iea-enel workshop oct2006行業(yè)減排與電力行業(yè)減排的很多相關(guān)問題barata session 4

1、Sector-Based Approach for “Post-2012”:Electricity Sector and Major IndustriesJake Schmidt, International Program Manager Ned Helme, PresidentPedro Barata, Senior FellowCenter for Clean Air Policy*IEA-ENEL Workshop: Sectoral Approaches for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in the Power Sector 30-31 October 2

2、006Rome, ItalyPresentation Outline Sector-based approachWhat is it? Overview of sector GHG emissions and projectionsGlobal, Non-Annex I Overall structural optionsSector-wide & Country-based sectoral “Straw” sector proposalCovered sectors and countriesEstablishing the “No Lose” Target Technology Fina

3、nce PackageApplication to Developed Countries, Emissions TradinM Sectoral Programs potential to maintain 450ppm pathThree Global Scenarios & Preliminary ResultsAbout the Center for Clean Air PolicyNon-profit Washington, DC, Prague, and Brussels based environmental think-tank committed to advancing p

4、ragmatic and cost- effective air quality and climate policy through analysis, dialogue, and educationLeader in several international climate initiatives on international emissions trading, the CDM, and post-2012 optionszzDialogue on Future International Actions to Address Global Climate Change (the

5、FAD) brings together senior climate negotiators from 30 countries to discuss options for post-2012 climate regimeInvolved in a number of capacity building and analytical projects in developing countries, including China, India, Brazil, Mexico, and the CaribbeanLead analyst on project to help design

6、the EU CO2 emissions trading system and MRV program.zzWhat is a Sectoral Approach to Post-2012GHG Reductions?Bottom-up method for encouraging developing country sectoral (e.g. steel, cement, electricity) pledges and for deriving Annex I country targetsBased on analysis of what is technologically fea

7、sible and economically cost-effective in each industrial sector both globally and in each countryFor developing countries, goal is no-lose target pledge to reach intensity level in given sector, rewarded if achieved, no penalty if not achievedFor A1, creates building block for next national targetGl

8、obal Sector GHG Emissions (without LUCF)& Sectoral CO2 Projection2000ProjectionsUnallocated Non- CO2 Gas3%Other sectors 6%Residential & Commercial 8%40000Electricity 25%35000300002500020000Agriculture 14%Unallocated Autoproducers 3%1500010000Other Energy Industries, 7%5000Transport 15%Iron & Steel,

9、2%Chemical & Petrochemical,02000201020202030Other Industries, 4%Aluminum2,%0%YearCement, 3% Paper, Pulp andPrinting, 0%Non-CO2Industrial Processes, 2%Source: Authors calculation, see Schmidt et al., 2006EnergyIndustryTranspo rtationOther Sectors*Non-Annex I Sector GHG Emissions (w/o& Sectoral CO2 Pr

10、ojectionLUCF)2000Projections20000Electricity 21%Unallocated Non- CO2 Gas9%17500Other sectors 9%1500012500Unallocated Autoproducers 1%Residential & Commercial 5%10000Other Energy Industries, 8%75005000Iron & Steel, 3%Chemical & Petrochemical 3%Aluminum, 0%Cement, 6%Paper, Pulp and Printing, 0%Agricul

11、ture 19%250002000201020202030YearTransport9%Other Industries 6%Non-CO2IndustrialProcesses, 1%Source: Authors calculation, see Schmidt et al., 2006EnergyIndustryTransportationOther Sectors*Establishing the “No-Lose” Sector Target A voluntary “no lose” intensity target (e.g., CO2 / ton of steel) is es

12、tablishedNo penalty for not meeting the pledge Emissions reductions beyond the “voluntary pledge” are eligible for sale“Contribution to the AtmosphereEligible for SaleAs emissions reductions credits (ERCs) for sale to developed countriesVoluntary intensity target effectively becomes the countryscred

13、itinM”) baseline“Technology Financing and AssistancePackage” Industrialized countries, international financial institutions (IFIs), and export credit agencies (ECAs) provide a package of technology finance and assistance incentives to help participating non-Annex I countries establish and meet more

14、aggressive “no lose” targets Designed to make these new technologies available to firms in developing countries while providing reasonable profits and property rights protections for the industrialized-country entities that provide the technologies. Scope of amount based upon bottom-up assessment in

15、 targeted sectorsDesigned to leverage private sector financeDiffering financing tools (e.g., “soft” loans, grants, etc.) would be utilized as appropriateFinancing will decline (and end) over time as these technologies become commercially viable due to economies of scale (e.g., German wind costs) Pac

16、kage could include:commitments to demonstration and pilot projectsa pool of concessionary financing with WB, ECAs, loans, grants, & securitization support for development of small- and medium-sized enterprisesCapacity building Etc.Negotiation ProcessNegotiation of the program could proceed as follow

17、s:Agree on which countries will participate minimum global coverage needed in each sectorIndependent agency defines energy intensity benchmark for a given sector as starting point for negotiations a la Triptych EU processNegotiate a GHG intensity using such factors as the energy intensity BAT, fuel

18、mix, and cost one for new facilities and one for existing in each sectorLink the program to a technology finance package assistance from tech finance is incentive to stronger pledge levelsLink to Annex I target setting process Agree on structure of trading, link to CDM1)2)3)4)5)6)Key Operational Que

19、stions? What sectors? Country-based or Industry-based? Structure of the target? Creation of emissions reduction credits? What role for Annex I? Role and structure of a “technology financing and assistance package”? How does the sectoral pledge and financing package relate to the CDM?Which Sectors Co

20、vered? Program could focus on the Energy and Major Industry Sectorselectricity, iron & steel, aluminum, oil refining, cement & lime, paper, pulp & printingrelatively small number of entities, easier data collection, relatively homogenous products (except oil refining and pulp & paper), and operate i

21、n international trade (except electricity)33% of non-Annex I emissions (2000; w/o LUCF) 20% of global emissions (2000; w/o LUCF)Bottom-up definitions (e.g., electricity facilities 20 MW) used to define individual facilities involved in the systemOnly direct emissions (e.g., on-site fuel combustion)

22、included for the sectorsSource: Authors calculation, see Schmidt et al., 2006Small # of Large Electricity FacilitiesNumber of Non-Annex I Facilities with Greater than 100 KT CO2/year (“top 20”)1140 facilities in the “top 10” countries; additional 304 facilities in the “top 20” countriesSource: IEA G

23、HG CO2 Database v.2006# oPower500462450400350300250193200150101100685671507355445040405026261192713290Country based Structure Program will aim to include all major developing countries, but at least 80% of sectors emissions Country responsible for tracking and ensuring “no lose” targets met Variety

24、of approaches could be used: Ten developing countries w/ the highest emissions in each sector Sufficient countries to cover 80% of sectors DC emissions Key is to cover enough of the sector to address leakage concerns Select internationally competitive industry sectors - for many sectors, small numbe

25、r of countries account for a large share of emissionsPossible Thresholds: “Top 10”z Small number of non-Annex I countries account for sizeable share of non-Annex I and global emissions for these sectorsSource: Authors calculation; see Schmidt et al., 2006Note: non-metallic minerals is cement and lim

26、estone; non-ferrous metals is mostly aluminum Note: See appendix for list of countries implied by this thresholdNumber of Countries2015104710651092273440Number of participating countries required to cover 80-90% of non-Annex I GHG emissions in particular sectors in 2000.80% of NA1 Sectoral Emissions

27、90% of NA1 Sectoral EmissionsAlternative Structure:Global Industry-based Covers all or major actors in the global sector to address concerns of:Leakage: e.g., firms moving operations from covered to non-covered countriesCompetitiveness: e.g., one firm is covered, but its competitor are not We sugges

28、t that a sectoral approach be country-based since:A small number of countries generally responsible for the vast majority of the GHG emissions in each sector thus competition concerns addressed through participation of small number of countriesCountries have much clearer legal authority to ensure th

29、at firms operating within their borders comply with program requirements establishing a new legal institution to enforce sector-wide targets would likely require lengthy and contentious international negotiations.How is the Target Established?Experts assess and define energy-intensity benchmarks in

30、each sector to use as a starting point for discussions.zDefined as energy intensity of commercially available technologySeparate benchmarks could be established one based upon technological potential and the other reflecting costSeparate benchmarks for new and existing facilitiesReflects a limited n

31、umber of the major processes within the sector Updated regularly to reflect changes in technologyNon-annex I countries pledge a carbon-intensity level that they can meet without assistance.zbased upon the benchmark, fuel mix, impact on competitiveness of their products, and other factors (e.g., ener

32、gy security, air quality, and sustainable development)Annex I countries negotiate with developing countries on specific financial and other supportthrough a Technology Finance and Assistance Package to encourage non-Annex I countries to ultimately commit to stricter “no-lose” emissions intensity lev

33、els.Likely negotiation will produce different “no lose” targets for each country, but will begin from the same starting pointthe benchmarkzEmissions Trading Emissions Reduction Credits (ERCs) Earned sector-wide; managed by individual participating countries Need to be converted from rate-based to a

34、fixed quantity of reductions Ex-post conversion conducted every two years ERCs equal difference b/t “no lose” target and actual intensity target multiplied by actual operations in previous two years Therefore ERCs calculated two years into the five year target period and at the end ERCs eligible int

35、o other trading systems (e.g., EU ETS)Developed CountriesRetain “hard economy-wide targets” (e.g., 30% below 1990 levels) use Benchmarks as building block similar to the EU Triptych approachBottom-up development of the sectors AAUs (e.g., national allocation plans) using the energy-intensity benchma

36、rkOther sectors targets would be developed and added to the electricity and major industry AAUs to come up w/ the natl targetHelps “Levels the playing field” since the covered sector in both developing and developed countries start w/ the same basis for their target settingSome differentiation is li

37、kely, but moves the intl process forward in “l(fā)eveling the playing field”Trading allowed to provide covered sectors flexibility to improve cost-effectiveness, helps to offset disadvantage that DCs have sectoral intensity targets rather than hard targetsFurther, for some sectors developing countries a

38、re as or more efficient than their developed country counterpartsEmissions Implicationsof the Sectoral Program “Top-down” analysis conducted by ECOFYSEvaluated implications of sector-based proposal on emissions level in key countries & global CO2 stabilization trajectories Data, Sectors, & Countries

39、 used in the analysisData: physical production, energy use, and GHG emissions Sectors: electricity, iron & steel, cement 91% of emissions covered in this proposalCountries: Annex I: EU-15, USA, Japan, Canada, Russia Non-Annex I: Brazil, China, India, Mexico, South Africa, South Korea 72% of total gl

40、obal emissions; 79% of three sectors global emissions Three Global Scenarios“Mild,” “Strong,” and “Sectoral Only”Three Global Scenarios Annex I countries economy-wide emissions are limited to fixed quantities NOT implied that emissions reductions must be achieved Domestic emissions could exceed thes

41、e levels if additional ERCs were purchasedAnnex I countries can purchase ERCs from both covered sectors w/ “No Lose” target or other sectors (e.g., transportation through sectoral CDM)ElectricityReduce carbon intensity of production (C/kWh) by 3% per year; growth in electricity production reduced by

42、 0.5% for EE improvementsIron & SteelConvergence in CO2/t steel by 2025 to0.80 (todays avg. 1.63)CementConvergence in CO2/tcement by 2020 to0.60 (todays avg. 0.78)ScenarioCondition“Mild”Annex I excl. USA-15% below 1990 level in2020USA+10% above 1990 level in2020Non-Annex IReference“Strong”Annex I ex

43、cl. USA-30% below 1990 level in2020USA+0% at 1990 level in 2020Non-Annex I“Sectoral” for electricity, iron & steel and cement“Sector only”All countries“Sectoral” for electricity, iron & steel and cementPreliminary Results: Through 2020525006000Reference MildOnly sectoralStrong50000500047500400045000

44、42500300040000200037500100035000032500Iron and steelCementElectricity30000275001990200020102020Non-Annex I country model GHG emissions in 2020 in the electricity, cement, and iron and steel sectors.Global GHG emissions under the sectoral scenarios.MMtCO2eMMtCO2Reference CaseSector ProgramImplication

45、s for Emissions StabilizationLevels: Preliminary Results Required reductions for global CO2 stabilization levels after 2020: 450ppmStrong: 2.2% per year; Mild: 6.5% per year 550ppmStrong: 0.6% per year; Mild: 0.9% per yeaSource: Hhne et al., 2005Global CO2 emissions (GtC)14121086Reference4MildOnly s

46、ectoral2Strong01990200020102020203020402050Global CO2 emissions required to stabilize atmospheric CO2 concentrations at 450 ppmv in the sectoral models.Conclusions Sectoral No-Lose target approach can maintain needed progress in 2020 to stay on course for 450 ppm CO2 concentration goal provided A1 c

47、ountries take strong targets for 2020 No-lose target has political and cost-effectiveness attractions simplifies current CDM issues “No lose” sectoral targets have garnered significant interest among developing countries and other PartiesMentioned in several interventions to the UNFCCC Dialogue (e.g

48、., Mexico and South Africa) and garnered quiet interest among other countries in CCAP FAD Begins to move intl process forward by:Recognizing and encouraging “unilateral actions” by developing countries (e.g., Chinas vehicle efficiency standard)Addressing leakage and competition since all the major p

49、layers in a given sector participate and starting point for target setting is same energy intensity benchmarkCovering all facilities in a given sector (not just the ones reducing emissions as in the CDM) Encouraging developing country “contributions to the atmosphere”Providing specific and targeted

50、technology finance for advanced and more expensive technologies Potentially viable for other secotrs as well, e.g.:Vehicle efficiencyAppliance and lighting effiiciencyReferencesFor more information, visit our website: /international/future.htmPaper on proposal: Schmidt, J., N. Helme, J.

51、Lee. (2006). Sector-based Approach to the Post-2012 Climate Change Policy Architecture. Future Actions Dialogue Working Paper. August. Available at: /international/Sector%20Straw%20Proposal%20-%20FINAL%20for%20FAD%20Working%20Paper%20%7E%208%2025%2006.pdfHmphreys, K. and M. Mahasen

52、an (2002). Toward a Sustainable Cement Industry: Substudy 8: Climate Change, commissioned by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Battelle.IEA. (2003). CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion, 1970-2001. Paris, France. IEA. (2006). IEA GHG CO2 Emissions Database, v.2006.Marland, G., T.

53、A. Boden, and R. J. Andres. (2003). Global, Regional, and National Fossil Fuel CO2 Emissions. In Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A. Available online at: /trends/emis/meth_reg.htm.Schaefer, D. O., D. Godwin, and J. Harnisch (2004). Estimating Future Emissions and Potential Reductions of HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. Energy Journal.Scheehle, E. A. and Kruger, D. (2004). “Global antropogenic methane and nitrous oxide emissions”. Energy J