, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 3–26 | Cite as

Integrated Energy and Environment Modeling System and Application for India

  • Amit GargEmail author
  • Debyani Ghosh
  • P. R. Shukla
Theoretical Paper


Integrated modeling system offers advantages over a huge monolith model in addressing diverse issues in energy and environment modeling for a vast country like India. It utilizes the inherent strengths of strong individual top-down and bottom-up models that are best suited to address specific energy and environment issues. The Integrated modeling system soft links these models through consistent and similar assumptions for all the models, a shared database and talking between the models as against hard linking them through model codes and runs. Multiple feedback is required among the models to ensure consistency of results and policy analysis. The paper discusses an integrated modeling system for India that uses ten models and presents some results to highlight their in-depth coverage and capability to address energy and environmental concerns.

Key words

Energy Environment Modeling Integrated Model Dynamic Optimization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Alcamo J (ed). “IMAGE 2.0 Integrated Modeling of Global Climate Change”. Kluwer Academic Publishers (1994). Chapter 1, 1–35Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Berger C, Haurie A and Loulou R. “Modelling Long Range Energy Technology Choices: The MARKAL Approach”, Report, GERAD, Montreal, Canada (1987).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Dowlatabadi H. “Integrated Assessment Models of Climate Change”. An incomplete Overview Energy Policy, Vol. 23, No. 4/5, (1995) 289–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Edmonds J and Barns D W. “Factors Affecting the Long-term Cost of Global Fossil Fuel CO2 Emissions Reductions”. International Journal of Global Energy Issues 4(3), (1992), 140–166.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Edmonds J and Reilly J A. “Long-term energy-economic model of carbon dioxide release from fossil fuel use”, Energy Economics, April (1983), 74–88.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Edmonds J and Reilly J. “Global Energy: Assessing the Future”. Oxford University Press, New York (1985).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Edmonds J, Pitcher H M, Barns D, Baron R and Wise M. “Modelling Future Greenhouse Gases Emissions: The Second Generation Model Description, in Modelling Global Change”, United Nations University Press, Tokyo (1993).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Edmonds J A, Wise M, Pitcher H, Richels R, Wigley T and MacCracken C. “An Integrated Assessment of Climate Change and the Accelerated Introduction of Advanced Energy Technologies”, mimeo, Pacific Northwest National laboratory, Washington DC. (1994).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Fishbone L G and Abilock H. “MARKAL, A linear programming model for energy systems analysis: technical description of the BNL version”, Energy Research, 5, (1981) 353–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Garg Amit. “Technologies, Policies and Measures for Energy and Environment Future” Doctoral Thesis, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India (2000).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Garg Amit, Bhattacharya Sumana, Shukla P.R. and Dadhwal V K (2000a). “Sectoral and regional Greenhouse Gases Emissions for India”, Atmospheric Environment (accepted), November (2000).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Garg Amit, Shukla P Ft., Bhattacharya Sumana and Dadhwal V K (2000b). “Sub-region (District) and sector level SO2 and NOx Emissions for India: Assessment of Inventories and Mitigation Flexibility”, Atmospheric Environment February (2001).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Grübler A, Messener S. “Technological Uncertainty in Climate Change: Integrating Science, Economics and Policy”. CP-96-1, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Luxemburg, Austria (1996).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J P Bruce, H Lee and E Haites (ed), “Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. IPCC (1996).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Bracknell. “Revised IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse gas Inventories: Reference Manual”, Vol. 3. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, USA. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (1997).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Kainuma M, Matsuoka Y and Morita. “The AIM Model and Simulations”, AIM Interim Paper, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan. (1997).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Kanudia A. “Energy-Environment Policy and Technology Selection: Modelling and Analysis for India”. Doctoral Thesis, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India. (1996).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Loulou R, Shukla P R, and Kanudia A, “Energy and Environment Strategies for a Sustainable Future: Analysis with the Indian MARKAL Model”, Allied Publishers, New Delhi (1997).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Manne A S and Wene C O. “MARKAL-MACRO: A Linked Model for Energy-Economy Analysis”, BNL-47161, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York. (1992).Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Matsuoka Yuzuru, Mikiko Kainuma and Tsuneyuki Morita. “Scenario analysis of Global Warming using the Asian Pacific Integrated Model (AIM)” Energy Policy, Vol. 23, No. 4/5. (1995) 357–371.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Morita T, Kainuma M, Harasawa H, Kai K, Kun L D and Matsuoka Y. “Asian-Pacific Integrated Model for Evaluating Policy Options to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Warming Impacts”, AIM Interim Paper, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan. (1994).Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Morita T, Kainuma M, Harasawa H, Kai K, Kun L D and Matsuoka Y. “A Guide to the AIM/ENDUSE Model - Technology Selection Program with Linear”, AIM Interim Paper, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan. (1996).Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Rana A, Shukla P. R. “Macroeconomic Models for Long-term Energy and Emissions in India”. Opsearch, February (2001).Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Reilly J M, Edmonds J A, Gardner R H, and Brenkert A L, “Uncertainty Analysis of the IEA/ORAU CO2 Emissions Model”. The Energy Journal 8(3) (1987) 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Romans J and Vries B (eds) “Perspectives on Global Change The TARGETS Approach”, Cambridge University Press, Chapter 3. (1997), 35–54.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Shukla P. R. “The Modelling of Policy Options for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in India”, AMBIO, XXV (4), (1996) 240–248.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Shukla P R and Kanudia A, “The Indian MARKAL: Innovations, Extensions and Policy Analysis”, Technical Paper, G-96-14, GERAD, Montreal, Canada, April (1996).Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Shukla P R, “Implications of Uncertainties on Energy Investments and Emissions: Analysis for India”, Paper Presented at the Seminar on Uncertainty and Energy Policy to Meet UNFCCC Objectives, International Energy Agency, Paris, October 17-18, (1997).Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Shukla, P R, Ghosh Debyani, Chandler W, Logan J “Developing Countries and Global Climate Change: Electric Power Option in India”. PEW Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, US (1999).Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    “India: Policies and finance strategies for strengthening primary health care services” Report No 13042-IN, Population and Human Resource Division, South Asia Country Department II, The World Bank, Washington DC (1995).Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    “India New directions in Health sector development at the state level: An operational perspective”, Report No. 15753-IN, Population and Human Resources Division, South Asia Country Department!!, (Bhutan, India, Nepal) World Bank (1997).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Operational Research Society of India 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indian Institute of ManagementAhmedabadIndia
  2. 2.Centre De Sciences HumainesNew DelhiIndia
  3. 3.Indian Institute of ManagementAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations