A Long-Term Strategy to Decarbonise the Danish Inland Passenger Transport Sector

  • Jacopo Tattini
  • Eamonn Mulholland
  • Giada Venturini
  • Mohammad Ahanchian
  • Maurizio Gargiulo
  • Olexandr Balyk
  • Kenneth Karlsson
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Energy book series (LNEN, volume 64)

Abstract

This study applies a novel modelling framework to assess how alternative policies may contribute to a fossil-free transport sector for Denmark and the potential contribution they may have to a well-below 2 °C world. The approach adopted consists of linking an energy system optimisation model, TIMES-DKMS, with a private car simulation model, the Danish Car Stock Model. The results of this study include the magnitude of CO2 abatement presented alongside the corresponding change in tax revenue generated through combinations of policies focusing on the derogation of motor taxes for low emission vehicles and banning the sale of the internal combustion engines. The resulting cumulative emissions from the Danish energy system are also compared to a range of national carbon budgets, calculated to adhere to various levels of global temperature rise at different levels of confidence. The results indicate that a ban on the sale of the internal combustion engines enforced in 2025 would enable the largest cut in cumulative greenhouse gas emissions of all the policies considered. However, none of the policies analysed comply with Denmark’s carbon budget capable of maintaining the increase of global temperature limited to 1.5 °C.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work presented in this paper is a result of the research activities within the COMETS (Co-Management of Energy and Transport Sector) project (COMETS 4106-00033A), which has received funding from The Innovation Fund Denmark.

References

  1. Balyk O, Andersen SK, Dockweiler S et al (2018) TIMES-DK: technology-rich multi-sectoral optimisation model of the Danish energy system. Energy Strategy Rev [under review]Google Scholar
  2. CDIAC (2016) Global carbon project. US Department of Energy. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/GCP/. Accessed 10 Aug 2017
  3. Daly H, Lavigne D, Chiodi A et al (2011) An integrated energy systems and stock modelling approach for modelling future private car energy demand. Paper presented at the 60th semi-annual ETSAP meeting, Stanford University, California, USA, 6–13 July 2011Google Scholar
  4. Danish Energy Agency (2015) Denmark’s energy and climate outlook 2015. https://ens.dk/sites/ens.dk/files/Analyser/danish_energy_and_climate_outlook_2015.pdf. Accessed 12 Sep 2017
  5. European Commission (2016) Regulation of the European parliament and of the council. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0482&from=en. Accessed 12 Aug 2017
  6. Eurostat (2017) Energy balances 2017. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/energy/data/energy-balances. Accessed 25 Sep 2017
  7. FDM (2017) Bildatabasen. http://www.fdm.dk/bildatabasen. Accessed 18 Jun 2017
  8. International Energy Agency (2017) Global EV outlook 2017. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/GlobalEVOutlook2017.pdf. Accessed 11 Aug 2017
  9. IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: synthesis report. In: Pachauri RK, Meyer LA (eds) Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/. Accessed 18 Jun 2017
  10. Loulou R, Lehtilä A, Kanudia A et al (2016) Documentation for the TIMES model—part I: TIMES concepts and theory. Energy Systems Technology Analysis Programme (ETSAP). International Energy Agency (IEA). https://iea-etsap.org/docs/Documentation_for_the_TIMES_Model-Part-I_July-2016.pdf
  11. McCollum DL, Wilson C, Pettifor H et al (2017) Improving the behavioral realism of global integrated assessment models: an application to consumers’ vehicle choices. Transport Res Part D Transport Environ 55:322–342.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.04.003
  12. Merven B, Stone A, Hughes A et al (2012) Quantifying the energy needs of the transport sector for South Africa: a bottom-up model. http://www.sanea.org.za/CalendarOfEvents/2013/SANEALecturesCT/Aug14/AdrianStone-EnergyResearchCentreUniversityofCapeTown.pdf
  13. Mulholland E, Rogan F, Ó Gallachóir B (2017a) From technology pathways to policy roadmaps to enabling measures—a multi-model approach. Energy 138:1030–1041.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.116
  14. Mulholland E, Tattini J, Ramea K et al (2017b) The cost of electrifying private transport—evidence from an empirical consumer choice model of Ireland and Denmark. Transport Res Part D Transport Environ [Under Review]Google Scholar
  15. Raupach MR, Davis SJ, Peters GP et al (2014) Sharing a quota on cumulative carbon emissions. Nat Clim Change 4(10):873–879.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rivers N, Jaccard M (2005) Combining top-down and bottom-up approaches to energy-economy modeling using discrete choice methods. Energy J 26(1):83–106.  https://doi.org/10.2307/41323052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schäfer A, Jacoby HD (2005) Technology detail in a multisector CGE model: transport under climate policy. Energy Econ 27(1):1–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2004.10.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schipper L, Marie-Lilliu C, Gorham R (2000) Flexing the link between transport and greenhouse gas emissions: a Path for the World Bank. International Energy Agency, Paris, p 16Google Scholar
  19. Tattini J, Gargiulo M, Karlsson K (2018a) Reaching carbon neutral transport sector in Denmark—evidence from the incorporation of modal shift into the TIMES energy system modeling framework. Energy Policy 113:571–583.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.11.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tattini J, Ramea K, Gargiulo M et al (2018b) Improving the representation of modal choice into bottom-up optimization energy system models—the MoCho-TIMES model. Appl Energy 212:265282.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. The Danish Government (2011) Our future energy. 2011. https://stateofgreen.com/files/download/387. Accessed 8 Sep 2017
  22. Transport DTU (2016) Danish national travel survey, dataset TU0615v1, from May 2006 to December 2015. Accessed 10 Sep 2017Google Scholar
  23. UN (2017a) Carbon dioxide emissions. http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?q=emissions&d=MDG&f=seriesRowID%3a749#MDG. Accessed 16 Sep 2017
  24. UN (2017b) World population prospects 2017. https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/DataQuery/. Accessed 11 Sep 2017
  25. UNFCCC (2016) Report of the conference of the parties on its twenty-first session, 30 Nov–13 Dec 2015. Part two: action taken by the conference of the parties at its twenty-first session, ParisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacopo Tattini
    • 1
  • Eamonn Mulholland
    • 2
  • Giada Venturini
    • 1
  • Mohammad Ahanchian
    • 1
  • Maurizio Gargiulo
    • 3
  • Olexandr Balyk
    • 1
  • Kenneth Karlsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Technical University of DenmarkKongens LyngbyDenmark
  2. 2.MaREI Centre, Environmental Research InstituteUniversity College CorkCorkIreland
  3. 3.E4SMATurinItaly

Personalised recommendations