skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: The Value of CCS under Current Policy Scenarios: NDCs and Beyond

Abstract

This paper describes preliminary results of analysis using the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM) to evaluate the potential role of CCS in addressing emissions reduction targets. Scenarios are modelled using the Paris-Increased Ambition (PIA) case developed by Fawcett et al. (2015), and a more aggressive Paris Two-Degree Ambition (P2A) case. Both cases are based upon nationally determined contributions (NDCs) agreed to at the UNFCCC Conference of Parties (COP-21) in December 2015, coupled with additional mitigation effort beyond the 2030 Paris timeframe, through the end of the century. Analysis of CCS deployment and abatement costs under both policy scenarios suggests that, as modelled, having CCS in the technological portfolio could reduce the global cost of addressing emissions reduction targets specified under the policy scenario by trillions of dollars, primarily by enabling a smoother and lower-cost transition to next-generation technologies. Through the end of the century, total global abatement costs associated with the PIA case – with five percent annual reduction in emission intensity and reaching 2.2 degrees by 2100 – are reduced by $15 trillion USD in the scenario where CCS is available to deploy by 2025 and remains available through 2100, reflecting a 47 percent savings in the cost ofmore » climate change abatement. Under the more ambitious P2A case, with 8 percent annual reduction in emission intensity and reaching 1.9 degrees by 2100, the availability of CCS reduces global abatement costs by $22 trillion USD through the end of the century, again nearly halving the costs of addressing the policy, relative to achieving the same target using an energy portfolio that does not include CCS. PIA and P2A scenarios with CCS result in 1,250 and 1,580 GtCO2 of global geologic storage by the end of the century, respectively.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1379436
Report Number(s):
PNNL-SA-121411
Journal ID: ISSN 1876-6102; AA9020100
DOE Contract Number:
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Energy Procedia; Journal Volume: 114; Journal Issue: C
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY

Citation Formats

Davidson, Casie L., Dahowski, Robert T., McJeon, Haewon C., Clarke, Leon E., Iyer, Gokul C., and Muratori, Matteo. The Value of CCS under Current Policy Scenarios: NDCs and Beyond. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1885.
Davidson, Casie L., Dahowski, Robert T., McJeon, Haewon C., Clarke, Leon E., Iyer, Gokul C., & Muratori, Matteo. The Value of CCS under Current Policy Scenarios: NDCs and Beyond. United States. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1885.
Davidson, Casie L., Dahowski, Robert T., McJeon, Haewon C., Clarke, Leon E., Iyer, Gokul C., and Muratori, Matteo. 2017. "The Value of CCS under Current Policy Scenarios: NDCs and Beyond". United States. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1885.
@article{osti_1379436,
title = {The Value of CCS under Current Policy Scenarios: NDCs and Beyond},
author = {Davidson, Casie L. and Dahowski, Robert T. and McJeon, Haewon C. and Clarke, Leon E. and Iyer, Gokul C. and Muratori, Matteo},
abstractNote = {This paper describes preliminary results of analysis using the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM) to evaluate the potential role of CCS in addressing emissions reduction targets. Scenarios are modelled using the Paris-Increased Ambition (PIA) case developed by Fawcett et al. (2015), and a more aggressive Paris Two-Degree Ambition (P2A) case. Both cases are based upon nationally determined contributions (NDCs) agreed to at the UNFCCC Conference of Parties (COP-21) in December 2015, coupled with additional mitigation effort beyond the 2030 Paris timeframe, through the end of the century. Analysis of CCS deployment and abatement costs under both policy scenarios suggests that, as modelled, having CCS in the technological portfolio could reduce the global cost of addressing emissions reduction targets specified under the policy scenario by trillions of dollars, primarily by enabling a smoother and lower-cost transition to next-generation technologies. Through the end of the century, total global abatement costs associated with the PIA case – with five percent annual reduction in emission intensity and reaching 2.2 degrees by 2100 – are reduced by $15 trillion USD in the scenario where CCS is available to deploy by 2025 and remains available through 2100, reflecting a 47 percent savings in the cost of climate change abatement. Under the more ambitious P2A case, with 8 percent annual reduction in emission intensity and reaching 1.9 degrees by 2100, the availability of CCS reduces global abatement costs by $22 trillion USD through the end of the century, again nearly halving the costs of addressing the policy, relative to achieving the same target using an energy portfolio that does not include CCS. PIA and P2A scenarios with CCS result in 1,250 and 1,580 GtCO2 of global geologic storage by the end of the century, respectively.},
doi = {10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1885},
journal = {Energy Procedia},
number = C,
volume = 114,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month = 7
}
  • This paper considers the effect of several key parameters of low carbon energy technologies on the cost of abatement. A methodology for determining the minimum level of performance required for a parameter to have a statistically significant impact on CO2 abatement cost is developed and used to evaluate the impact of eight key parameters of low carbon energy supply technologies on the cost of CO2 abatement. The capital cost of nuclear technology is found to have the greatest impact of the parameters studied. The cost of biomass and CCS technologies also have impacts, while their efficiencies have little, if any.more » Sensitivity analysis of the results with respect to population, GDP, and CO2 emission constraint show that the minimum performance level and impact of nuclear technologies is consistent across the socioeconomic scenarios studied, while the other technology parameters show different performance under higher population, lower GDP scenarios. Solar technology was found to have a small impact, and then only at very low costs. These results indicate that the cost of nuclear is the single most important driver of abatement cost, and that trading efficiency for cost may make biomass and CCS technologies more competitive.« less
  • This article presents the synthesis of results from the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum Study 27, an inter-comparison of 19 energy-economy and integrated assessment models. The study investigated the value of individual mitigation technologies such as energy intensity improvements, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), nuclear power, solar and wind power and bioenergy for climate mitigation. Achieving atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration targets at 450 and 550 ppm CO2 equivalent requires massive greenhouse gas emissions reductions. A fragmented policy approach at the level of current ambition is inconsistent with these targets. The availability of a negative emissions technology, in most models biofuels withmore » CCS, proved to be a key element for achieving the climate targets. Robust characteristics of the transformation of the energy system are increased energy intensity improvements and the electrification of energy end use coupled with a fast decarbonization of the electricity sector. Non-electric energy end use is hardest to decarbonize, particularly in the transport sector. Technology is a key element of climate mitigation. Versatile technologies such as CCS and bioenergy have largest value, due in part to their combined ability to produce negative emissions. The individual value of low-carbon power technologies is more limited due to the many alternatives in the sector. The scale of the energy transformation is larger for the 450 ppm than for the 550 ppm CO2e target. As a result, the achievability and the costs of the 450 ppm target are more sensitive to variations in technology variability. Mitigation costs roughly double when moving from 550 ppm to 450 ppm CO2e, but remain below 3% of GDP for most models.« less
  • The semileptonic decays {tau}{sup -}{yields}{mu}{sup -}M(M={pi}{sup 0},{eta},{eta}{sup '}) could be sensitive probes for new physics scenarios with lepton flavor violation (LFV). Motivated by the recent Belle measurement, we investigate these decays in the type III two-Higgs-doublet model, R-parity violating supersymmetric models, and flavor changing Z{sup '} models with family nonuniversal couplings, respectively. In these new physics scenarios, there are LFV couplings at tree level. Our results have shown that the decays are very sensitive to the LFV couplings and could be enhanced to the present experimental sensitivities. We have derived tighter bounds on relevant couplings of these models, which maymore » be useful for further relevant studies.« less
  • An important commitment in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) for so-called Annex I Parties (OECD plus Central and Eastern Europe) is the communication on climate change policies. A detailed description of policies and measures and specific estimates of their effects on projected anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks are crucial chapters in each Annex I Party communication. This article focuses on the Netherlands` climate change policy-making process with respect to projections of greenhouse gases (GHG). A main element of this process is the periodic monitoring of the progress of climate change policy, including assessmentmore » of effects of implemented measures, updating the validity of assumptions made, and analysis of structural economic changes. Another element of this policy-making process is analysis of the cost-effectiveness of possible mitigation options and evaluation of the impacts of these options. Several monitoring and analysis instruments and modeling tools used in this process are discussed, as is the broader framework. Attention is also given to the FCCC review process and its relevance for the Netherlands` policy-making process. 6 refs., 1 fig., 3 tabs.« less
  • We have investigated three policy scenarios, entailing different degrees of commitment to improve energy efficiency to address the energy, economic and environmental challenges faced by the US industry. The scenarios reflect alternative views of the urgency with which policymakers and the American people will view these challenges and the policies they will seek. The industry consumes about 37 percent of primary energy in the United States, and is expected to grow under business-as-usual conditions. The policy scenarios find energy efficiency improvements from 7 percent to 17 percent beyond business as usual by 2020 for the Moderate and Advanced scenarios, respectively.more » The study demonstrates that there are substantial potentials for further efficiency improvement in the industry. However, an integrated policy framework that accounts for the different characteristics of industrial sector decision-makers, technologies and sectors is needed to achieve these potentials.« less