• Energy Research

Abstract India and China are the world’s most populous nations, but they have experienced a very different pattern of economic development. As a result, India currently contributes less than one-quarter of the amount of China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. However, India’s forecasted economic growth suggests that those emissions will almost quadruple, with much of this rise coming from the industry sector. Whole-economy scenarios for limiting global warming suggest that direct CO2 emissions should decrease significantly, but leave unanswered the question of how this can be achieved by real-world policies. This study describes a bottom-up model that can be used to assess the impacts of emissions mitigation policies and the linkages between the physical drivers and energy growth of India’s key industries. It focuses on capturing the main physical drivers of this growth, to identify and prioritize the subsectors to address and develop sustainable, low carbon pathways to support economic growth. This analysis shows that India can achieve its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) while achieving substantial economic growth using its currently planned policies. The study describes in detail the methodology and underlying assumptions that are needed by policy makers to inform targeted policy interventions and provide a baseline scenario in the case of no major new technology breakthroughs and no new adopted policies.

Industry is one of the most difficult sectors to decarbonize. With the rapidly falling cost of solar PV, wind power, and battery storage, industry electrification coupled with renewable electricity supply has the potential to be a key pathway to achieve industry decarbonization. This paper summarizes the latest research on the possibility of electrification of the industry sector. The transition to industry electrification would entail major changes in the energy system: large scale increases in renewable electricity or nuclear power supplies, the expansion of electricity transmission and distribution networks, completely different end-use technologies for process heating, and new infrastructure for distributing and dispensing hydrogen. Thus, aggressive and sustained supportive policies and much wider research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities are required to meet net zero carbon emissions goals in the industrial sector. Existing economically competitive electrified industrial processes (such as electric arc furnaces for secondary steelmaking from scrap steel), coupled with zero-carbon electricity sources can sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) compared to manufacturing processes that rely on fossil fuels. Fuel switching in industry from fossil fuel–based process heating to electrified heat can offer many product and productivity benefits, but operating costs in general are much higher than fossil fuel-based heating. Either much lower costs of electricity and energy storage are required and/or new, cost-competitive electric-technology applications are needed to enable further electrification of industry. Indirect electrification i.e., hydrogen production via water electrolysis is another complimentary technology reliant on electricity. Hydrogen can be used as an energy carrier, industrial feedstock for products and fuels, or for long-duration energy storage, and thus can also play a key role in industry decarbonization when the hydrogen is produced from zero-carbon electricity and/or with carbon capture and storage. As with direct electrification, cost is the key barrier for the deployment of hydrogen resources.

A mid-century net zero target creates a challenge for reducing the emissions of emissions-intensive, trade-exposed sectors with high cost mitigation options. These sectors include aluminium, cement, chemicals, iron and steel, lime, pulp and paper and petroleum refining. Available studies agree that decarbonization of these sectors is possible by mid-century if more ambitious policies are implemented soon. Existing carbon pricing policies have had limited impact on the emissions of these sectors because their marginal abatement costs almost always exceed the tax rate or allowance price. But emissions trading systems with free allowance allocations to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed sectors have minimized the adverse economic impacts and associated leakage. Internationally coordinated policies are unlikely, so implementing more ambitious policies creates a risk of leakage. This paper presents policy packages a country can implement to accelerate emission reduction by these sectors with minimal risk of leakage. To comply with international trade law the policy packages differ for producers whose goods compete with imports in the domestic market and producers whose goods are exported. Carbon pricing is a critical component of each package due its ability to minimize the risk of adverse economic impacts on domestic industry, support innovation and generate revenue. The revenue can be used to assist groups adversely impacted by the domestic price and production changes due to carbon pricing and to build public support for the policies. Key policy insights:A country with a mid-century net zero GHG emission target likely will need to implement more ambitious mitigation policies soon for emission-intensive sectors such as aluminium, cement, chemicals, iron and steel, lime, pulp and paper and petroleum refining.More ambitious mitigation policies are likely to vary by country and be implemented at different times, creating a risk of leakage due to industrial production shifts to other jurisdictions.More ambitious mitigation policy packages, compatible with international trade law, that a country can implement to reduce emissions from these sectors with minimal risk of leakage are available but differ for producers whose goods compete with imports in the domestic market and those whose goods are exported.Carbon pricing is a critical component of each package due its ability to minimize the risk of adverse economic impacts on domestic producers, support innovation and generate revenue. A country with a mid-century net zero GHG emission target likely will need to implement more ambitious mitigation policies soon for emission-intensive sectors such as aluminium, cement, chemicals, iron and steel, lime, pulp and paper and petroleum refining. More ambitious mitigation policies are likely to vary by country and be implemented at different times, creating a risk of leakage due to industrial production shifts to other jurisdictions. More ambitious mitigation policy packages, compatible with international trade law, that a country can implement to reduce emissions from these sectors with minimal risk of leakage are available but differ for producers whose goods compete with imports in the domestic market and those whose goods are exported. Carbon pricing is a critical component of each package due its ability to minimize the risk of adverse economic impacts on domestic producers, support innovation and generate revenue.

The target of zero emissions sets a new standard for industry and industrial policy. Industrial policy in the twenty-first century must aim to achieve zero emissions in the energy and emissions int...

The original version of this paper unfortunately contained an error. The second paragraph and first sentence of the second paragraph of the Discussions and Conclusions section should read: In absolute terms, it is difficult to gauge the significance of the CO2 savings represented in Table 8. These results benefit from some comparison. For example, these results can be compared to reductions that the International Energy Agency deems sufficient to stabilize global CO2 concentration at 450 ppm [9]. Emissions projections in the IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2012 (WEO) are divided into emissions related to power generation and emissions from transport and ‘on site’ consumption in the buildings and industrial sector. Most of the savings covered by BUENAS is in the form of electricity, which accounts for 1005 Mt of the 1075 Mt total, or 93 %. Annex A of the WEO report projects power-related emissions in 2030 to be 18,329 Mt in the Current Policies Scenario (CPS) compared to 6,696 Mt in the 450 Scenario. The difference between these two scenarios implies a policydriven mitigation of 11,633 Mt in the power sector, or about two-thirds of the total mitigation of 16,316 Mt. The 1005 Mt of electricity savings from BUENAS is 8.6 % of the WEO power sector savings. This is a very significant contribution to the target, especially since BUENAS is extensive in scope, but not comprehensive. Energy Efficiency (2013) 6:617 DOI 10.1007/s12053-013-9213-y

Les solutions d'atténuation sont souvent évaluées en termes de coûts et de potentiels de réduction des gaz à effet de serre, omettant la prise en compte des effets directs sur le bien-être humain. Ici, nous évaluons systématiquement le potentiel d'atténuation des options du côté de la demande classées en éviter, changer et améliorer, et leurs liens avec le bien-être humain. Nous montrons que ces options, reliant les domaines socio-comportementaux, infrastructurels et technologiques, peuvent réduire les émissions sectorielles contrefactuelles de 40 à 80 % dans les secteurs d'utilisation finale. Sur la base du jugement d'experts et d'une vaste base de données bibliographiques, nous évaluons 306 combinaisons de résultats en matière de bien-être et d'options du côté de la demande, trouvant des effets largement bénéfiques sur l'amélioration du bien-être (79 % positifs, 18 % neutres et 3 % négatifs), même si nous trouvons une faible confiance dans les dimensions sociales du bien-être. La mise en œuvre de telles solutions nuancées est basée de manière axiomatique sur une compréhension des préférences malléables plutôt que fixes, et de manière procédurale sur l'évolution des infrastructures et des architectures de choix. Les résultats démontrent le potentiel élevé d'atténuation des options d'atténuation du côté de la demande qui sont synergiques avec le bien-être. L'évaluation des mesures d'atténuation se concentre souvent sur les coûts et néglige les effets directs sur le bien-être. Ce travail montre que les mesures du côté de la demande ont un grand potentiel d'atténuation et des effets bénéfiques sur les résultats en matière de bien-être. Las soluciones de mitigación a menudo se evalúan en términos de costos y potenciales de reducción de gases de efecto invernadero, sin tener en cuenta los efectos directos sobre el bienestar humano. Aquí, evaluamos sistemáticamente el potencial de mitigación de las opciones del lado de la demanda clasificadas en evitar, cambiar y mejorar, y sus vínculos con el bienestar humano. Mostramos que estas opciones, uniendo los dominios socio-conductuales, infraestructurales y tecnológicos, pueden reducir las emisiones sectoriales contrafactuales en un 40–80% en los sectores de uso final. Con base en el juicio de expertos y una extensa base de datos bibliográfica, evaluamos 306 combinaciones de resultados de bienestar y opciones del lado de la demanda, encontrando efectos en gran medida beneficiosos en la mejora del bienestar (79% positivo, 18% neutral y 3% negativo), a pesar de que encontramos poca confianza en las dimensiones sociales del bienestar. La implementación de tales soluciones matizadas se basa axiomáticamente en la comprensión de preferencias maleables en lugar de fijas, y procedimentalmente en infraestructuras cambiantes y arquitecturas de elección. Los resultados demuestran el alto potencial de mitigación de las opciones de mitigación del lado de la demanda que son sinérgicas con el bienestar. La evaluación de las acciones de mitigación a menudo se centra en el coste y pasa por alto los efectos directos sobre el bienestar. Este trabajo muestra que las medidas del lado de la demanda tienen un gran potencial de mitigación y efectos beneficiosos en los resultados de bienestar. Mitigation solutions are often evaluated in terms of costs and greenhouse gas reduction potentials, missing out on the consideration of direct effects on human well-being. Here, we systematically assess the mitigation potential of demand-side options categorized into avoid, shift and improve, and their human well-being links. We show that these options, bridging socio-behavioural, infrastructural and technological domains, can reduce counterfactual sectoral emissions by 40–80% in end-use sectors. Based on expert judgement and an extensive literature database, we evaluate 306 combinations of well-being outcomes and demand-side options, finding largely beneficial effects in improvement in well-being (79% positive, 18% neutral and 3% negative), even though we find low confidence on the social dimensions of well-being. Implementing such nuanced solutions is based axiomatically on an understanding of malleable rather than fixed preferences, and procedurally on changing infrastructures and choice architectures. Results demonstrate the high mitigation potential of demand-side mitigation options that are synergistic with well-being. Evaluation of mitigation actions often focuses on cost and overlooks the direct effects on well-being. This work shows demand-side measures have large mitigation potential and beneficial effects on well-being outcomes. غالبًا ما يتم تقييم حلول التخفيف من حيث التكاليف وإمكانات الحد من غازات الدفيئة، مع إغفال النظر في الآثار المباشرة على رفاهية الإنسان. هنا، نقيم بشكل منهجي إمكانات التخفيف لخيارات جانب الطلب المصنفة في فئات التجنب والتحول والتحسين، وروابط رفاه الإنسان الخاصة بها. نظهر أن هذه الخيارات، التي تربط بين المجالات الاجتماعية والسلوكية والبنية التحتية والتكنولوجية، يمكن أن تقلل من الانبعاثات القطاعية المضادة بنسبة 40-80 ٪ في قطاعات الاستخدام النهائي. استنادًا إلى حكم الخبراء وقاعدة بيانات شاملة للأدبيات، نقوم بتقييم 306 مجموعة من نتائج الرفاهية وخيارات جانب الطلب، ونجد آثارًا مفيدة إلى حد كبير في تحسين الرفاهية (79 ٪ إيجابي و 18 ٪ محايد و 3 ٪ سلبي)، على الرغم من أننا نجد ثقة منخفضة في الأبعاد الاجتماعية للرفاهية. يعتمد تنفيذ مثل هذه الحلول الدقيقة بشكل بديهي على فهم التفضيلات المرنة بدلاً من التفضيلات الثابتة، ومن الناحية الإجرائية على تغيير البنى التحتية وبنى الاختيار. تُظهر النتائج إمكانات التخفيف العالية لخيارات التخفيف من جانب الطلب التي تتآزر مع الرفاهية. غالبًا ما يركز تقييم إجراءات التخفيف على التكلفة ويتجاهل الآثار المباشرة على الرفاهية. يُظهر هذا العمل أن تدابير جانب الطلب لها إمكانات تخفيف كبيرة وآثار مفيدة على نتائج الرفاهية.

Energy efficiency can make energy access more affordable by reducing the electricity cost burden on households and businesses. Improving products’ energy efficiency helps reduce monthly energy bills— freeing up funds that can feed back into the economy, thus stimulating economic growth. To demonstrate these benefits, this paper conducts a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and a national impact analysis (NIA) for implementing an energy-efficiency standards and labeling (EESL) program for refrigeration products in Uganda. The CBA compares the costs versus the benefits of investing in energy-efficient products for consumers: It shows that the most cost-effective products have an efficiency level 35 % higher than baseline products sold on the market. By choosing these products, consumers save, on average, US$76 over the lifetime of the product. The NIA assesses the impact of an energy-efficiency standard set at that level and shows potential cumulative savings of US$595 million (2023–2040) for households and small businesses. These savings translate into additional purchasing power for households and investments for small businesses, leading to increased living standards and economic development. This paper describes the importance of implementing energy efficiency policies and programs in emerging economies where affordability of electricity hinders electricity access. This paper provides a rigorous approach of using CBA and NIA assessments to demonstrate the economic savings for the consumers and the nation to implement EESL programs for major electric equipment.

The greenhouse gas mitigation potential of different economic sectors in three world regions are estimated using a bottom-up approach. These estimates provide updates of the numbers reported in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR4). This study is part of a larger project aimed at comparing greenhouse gas mitigation potentials from bottom-up and top-down approaches. The sectors included in the analysis are energy supply, transport, industry and the residential and service sector. The mitigation potentials range from 11 to 15 GtCO2eq. This is 26–38% of the baseline in 2030 and 47–68% relative to the year 2000. Potential savings are estimated for different cost levels. The total potential at negative costs is estimated at 5–8% relative to the baseline, with the largest share in the residential and service sector and the highest reduction percentage for the transport and industry sectors. These (negative) costs include investment, operation and maintenance and fuel costs and revenues at moderate discount rates of 3–10%. At costs below 100 US$/tCO2, the largest potential reductions in absolute terms are estimated in the energy supply sector, while the transport sector has the lowest reduction potential.