|
Title:
|
|
A technology approach to CO2 emission reduction objectives
|
|
|
|
Author(s):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published by:
|
Publication date:
|
|
ECN
Policy Studies
|
1996
|
|
|
|
ECN report number:
|
Document type:
|
|
ECN-RX--96-056
|
Other
|
|
|
|
Number of pages:
|
Full text:
|
|
31
|
Download PDF
|
Abstract:
At the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP-1) under theFCCC, the Annex 1 countries were called to set quantified emission limitation
and reduction objectives (QELROs) for greenhouse gases within specified
time-frames. Several kinds of QELROs, based on different concepts, have been
suggested for the period after the year 2000. The suggested QELROs range from
those expressed in terms of emission levels to be achieved in a specific year
to those which relate to efficiency improvement objectives. For policymakers
it is not an easy task to decide which concept for a QELRO is preferable,
which level of emission reduction should be aimed at, which time-frame should
be considered and which level of differentiation between countries is
appropriate. For their decisions on QELROs, policymakers consider if the
consequences are justly distributed over countries and if the required
policies are feasible to implement. Many studies have been performed to
estimate the cost of CO2 emission abatement for a country. Such studies can
provide key information to climate agreement negotiators. The studies have
shown that countries differ substantially in their capabilities to limit
future CO2 emissions. A few international programmes have tried to perform
comparable CO2 abatement studies for different countries. The results from
those studies can be used for the discussion on QELROs as they can provide
quantitative estimates of the consequences of different QELROs. In this paper
an illustration is given, drawing upon the results of the IEA-ETSAP study.
The objectives of this paper are twofold: (1) to critically discuss the
relevance of national technology based models for the QELRO discussion; and
(2) to present and discuss the consequences of 3 different QELROs for 6
countries and for 3 time horizons, as extracted from the illustrative
example. 4 figs., 7 tabs., 1 appendix, 6 refs.
Back to List