post-2012 emission reduction targets

81
What constitutes a fair level of effort for individual Parties? Ben Gleisner: [email protected] Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Upload: benita

Post on 03-Feb-2016

34 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets. What constitutes a fair level of effort for individual Parties? Ben Gleisner: [email protected]. Overview. Concept of equity within the UNFCCC and Kyoto International approaches used to determine post-2012 targets Methodology/criteria - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

What constitutes a fair level of effort for individual Parties?

Ben Gleisner: [email protected]

Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Page 2: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Overview

• Concept of equity within the UNFCCC and Kyoto• International approaches used to determine post-2012 targets

• Methodology/criteria• Results• Strengths and weaknesses

• Integrating various elements into a conceptual framework to ‘Assess Comparable Effort’ (ACE)

• Generating results in an interactive model – ‘Assessing Comparable Effort – Interactive Support Tool’ (ACE-IST)

• An indicator/proxy based approach

Page 3: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol

• Article 3.1 of the UNFCCC states action should be taken….. ‘on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibility and respective capability’

• Current Kyoto targets range from -8% to +8% compared to 1990

• Bali Action Plan includes reference that mitigation efforts need to be made while ‘ensuring comparability of effort’

• European Commission also have agreed to targets ‘provided that other developed countries commit themselves to comparable emission reductions’

Page 4: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

International Approaches

1) European Commission

2) The Japanese Government

3) Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

4) International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Page 5: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

European Commission Proposal

The EU has proposed a 30% reduction target by 2020 compared to 1990 for Annex 1 as a whole

The EU is willing to take on a reduction target of 30% if the future international agreement is sufficiently ambitious

Four indicators used as criteria to assess comparability:1) Income (GDP/Capita, 2005)2) Efficiency (GHG/GDP, 2005) 3) Population trends (1990 – 2005)4) Past efforts (1990 – 2005 growth in gross emissions)

Page 6: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

European Commission Proposal

Page 7: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

European Commission Proposal

Targets – results from equal weighting of each criteria

Page 8: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

European Commission Proposal

Strengths of approach

•Simple – uses currently available data •Equitable – attempts to factor in a range of different criteria

Weaknesses of approach

•No rationale for weighting chosen within and between criteria•Past efforts should be relative to Kyoto Target•‘Mitigation potential (‘efficiency’) not well captured with GHG/GDP’ [OECD]•Costs of meeting targets are varied and could be perceived as unequitable

Page 9: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

European Commission Proposal

Economic implications of meeting the 2020 target

Page 10: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Japanese Government’s proposal

Page 11: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Japanese Government’s proposal

Targets should be based on:

1)Sectoral mitigation potential (efficiency indices)• Residential and Commercial• Power generation• Transport• Industry – Steel, Aluminium and Cement

2)An assessment of total costs of meeting target as % of GDP – using marginal abatement cost curves

Page 12: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Strengths of approach

•Acknowledges that costs are a key part of an assessment of what is fair•Uses sectoral-based analysis to determine potential (not GDP/GHG)

Weaknesses of approach

•Only takes into consideration ‘cost’ as a basis for equity•Data to compare sectoral efficiencies may be difficult to find •Do not propose how sectoral efficiencies could be used/compared against aggregate costs/MACCs

Japanese Government’s proposal

Page 13: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

Page 14: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

Two conceptual approaches for “comparable efforts” :

1. Equal effort: based on country’s sharing the effort or burden according to a defined indicator.

• Efforts are needed to change the current state or to change a likely baseline or reference development

• For example, equal reduction below BAU, equal MAC and equal costs as %-GDP

2. Equal endpoint: the countries’ effort is based on achieving the “same state in the future”• For example, equal emissions intensity per sector, or per

capita emissions, Triptych.

Page 15: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

Results for countries are relatively similar under each approach

Page 16: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

The results change for some countries using different models

Page 17: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Strengths of approach

•Uses a range of different criteria •Uses sensitivity analysis to show how different models change results•Generates a set of (relatively) independent results

Weaknesses of approach

•Only uses 2 models in their sensitivity analysis •No transparency of underlying data•Does not integrate criteria – i.e. only cost, or only GHG/capita•Does not provide results for smaller countries – like New Zealand

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

Page 18: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Page 19: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Large independent modelling exercise

Post-2012 targets (2020) for Annex 1 Parties are based on the costs of meeting the target, as a % of GDP

The primary inputs to this model are:

• Baseline projections in 2020• Marginal abatement costs in 2020• GDP projections in 2020

Page 20: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

1990 2005 2020Yea r

Em

issi

on

s re

lati

ve t

o 1

990 A us tralia

New Z ealand

Canada

Norw ay

United S tates of A meric a

S w itz erland

J apan

A nnex-I

EU27

Rus s ian Federation

Ukraine

Baseline projections out to 2020

Page 21: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Mitigation costs in 2020

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Page 22: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

-0.2%

-0.1%

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

-60%-40%-20%0%20%40%60%

E mis s ions re lativ e to 1990

To

tal c

ost

(s

har

e o

f GD

P20

20)

A us tralia New Zealand C anada

Norway United S tates of A meric a S witz erland

J apan E U27 R us s ian F ederation

Ukraine

Using the total cost of abatement define targets as % of GDP

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Page 23: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Strengths of approach

•Data is publicly available •Measures the cost of meeting targets – a key factor in assessing equity•Requesting from Parties more accurate data

Weaknesses of approach

•Focuses only on costs•Underlying MACC data has been questioned, in some cases

Page 24: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Within the negotiations there is a need for a framework within which effort can be measured

The concept of effort being measured in terms of the costs faced by a country in meeting a specific target is widely accepted

However, other criteria also need to be integrated, to ensure compatibility with Article 3 of the Convention.

Initial presentation on this framework in Poznan (see UNFCCC)

Page 25: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Estimating the costs faced by a country• The cost that a country will face in meeting a target is a

function of:

1. BAU emission projections during the commitment period Population/GDP growth Emission intensity

2. Cost of reducing emissions below BAU Structure of the economy – domestic emission profile

and sectoral mitigation potential – “domestic MAC”

Page 26: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

“1990 Target”

“10% below

1990 Target”

Do these targets represent a comparable effort?

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

Emissions

Page 27: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?

Page 28: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

BAU/baseline projectionsHistoric emissions

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

Target

Target

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

Emissions

BAU

BAU

Page 29: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

Page 30: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

Page 31: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

Page 32: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

BAU/baseline projectionsHistoric emissions

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

Target

18MT or

28% of 1990

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

Emissions

BAU

Page 33: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Emissions

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

Historic emissions

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

16MT or

22% of 1990

Target

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

BAU

BAU/baseline projections

Page 34: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

BAU/baseline projectionsHistoric emissions

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20 18MT

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

Emissions

16MT

Page 35: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

Country A 18MT Country B 16MT

Page 36: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 18MT Country B 16MT

Page 37: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

MAC curves

5

16%

Page 38: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

MAC curves

Target A

5

16%

18

Page 39: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

MAC curves

Target ATarget B

5

16%

18 16

Page 40: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

MAC curves

Target ATarget B

5

16%

18 16

price of carbon

Page 41: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

0

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

purchase credits

Reductions in 2020

(MT)

(Relative to 1990)

price of carbon

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Target A

8% 24% 33% 42% 50%

5

16%

10 15 20 25 30

Total Cost

18

Page 42: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

0

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)

(Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

price of carbon

Total Cost

Target B

8% 24% 33% 42% 50%

5

16%

10 15 20 25 3016

Page 43: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

0

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)

(Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

price of carbon

Total Cost

Target B

8% 24% 33% 42% 50%

5

16%

10 15 20 25 3016

$100million

Page 44: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Total Cost

price of carbon

5

16%

Target A

18

$200million

Page 45: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 18MT Country B 16MT

Country A $200m Country B $100m

Page 46: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 18MT Country B 16MT

Country A $200m Country B $100m GDP $10b GDP $10b

Page 47: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 18MT Country B 16MT

Country A $200m Country B $100m GDP $10b 0.02% of GDP GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP

Page 48: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Total Cost

price of carbon

5

16%

Target A

18

$200million

Page 49: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal Total Costs

price of carbon

Target A

5

16%

12

Target A

18

$100million

Page 50: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 18MT Country B 16MT

Country A $200m Country B $100m GDP $10b 0.02% of GDP GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP

Page 51: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 12MT Country B 16MT

Country A $100m Country B $100m GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP

Page 52: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal Total Costs

price of carbon

Target A

5

16%

12

Target B

16

$100million $100million

Page 53: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal areas = Equal total costs

$100million$100million

Page 54: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 12MT Country B 16MT

Country A $100m Country B $100m GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP

Page 55: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A ? MT Country B 16MT

Country A $300m Country B $100m GDP $30b 0.01% of GDP GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP

Page 56: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal Total Costs

price of carbon

Target A

5

16%

12

Target A

24

$100million

Page 57: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal Total Costs

price of carbon

5

16%

12

Target A

24

$300million

Page 58: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

1. Where are the countries BAU emissions in 2020?Country A +30 % of 1990 Country B +15% of 1990

2. What are the costs of meeting the target?

a) How many reductions are required?

b) How much does it cost to reduce these emissions?

Country A 24 MT Country B 16MT

Country A $300m Country B $100m GDP $30b 0.01% of GDP GDP $10b 0.01% of GDP

Page 59: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

Do these targets represent a comparable effort?

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

Emissions

1990 Target

18MT red

10% below Target

16MT red

Summary of results

Page 60: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

0

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)

(Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

price of carbon

Total Cost

Target B

8% 24% 33% 42% 50%

5

16%

10 15 20 25 3016

$100million

Page 61: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Total Cost

price of carbon

5

16%

Target A

18

$200million

Page 62: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

Do these targets represent a comparable effort?

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

60

66

72

78

84

52

Emissions

1990 Target

18MT red

10% below Target

16MT red

Country A $200m Country B $100m GDP $10b 0.02% GDP $10b 0.01%

NO

Page 63: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal areas = Equal total costs

$100million$100million

Page 64: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

Fairer targets

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

60

66

72

78

84

52

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

Emissions

Target

18MT red

Target

16MT red

Target

12MT red

Page 65: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

Fairer targets

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

60

66

72

78

84

52

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

Emissions

Target

16MT red

Target

12MT red

Country A $100m Country B $100m GDP $10b 0.01% GDP $10b 0.01%

Page 66: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

Fairer targets

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

60

66

72

78

84

52

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

Emissions

Target

16MT red

Target

MT red

Country A $300m Country B $100m GDP $30b 0.01% GDP $10b 0.01%

?

Page 67: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

100

010 15 20 25 30

80

60

40

20

Price of carbon ($US)

Country ACountry B

Reductions in 2020

(MT)8% 24% 33% 42% 50% (Relative to 1990)

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Equal Total Costs

price of carbon

5

16%

12

Target A

24

$300million

Page 68: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

1990 2000 2010

+40

+10

0

2020

+30

Fairer targets?

-10

Country ACountry B

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

+20

60

66

72

78

84

52

relative to 1990 (%)

Total (MT)

Emissions

Target = -10%

24MT red

Target = -6%

Country A $300m Country B $100m GDP $30b 0.01% GDP $10b 0.01%

Page 69: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capability – ‘equity’ within the UNFCCC

GDP/capita needs to be taken into account – internationally accepted that those with higher incomes should pay more as %

GDP/capita also takes into account to some respect the responsibility for historic emissions

GHG/capita is also a useful proxy for responsibility, and is reasonably correlated to GDP/capita

Page 70: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Integrating the equity criteria of GDP/capita and GHG/capita

%impact on GDP

-0.20

-0.15

-0.10

-0.25

GDP/capitaGHG/capita

-0.05

-0.30

Equalising impact on GDP at - 0.15%

low high

Page 71: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Integrating the equity criteria of GDP/capita and GHG/capita

%impact on GDP

-0.20

-0.15

-0.10

-0.25

-0.05

-0.30

high GDP/capitaGHG/capita

low

Equity variance

Page 72: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Integrating the equity criteria of GDP/capita and GHG/capita

%impact on GDP

-0.20

-0.15

-0.10

-0.25

-0.05

-0.30

high GDP/capitaGHG/capita

low

No more than 3xEquity variance

Page 73: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort (ACE) Framework

Conclusions

1) Baseline emissions, relative to the base year, are a key input into determining a fair target: higher population and economic growth = less reductions relative to base year

2) The structure of an economy and domestic emissions profile are also important: more efficient = less reductions

3) Capability and responsibility need to also be taken into account: higher GHG or GDP/capita = more reductions

Page 74: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Assessing Comparable Effort Interactive Support Tool

(ACE – IST)

Page 75: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets
Page 76: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

ACE-IST: Baseline

Page 77: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

ACE-IST: Marginal Abatement Cost Curves

Page 78: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

ACE-IST: Total Abatement Cost relative to GDP

Page 79: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

ACE-IST: Results

Page 80: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

ACE-IST: Results

Page 81: Post-2012 Emission Reduction Targets

Thank you