IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i5p3012-3024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Long-term implications of alternative light-duty vehicle technologies for global greenhouse gas emissions and primary energy demands

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle, Page
  • Kim, Son H.

Abstract

This study assesses global light-duty vehicle (LDV) transport in the upcoming century, and the implications of vehicle technology advancement and fuel-switching on greenhouse gas emissions and primary energy demands. Five different vehicle technology scenarios are analyzed with and without a CO2 emissions mitigation policy using the GCAM integrated assessment model: a reference internal combustion engine vehicle scenario, an advanced internal combustion engine vehicle scenario, and three alternative fuel vehicle scenarios in which all LDVs are switched to natural gas, electricity, or hydrogen by 2050. The emissions mitigation policy is a global CO2 emissions price pathway that achieves 450Â ppmv CO2 at the end of the century with reference vehicle technologies. The scenarios demonstrate considerable emissions mitigation potential from LDV technology; with and without emissions pricing, global CO2 concentrations in 2095 are reduced about 10Â ppmv by advanced ICEV technologies and natural gas vehicles, and 25Â ppmv by electric or hydrogen vehicles. All technological advances in vehicles are important for reducing the oil demands of LDV transport and their corresponding CO2 emissions. Among advanced and alternative vehicle technologies, electricity- and hydrogen-powered vehicles are especially valuable for reducing whole-system emissions and total primary energy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle, Page & Kim, Son H., 2011. "Long-term implications of alternative light-duty vehicle technologies for global greenhouse gas emissions and primary energy demands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 3012-3024, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:5:p:3012-3024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(11)00196-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Espey, Molly, 1998. "Gasoline demand revisited: an international meta-analysis of elasticities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 273-295, June.
    2. McCollum, David & Yang, Christopher, 2009. "Achieving deep reductions in US transport greenhouse gas emissions: Scenario analysis and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5580-5596, December.
    3. Yeh, Sonia & Farrell, Alexander E. & Plevin, Richard J & Sanstad, Alan & Weyant, John, 2008. "Optimizing U.S. Mitigation Strategies for the Light-Duty Transportation Sector: What We Learn from a Bottom-Up Model," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1td1g7qw, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    4. Schafer, Andreas & Victor, David G., 2000. "The future mobility of the world population," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 171-205, April.
    5. Kenneth A. Small & Kurt Van Dender, 2007. "Fuel Efficiency and Motor Vehicle Travel: The Declining Rebound Effect," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 25-52.
    6. Zhang, Shuwei & Jiang, Kejun & Liu, Deshun, 2007. "Passenger transport modal split based on budgets and implication for energy consumption: Approach and application in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4434-4443, September.
    7. Difiglio, Carmen & Fulton, Lewis, 2000. "How to reduce US automobile greenhouse gas emissions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 657-673.
    8. Ribeiro, Suzana K & Kobayashi, Shigeki & Beuthe, Michel & Gasca, Jorge & Greene, David & Lee, David S. & Muromachi, Yasunori & Newton, Peter J. & Plotkin, Steven & Sperling, Daniel & Wit, Ron & Zhou, , 2007. "Transportation and its Infrastructure," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt98m5t1rv, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    9. Takeshita, Takayuki & Yamaji, Kenji, 2008. "Important roles of Fischer-Tropsch synfuels in the global energy future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2791-2802, August.
    10. Clarke, John F. & Edmonds, J. A., 1993. "Modelling energy technologies in a competitive market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 123-129, April.
    11. Azar, Christian & Lindgren, Kristian & Andersson, Bjorn A., 2003. "Global energy scenarios meeting stringent CO2 constraints--cost-effective fuel choices in the transportation sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 961-976, August.
    12. Grubler, Arnulf & Messner, Sabine, 1998. "Technological change and the timing of mitigation measures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 495-512, December.
    13. Clarke, Leon & Weyant, John & Edmonds, Jae, 2008. "On the sources of technological change: What do the models assume," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 409-424, March.
    14. Sergey Paltsev & John M. Reilly & Henry D. Jacoby & Angelo C. Gurgel & Gilbert E. Metcalf & Andrei P. Sokolov & Jennifer F. Holak, 2007. "Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals," NBER Working Papers 13176, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Son H. Kim, Jae Edmonds, Josh Lurz, Steven J. Smith, and Marshall Wise, 2006. "The objECTS Framework for integrated Assessment: Hybrid Modeling of Transportation," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 63-92.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Iyer, Gokul C. & Clarke, Leon E. & Edmonds, James A. & Hultman, Nathan E., 2016. "Do national-level policies to promote low-carbon technology deployment pay off for the investor countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 400-411.
    2. Takeshita, Takayuki, 2012. "Assessing the co-benefits of CO2 mitigation on air pollutants emissions from road vehicles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 225-237.
    3. Pietzcker, Robert C. & Longden, Thomas & Chen, Wenying & Fu, Sha & Kriegler, Elmar & Kyle, Page & Luderer, Gunnar, 2014. "Long-term transport energy demand and climate policy: Alternative visions on transport decarbonization in energy-economy models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 95-108.
    4. Iyer, Gokul & Hultman, Nathan & Fetter, Steve & Kim, Son H., 2014. "Implications of small modular reactors for climate change mitigation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 144-154.
    5. Takayuki Takeshita, 2011. "Global Scenarios of Air Pollutant Emissions from Road Transport through to 2050," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-31, July.
    6. Iyer, Gokul C. & Clarke, Leon E. & Edmonds, James A. & Hultman, Nathan E. & McJeon, Haewon C., 2015. "Long-term payoffs of near-term low-carbon deployment policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 493-505.
    7. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    8. Liddle, Brantley & Parker, Steven, 2022. "One more for the road: Reconsidering whether OECD gasoline income and price elasticities have changed over time," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    9. Shanjun Li & Joshua Linn & Erich Muehlegger, 2014. "Gasoline Taxes and Consumer Behavior," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 302-342, November.
    10. Yuliya Lovcha & Alejandro Perez-Laborda, 2017. "Structural shocks and dynamic elasticities in a long memory model of the US gasoline retail market," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 405-422, September.
    11. Britt Groosman & Nicholas Muller & Erin O’Neill-Toy, 2011. "The Ancillary Benefits from Climate Policy in the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(4), pages 585-603, December.
    12. Hart, Rob, 2008. "The timing of taxes on CO2 emissions when technological change is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 194-212, March.
    13. Javier D. Donna, 2021. "Measuring long‐run gasoline price elasticities in urban travel demand," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(4), pages 945-994, December.
    14. Donna, Javier D., 2018. "Measuring Long-Run Price Elasticities in Urban Travel Demand," MPRA Paper 90059, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Creutzig, Felix & McGlynn, Emily & Minx, Jan & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2011. "Climate policies for road transport revisited (I): Evaluation of the current framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2396-2406, May.
    16. Peeters, Paul & Dubois, Ghislain, 2010. "Tourism travel under climate change mitigation constraints," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 447-457.
    17. Wang, H. & Zhou, P. & Zhou, D.Q., 2012. "An empirical study of direct rebound effect for passenger transport in urban China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 452-460.
    18. James M. Sallee, 2019. "Pigou Creates Losers: On the Implausibility of Achieving Pareto Improvements from Efficiency-Enhancing Policies," NBER Working Papers 25831, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Bosetti, Valentina & Longden, Thomas, 2013. "Light duty vehicle transportation and global climate policy: The importance of electric drive vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 209-219.
    20. Tilov, Ivan & Weber, Sylvain, 2023. "Heterogeneity in price elasticity of vehicle kilometers traveled: Evidence from micro-level panel data," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:5:p:3012-3024. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.