1 / 25

Taiwan's GHG Mitigation Potentials and Costs: An Evaluation with the MARKAL Model

Taiwan's GHG Mitigation Potentials and Costs: An Evaluation with the MARKAL Model. Ssu -Li, Chang Professor, Institute of Natural Resource Management, National Taipei University, Taiwan Miao-Shan, Tsai* Researcher , Industrial Technology Research Institute, Taiwan

linnea
Download Presentation

Taiwan's GHG Mitigation Potentials and Costs: An Evaluation with the MARKAL Model

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Taiwan's GHG Mitigation Potentials and Costs: An Evaluation with the MARKAL Model Ssu-Li, Chang Professor, Institute of Natural Resource Management, National Taipei University, Taiwan Miao-Shan, Tsai* Researcher, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Taiwan PhD student, Institute of Natural Resource Management, National Taipei University, Taiwan Tzu-Yar, Liu Lead Engineer, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Taiwan IEW2012, Cape Town, Jane 19-21, 2012 * Corresponding author

  2. Outline • Introduction • MARKAL-Taiwan Model • International GHG Reduction Trend • Scenarios and Assumptions • Simulation Results • Discussions • Conclusions

  3. Introduction (1/2) • Taiwan is an island that lacks natural energy resources. It relied on imported energy for 99.30% of its total supply, which comprises 91% fossil fuels and only 0.25% of renewable energy (MOEABOE, 2011). • Taiwan ranked 23rd in the world for countries with the highest CO2 emission countries (IEA, 2011). 145.58 58.52 Source: MOEABOE, 2011.

  4. Introduction (2/2) • Copenhagen Accord asks • The Annex I countries to submit quantitative reduction commitment for 2020 • The non-Annex I countries to submit Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) • Taiwan also announced its NAMAs to international community • CO2 reduction target: 30% lower than REF in 2020 • Objective • Utilize MARKAL model to evaluate emission reduction on Taiwan’s electricity, industrial, buildings, and transportation sectors.

  5. MARKAL-Taiwan Model • The Reference Energy System 256 demand technologies 75 processes technologies 63generation technologies

  6. International GHG Reduction Trend (1/2) • International Low Carbon Society Scenario in 2025 • CO2Target: Lower than REF 0.7%~22%, lower than 2005 level 11%~32% • Energy intensity: 0.13~0.61 toe/US$ • Energy per capital: 1.96~7.6 t CO2/per capita

  7. International GHG Reduction Trend (2/2) • Energy Structure in 2025 • WEO-2011 scenario: coal is the largest energy • AEO-2011, Japan-2009, and Korea-2008 scenarios: oil is the largest energy Source: IEA(2011), USEIA(2011), NIES(2009), Korea(2008).

  8. Scenarios and Assumptions (1/3) • Assumptions in MARKAL model Taiwan Industrial Structure (%) Taiwan Import Energy Price

  9. Scenarios and Assumptions (2/3) • Key Scenario Assumptions

  10. Scenarios and Assumptions (3/3)

  11. Simulation results(1/8) • CO­2 emission pathways in each scenario

  12. Simulation results(2/8) • Energy Supply Structure • The Energy supply growth rate from 2008 to 2025 • REF and GDPL: 1.8%/y~2.4%/y • Four reduction scenarios: 1.3%/y ~1.5%/y • The reduction scenario’s • Total energy supply in 2020 and 2025 are reduced by about 12% relative to REF. • Coal and oil demand proportion more than 87% in REF, thus the proportion of reduction scenario must be reduced to 73% ~ 76%.

  13. Simulation results(3/8) • Power generation structure • Electricity demand growth rate • The REF and GDPL scenarios: 3.7%/y ~5.6%/y till 2025 • Four reduction scenarios decrease to 2%/y ~2.6%/y • Increase electricity consumption ratio through fuel change choices. Nuclear, gas or coal power generation as the base load unit.

  14. Simulation results(4/8) • Sector energy demand in 2025 • Industry: • REF and GDPL scenarios: the oil ratios provided 22.3% • Reduction scenarios: the oil ratios provided30% Industry Sector

  15. Simulation results(5/8) • Buildings: • REF and GDPL scenarios: electricityprovided 71% • Reduction scenarios: Natural gas will replace electricity and oil is due to natural gas target. BuildingsSector

  16. Simulation results(6/8) • Transport: • REF and GDPL scenarios: Traditional fossil oils provided 97% • Reduction scenarios: Traditional fossil oils are replaced under given biomass energy targets in order to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions Transport Sector

  17. Simulation results(7/8) • Total incremental cost in Reduction scenarios • 2015: increases 27% relative to REF • 2020: increase 20%~21% relative to REF • 2025: increase2%~7% relative to REF • the accumulated incremental cost will be 9%~14% relative to REF.

  18. Simulation results(8/8) • CO2 Index in Reduction Scenarios • The per capita emission in 2020 are between 11.1~14.4 tons/per capita, and 9.5 tons/ per capita in 2025. • The emission intensity are between 0.46~0.54 g/US$ in 2020 , and between 0.31~0.33 g/US$ in 2025. • The energy intensity in 2020 are between 0.23~0.28 toe/US$ and 0.22 toe/US$ in 2025.

  19. Discussions (1/2) • The energy demand growth rate • REF and GDPL scenarios : more than 1.8%/y • Reduction scenario: decreases to 1.4%/y, close to the growth rate in WEO-2011. • CO2 reduction ratio • In 2025 a decrease of 56~60% relative to the baseline scenarios, and decrease of 15% relative to 2005 level • This result is higher than Kyoto targets of Annex I countries, and also higher than reported in WEO-2011 and AEO-2011 scenarios. • The total incremental cost • The accumulated incremental cost will be 9%~14% relative to REF.

  20. Discussions (2/2) • Energy intensity • Taiwan’s is higher than in WEO-2011, AEO-2011, and Japan-2009 scenarios • Near Korea-2008 scenario • the Per capita emission • Taiwan’s is also higher than WEO-2011 and AEO-2011 scenarios • Because • 98% of Taiwan’s energy system relies on imports from oversea sources • Limited natural endowments of domestic renewable energy • Limitation of imported natural gas • Nuclear power and oil accounts for high proportions in energy demand structure • Renewable energy only accounts for a small ratio in power generation structure

  21. Conclusions • Taiwan CO2 reduction target is higher than in both WEO scenario and AEO scenario • Taiwantotal accumulated incremental cost increase will be 9%~14% relative to REF • For Taiwan, it is very difficult to reach the reduction target just by relying on mitigation technology. • It is also necessary to allow Taiwan to participate in international flexible mechanisms. • Such participation will also benefit the international community’s GHG reduction efforts tremendously.

  22. Acknowledgements • We would like to thank the Bureau of Energy for financial support in buildingTaiwan MARKAL model. • We thank Yu-FengChou, Jing-Wei Kuo, Kuei-Lan Chou, Ming-Lung Hsu, and Shu-Yi Ho of MARKAL working group in Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) for the research reported here. • We thank Dr. Wei Ming Huang for his valuable suggestions. • Also we thank Jin-Shiuan Li, Ming-Chih Chuang, Chin-Wei Wu, Chi-Liang Tsai , Su-Chen Weng of Bureau of Energy for additional support.

  23. Thank you for your attention ! Miao-Shan, Tsai Researcher Green Energy & Environment Research Laboratories Industrial Technology Research Institute E-mail: marshatsai@itri.org.tw.

  24. Appendix

  25. Model Background • ITRI established MARKAL-Taiwan model since 1993 supported by ETSAP Outreach Program and Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs. • Major Application • The annual energy outlook • The main analytic results includes: • Energy supply outlook, Energy demand outlook, Power capacity, Electricity Structure, Energy intensity, CO2 intensity, Per capita CO2 emission. • To evaluate the benefits and costs of CO2 mitigation strategies, and make comparison with other nations. • To analyze the impacts of energy conservations and renewable energy development strategies on the future energy structure and GHG emissions of Taiwan.

More Related