Putting a price tag on the 2 deg climate target

Jul 02, 2014

Addressing climate change will require substantial new investment in low-carbon energy and energy efficiency – but no more than what is currently spent on today's fossil-dominated energy system, according to new research from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and partners.

To limit climate change to 2° Celsius, low-carbon energy options will need additional investments of about US $800 billion a year globally from now to mid-century, according to a new study published in the journal Climate Change Economics. But much of that capital could come from shifting subsidies and investments away from and associated technologies. Worldwide, fossil subsidies currently amount to around $500 billion per year.

"We know that if we want to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we need to drastically transform our energy system," says IIASA researcher David McCollum, who led the study. "This is the first comprehensive analysis to show how much capital is needed to successfully make that transition."

The study, part of a larger EU research project examining the implications and implementation needs of climate policies consistent with the internationally agreed 2° C target, compared the results from six separate global energy-economic models, each with regional- and country-level detail. The authors examined future scenarios for energy investment based on a variety of factors, including technology progress, efficiency potential, economics, regional socio-economic development, and climate policy.

Investments in clean energy currently total around $200 to 250 billion per year, and reference scenarios show that with currently on the books, this is likely to grow to around $400 billion. However, the amount needed to limit climate change to the 2° target amounts to around $1200 billion, the study shows.

The energy investments needed to address climate change continue to be an area of large uncertainty. By comparing the results from multiple models, the scientists were able to better define the costs of addressing climate change.

"Nearly all countries say that they're on board with the 2° target; some have even made commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. But until now, it hasn't been very clear how to get to that point, at least from an investment point of view. It's high time we think about how much capital is needed for new power plants, biofuel refineries, efficient vehicles, and other technologies—and where those dollars need to flow—so that we get the emissions reductions we want," says McCollum.

IIASA Energy Program Director Keywan Riahi, another study co-author and project leader, says, "Given that energy-supply technologies and infrastructure are characterized by long lifetimes of 30 to 60 years or more, there's a considerable amount of technological inertia in the system that could impede a rapid transformation. That's why the decisions of the next several years are so important: because they will shape the direction of the energy transition path for many years to come."

The study shows that the greatest investments will be needed in rapidly developing countries, namely in Asia, Latin America, and Sub-Saharan Africa.

"Energy investment in these countries is poised to increase substantially anyway. But if we're serious about addressing , we must find ways to direct more investment to these key regions. Clever policy designs, including carbon pricing mechanisms, can help." says Massimo Tavoni, researcher at the Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, a climate research center in Italy, and overall coordinator of the LIMITS project, of which the new study is a part.

The researchers note that their analysis of future investment costs does not attempt to quantify the potentially major fuel savings from switching from fossil fuels to renewable sources, such as wind and solar . As shown in the IIASA-led Global Energy Assessment, such savings could offset a considerable share of increased investment on a global scale.

Explore further: Investments may make or break climate change

More information: McCollum D, Nagai Y, Riahi K, Marangoni G, Calvin K, Pietzcker R, Van Vliet J, van der Zwaaan B. (2014). Energy investments under climate policy: a comparison of global models. Climate Change Economics Vol. 04, No. 04. DOI: 10.1142/S2010007813400101

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Investments may make or break climate change

Jun 04, 2014

A new International Energy Association (IEA) report, released today, says that the current trend of energy investments falls well short of the amount needed to avoid dangerous global warming, and policies ...

Capturing CO2 emissions needed to meet climate targets

Jun 26, 2014

Technologies that are discussed controversially today may be needed to keep the future risks and costs of climate change in check. Combining the production of energy from fossil fuels and biomass with capturing ...

Japan posts top growth in clean energy

Apr 03, 2014

Japan last year stepped up spending on clean energy at a faster rate than any other country, despite a drop in the world's overall investment, a study said Thursday.

What will climate policy mean for coal?

Mar 31, 2014

Limiting climate change to 2 degrees C means shutting down coal power plants - an unpopular proposition for coal power companies. But a new study shows that delaying climate policies could prove even worse for power plant ...

UN climate panel chair calls for 'enlightenment'

Apr 07, 2014

The head of the United Nations scientific panel on climate change urged diplomats and scientists to show "enlightenment" Monday, as they began a weeklong meeting aimed at spelling out in plain terms what ...

Recommended for you

Coal gas boom in China holds climate change risks

36 minutes ago

Deep in the hilly grasslands of remote Inner Mongolia, twin smoke stacks rise more than 200 feet into the sky, their steam and sulfur billowing over herds of sheep and cattle. Both day and night, the rumble ...

Water crisis threatens thirsty Sao Paulo

8 hours ago

Sao Paulo is thirsty. A severe drought is hitting Brazil's largest city and thriving economic capital with no end in sight, threatening the municipal water supply to millions of people.

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

The Alchemist
3 / 5 (6) Jul 02, 2014
Somebody explain how this is going to COST?
It will pay itself back in a few years at most.
But then, I suppose oil and gas companies will be losing $800 billion a year.

Still they've been making that much for a hundred years, you'd think that'd be good.
TegiriNenashi
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 02, 2014
That is the problem: countless impotent climate related "studies" telling us what not to do, begging for money, and projecting "authority" where the rest of the bulk of public money should go (besides their pockets). Quit bitching. Compare yourself to entrepreneurs which are busy devising novel ways of transportation (and making some buck as a side effect).