|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{ComponentDescriptionTemplate | | {{ComponentDescriptionTemplate |
|
| |
| |Reference=Enerdata, 2010; Kindermann et al., 2008; Den Elzen et al., 2007; Van Vuuren et al., 2011a; Meinshausen et al., 2011c; Hof et al., 2013; Hof et al., 2012; Den Elzen et al., 2012b; Den Elzen et al., 2012c; Den Elzen et al., 2011b; Hof et al., 2010; Hof et al., 2009; Roelfsema et al., 2013a; Roelfsema et al., 2013b; Den Elzen et al., 2013; De Bruin et al., 2009; | | |Reference=Enerdata, 2010; Kindermann et al., 2008; Den Elzen et al., 2007; Van Vuuren et al., 2011a; Meinshausen et al., 2011c; Hof et al., 2013; Hof et al., 2012; Den Elzen et al., 2012b; Den Elzen et al., 2012c; Den Elzen et al., 2011b; Hof et al., 2010; Hof et al., 2009; Roelfsema et al., 2013a; Roelfsema et al., 2013b; Den Elzen et al., 2013; De Bruin et al., 2009; |
| |Description=In contrast to some of the other models in the IMAGE framework, [[FAIR model|FAIR]] is often used as a stand-alone model. However, if it is used as an integral part of the IMAGE framework, the model is tightly coupled to other parts of the framework. | | |Description=FAIR consists of six linked modules as presented in the flowchart and described briefly below. |
| | |
| | |
| The FAIR model consists of the following six linked modules (see figure Model scheme of FAIR):
| |
| | |
| # The global pathfinder module calculates cost-optimal global pathways for achieving long-term climate targets;
| |
| # The policy evaluation module calculates the emission levels for 2020 and beyond, resulting from national pledges and domestic climate mitigation plans;
| |
| # The effort-sharing module calculates regional and national emissions allowances or reduction targets, based on a wide range of equity principles, hence, sharing a global emissions target;
| |
| # The mitigation costs module calculates the level of emissions trading and abatement costs with flexible assumptions on regional carbon market participation, based on the information from the effort-sharing module or policy evaluation module;
| |
| # The damage and cost-benefit module calculates consumption losses resulting from climate change damage, adaptation costs, and mitigation costs, under a specified level of adaptation.
| |
| | |
| | |
| Input for the modules consists of baseline scenarios on population, GDP and emissions, as calculated by the IMAGE modelling framework. Emissions are from all major sources and include all six Kyoto greenhouse gases. Marginal abatement costs ([[HasAcronym::MAC]]) curves describing mitigation potential and costs of greenhouse gas emission reductions are derived from the TIMER energy model and the IMAGE land-use model. The MAC curves take into account a wide range of options, including carbon plantations, carbon capture and storage ([[HasAcronym::CCS]]), bio, wind and solar energy, and energy efficiency and technological improvements. In addition, FAIR can also use emission projections and MACs from other models, such as the POLES energy system model [[POLES database]] ([[Enerdata, 2010]]) and the [[IIASA database]] ([[Kindermann et al., 2008]]), to assess the sensitivity of the outcomes to these main inputs.
| |
|
| |
|
| The modules are described in more detail below. | | The Global pathfinder and climate module. The pathfinder module FAIR-SiMCaP calculates global emission pathways that are consistent with a long-term climate target ([[Den Elzen et al., 2007]];[[Van Vliet et al., 2009]]; [[Van Vuuren et al., 2011b]]). Inputs are climate targets defined in terms of concentration levels, radiative forcing, temperature, and cumulative emissions. In addition, intermediate restrictions on overshoot levels or intermediate emission targets representing climate policy progress can be included. The model combines the FAIR mitigation costs model and a module that minimises cumulative discounted mitigation costs by varying the timing of emission reductions. For climate calculations, FAIR-SiMCaP uses the [[MAGICC model|MAGICC 6 model]], with parameter settings calibrated to reproduce the medium response in terms of time scale and amplitude of 19 IPCC {{abbrTemplate|AR}}4 General Circulation Models ([[Meinshausen et al., 2011b]]). |
|
| |
|
| | The Policy evaluation module calculates emission levels resulting from the pledges and mitigation actions submitted by developed and developing countries as part of the 2010 {{abbrTemplate|UNFCCC}} Cancún Agreements ([[Den Elzen et al., 2013]]; [[Hof et al., 2013]]). Next, this module analyses the impact of planned and/or implemented domestic mitigation policies, such as carbon taxes, feed-in tariffs and renewable targets, on national emissions by 2020 to determine whether countries are on track with their reduction pledges ([[Roelfsema et al., 2014]]). The module is used in conjunction with a wide range of evaluation tools developed in cooperation with [[IIASA]], [[JRC]] and [[ECOFYS]], such as tools for analysing policy options for land-use credits and surplus emissions. |
|
| |
|
| ===Global pathfinder and climate module===
| | The Effort sharing module calculates emission targets for regions and countries, resulting from different emission allocation or effort-sharing schemes ([[Den Elzen et al., 2012a]]; [[Hof et al., 2012]]). Such schemes start either at the global allowed emission level, after which the effort-sharing approach allocates emission allowances across regions, or at the required global reduction level, after which various effort-sharing approaches allocate regional emission reduction targets. Both approaches use information from the Global Pathfinder and Climate module on the required global emission level or emission reductions. As an alternative, emission allowances can be allocated to regions without a predefined global reduction target, based on different effort-sharing approaches. The model includes effort-sharing approaches such as Contraction & Convergence, common-but-differentiated convergence, and a multi-stage approach. |
| The pathfinder module [[FAIR-SiMCaP model|FAIR-SiMCaP*]] calculates global emission pathways that satisfy a long-term climate target ([[Den Elzen et al., 2007]]; [[Van Vliet et al., 2009]]; [[Van Vuuren et al., 2011a]]) . Input are climate targets that are defined in terms of concentration levels, radiative forcing, temperature, or cumulative emissions. Intermediate restrictions on overshoot levels or intermediate emission targets representing climate policy progress also can be included. The model combines the mitigation costs model of FAIR and a module that minimises cumulative discounted mitigation costs by varying the timing of emission reductions. For the climate calculations, FAIR-SiMCaP uses the [[MAGICC model|MAGICC]] 6 model, with parameter settings calibrated to reproduce the medium response in terms of time scale and amplitude of 19 [[IPCC]] [[AR|AR4]] General Circulation Models ([[Meinshausen et al., 2011c]]). | |
|
| |
|
| ===Policy evaluation module===
| | The Mitigation costs module is used for calculating the regional mitigation costs of achieving the targets calculated in the Policy Evaluation and/or the Effort Sharing modules, and to determine the buyers and sellers on the international emissions trading market ([[Den Elzen et al., 2008]]; [[Den Elzen et al., 2011a]]). Inputs to the model are regional gas- and source-specific Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves that reflect the additional costs of abating one extra tonne of CO2 equivalent emissions. The {{abbrTemplate|MAC}} curves describe the potential and costs of the abatement options considered. The model uses aggregated regional permit demand and supply curves derived from the MAC curves to calculate the equilibrium permit price on the international trading market, its buyers and sellers, and the resulting domestic and external abatement per region. The design of the emissions trading market can include: constraints on imports and exports of emission permits; non-competitive behaviour; transaction costs associated with the use of emission trading; a less than fully efficient supply of viable {{abbrTemplate|CDM}} projects with respect to their operational availability; and the banking of surplus emission allowances. |
| The policy evaluation module calculates emission levels resulting from the pledges and mitigation actions submitted by developed and developing countries as part of the 2010 [[UNFCCC]] Cancún Agreements (for instance, [[Den Elzen et al., 2013]]; [[Hof et al., 2013]]). This module also analyses the impact of planned and/or implemented domestic mitigation policies, such as carbon taxes, feed-in tariffs and renewable targets, on national emissions by 2020, to determine whether countries are on track to achieve their reduction pledges ([[Roelfsema et al., 2013a]]; [[Roelfsema et al., 2013b]]). For this purpose, it uses a wide range of evaluation tools, which have been developed in cooperation with [[IIASA]] and [[ECOFYS]], such as tools for analysing policy options for addressing land-use credits and surplus emissions. | |
|
| |
|
| ===Effort-sharing module===
| | The Damage and Cost-Benefit Analysis modules calculate the consumption loss resulting from climate change damage, and compare these with the consumption losses of adaptation and mitigation costs ([[Hof et al., 2008]]; [[Hof et al., 2009|2009]]; [[Hof et al., 2010|2010]]). Estimates of adaptation costs and residual damage (defined as the damage that remains after adaptation) are based on the [[AD-RICE model]] ([[De Bruin et al., 2009]]), which are based on total damage projections made by the [[RICE model]]. Calibration of the regional adaptation cost functions is based on an assessment of each impact category described in the RICE model, using relevant studies and with expert judgement where necessary. The optimal level of adaptation can be calculated by the model, but may also be set to a non-optimal level by the user. |
| The effort-sharing module calculates emission targets for regions and countries, resulting from different emission allocation or effort-sharing schemes (for instance, [[Den Elzen et al., 2012b]]; [[Den Elzen et al., 2012c]]; [[Hof et al., 2012]]). Such schemes start either at the global allowed emission level, after which a certain effort-sharing approach allocates emission allowances across regions, or at the required global reduction level, after which various effort-sharing approaches allocate regional emission reduction targets. Both these approaches use information from the global pathfinder and climate module on the required global emission level or emission reductions. As an alternative, emission allowances can be allocated to regions without a predefined global (reduction) target, based on different effort-sharing approaches. Effort-sharing approaches included in the model are Contraction & Convergence, common-but-differentiated convergence and a multi-stage approach. | |
|
| |
|
| ===Mitigation costs module===
| | Consumption losses due to mitigation, adaptation and climate change damage are estimated based on a simple Cobb-Douglas economic growth model. Each region is calibrated separately to the exogenous GDP path. Damages, adaptation and abatement costs are subtracted from investment or consumption to determine either the direct replacement effect on consumption, or the indirect effect from replacing investments. |
| The mitigation costs module is used for calculating the regional mitigation costs of achieving the targets calculated in the policy evaluation and/or the effort-sharing module, and to determine the buyers and sellers on the international emissions trading market (for instance, [[Den Elzen et al., 2008]]; [[Den Elzen et al., 2011a]]; [[Den Elzen et al., 2011b]]). As input, the model uses regional, gas- and source-specific MAC curves, which reflect the additional costs of abating one extra tonne of CO2 equivalent emissions. In this way, the MAC curves describe the potential and costs of the different abatement options considered. The model uses aggregated regional permit demand and supply curves, derived from the MAC curves, to calculate the equilibrium permit price on the international trading market, its buyers and sellers, and the resulting domestic and external abatement per region. The design of the emissions trading market can include constraints on imports and exports of emission permits, non-competitive behaviour, transaction costs associated with the use of emission trading, a less than fully efficient supply of viable [[CDM]] projects with respect to their operational availability, and the banking of surplus emission allowances.
| |
|
| |
|
| ===Damage and cost-benefit module===
| |
| The damage and cost-benefit module calculates the consumption loss resulting from the damage of climate change, and compares these with the consumption losses of adaptation and mitigation costs (for instance, [[Hof et al., 2008]]; [[Hof et al., 2009]]; [[Hof et al., 2010]]). The estimates on adaptation costs and residual damage were based on the [[AD RICE model]] ([[De Bruin et al., 2009]]). The [[AD RICE model]] estimates adaptation costs based on total damage projections by the [[RICE model]]. These total damage projections include both adaptation costs and residual damage. Calibration of the regional adaptation cost functions was based on an assessment of each impact category described in the RICE model, using relevant literature, supplemented with expert judgement where necessary. The optimal level of adaptation can be calculated by the model, but the level of adaptation may also be set to a non-optimal level by the user. Consumption losses are estimated based on a simple [[Cobb-Douglas economic growth model]]. First, this model, for each region, is separately calibrated to the exogenous GDP path. Next, damage, adaptation costs and abatement costs are subtracted from investment or consumption to determine the effect on consumption (directly by replacing consumption or indirectly by replacing investments).
| |
| }} | | }} |
