The Experts below are selected from a list of 14976 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jan Tomaschek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
marginal Abatement Cost curves for policy recommendation a method for energy system analysis
Energy Policy, 2015Co-Authors: Jan TomaschekAbstract:The transport sector is seen as one of the key factors for driving future energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In order to rank possible measures marginal Abatement Cost curves have become a tool to graphically represent the relationship between Abatement Costs and emission reduction. This paper demonstrates how to derive marginal Abatement Cost curves for well-to-wheel GHG emissions of the transport sector considering the full energy provision chain and the interlinkages and interdependencies within the energy system. Presented marginal Abatement Cost curves visualize substitution effects between measures for different marginal mitigation Costs. The analysis makes use of an application of the energy system model generator TIMES for South Africa (TIMES-GEECO). For the example of Gauteng province, this study exemplary shows that the transport sector is not the first sector to address for Cost-efficient reduction of GHG emissions. However, the analysis also demonstrates that several options are available to mitigate transport related GHG emissions at comparable low marginal Abatement Costs. This methodology can be transferred to other economic sectors as well as to other regions in the world to derive Cost-efficient GHG reduction strategies
-
Marginal Abatement Cost curves for policy recommendation – A method for energy system analysis
Energy Policy, 2015Co-Authors: Jan TomaschekAbstract:The transport sector is seen as one of the key factors for driving future energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In order to rank possible measures marginal Abatement Cost curves have become a tool to graphically represent the relationship between Abatement Costs and emission reduction. This paper demonstrates how to derive marginal Abatement Cost curves for well-to-wheel GHG emissions of the transport sector considering the full energy provision chain and the interlinkages and interdependencies within the energy system. Presented marginal Abatement Cost curves visualize substitution effects between measures for different marginal mitigation Costs. The analysis makes use of an application of the energy system model generator TIMES for South Africa (TIMES-GEECO). For the example of Gauteng province, this study exemplary shows that the transport sector is not the first sector to address for Cost-efficient reduction of GHG emissions. However, the analysis also demonstrates that several options are available to mitigate transport related GHG emissions at comparable low marginal Abatement Costs. This methodology can be transferred to other economic sectors as well as to other regions in the world to derive Cost-efficient GHG reduction strategies
S Fonseca - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
using the soil and water assessment tool to estimate dissolved inorganic nitrogen water pollution Abatement Cost functions in central portugal
Journal of Environmental Quality, 2014Co-Authors: Peter Roebeling, Joao Rocha, Joao Pedro Nunes, Teresa Fidelis, Henrique Alves, S FonsecaAbstract:Coastal aquatic ecosystems are increasingly affected by diffuse source nutrient water pollution from agricultural activities in coastal catchments, even though these ecosystems are important from a social, environmental and economic perspective. To warrant sustainable economic development of coastal regions, we need to balance marginal Costs from coastal catchment water pollution Abatement and associated marginal benefits from coastal resource appreciation. Diffuse-source water pollution Abatement Costs across agricultural sectors are not easily determined given the spatial heterogeneity in biophysical and agro-ecological conditions as well as the available range of best agricultural practices (BAPs) for water quality improvement. We demonstrate how the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) can be used to estimate diffuse-source water pollution Abatement Cost functions across agricultural land use categories based on a stepwise adoption of identified BAPs for water quality improvement and corresponding SWAT-based estimates for agricultural production, agricultural incomes, and water pollution deliveries. Results for the case of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) surface water pollution by the key agricultural land use categories (“annual crops,” “vineyards,” and “mixed annual crops & vineyards”) in the Vouga catchment in central Portugal show that no win-win agricultural practices are available within the assessed BAPs for DIN water quality improvement. Estimated Abatement Costs increase quadratically in the rate of water pollution Abatement, with largest Abatement Costs for the “mixed annual crops & vineyards” land use category (between 41,900 and 51,900 € tDIN⁻¹ yr⁻¹) and fairly similar Abatement Costs across the “vineyards” and “annual crops” land use categories (between 7300 and 15,200 € tDIN⁻¹ yr⁻¹).
Fabian Kesicki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Marginal Abatement Cost Curves: Combining Energy System Modelling and Decomposition Analysis
Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 2013Co-Authors: Fabian KesickiAbstract:Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves are a useful policy tool to communicate findings on the technological structure and the economics of CO_2 emissions reduction. However, existing ways of generating MAC curves do not display consistent technological detail and do not consider system-wide interactions and uncertainty in a structured manner. This paper details a new approach to overcome the present shortcomings by using an energy system model, UK MARKAL, in combination with index decomposition analysis. In addition, this approach allows different forms of uncertainty analysis to be used in order to test the robustness of the MAC curve. For illustration purposes, a sensitivity analysis concerning fossil fuel prices is applied to the transport sector of the UK. The resulting MAC curves are found to be relatively robust to different fuel Costs at higher CO_2 tax levels. The new systems-based approach improves MAC curves through the avoidance of an inconsistent emissions baseline, the incorporation of system-wide interactions and the price responsiveness of demand.
-
intertemporal issues and marginal Abatement Costs in the uk transport sector
Transportation Research Part D-transport and Environment, 2012Co-Authors: Fabian KesickiAbstract:Abstract An energy system model, UK MARKAL, is combined with decomposition analysis and sensitivity analysis to derive mitigation Costs and emissions reduction potentials in the UK transport sector. The paper tests the robustness of a marginal Abatement Cost curve for the year 2030 for two parameters: path dependency and discount rate. Path dependency is found to be a significant, yet not substantial, influencing factor on the shape and the structure of the marginal Abatement Cost curve. Doubling the technology-specific hurdle rates shows that Abatement Costs increase significantly. The results suggest that policy makers should be aware of the underlying carbon tax pathway and whether results are based on society’s view or a private perspective.
-
marginal Abatement Cost curves a call for caution
Climate Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Fabian Kesicki, Paul EkinsAbstract:Legal commitments to reduce CO 2 emissions require policy makers to find Cost-efficient means to meet these obligations. Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves, which illustrate the economics associated with climate change mitigation, have recently attracted a great amount of attention. A number of limitations with MAC curves are explained by the implication they should be just one tool in a broader set of decision-making aids used in assessing climate policy. MAC curves, for example, omit ancillary benefits of greenhouse gas emission Abatement, treat uncertainty in a limited manner, exclude intertemporal dynamics and lack the necessary transparency concerning their assumptions. MAC curves based on the individual assessment of Abatement measures suffer from additional shortcomings such as the non-consideration of interactions and non-financial Costs, a possibly inconsistent baseline, double counting and limited treatment of behavioural aspects. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation exhibit many of the above-mentioned problems, making it particularly difficult to capture in a Cost curve. Policy makers should therefore be cautious when interpreting MAC curves, pay attention to the underlying assumptions, consider non-financial Costs and be aware of the important uncertainties and underlying path dependencies.
-
marginal Abatement Cost mac curves confronting theory and practice
Environmental Science & Policy, 2011Co-Authors: Fabian Kesicki, Neil StrachanAbstract:Abstract Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves are a commonly used policy tool indicating emission Abatement potential and associated Abatement Costs. They have been extensively used for a range of environmental issues in different countries and are increasingly applied to climate change policy. However in the past, decisions in the complex field of climate policy have been partially based on MAC curves with methodological shortcomings. This paper investigates how their simplistic use has been misleading and finds that the limits of the MAC curve concept can lead to biased decision making. Nevertheless, MAC curves are a useful policy tool, if not relied on exclusively, providing an illustrative guide for subsequent analysis especially for iterative policy making as more information on Costs and policy effectiveness is discovered. This paper identifies some steps to overcome present shortcomings in the generation of MAC curves. These include a systems approach to capture interactions, consideration of ancillary benefits, a better representation of uncertainties and representation of cumulative emission Abatement to address time-related interactions.
Stéphane Hallegatte - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
marginal Abatement Cost curves and the quality of emission reductions a case study on brazil
Climate Policy, 2015Co-Authors: Adrien Vogtschilb, Stéphane Hallegatte, Christophe De GouvelloAbstract:Decision makers facing emission-reduction targets need to decide which Abatement measures to implement, and in which order. This paper investigates how marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves can inform such a decision. We re-analyse a MAC curve built for Brazil by 2030, and show that misinterpreting MAC curves as Abatement supply curves can lead to suboptimal strategies. It would lead to (i) under-investment in expensive, long-to-implement and large-potential options, such as clean transportation infrastructure, and (ii) over-investment in cheap but limited-potential options such as energy-efficiency improvement in refineries. To mitigate this issue, the paper proposes a new graphical representation of MAC curves that explicitly renders the time required to implement each measure. In addition to the Cost and potential of available options, designing optimal short-term policies requires information on long-term targets (e.g., halving emissions by 2050) and on the speed at which measures can deliver emission reductions. Mitigation policies are thus best investigated in a dynamic framework, building on sector-scale pathways to long-term targets. Climate policies should seek both quantity and quality of Abatement, by combining two approaches. A "synergy approach" that focuses on the cheapest mitigation options and maximizes co-benefits. And an "urgency approach" that starts from a long-term objective and works backward to identify actions that need to be implemented early. Accordingly, sector-specific policies may be used (i) to remove implementation barriers on negative- and low-Cost options and (ii) to ensure short-term targets are met with Abatement of sufficient quality, i.e. with sufficient investment in the long-to-implement options required to reach long-term targets.
-
long term mitigation strategies and marginal Abatement Cost curves a case study on brazil
2014Co-Authors: Adrien Vogtschilb, Stéphane Hallegatte, De Gouvello ChristopheAbstract:Decision makers facing Abatement targets need to decide which Abatement measures to implement, and in which order. This paper investigates the ability of marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves to inform this decision, reanalysing a MAC curve developed by the World Bank on Brazil. Misinterpreting MAC curves and focusing on short-term targets (e.g., for 2020) would lead to under-invest in expensive, long-to-implement and large-potential options, such as clean transportation infrastructure. Meeting short-term targets with marginal energy-efficiency improvements would lead to carbon-intensive lock-ins that make longer-term targets (e.g., for 2030 and beyond) impossible or too expensive to reach. Improvements to existing MAC curves are proposed, based on (1) enhanced data collection and reporting; (2) a simple optimization tool that accounts for constraints on implementation speeds; and (3) new graphical representations of MAC curves. Designing climate mitigation policies can be done through a pragmatic combination of two approaches. The synergy approach is based on MAC curves to identify the cheapest mitigation options and maximize co-benefits. The urgency approach considers the long-term objective (e.g., halving emissions by 2050) and works backward to identify actions that need to be implemented early, such as public support to clean infrastructure and zero-carbon technologies.
-
Marginal Abatement Cost curves and the optimal timing of mitigation measures
Energy Policy, 2014Co-Authors: Adrien Vogt-schilb, Stéphane HallegatteAbstract:Decision makers facing Abatement targets need to decide which Abatement measures to implement, and in which order. Measure-explicit marginal Abatement Cost curves depict the Cost and abating potential of available mitigation options. Using a simple intertemporal optimization model, we demonstrate why this information is not sufficient to design emission reduction strategies. Because the measures required to achieve ambitious emission reductions cannot be implemented overnight, the optimal strategy to reach a short-term target depends on longer-term targets. For instance, the best strategy to achieve European's -20% by 2020 target may be to implement some expensive, high-potential, and long-to-implement options required to meet the -75% by 2050 target. Using just the cheapest Abatement options to reach the 2020 target can create a carbon-intensive lock-in and make the 2050 target too expensive to reach. Designing mitigation policies requires information on the speed at which various measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions can be implemented, in addition to the information on the Costs and potential of such measures provided by marginal Abatement Cost curves.
-
Marginal Abatement Cost Curves and Quality of Emission Reductions: A Case Study on Brazil
Climate Policy, 2014Co-Authors: Adrien Vogt-schilb, Stéphane Hallegatte, Christophe De GouvelloAbstract:Decision makers facing emission-reduction targets need to decide which Abatement measures to implement, and in which order. This paper investigates how marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves can inform such a decision. We re-analyse a MAC curve built for Brazil by 2030, and show that misinterpreting MAC curves as Abatement supply curves can lead to suboptimal strategies. It would lead to (i) under-investment in expensive, long-to-implement and large-potential options, such as clean transportation infrastructure, and (ii) over-investment in cheap but limited-potential options such as energy-efficiency improvement in refineries. To mitigate this issue, the paper proposes a new graphical representation of MAC curves that explicitly renders the time required to implement each measure. In addition to the Cost and potential of available options, designing optimal short-term policies requires information on long-term targets (e.g., halving emissions by 2050) and on the speed at which measures can deliver emission reductions. Mitigation policies are thus best investigated in a dynamic framework, building on sector-scale pathways to long-term targets. Climate policies should seek both quantity and quality of Abatement, by combining two approaches. A "synergy approach" that focuses on the cheapest mitigation options and maximizes co-benefits. And an "urgency approach" that starts from a long-term objective and works backward to identify actions that need to be implemented early. Accordingly, sector-specific policies may be used (i) to remove implementation barriers on negative- and low-Cost options and (ii) to ensure short-term targets are met with Abatement of sufficient quality, i.e. with sufficient investment in the long-to-implement options required to reach long-term targets.
-
When Starting with the Most Expensive Option Makes Sense On Marginal Abatement Cost Curves and Optimal Abatement Pathways
Ecological Economics, 2013Co-Authors: Adrien Vogt-schilb, Stéphane HallegatteAbstract:This paper investigates the optimal implementation schedule of the measures listed in a Marginal Abatement Cost Curves (MACC). Costs and abating potentials of each measure, provided by a MACC, are completed with a maximum implementation speed. We find that, when coping with a carbon budget, it makes sense to implement some expensive options before exhausting the abating potential of the cheapest options. With Abatement targets expressed in terms of emissions at one point in time, e.g.~reducing emissions by 20\% in 2020 and by 75\% in 2050 it can be preferable to start with the most expensive options if their potential is higher and their inertia is great. The best strategy to reach a short-term target depends on whether this target is the ultimate objective or there is a longer-term target. Using just the cheapest options to reach the 2020 target may create a carbon-intensive lock-in and make the 2050 target unreachable. Results suggest that a unique carbon price in all sectors may not be the most efficient approach. Additional sectoral policies, such as the 20\% renewable energy target in Europe, may be part of an efficient mitigation policy.
Nicola Beaumont - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Abatement Cost curves a viable management tool for enabling the achievement of win win waste reduction strategies
Journal of Environmental Management, 2004Co-Authors: Nicola Beaumont, Robert TinchAbstract:Environmental regulation of industrial activity is generally believed to have a negative impact on the industry. Recent literature has suggested, however, that reducing industrial waste outputs can, in some circumstances, result in a 'win-win', or at least 'win-draw', scenario for industry and the environment. The viability of using the Abatement Cost curve method as a management tool to enable the achievement of a 'win-win' state is investigated here. Copper pollution in the Humber Estuary is used as a case-study, and the Abatement Cost curve methodology proves to be a valuable tool in identifying barriers to achieving the win-win state, and also in providing future direction for the waste management strategy. Abatement Cost curves are concluded to be powerful management tools which greatly improve the transparency of waste reduction information.
