DOE OSTI2014
This article presents the synthesis of results from the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum Study 27, an inter-comparison of 19 energy-economy and integrated assessment models. The study investigated the value of individual mitigation technologies such as energy intensity improvements, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), nuclear power, solar and wind power and bioenergy for climate mitigation. Achieving atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration targets at 450 and 550 ppm CO2 equivalent requires massive greenhouse gas emissions reductions. A fragmented policy approach at the level of current ambition is inconsistent with these targets. The availability of a negative emissions technology, in most models biofuels with CCS, proved to be a key element for achieving the climate targets. Robust characteristics of the transformation of the energy system are increased energy intensity improvements and the electrification of energy end use coupled with a fast decarbonization of the electricity sector. Non-electric energy end use is hardest to decarbonize, particularly in the transport sector. Technology is a key element of climate mitigation. Versatile technologies such as CCS and bioenergy have largest value, due in part to their combined ability to produce negative emissions. The individual value of low-carbon power technologies is more limited due to the many alternatives in the sector. The scale of the energy transformation is larger for the 450 ppm than for the 550 ppm CO2e target. As a result, the achievability and the costs of the 450 ppm target are more sensitive to variations in technology variability. Mitigation costs roughly double when moving from 550 ppm to 450 ppm CO2e, but remain below 3% of GDP for most models.