Carmen Difiglio, Dolf Gielen International Energy Agency Energy PMP 19 August 2004

1. What is the Cost of Not Having Nuclear Power or Carbon Capture and Storage While Still Stabilizing GHG Concentrations at Safe Levels? Carmen Difiglio, Dolf Gielen International Energy Agency Energy PMP 19 August 2004

2. Assumptions • A “safe level” of GHG concentrations was assumed to be 550 ppm (highly uncertain). • A “business-as-usual” base case was assumed not to be consistent with achieving 550 ppm (depends on emissions beyond the modeling horizon - 2050). • A low-emission case (GLO50) was assumed to be consistent with stabilizing at 550 ppm beyond 2050. • The IEA ETP model was used to estimate the average and marginal costs of emission reductions. • The most optimistic ETP technology scenario was assumed (with high technology learning) for renewable and efficiency technologies.

3. Business-as-Usual Global CO2 Emissions (Base) vs Emissions Case Consistent with Stabilization at 550 ppm (GLO50)

4. World-Wide Annual Cost of Not Having Nuclear or CCS While Achieving 550 ppm

5. Costs/Ton CO2 to Achieve 550 ppm

6. Marginal Costs to Achieve 550 ppm in One Model Region

7. Appendix (1)ETP Structure Primary energy Conversion sectors/processes Final energy Demand sectors/processes Useful energy Electricity production Industry Fossil fuels Gasoline Natural gas Electricity Coke Hydrogen Heat etc. Refineries Heating Cooling Power Moving etc. Coke ovens Transport Renewables Heat production Residential/ commercial Nuclear Hydrogen production AGENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L’ENERGIE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY

8. Appendix (2)Electricity Sector in ETP • Coal 13 technologies • Coal –CO2 7 technologies • Gas 12 technologies • Gas –CO2 4 technologies • Nuclear 3 technologies • Renewables 83 technologies • Industrial CHP 40 technologies

9. IEA-Regions: US Canada Japan Australia and New Zealand IEA-Europe South Korea Non-IEA Regions: Eastern Europe FSU China India Rest of Asia Latin America Mexico Africa Middle East Appendix 3ETP - Regions