nach oben

Energy Efficiency

Erschienen in:

07.06.2018 | Original Article

The transition in energy demand sectors to limit global warming to 1.5 °C

verfasst von: Aurélie Méjean, Céline Guivarch, Julien Lefèvre, Meriem Hamdi-Cherif

Erschienen in: Energy Efficiency | Ausgabe 2/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Achieving an emission pathway that would be compatible with limiting the global temperature increase to 1.5 °C compared with pre-industrial levels would require unprecedented changes in the economy and energy use and supply. This paper describes how such a transition may impact the dynamics of sectoral emissions. We compare contrasted global scenarios in terms of the date of emission peaks, energy efficiency, availability of low-carbon energy technologies, and fossil fuels, using the global integrated assessment model IMACLIM-R. The results suggest that it is impossible to delay the peak of global emissions until 2030 while remaining on a path compatible with the 1.5 °C objective. We show that stringent policies in energy-demand sectors—industry and transportation especially—are needed in the short run to trigger an immediate peak of global emissions and increase the probability to meet the 1.5 °C objective. Such sector-specific policies would contribute to lowering energy demand and would reduce the level of the carbon price required to reach the same temperature objective. Bringing forward the peak of global emissions does not lead to a homothetic adjustment of all sectoral emission pathways: an early peak of global emissions implies the fast decarbonization of the electricity sector and early emission reductions in energy-demand sectors—mainly industry and transportation.

Vorheriger Artikel The potential contribution of disruptive low-carbon innovations to 1.5 °C climate mitigation

Nächster Artikel Carbon pricing and energy efficiency: pathways to deep decarbonization of the US electric sector

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Note that the residential sector refers to private housing only and is separate from the service (or composite) sector. We left the service sector out of the analysis as it represents less than 5% of total emissions in 2015 and as the representation of this sector is less detailed than other sectors in IMACLIM-R.

For a detailed description of the IMACLIM-R model, see: http://themasites.pbl.nl/models/advance/index.php/Model_Documentation_-_IMACLIM

See Bibas et al. (2015) for a thorough description of the representation of technical change in IMACLIM-R.

Non-CO₂ GHG gases and emissions from land-use change are not modeled explicitly in this version of the model.

Note that global emissions are imposed over that period but not the sectoral shares of those emissions.

One family corresponds to one global emission constraint with a peak at year 2016, 2020, 2025, or 2030 and eight different combinations of technico-economic parameters.

Non-CO₂ GHG gases and emissions from land-use change are not modeled explicitly in this version of the model. Cumulative CO₂ emissions over 2010–2050 are compared with CO₂ budgets from studies that account for the impact of non-CO₂ gases on warming. Implicitly, this means that we are assuming non-CO₂ gases emissions to be similar to the trends from those studies.

Threshold Exceedance Budget (TEB) and Threshold Avoidance Budget (TAB) are defined as follows: “TEB is the amount of cumulative carbon emissions at the time a specific temperature threshold is exceeded with a given probability in a particular multi-gas emission scenarios,” “TAB is the amount of cumulative carbon emissions over a given time period of a multi-gas emission scenario that limits global-mean temperature increase to below a specific threshold with a given probability” (definition from Rogelj et al. (2016), which detail the different types of carbon budget concepts used and their implications). TEB is expected to be higher than TAB.

Note that the results show direct emissions for the transportation and residential sector (i.e., excluding for instance the emissions associated with the production of electricity used for transportation). We account for both direct and indirect emissions in the industry sector.

Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 273–291.CrossRef

Allcott, H., & Mullainathan, S. (2010). Behavior and Energy Policy. Science, 327, 1204–1205.CrossRef

Anderson, K., & Peters, G. (2016). The trouble with negative emissions. Science, 354(6309), 182–183.CrossRef

Bager, S., & Mundaca, L. (2017). Making “Smart Meters” smarter? Insights from a behavioural economics pilot field experiment in Copenhagen, Denmark. Energy Research & Social Science, 28, 68–76.CrossRef

Bertoldi, P., Rezessy, S., Lees, E., Baudry, P., Jeandel, A., & Labanca, N. (2010). Energy supplier obligations and white certificate schemes: comparative analysis of experiences in the European Union. Energy Policy, 38, 1455–1469.CrossRef

Bertoldi, P., Rezessy, S., & Oikonomou, V. (2013). Rewarding energy savings rather than energy efficiency: exploring the concept of a feed-in tariff for energy savings. Energy Policy, 56, 526–535.CrossRef

Bibas, R., Méjean, A., & Hamdi-Cherif, M. (2015). Energy efficiency policies and the timing of action: an assessment of climate mitigation costs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90(Part A), 137–152.CrossRef

Chapman, L. (2007). Transport and climate change: a review. Journal of Transport Geography, 15, 354–367.CrossRef

Clarke L., K. Jiang, K. Akimoto, M. Babiker, G. Blanford, K. Fisher-Vanden, J.-C. Hourcade, V. Krey, E. Kriegler, A. Löschel, D. McCollum, S. Paltsev, S. Rose, P. R. Shukla, M. Tavoni, B. C. C. van der Zwaan, and D.P. van Vuuren, 2014. Assessing transformation pathways. In: Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Creutzig, F., McGlynn, E., Minx, J., & Edenhofer, O. (2011). Climate policies for road transport revisited (I): Evaluation of the current framework. Energy Policy, 39(5), 2396–2406.CrossRef

Edenhofer, O., Pichs-Madruga, R., Sokona, Y., Kadner, S., Minx, J. C., Brunner, S., Agrawala, S., Baiocchi, G., Bashmakov, I. A., Blanco, G., Broome, J., Bruckner, T., Bustamante, M., Clarke, L., Conte Grand, M., Creutzig, F., Cruz-Núñez, X., Dhakal, S., Dubash, N. K., Eickemeier, P., Farahani, E., Fischedick, M., Fleurbaey, M., Gerlagh, R., Gómez-Echeverri, L., Gupta, S., Harnisch, J., Jiang, K., Jotzo, F., Kartha, S., Klasen, S., Kolstad, C., Krey, V., Kunreuther, H., Lucon, O., Masera, O., Mulugetta, Y., Norgaard, R. B., Patt, A., Ravindranath, N. H., Riahi, K., Roy, J., Sagar, A., Schaeffer, R., Schlömer, S., Seto, K. C., Seyboth, K., Sims, R., Smith, P., Somanathan, E., Stavins, R., von Stechow, C., Sterner, T., Sugiyama, T., Suh, S., Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Urama, K., Venables, A., Victor, D. G., Weber, E., Zhou, D., Zou, J., & Zwickel, T. (2014). Technical summary. In O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, & J. C. Minx (Eds.), Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Faruqui, A., & Sergici, S. (2010). Household response to dynamic pricing of electricity: a survey of 15 experiments. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 38, 193–225.CrossRef

Figueres, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Whiteman, G., Rockström, J., Hobley, A., & Rahmstorf, S. (2017). Three years to safeguard our climate. Nature, 546(7660), 593–595.CrossRef

Fuss, S., Canadell, J. G., Peters, G. P., Tavoni, M., Andrew, R. M., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Jones, C. D., Kraxner, F., & Nakicenovic, N. (2014). Betting on negative emissions. Nature Climate Change, 4(10), 850–853.CrossRef

Goodwin, P., Dargay, J., & Hanly, M. (2004). Elasticities of road traffic and fuel consumption with respect to price and income: a review. Transport Reviews, 24(3), 275–292.CrossRef

Grubler, A., Bai, X., Buettner, T., Dhakal, S., Fisk, D., Ichinose, T., Keristead, J., Sammer, G., Satterthwaite, D., Schulz, N., Shah, N., Steinberger, J., & Weiz, H. (2012). Urban energy systems. In Global energy assessment—toward a sustainable future (pp. 1307–1400). Cambridge, UK: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Guivarch, C., & Hallegatte, S. (2013). 2C or not 2C? Global Environmental Change, 23(1), 179–192.CrossRef

Guivarch, C., Monjon, S., Rozenberg, J., & Vogt-Schilb, A. (2015). Would climate policy improve the European energy security? Climate Change Economics, 6, 1550008.CrossRef

Harmelink, M., Nilsson, L., & Harmsen, R. (2008). Theory-based policy evaluation of 20 energy efficiency instruments. Energy Efficiency, 1, 131–148.CrossRef

Hansen, J., Sato, M., Kharecha, P., Beerling, D., Berner, R., Masson-Delmotte, V., Pagani, M., Raymo, M., Royer, D. L., & Zachos, J. C. (2008). Target atmospheric CO₂: where should humanity aim? The Open Atmospheric Science Journal., 2(1), 217–231.CrossRef

Hare, W. L., Cramer, W., Schaeffer, M., Battaglini, A., & Jaeger, C. C. (2011). Climate hotspots: key vulnerable regions, climate change and limits to warming. Regional Environmental Change, 11(Supplement 1), 1–13.CrossRef

IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. In O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, & J. C. Minx (Eds.), Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

IEA, 2008. World energy outlook. Tech. rep., IEA/OECD, Paris, France.

Iyer, G., Hultman, N., Eom, J., McJeon, H., Patel, P., & Clarke, L. (2015). Diffusion of low-carbon technologies and the feasibility of long-term climate targets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90(Part A), 103–118.CrossRef

Jackson, R. B., Canadell, J. G., Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Korsbakken, J. I., Peters, G. P., & Nakicenovic, N. (2016). Reaching peak emissions. Nature Climate Change, 6(1), 710.CrossRef

Kriegler, E., Petermann, M., Krey, V., Schwanitz, V. J., Luderer, G., Ashina, S., Bosetti, V., et al. (2015). Diagnostic indicators for integrated assessment models of climate policy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90(Part A), 45–61.CrossRef

Kunreuther, H., & Weber, E. U. (2014). Aiding Decision Making to Reduce the Impacts of Climate Change. Journal of Consumer Policy, 37, 397–411.CrossRef

Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Sitch, S., Korsbakken, J. I., Peters, G. P., Manning, A. C., Boden, T. A., Tans, P. P., & Houghton, R. A. (2016). Global carbon budget 2016. Earth System Science Data, 8(2), 605–649.CrossRef

Luderer, G., Pietzcker, R. C., Bertram, C., Kriegler, E., Meinshausen, M., & Edenhofer, O. (2013). Economic mitigation challenges: how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets. Environmental Research Letters, 8(3), 034033.CrossRef

McGilligan, C., Sunikka-Blank, M., & Natarajan, S. (2010). Subsidy as an agent to enhance the effectiveness of the energy performance certificate. Energy Policy, 38, 1272–1287.CrossRef

Millar, R. J., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Friedlingstein, P., Rogelj, J., Grubb, M. J., Matthews, H. D., Skeie, R. B., Forster, P. M., Frame, D. J., & Allen, M. R. (2017). Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C. Nature Geoscience, 10, 741–747.CrossRef

Pichert, D., & Katsikopoulos, K. V. (2008). Green defaults: Information presentation and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 63–73.CrossRef

Riahi, K., Kriegler, E., Johnson, N., Bertram, C., den Elzen, M., Eom, J., Schaeffer, M., et al. (2015). Locked into Copenhagen pledges—implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90(Part A), 8–23.CrossRef

Rogelj, J., Popp, A., Calvin, K. V., Luderer, G., Emmerling, J., Gernaat, D., Fujimori, S., Strefler, J., Hasegawa, T., Marangoni, G., Krey, V., Kriegler, E., Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Doelman, J., Drouet, L., Edmonds, J., Fricko, O., Harmsen, M., Havlík, P., Humpenöder, F., Stehfest, E., & Tavoni, M. (2018). Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °C. Nature Climate Change, 8, 325–332.CrossRef

Rogelj, J., Luderer, G., Pietzcker, R. C., Kriegler, E., Schaeffer, M., Krey, V., & Riahi, K. (2015). Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5 °C. Nature Climate Change, 5(6), 519–527.CrossRef

Rogelj, J., Schaeffer, M., Friedlingstein, P., Gillett, N. P., van Vuuren, D. P., Riahi, K., Allen, M., & Knutti, R. (2016). Differences between carbon budget estimates unravelled. Nature Climate Change, 6, 245–252.CrossRef

Rozenberg, J., Hallegatte, S., Vogt-Schilb, A., Sassi, O., Guivarch, C., Waisman, H., & Hourcade, J. C. (2010). Climate policies as a hedge against the uncertainty on future oil supply. Climatic Change, 101(3–4), 663–668.CrossRef

Schafer, A., & Victor, D. G. (2000). The future mobility of the world population. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 34, 171–205.

Schafer, A. (2012). Introducing Behavioral Change in Transportation into Energy/Economy/Environment Models (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 6234). Washington, D.C: World Bank.CrossRef

Sims, R., Schaeffer, R., Creutzig, F., Cruz-Núñez, X., D’Agosto, M., Dimitriu, D., Figueroa Meza, M. J., Fulton, L., Kobayashi, S., Lah, O., McKinnon, A., Newman, P., Ouyang, M., Schauer, J. J., Sperling, D., & Tiwari, G. (2014). Transport. In O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, & J. C. Minx (Eds.), Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, P., Davis, S. J., Creutzig, F., Fuss, S., Minx, J., Gabrielle, B., Kato, E., Jackson, R. B., Cowie, A., & Kriegler, E. (2016). Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions. Nature Climate Change, 6(1), 42–50.CrossRef

Stocker, T. F. (2013). The closing door of climate targets. Science, 339(6117), 280–282.CrossRef

Suzuki, M. (2015). Identifying roles of international institutions in clean energy technology innovation and diffusion in the developing countries: matching barriers with roles of the institutions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 229–240.CrossRef

Tanaka, K. (2011). Review of policies and measures for energy efficiency in industry sector. Energy Policy, 39, 6532–6550.CrossRef

van Vuuren, D., den Elzen, M., Lucas, P., Eickhout, B., Strengers, B., van Ruijven, B., Wonink, S., & van Houdt, R. (2007). Stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels: an assessment of reduction strategies and costs. Climatic Change, 81, 119–159.CrossRef

Waisman, H., Guivarch, C., & Lecocq, F. (2013). The transportation sector and low-carbon growth pathways: modelling urban, infrastructure, and spatial determinants of mobility. Climate Policy, 13(1), 106–129.CrossRef

Waisman, H., Guivarch, C., Grazi, F., & Hourcade, J. C. (2012). The IMACLIM-R model: infrastructures, technical inertia and the costs of low carbon futures under imperfect foresight. Climatic Change, 114(1), 101–120.CrossRef

World Bank and Ecofys. 2017. Carbon pricing watch 2017. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Zhou, N., McNeil, M., & Levine, M. (2011). Assessment of building energy-saving policies and programs in China during the 11th five year plan. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 19 pp.CrossRef

Grübler, A., Nakicenovic, N., & Victor, D. G. (May 1999). Dynamics of energy technologies and global change. Energy Policy, 27(5), 247–280.CrossRef

IEA, 2007. World energy outlook. Tech. rep., IEA/OECD, Paris, France.

Titel: The transition in energy demand sectors to limit global warming to 1.5 °C
verfasst von: Aurélie Méjean
Céline Guivarch
Julien Lefèvre
Meriem Hamdi-Cherif
Publikationsdatum: 07.06.2018
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Energy Efficiency / Ausgabe 2/2019
Print ISSN: 1570-646X
Elektronische ISSN: 1570-6478
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9682-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2019

Mobility, food and housing: responsibility, individual consumption and demand-side policies in European deep decarbonisation pathways

The potential contribution of disruptive low-carbon innovations to 1.5 °C climate mitigation

Minimum energy performance standards for the 1.5 °C target: an effective complement to carbon pricing

Modeling on building sector’s carbon mitigation in China to achieve the 1.5 °C climate target

Decarbonising transport to achieve Paris Agreement targets

Demand-side approaches for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C