1 / 20

TOCSIN

gaetan
Download Presentation

TOCSIN

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Coupling bottom-up and top-down energy models: challenges and results with TIAM and GEMINI-E3Maryse Labriet1, Marc Vielle2, Laurent Drouet3, Alain Haurie4, Amit Kanudia5, Richard Loulou61Kanlo Consultants, France and Spain2 Ecole Polytechnique de Lausanne and ORDECSYS, Switzerland3 Ecole Polytechnique de Lausanne, Switzerland4 University of Geneva and ORDECSYS, Switzerland5 Kanors Consulting, India6 Kanlo Consultants, FranceInternational Energy WorkshopVenice (Italy), June 17th, 2009 TOCSIN

  2. Aims of coupling Enhance the description of world energy system by combining the strengths of the two models : • Detailed technological representation of the energy system of ETSAP-TIAMallowing the endogenous computation of (amongst others) energy flows and prices • General equilibrium effects of GEMINI-E3allowing the explicit representation of the main economic factors (labor, consumption, capital, etc.) and their interactions with the energy service demands

  3. GEMINI-E3 • General Equilibrium Model • 28 countries/regions – 18 sectors • CO2 and other GHG • Reference year 2001 – based on GTAP database • Time period 2001- 2050 • Website: http://www.gemini-e3.net/

  4. ETSAP-TIAM • Technology rich, dynamic inter-temporal partial equilibrium representing the entire energy systems • Based on maximum total surplus (via LP) with own price elastic service demands • Driven by demands for energy services. eg. tons aluminium, km car travel, etc. • 15 regions linked by trades of 9 energy commodities + emissions • CO2 and other GHGs • Reference year 2005 – IEA Energy Statistics • Time horizon 2005-2100 (2005-2050 is used here) • Website: www.etsap.org/documentation(Energy Technology System Analysis Programme)

  5. Connecting the models: regions, sectors and commodities • Choose a common regional aggregation level TIAM GEMINI-E3

  6. Connecting the models: regions, sectors and commodities • Create connections between the two activity classifications (the two models are based on two different data sets) • Additions of activity sectors in GEMINI-E3: hydrogen, biomass, adjusted share of other non-fossil fuels.

  7. GEMINI-E3 TIAM Demand functions demand=driverelast Coupling Framework • Harmonisation of the two models (POP, GDP, energy prices, some energy constraints) • Coupling of the two models Energy mix Energy prices Technical progress Investments Cost CO2 price COUPLING Drivers:GDP Industrial outputs Service demands

  8. Coupling Algorithm Starting point: harmonized models (GDP, POP, energy prices)

  9. Case study: World Climate Agreement • Radiative forcing limited to 3.5 W/m2(2005-2050, no overshooting) • Full Worldcooperation • All sectors • All countries • Only one carbon price for each time period, equivalent to a tax applied to all sectors and all countries What do we learn from the coupling?

  10. Convergence criteria Convergence Achieved at iteration 4

  11. Some verifications CO2 emissions (GtC/yr) • No difference between Coupled models and TIAM-Elast • Of course, energy service reductions help for mitigation (lower CO2 price than w/o elasticities)

  12. Focus on final energy services • Expected added value of the coupling of TIAM and GEMINI-E3: better representation of the factors influencing the demands for energy services, globally and more importantly, regionally • What is observed in the results of the Coupled models? • Agriculture, commercial, residential and road transport behave similarly in both approaches, with slightly higher reductions in the Coupled models in residential and non-road sectors, and slightly smaller reduction in commercial and agriculture. • Demands fornon-road transport (aviation, navigation) are more drastically reduced in TIAM-Elast • More complex dynamics in the industrysector, while in TIAM-Elast, all industrial energy services decrease

  13. Industrial sector

  14. Example: the Iron&Steel sector Relative values of production w.r.t. Ref Domestic production = Domestic demand+ Exports- Imports Decision factors Relative values of domestic consumption and trade w.r.t. Ref

  15. Some macro-economic effects (from GEMINI-E3) • Energy exporting countries: loss of terms of trade • Other affected countries: where the energy intensive industry is strong • Importing countries / high energy efficiency: smaller costs

  16. Other applications: Partial Climate Agreements • (S2) Climate Agreement Limited to the Energy Intensive Industries in Non-OECDin order to avoid penalizing too much the households (residential and transport) but also to limit the loss of competitiveness of developed countries. Same target 3.5 W/m2. • (S2B) Climate Agreement Limited to the Electricity generation of Non-OECD countries. Target 3.5 W/m2 infeasible. Target 4.0 W/m2. What are the impacts on the energy system? Are there emissions / investment leakages? Are the costs supported by Non-OECD countries reduced?

  17. Some of the technology decisions S1: Full Cooperation – 3.5 W/m2 S2: Only Energy Intensive Sectors of Non-OECD – 3.5 W/m2 S2B: Only Electricity Sectors of Non-OECD – 4.0 W/m2 • More electricity consumed in S2 wrt S1 by industry in all countries, and by residential in OECD only. No increase of electricity consumed in Non-OECD in S2B • Electricity generation by plants with CCS and renewable in all scenarios • Increase of emissions of the residential sector of Non-OECD countries in both scenarios: biomass consumed in residential is transferred to industry and power plants, and replaced by coal • No rebound of oil consumption in Non-OECD • Displacement of gas extraction in S2B when Supply is excluded form the Climate agreement (AFR, FSU)

  18. Other effects; leakages? • Industrial productions and trade variations of S2 (where industry of Non-OECD is covered by the Climate agreement) follow the same trends as in S1 (full cooperation) • There is displacement of some energy intensive industries in S2B when industry is excluded from the Climate agreement (AFR, MEA), but remains moderate • No increase of emissions thanks to the decrease of World oil consumption  less extraction  less emissions • Macro-economic costs reduced for non-OECD countries

  19. Macro-economic impacts(surplus in % of households final consumption) • S2 more costly for developed countries than the full coop (S1), since the CO2 price is higher • Developing countries are better: households are exempted from carbon taxation and benefit from the decrease of fossil fuel prices vs Reference • Energy exporting countries are especially better since the World energy consumption does not decrease so much • S2B: smaller costs (more acceptable?), but less strict environmental target

  20. Conclusion • Fine technology and energy analysis (mix, prices, technical progress) provided by ETSAP-TIAM • Fine macro-economic analysis (GDP, sectoral outputs) provided by GEMINI-E3. Finer representation of the variations of the demands for energy services, especially at the regional level (possible displacement of the production). • Crucial (and not easy): Connections between the two models • Complexity in the understanding of the results, especially the macro-economic ones, since GEMINI-E3 is the most altered model in the coupled approach

More Related