Robert C. Pietzcker

Long-Term Transport Energy Demand and Climate Policy: Alternative Visions on Transport Decarbonization in Energy Economy Models

Decarbonizing transport will be necessary to limit global warming below 2 °C. Due to persistent reliance on fossil fuels, it is posited that transport is more difficult to decarbonize than other sectors. To test this hypothesis, we compare long-term transport energy demand and emission projections for China, USA and the world from five large-scale energy-economy models. We diagnose the models characteristics by subjecting them to three climate policies. We systematically analyze mitigation levers along the chain of causality from mobility to emissions, finding that some models lack relevant mitigation options. We partially confirm that transport is less reactive to a given carbon tax than the non-transport sectors: in the first half of the century, transport mitigation is delayed by 10–30 years compared to non-transport mitigation. At high carbon prices towards the end of the century, however, the three global models achieve deep transport emission reductions by >90% through the use of advanced vehicle technologies and low-carbon primary energy; especially biomass with CCS (carbon capture and sequestration) plays a crucial role. The extent to which earlier mitigation is possible strongly depends on implemented technologies and model structure. Compared to the global models, the two partial-equilibrium models are less flexible in their reaction to climate policies.

Description of the REMIND Model (Version 1.5)

This document describes the REMIND model in its version 1.5. REMIND is an integrated assessment model of the energy-economy-climate system. REMIND stands for “Regional Model of Investments and Development.”

Exploring the use of dynamic linear panel data models for evaluating energy/economy/environment models — an application for the transportation sector

This paper uses the RoSE transportation sector scenarios of the GCAM and REMIND energy-economy-models for the U.S. region to derive and compare these models’ intrinsic elasticities with those resulting from historical trends, estimates from the literature, and across each other. To estimate the model-intrinsic elasticities, we explore the use of dynamic linear panel data models. On the basis of 26 scenarios (panels) between 2010 and 2050, our analysis suggests that nearly all model-intrinsic elasticities with respect to final energy use are roughly comparable to each other, to those observed historically, and to those from other studies. The key difference is these models’ comparatively low intrinsic income elasticity of final energy use. This and other minor differences are interpreted through key assumptions underlying both energy-economy-models.

Residual fossil CO2 emissions in 1.5-2 °c pathways

The Paris Agreement—which is aimed at holding global warming well below 2 °C while pursuing efforts to limit it below 1.5 °C—has initiated a bottom-up process of iteratively updating nationally determined contributions to reach these long-term goals. Achieving these goals implies a tight limit on cumulative net CO2 emissions, of which residual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are the greatest impediment. Here, using an ensemble of seven integrated assessment models (IAMs), we explore the determinants of these residual emissions, focusing on sector-level contributions. Even when strengthened pre-2030 mitigation action is combined with very stringent long-term policies, cumulative residual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels remain at 850–1,150 GtCO2 during 2016–2100, despite carbon prices of US

Optimal international technology cooperation for the low-carbon transformation

130–420 per tCO2 by 2030. Thus, 640–950 GtCO2 removal is required for a likely chance of limiting end-of-century warming to 1.5 °C. In the absence of strengthened pre-2030 pledges, long-term CO2 commitments are increased by 160–330 GtCO2, further jeopardizing achievement of the 1.5 °C goal and increasing dependence on CO2 removal.Residual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels limit the likelihood of meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement. A sector-level assessment of residual emissions using an ensemble of IAMs indicates that 640–950 GtCO2 removal will be required to constrain warming to 1.5 °C.

Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5 °C

ABSTRACT Research on low-carbon transformation pathways has focused on carbon pricing as a means for climate stabilization. By contrast, technology policies remain the more prominent national climate policy instruments today: renewable energy subsidies amount to more than US

Using the sun to decarbonize the power sector: The economic potential of photovoltaics and concentrating solar power ☆

100 billion per year globally – more than twice the value of priced carbon in 2016. Given technology spillovers and global learning effects, it remains unclear how technology policies can be coordinated internationally as part of climate stabilization policy. Our study is the first to derive optimal technology and climate policy for the 2C target using an energy-economy-climate model. We show an economic rationale to include an international technology protocol alongside carbon pricing: Cumulative low-carbon subsidies of more than US

Fossil-fueled development (SSP5): An energy and resource intensive scenario for the 21st century

1 trillion from 2020 until the end of the century mainly support solar power as well as electric- and hydrogen-powered passenger vehicles. Higher carbon pricing could replace subsidies at very low cost, but mitigation cost increases from delayed carbon pricing can be reduced only somewhat by stepping up subsidies. Our study suggests that existing low-carbon subsidies must be complemented by full carbon pricing to achieve 2C cost-efficiently: Alongside the optimal carbon price, low-carbon subsidies should amount to no more than ∼6% of the value of priced carbon. Key policy insights International spillovers in low-carbon technologies may slow their deployment. We derive optimal technology and climate policy for 2C in an energy-economy-climate model. Subsidies of more than US

Complementing carbon prices with technology policies to keep climate targets within reach

1 trillion support mainly solar and advanced car technologies. Replacing all subsidies by carbon pricing barely increases mitigation costs.