Skip to main content
Log in

Analyzing CO2 emissions mitigation by technology improvement in Central and Eastern Europe

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As a legacy of the centrally planned economy, the economies in transition of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have a unique potential to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions through the improvement in their high energy intensities. Since much of this `low-hanging fruit' in energy-efficiency improvements can be highly cost-effective, many developed countries facing difficulties in meeting their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets domestically are eager to find such opportunities in the CEE region. Therefore, studies analysing the potentials and costs of carbon dioxide reduction through technology improvement in the region have come into the limelight. While there are a few excellent studies in the region aimed at analysing climate change abatement potentials, they all embark on different assumptions, methodologies and boundary conditions. It is hence difficult, if not impossible, to compare and analyse the results of these studies across different authors, countries or time horizons. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to place four leading studies on GHG mitigation through technology improvement from the CEE region into an internationally comparable framework. Four studies were selected from three countries, Poland, Hungary and Estonia, which are all the results of major national and international efforts to assess costs and potentials of GHG reduction. The paper places their assumptions, methods and final results into a framework which enables policy-makers and project designers to compare these across geographical and technological boundaries. Since other studies from around the globe have been analysed in this framework in the literature, this paper provides a vehicle for the findings of these four studies to be compared to others worldwide. In addition, the paper highlights a few areas where similar studies to be completed in the future in the region may be enhanced by incorporating features used in GHG mitigation research in other parts of the world.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brown M., Levine M.D., Romm J.P., Rosenfeld A.H. and Koomey J.G., 1998: Engineering-Economic Studies of Energy Technologies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Opportunities and Challenges. Annual Review of Energy and Environment, Vol. 23. Annual Reviews Inc.

  • Energy Economist, 2000: Hague failure points up climate challenge. Energy Economist by the Financial Times. December, 230.

  • Grubb M., Vrolijk C. and Brack D., 1999:The Kyoto Protocol. A Guide and Assessment. The Royal Institute of International Affairs.

  • Househam I., Hauff J., Missfeldt F. and Grubb M., 1998:Climate Change and the Energy Sector. A country-by-country analysis of national programmes. Volume 3 : The Economies in Transition. Financial Times Energy.

  • IEA, 1997:Energy Efficiency Initiative. IEA/OECD, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA, 2000a: International Workshop on Technologies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Engineering-Economic Analyses of Conserved Energy and Carbon, International Energy Agency. http://www.iea.org/workshop/engecon/index.html. Accessed 2001.

  • IEA, 2000b:Key World Energy Statistics from the IEA. International Energy Agency.

  • Kallaste T., Liik O. and Ots A. (eds), 1998:Economics of Greenhouse Gas Limitations Phase 1: Establishment of a Methodological Framework for Climate Change Mitigation Assessment. Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre, Tallinn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause F., Olivier D. and Koomey J., 1995:Negawatt Power. The Cost and Potential of Electrical Efficiency Resources in Western Europe. IPSEP, El Cerrito, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthes F. and Mez L. (eds), 1996:10 Years after the Chernobyl Disaster. Electricity in Eastern Europe. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, öko-Institut, Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalik J., Pasierb S., Piszczek J., Pyka M. and Surowka J., 1993: Update: Evaluation of the Feasibility and Profitability of Implementing New Energy Conservation Technologies in Poland. FEWE. Katowice.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD/EIA, 1996:Energy Policies of Poland. OECD, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD/EIA, 1999:Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Hungary 1999 Review. OECD, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadowski M. (ed.), 1996:Strategies of the GHG emission reduction and adaptation of the Polish economy to the changed climate. Institute of Environmental Protection, Poland, Warsaw.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schipper L., Martinot E., Vorsatz D., Khrushch M., Salay J. and Scheinbaum C., 1994: Structure and Efficiency of Energy Use in a Reforming Economy: The Case of Estonia. Energy and Environment Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.

  • TEBODIN, 1996: Energy Strategy for Estonia/EU Phare. TEBODIN, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP, 1994: UNEP Greenhose Gas Abatement Cosing Studies. Appendix: Guidelines. UNEP Collaborating Center on Energy and Environment. Riso, Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • ürge-Vorsatz D., SzlÁvik J., PÁlvolgyi T. and Füle M., 1998: Economics of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation. Hungary Country Study. UNEP Energy and Environment Centre.

  • Vorsatz D., 1996: Exploring US Residential and Commercial Electricity Conservation Potentials: Analysis of the Lighting Sector. Environmental Science and Engineering; and Energy and Resources Group. UCLA and UC Berkeley: Los Angeles and Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Szeszler, A. Analyzing CO2 emissions mitigation by technology improvement in Central and Eastern Europe. GeoJournal 57, 211–226 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GEJO.0000003617.62217.83

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GEJO.0000003617.62217.83

Navigation