Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Top-down and bottom-up modelling to support low carbon scenarios: climate policy implications
Bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) models have been supporting climate policies, identifying the options required to meet greenhouse gases (GHG) abatement targets and evaluating its economic impact. Some studies have shown that GHG mitigation options from economic TD and technology BU models tend to vary, being different baseline scenarios one recognised divergence factors. This article explores the use of TIMES_PT (BU) and the general equilibrium GEM-E3_PT (TD), assessing the extent of their differences in mitigation options when calibrated to a common baseline scenario and how different outcomes are relevant for domestic climate policy making. Three low carbon scenarios were generated until 2050, with different GHG reduction targets for the case study of Portugal. The models present close mitigation options, allocating the larger mitigation potential to energy supply. However, they suggest different in mitigation options for end-use sectors. GEM-E3_PT focus more on energy efficiency, while TIMES_PT relies on carbon intensity decrease by shifting to electricity. Common baseline scenario cannot be ignored but the models inherent characteristics’ are the key factor for different outcomes, highlighting different mitigation recommendations. ; JRC.F.6-Energy systems evaluation
Top-down and bottom-up modelling to support low carbon scenarios: climate policy implications
Bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) models have been supporting climate policies, identifying the options required to meet greenhouse gases (GHG) abatement targets and evaluating its economic impact. Some studies have shown that GHG mitigation options from economic TD and technology BU models tend to vary, being different baseline scenarios one recognised divergence factors. This article explores the use of TIMES_PT (BU) and the general equilibrium GEM-E3_PT (TD), assessing the extent of their differences in mitigation options when calibrated to a common baseline scenario and how different outcomes are relevant for domestic climate policy making. Three low carbon scenarios were generated until 2050, with different GHG reduction targets for the case study of Portugal. The models present close mitigation options, allocating the larger mitigation potential to energy supply. However, they suggest different in mitigation options for end-use sectors. GEM-E3_PT focus more on energy efficiency, while TIMES_PT relies on carbon intensity decrease by shifting to electricity. Common baseline scenario cannot be ignored but the models inherent characteristics’ are the key factor for different outcomes, highlighting different mitigation recommendations. ; JRC.F.6-Energy systems evaluation
Top-down and bottom-up modelling to support low carbon scenarios: climate policy implications
FORTES Patricia (Autor:in) / GAGO DA CAMARA SIMOES SOFIA (Autor:in) / SEIXAS Julia (Autor:in) / VAN REGEMORTER Denise (Autor:in) / FERREIRA Francisco (Autor:in)
01.03.2013
Sonstige
Elektronische Ressource
Englisch
DDC:
710
Quantifying carbon flows in Switzerland: top-down meets bottom-up modelling
| DOAJ | 2021
| DOAJ | 2021
General Modelling Approaches: Top-down or Bottom-up?
| British Library Conference Proceedings