphere

leading to a change in radiative forcing are estimated, converted into a common unit (e.g. CO2,equivalent) using the GWP and added.

• In a second stage, all processes leading to a change in radiative

forcing (like changes in vegetation, carbon storage, albedo change) are added (not shown here, needs further research).

2. Indicators and Performance

• GHG emissions

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 4

Global warming potentials (GWPs for non-GHG substances preliminary rough estimates!)

Gas GWP 100 years (Range) CO2 1 CH4 25 (16 – 34) N2O 298 SF6 22800 SO2

• 40 (-24 – -56)

BC 680 (190 – 2240) OC

• 69 (-35 – -104)

VOC 3.4 (2 – 7) CO 1.9 (1 – 3) NOx ~0

Sources: IPCC, 2007; http://cdiac.ornl.gov/pns/current_ghg.html; Amann et al., 2010, Amann, 2011; http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/0710LetHouseBC%201.pdf

2. Indicators and Performance

• GHG emissions

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 5

GHG emissions 2005 in EU29 in CO2e

Source: HEIMTSA Common Case Study, UNFCCC, http://gains.iiasa.ac.at

2. Indicators and Performance

• GHG emissions
• 500

500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 2005 Mt CO2e CO2 CH4 BC N2O CO NMVOC SF6 OC SO2

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 6

GHG emission path in EU29 in CO2e

Source: HEIMTSA Common Case Study

2. Indicators and Performance

• GHG emissions
• 1,000

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 BAU BAU 450ppm BAU 450ppm BAU 450ppm 2005 2020 2030 2050 year Mt CO2e

NMVOC N2O CO CH4 CO2 SO2

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 7

Distance to target

• The indicator distance to target compares actual emissions with a

‘sustainable emission pathway’, that is a path for European GHG emissions leading to a reduction of ca. 71% of EU GHG emissions 1990 – 2050. This might be part of a worldwide strategy leading to fulfilling the 2°C target.

• Cost-Optimal pathway calculated with models (here TIMES), starting

e.g. 2010)

• Each year the sustainable emission path would have to be newly

calculated in case of a deviance.

• Alternatively: calculate cumulative deviation for each year;

Problem: negligence of time of emission (now or future)

• Procedure: Compare emission of sustainable emission path with

actual emissions. Add differences to accumulated difference of past years.

2. Indicators and Performance

• Distance to target

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 8

Emissions – TIMES model (only energy)

• 1,000

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm REF 450ppm 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 year Mt CO2e

NMVOC CO N2O CH4 CO2 SO2

2. Indicators and Performance

• Distance to target

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 9

Distance to target emissions - TIMES

500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 year Mt CO2e

Distance

2. Indicators and Performance

• Distance to target

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 10

Cumulated distance to target emissions - TIMES

2. Indicators and Performance

• Distance to target

2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 year

Mt CO2e

• cum. Distance

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 11

• The indicator ‘costs distance to target’ is based on the indicator

distance (of emissions) to target. The annual costs for reducing the emissions values to the target value is estimated.

• This is done using partial equilibrium models (energy, agriculture).

Costs distance to target

2. Indicators and Performance

• Costs distance to target

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 12

Costs distance to target – Annual System Costs (TIMES)

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 year

• Mio. €

Distance

2. Indicators and Performance

• Costs distance to target

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 13

• The indicator damage costs shows the monetized damage caused by

the greenhouse gases emitted in a year (e.g. for EU29).

• Extra: Avoided damages can be compared with avoidance costs.
• Procedure: Calculate total damage costs of emissions by multiplying

marginal damage costs with emissions (e.g. EU29) from all sectors in CO2e.

• Marginal damage costs are calculated using integrated assessment

models, here: FUND. Marginal damage costs here are estimated for two emission scenarios: SRES A1b (which leads to +3°C until 2100 and SRES B1 (leads to about +2°C).

• Open questions:

usage of equity weighting or not; how to deal with uncertainty whether important damages are missing.

Total damage costs

2. Indicators and Performance

• Total damage costs

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 14

Damage costs due to emissions of a year– EU29

200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 1,600,000 2005 2020 2030 2050 year

• Mio. €

REF_A1b_noEW REF_A1b_WeuEW 450ppm_B1_noEW 450ppm_B1_WeuEW

2. Indicators and Performance

• Total damage costs

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 15

Avoided annual damage costs – EU29

2. Indicators and Performance

• Total damage costs

200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 year

• Mio. €

avoided_damages_ REF_450_noEW avoided_damages_ REF_450_WeuEW

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 16

Avoided damage costs and avoidance costs– EU29 (TIMES)

2. Indicators and Performance

• Total damage costs

200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 year

• Mio. €

avoided_damages_ REF_450_noEW avoided_damages_ REF_450_WeuEW annual system costs smoothed

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 17

Conclusion

• GHG emissions:

+ easy to calculate; minor errors; new: also non-GHGs included

• only relative comparison to previous year or per capita; no certainty

if sustainable path.

• Distance to target:

+ distance to sustainable path visible

• path calculated by model; comparison with other indicators and

aggregation not possible

3. Conclusion

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 18

Conclusion

• Costs distance to target:

+ comparability to other indicators; aggregation possible

• costs depend on assumptions (e.g. innovation potential difficult to

determine)

• Damage costs:

+ similar to indicator above; aggregated measure for damages; worldwide emission path

• possibly not all damages included (precautionary principle); to be

decided, if EW or no EW.

• All indicators could/ should be further developed!

3. Conclusion

Veronika Wille 07.07.2011 19

References:

GWPs IPCC: http://www.ipcc.ch Amann, M., I. Bertok, C. Heyes, Z. Klimont, K. Kupiainen, W. Schöpp (2010): Identifying promising measures that could help reducing near- term forcing, State of play of the UNEP BC assessment, 38thSession of the Task Force on Integrated Assessment Modelling, Dublin, May 17- 19, 2010 Amann, M. (2011): The UNEP/WMO Integrated Assessment of Black Carbon and Tropospheric Ozone, 39th Meeting of the Task Force for Integrated Assessment Modelling, Stockholm, February 23-25, 2011. HEIMTSA – Common Case Study: http://www.heimtsa.eu TIMES model Blesl, M., D. Bruchof, T. Kober, R. Kuder (2011): Energy model runs with TIMES PanEU for the Common Case Study – Scenario analysis of the 2 °C target with and without external costs. Deliverable within the HEIMTSA project, Stuttgart. FUND model: http://www.fund-model.org