Asia
ExerciseModeling
The Role of Asia in Mitigating Climate Change: Results from the
Asia Modeling Exercise Kate Calvin, Leon Clarke, Volker Krey, Geoff Blanford, Jiang Kejun, Mikiko Kainuma, Elmar Kriegler, Gunnar Luderer, P.R.
Shukla
International Energy Workshop 2012Cape Town, South Africa
June 21, 2012
PNWD-SA-9886
Asia
ExerciseModelingGoals of AME
Objective: to better articulate the role of Asia in addressing climate change.
Goal: To bring together global modelers that commonly participate in efforts to explore international policy architectures with regional modelers and experts with Asia-specific knowledge, understanding, data, and analysis.
Method: A coordinated modeling exercise that attempts to link these communities to provide more effective modeling and analysis of Asia within a global context.
Asia
ExerciseModelingParticipants
26 Participating Models Australia (GTEM) Canada (TIAM-World) China (China MARKAL, IAMC, IPAC, PECE), EU (GEM-E3, IMAGE, MESSAGE, POLES-IPTS, REMIND,
TIMES-VTT, WITCH) India (GCAM-IIM) Japan (AIM-CGE, AIM-Enduse, DNE21+, GRAPE, MARIA-
23) Korea (KEI-Linkages) Nepal (Nepal MARKAL) United States (EPPA, GCAM, iPETS, MERGE, Phoenix)
Asia
ExerciseModelingThe Models
Models differ with respect to: Regional scope (Global, China only, Nepal Only) Time horizon (through 2100, through 2050) Degree of foresight (myopic, intertemporally optimizing) Underlying structure (market-equilibrium, cost minimization) Sectoral coverage (Energy only, Energy & Agriculture/Land-Use,
Full Economy) Emissions included (CO2 only, Kyoto gases only, all species) Climate representation (No representation, GHG concentrations
only, all radiative forcing agents)
Asia
ExerciseModeling
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
2005
$/tC
O2
Exercise Design Six Core Scenarios:
Baseline
3 CO2 price paths
These scenarios were used to link between the global
and regional models.
Asia
ExerciseModelingExercise Design
Six Core Scenarios: Baseline
3 CO2 price paths
2 Stabilization paths (global models only) 550 CO2-e stabilization (total forcing)
450 CO2-e overshoot (total forcing)
For models without all forcing agents, we provided exogenous paths that they could use.
Asia
ExerciseModelingExercise Design
Six Core Scenarios: Baseline
3 CO2 price paths
2 Stabilization paths (global models only)
All policies are first-best (immediate accession, economy-wide CO2 prices/constraints)
No harmonized variables in the core scenarios
Asia
ExerciseModelingVariation in AME Baselines
Median and Range Across Models in 2100
Asia
ExerciseModelingExercise Design
We created several subgroups, which allowed us to explore different aspects of the scenarios more in depth.
Subgroup topics: Base Year Data
Baseline Scenarios
Urban/Rural development
Technology and Technical Change
Global and Regional Mitigation Efforts
National Policies and Measures
Low Carbon Societies
Asia
ExerciseModelingExercise Design
We created several subgroups, which allowed us to explore different aspects of the scenarios more in depth.
Subgroup topics: Base Year Data
Baseline Scenarios
Urban/Rural development
Technology and Technical Change
Global and Regional Mitigation Efforts
National Policies and Measures
Low Carbon Societies
RESULTS
Asia
ExerciseModelingBase Year Data
Deviation from UN 2010 Deviation from WB
Asia
ExerciseModelingBase Year Data
Asia
ExerciseModelingBase Year Data
Deviation from UN 2010 Deviation from WB
Asia
ExerciseModelingBase Year Data
Deviation from IEA Deviation from CDIAC
Asia
ExerciseModelingBase Year Data
Key findings: There are some good reasons why base year data
differs across models. Examples include: Differences in region definition Differences in data sources Differences in modeled base year Differences in calibration method
While differences in base year data do affect future growth projections, differences in assumed growth rates have a much larger impact on the future.
Asia
ExerciseModelingBaseline Scenarios
Asia
ExerciseModeling
-6%
-5%
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
1%0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9%
Ener
gy In
tens
ity R
ate o
f Cha
nge
Per Capita Income Growth Rate
Japan 1959-1974Taiwan 1973-1988
Korea 1977-1992
Malaysia 1979-1994
Model projections
1990 – 2005 dataEIA projection
Baseline Scenarios
PC TPE = 1%
PC TPE = 2%
PC TPE = 3%
PC TPE = 4%
PC TPE = 5%PC TPE = -1%
PC TPE = 0%
PC TPE = -2%
Average Growth Rates in China, 2005 – 2020 with comparison to Asian history
Asia
ExerciseModelingBaseline Scenarios
Average Growth Rates in China, 2005 – 2020
Asia
ExerciseModelingBaseline Scenarios
Key findings: Models differ in their projections of economic growth,
energy intensity, and carbon intensity Differences in underlying growth assumptions result in
a factor of 2 difference in Chinese CO2 emissions across models in 2020
Models with similar emissions levels may achieve them in very different ways
The models do not span the full uncertainty range. This is merely the range of modelers’ “best guesses.”
Asia
ExerciseModelingVariation in AME Policy Case
Median and Range Across Models in 2100
Assumes a carbon price of $30/tCO2 in 2020, rising at 5% p.a.
Asia
ExerciseModelingGlobal & Regional Mitigation
Global Marginal Abatement Cost Curves, 2005 – 2050
Asia
ExerciseModelingGlobal & Regional Mitigation
Fossil fuel & industrial CO2 emissions in 2050, relative to baseline
Asia
ExerciseModelingGlobal & Regional Mitigation
Fossil fuel & industrial CO2 emissions reductions in 2050, relative to world
Asia
ExerciseModeling
Electricity Generation by model, region, and fuel in 2050 in $30/tCO2 Scenario
Technology
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
n
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesia
Japa
nO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
AIM-ENDUSEAIM-CGE DNE21+ EPPA GCAM GEM-E3 GTEM IMAGEGRAPE 2005
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesi
aJa
pan
Kore
aO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nKo
rea
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesi
aJa
pan
Kore
aO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
Japa
nO
ECD9
0
Chin
aIn
dia
OEC
D90
Chin
aIn
dia
Indo
nesi
aJa
pan
Kore
aO
ECD9
0
MERGEMARIA-23 MESSAGE PHOENIX POLES-IPTS REMIND TIMES-VTT WITCHTIAM-WORLD 2005
0
20
40
60
AIM
-CG
E
AIM
-End
use
Chin
a-M
ARK
AL
DN
E21
EPPA
GCA
M
GEM
-E3
GRA
PE
GTE
M
IMAG
E
MAR
IA-2
3
MER
GE
MES
SAG
E
Phoe
nix
POLE
S-IP
TS
REM
IND
TIA
M-W
ORL
D
TIM
ES-V
TT
WIT
CH
Oil Total Oil w/o CCS Oil w/ CCS Coal TotalCoal w/o CCS Coal w/ CCS Gas Total Gas w/o CCSGas w/ CCS Biomass Total Biomass w/o CCS Biomass w/ CCSNuclear Non-Bio Renewable Total Hydro WindSolar Geothermal Other
Asia
ExerciseModelingGlobal & Region Mitigation
Key findings: Models differ significantly in the amount of mitigation
achieved for a particular carbon price Some regions show less mitigation than others,
regardless of the model considered Differences in mitigation are due to a variety of
factors, including: Differences in baseline emissions levels Differences in model flexibility Differences in technology cost and availability
Asia
ExerciseModelingTechnology
Key findings: Models show a wide variety of future energy systems
across time and scenarios. Variation is due to differences in assumed technology
cost, resource availability, etc. While there is some variation across regions within a
model due to resource constraints, many models tend to “favor” certain technologies.
Asia
ExerciseModelingOther Analyses
Urban/Rural Development: Analyzed the effect of urbanization on energy use and emissions Finding: Urbanization has an effect on solid fuel consumption,
but may not strongly influence total CO2 emissions
National Policies & Measures: Compared results from the models to Copenhagen pledges and
MEF/G8 goals Finding: Stringency of Copenhagen pledges varies across
regions, and to a lesser extent across models
Low Carbon Societies: Assessed policies and measures needed to implement 2 degree
scenarios
Asia
ExerciseModelingSummary
The Asia Modeling Exercise brought together more than 20 energy-economy and integrated assessment models.
These models ran a set of coordinated scenarios. We focused our analysis of the results on Asian regions. We analyzed results across a variety of dimensions,
including base year data, baselines, global & regional mitigation, technology, and national policies & measures.
We find that models differ significantly across a number of variables, reflecting uncertainty in the future evolution of the world’s economy and energy system. However, there were some robust results across models.
Asia
ExerciseModeling
THANK YOU!