Climate policy/Description: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
===Global pathfinder and climate module=== | ===Global pathfinder and climate module=== | ||
The pathfinder module 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., 2011]]) . 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 6 model, with parameter settings calibrated to reproduce the medium response in terms of time scale and amplitude of 19 IPCC AR4 General Circulation Models ([[Meinshausen et al., 2011c]]). | The pathfinder module [[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., 2011]]) . 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]] 6 model, with parameter settings calibrated to reproduce the medium response in terms of time scale and amplitude of 19 IPCC AR4 General Circulation Models ([[Meinshausen et al., 2011c]]). | ||
===Policy evaluation module=== | ===Policy evaluation module=== | ||
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. | 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=== | ===Effort-sharing module=== | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
===Mitigation costs module=== | ===Mitigation costs 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 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. | 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=== | ===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). | 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). | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 17:37, 10 December 2013
Parts of Climate policy/Description
| Component is implemented in: |
|
| Related IMAGE components |
| Models/Databases |
| Key publications |
| References |
|
