the impact of post 2012 climate policies on european air quality kristin rypdal, cicero
DESCRIPTION
Background Project initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministers running 2005 and 2006 CICERO (Nathan A. Rive), DMU (Jesper Bak), IVL (Stefan Åström) and SYKE (Finland) Using the macroeconomic model GRACE at CICERO and the RAINS model Ongoing “post-Kyoto polcies” projects All scenarios use the same RAINS technical measures in CLE CAF Preliminary results – plan expansion of scopeTRANSCRIPT
The impact of post 2012 climate Policies on European air quality
Kristin Rypdal, CICERO
Objective
• To evaluate how options for post-Kyoto climate policies affects emissions and effects of air pollution across Europe– Structural changes in energy use– Shifts in emissions between regions– Costs
• Previous studies has shown that climate policies reduces costs and redistribute CO2 emissions to regions where abatement costs are less– SO2 more influenced than NOx
Background
• Project initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministers running 2005 and 2006
• CICERO (Nathan A. Rive), DMU (Jesper Bak), IVL (Stefan Åström) and SYKE (Finland)
• Using the macroeconomic model GRACE at CICERO and the RAINS model
• Ongoing “post-Kyoto polcies” projects
• All scenarios use the same RAINS technical measures in CLE CAF
• Preliminary results – plan expansion of scope
Options
• Cap on greenhouse gas emissions in Europe– (none)– As Kyoto– Further reductions from Kyoto (1 % per year)
• No cap on emissions in eastern Europe
• Emission trading scheme: Additional sectors
• Additional policies (taxes on non-ETS sectors)
• Trading with non-EU countries– Allowance of hot air trade
• CDM not considered
CO2 emissions
EU
0,000
0,200
0,400
0,600
0,800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
S1S2S3S4S5S6S7S8noTS8T
CO2 emissions
Rest of Europe
0,000
0,100
0,200
0,300
0,400
0,500
0,600
0,700
0,800
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
S1S2S3S4S5S6S7S8noTS8T
SO2 emissions (2020/2010)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
No, Sw, Fi,Dk
EU-12 EU-10 RestEurope
2020/2010
Further reductions
Kyoto forewer
No EE cli. Pol.
NOx emissions (2020/2010)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
No, Sw, Fi,Dk
EU-12 EU-10 RestEurope
Further reductions
Kyoto forewer
No EE cli. Pol.
SO2 emissions (2020/2010)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
No, Sw, Fi,Dk
EU-12 EU-10 Rest Europe
Current ETS
Expanded ETS
Additional tax
NOx emissions (2020/2010)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
No, Sw, Fi,Dk
EU-12 EU-10 Rest Europe
Current ETS
Expanded ETS
Additional tax
Effects
Costs
• Costs of additional RAINS technical measures (MFR scenario) to reach the emission level of each of the climate policy scenarios,
Total Alternative Costs for SO2 and NOx Emissions, 2011-2020 (relative to S4)
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
No, Sw, Fi, Dk EU-12 EU-10 Rest of Europe
Mill
ion
Euro
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8, No trade
S8, trade
Conclusions
• Post 2012 climate policies are unsettled and introduces an uncertainty about costs for revisions of ceilings
• The effect of climate policies on air quality in the second commitment period (or post-Kyoto) is smaller than in the first– Especially SO2 in Nordic countries + EU-12, NOx the same– Very strict targets or no policy at all are unlikely
• Eastern-European participation in emission trading and their policies form a large uncertainty as such trading will redistribute emissions and have large consequences for environmental effects
• Large share of CDM projects means that more technical measures are needed to reduce air pollutant emissions
• Role of Carbon Capture and Storage?
More work…
SO2 Emission Reductions Compared to S4, No, Sw, Fi, Dk
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 No trad S8 yes trad
kton
/ ye
ar
No, Sw, Fi, Dk, 2010 No, Sw, Fi, Dk, 2020
SO2 Emission Reductions Compared to S4, EU-12
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 No trad S8 yes trad
kton
/ ye
ar
EU-12, 2010 EU-12, 2020
SO2 Emission Reductions Compared to S4, EU-10
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 No trad S8 yes trad
kton
/ ye
ar
EU-10, 2010 EU-10, 2020
SO2 Emission Reductions Compared to S4, Rest of Europe
-900
-800
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 No trad S8 yes trad
kton
/ ye
ar
Rest. Europe, 2010 Rest Europe, 2020
NOx Emission Reductions Compared to S4, No, Sw, Fi, Dk
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 Notrad
S8 yestrad
kton
/ ye
ar
No, Sw, Fi, Dk, 2010 No, Sw, Fi, Dk, 2020
Nox Emissions reduction Compared to S4, EU-12
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 Notrad
S8 yestrad
kton
/ ye
ar
EU-12, 2010 EU-12, 2020
NOx Emission Reductions Compared to S4, EU-10
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 Notrad
S8 yestrad
kton
/ ye
ar
EU-10, 2010 EU-10, 2020
NOx Emission Reduction compared to S4, rest of Europe
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 Notrad
S8 yestrad
kton
/ ye
ar
Rest. Europe, 2010 Rest Europe, 2020