Study suggests energy independence policies will lead to only a small decline in global greenhouse gas emissions

June 7, 2016 by Bob Yirka, report

Credit: CC0 Public Domain
(—A team of researchers from across Europe has conducted a study looking into the impact that countries pursuing energy independence polices will have on global greenhouse gas emissions and by extension, global warming. In their paper published in Nature Energy, the team reports that though such efforts are likely to lower energy trade, they saw only a small decline in global greenhouse gas emissions. Vaibhav Chaturvedi, with the Council on Energy, Environment and Water, Thapar House, in India, offers a News & Views article on the work done by the team in the same journal issue, along with some opinions on the shortcomings he sees with studies that are built on models.

As the researchers note, many governments are seeking to address domestic energy issues by looking at ways to reduce reliance on imports. Such moves, many have assumed, might also help reduce emissions—to reduce reliance on imported oil, for example, some countries might switch over to using all electric vehicles. But, the team also notes, little research has been done to confirm that such an impact will actually occur. To find out if this might be true, the researches started by using five existing global energy models to create a series of different scenarios based on the institution of energy independence policies globally—they also input data meant to simulate compliance with the Copenhagen pledges.

Analysis of the models indicated that though such policies are likely to reduce the amount of energy trade conducted, doing so would likely have little impact on reducing . Notably, attempting to reduce reliance on oil imports, they found, appeared to yield the least amount of reductions in emissions. The also looked at the economic impact that global pursuit of such policies might have and found that overall doing so appeared to be comparatively cheaper than pursuing mitigation policies.

But as Chaturvedi notes, all of the results found by the team were based on modeled situations, most of which were based on simplistic recreations of our planet as a whole—and while their models represent an advance in such studies, they still must be viewed as only a single tool when hoping to fully understand the global impact of energy policies.

Explore further: Economic growth no longer translates into more greenhouse gas: IEA

More information: Jessica Jewell et al. Comparison and interactions between the long-term pursuit of energy independence and climate policies, Nature Energy (2016). DOI: 10.1038/nenergy.2016.73

Ensuring energy security and mitigating climate change are key energy policy priorities. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III report emphasized that climate policies can deliver energy security as a co-benefit, in large part through reducing energy imports. Using five state-of-the-art global energy-economy models and eight long-term scenarios, we show that although deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions would reduce energy imports, the reverse is not true: ambitious policies constraining energy imports would have an insignificant impact on climate change. Restricting imports of all fuels would lower twenty-first-century emissions by only 2–15% against the Baseline scenario as compared with a 70% reduction in a 450 stabilization scenario. Restricting only oil imports would have virtually no impact on emissions. The modelled energy independence targets could be achieved at policy costs comparable to those of existing climate pledges but a fraction of the cost of limiting global warming to 2 ∘C.

Related Stories

Recommended for you


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 07, 2016
Population and income disparities will continue to be the two factors most responsible for the degradation of the environment.

You can go back to lambasting the deniers for dragging their feet whilst you wring your hands and allow yourself behaviors that will not reach reasonable targets. The only difference in their species of selfishness is that they're honest about it. Your are better, actually. They lie to the world and themselves but you only lie to yourselves.

And in the US/UK political climate, better is good. Doesn't matter if anyone would ever call it good, it's better, so it's good. Doesn't matter if you get any different results.

To whit: Obummer is so much better than Shrub. He is. Doesn't make him good. Ditto Cameron and Blair.
1 / 5 (3) Jun 07, 2016
The only way to save the planet is to create a world totalitarian government that controls all aspects of the world economy, military, reduce the overall population and mandates everyone's lifestyle. Obviously, deniers must be imprisoned, reeducated or executed for the good of the planet.
5 / 5 (4) Jun 08, 2016
Too many people, simply
1.7 / 5 (6) Jun 10, 2016
Interesting. Someone actually living in a way that if all did would end the problems gets rated down, and an apologist for murdering Russians says the same thing and gets fives.

Like I just said on another thread, "Intellectual integrity is dead".

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.