IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v77y2015icp118-130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Achieving California's 80% greenhouse gas reduction target in 2050: Technology, policy and scenario analysis using CA-TIMES energy economic systems model

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Christopher
  • Yeh, Sonia
  • Zakerinia, Saleh
  • Ramea, Kalai
  • McCollum, David

Abstract

The CA-TIMES optimization model of the California Energy System (v1.5) is used to understand how California can meet the 2050 targets for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (80% below 1990 levels). This model represents energy supply and demand sectors in California and simulates the technology and resource requirements needed to meet projected energy service demands. The model includes assumptions on policy constraints, as well as technology and resource costs and availability. Multiple scenarios are developed to analyze the changes and investments in low-carbon electricity generation, alternative fuels and advanced vehicles in transportation, resource utilization, and efficiency improvements across many sectors. Results show that major energy transformations are needed but that achieving the 80% reduction goal for California is possible at reasonable average carbon reduction cost ($9 to $124/tonne CO2e at 4% discount rate) relative to a baseline scenario. Availability of low-carbon resources such as nuclear power, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), biofuels, wind and solar generation, and demand reduction all serve to lower the mitigation costs, but CCS is a key technology for achieving the lowest mitigation costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Christopher & Yeh, Sonia & Zakerinia, Saleh & Ramea, Kalai & McCollum, David, 2015. "Achieving California's 80% greenhouse gas reduction target in 2050: Technology, policy and scenario analysis using CA-TIMES energy economic systems model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 118-130.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:77:y:2015:i:c:p:118-130
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514006715
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. McCarthy, Ryan & Yang, Christopher & Ogden, Joan M., 2008. "California Energy Demand Scenario Projections to 2050," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt36x5006p, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Leighty, Wayne & Ogden, Joan M. & Yang, Christopher, 2012. "Modeling transitions in the California light-duty vehicles sector to achieve deep reductions in transportation greenhouse gas emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 52-67.
    3. Brian O’Neill & Elmar Kriegler & Keywan Riahi & Kristie Ebi & Stephane Hallegatte & Timothy Carter & Ritu Mathur & Detlef Vuuren, 2014. "A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(3), pages 387-400, February.
    4. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107005198.
    5. Yang, Christopher & Yeh, Sonia & Ramea, Kalai & Zakerinia, Saleh & McCollum, David & Bunch, David & Ogden, Joan, 2014. "Modeling Optimal Transition Pathways to a Low Carbon Economy in California: Appendices and Supplemental Material for California TIMES (CA-TIMES) Model," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2gz6g03d, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    6. Kay, Andrew I. & Noland, Robert B. & Rodier, Caroline J., 2014. "Achieving reductions in greenhouse gases in the US road transportation sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 536-545.
    7. Nelson, James & Johnston, Josiah & Mileva, Ana & Fripp, Matthias & Hoffman, Ian & Petros-Good, Autumn & Blanco, Christian & Kammen, Daniel M., 2012. "High-resolution modeling of the western North American power system demonstrates low-cost and low-carbon futures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 436-447.
    8. Yang, Christopher & McCollum, David L & McCarthy, Ryan & Leighty, Wayne, 2009. "Meeting an 80% Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation by 2050: A Case Study in California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2ns1q98f, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    9. Greene, David L., 2011. "Uncertainty, loss aversion, and markets for energy efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 608-616, July.
    10. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521182935.
    11. Elmar Kriegler & Jae Edmonds & Stéphane Hallegatte & Kristie Ebi & Tom Kram & Keywan Riahi & Harald Winkler & Detlef Vuuren, 2014. "A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared climate policy assumptions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(3), pages 401-414, February.
    12. Kenneth Gillingham, Matthew Harding, and David Rapson, 2012. "Split Incentives in Residential Energy Consumption," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    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. Guivarch, Céline & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2017. "Identifying the main uncertainty drivers of energy security in a low-carbon world: The case of Europe," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 530-541.
    2. Stefan Pauliuk & Niko Heeren, 2021. "Material efficiency and its contribution to climate change mitigation in Germany: A deep decarbonization scenario analysis until 2060," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(2), pages 479-493, April.
    3. Mundaca, Luis & Markandya, Anil, 2016. "Assessing regional progress towards a ‘Green Energy Economy’," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1372-1394.
    4. Leibowicz, Benjamin D. & Krey, Volker & Grubler, Arnulf, 2016. "Representing spatial technology diffusion in an energy system optimization model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 350-363.
    5. Fujimori, S. & Kainuma, M. & Masui, T. & Hasegawa, T. & Dai, H., 2014. "The effectiveness of energy service demand reduction: A scenario analysis of global climate change mitigation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 379-391.
    6. Alshammari, Yousef M. & Sarathy, S. Mani, 2017. "Achieving 80% greenhouse gas reduction target in Saudi Arabia under low and medium oil prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 502-511.
    7. Giannousakis, Anastasis & Hilaire, Jérôme & Nemet, Gregory F. & Luderer, Gunnar & Pietzcker, Robert C. & Rodrigues, Renato & Baumstark, Lavinia & Kriegler, Elmar, 2021. "How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    8. Edelenbosch, O.Y. & van Vuuren, D.P. & Blok, K. & Calvin, K. & Fujimori, S., 2020. "Mitigating energy demand sector emissions: The integrated modelling perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    9. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    10. Fankhauser, Samuel & Jotzo, Frank, 2017. "Economic growth and development with low-carbon energy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86850, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    12. Lamperti, Francesco & Bosetti, Valentina & Roventini, Andrea & Tavoni, Massimo & Treibich, Tania, 2021. "Three green financial policies to address climate risks," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    13. Tilmann Rave, 2013. "Innovation Indicators on Global Climate Change – R&D Expenditure and Patents," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 66(15), pages 34-41, August.
    14. Solberg, Birger & Moiseyev, Alex & Hansen, Jon Øvrum & Horn, Svein Jarle & Øverland, Margareth, 2021. "Wood for food: Economic impacts of sustainable use of forest biomass for salmon feed production in Norway," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    15. Lanzi, Elisa & Dellink, Rob & Chateau, Jean, 2018. "The sectoral and regional economic consequences of outdoor air pollution to 2060," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 89-113.
    16. Daniel Moran & Richard Wood, 2014. "Convergence Between The Eora, Wiod, Exiobase, And Openeu'S Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 245-261, September.
    17. Lykke E. Andersen & Luis Carlos Jemio, 2016. "Decentralization and poverty reduction in Bolivia: Challenges and opportunities," Development Research Working Paper Series 01/2016, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    18. Chen, Han & Huang, Ye & Shen, Huizhong & Chen, Yilin & Ru, Muye & Chen, Yuanchen & Lin, Nan & Su, Shu & Zhuo, Shaojie & Zhong, Qirui & Wang, Xilong & Liu, Junfeng & Li, Bengang & Tao, Shu, 2016. "Modeling temporal variations in global residential energy consumption and pollutant emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 820-829.
    19. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2017. "Social rate of return to R&D on various energy technologies: Where should we invest more? A study of G7 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 521-525.
    20. Tom Mikunda & Tom Kober & Heleen de Coninck & Morgan Bazilian & Hilke R�sler & Bob van der Zwaan, 2014. "Designing policy for deployment of CCS in industry," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 665-676, September.

    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:77:y:2015:i:c:p:118-130. 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.