Integrated Assessment of Energy-Options for CO2 Reduction

  • T. Kram
  • P. A. Okken

Abstract

Energy technology options for CO2 reduction are evaluated in a process-oriented dynamic national costs minimizing LP-model of the Dutch energy system. To identify cost-effective CO2 reduction strategies two scenarios are calculated with a 50% reduction of CO2 emissions in 2020. CO2 reduction sharpens the contrast between both scenarios: the nuclear supply-oriented all-electric strategy in the “Trend” scenario, versus the demand oriented gas strategy in the “Green” scenario. Some options are chosen in both scenarios to reduce CO2. It is recommended to direct R,D&D-policy to these “robust” options, which include energy conservation, materials recycling, renewable energy and high efficient gas conversion technologies. Accounting for indirect CO2 emissions and non-CO2 greenhouse gases from the energy system is not expected to change the optimal reduction strategies.

This scenario study was sponsored by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ) and by the Netherlands Agency for Energy and Environment R,D&D Management (NOVEM).

Keywords

Emission Coefficient Base Case Scenario Underground Coal Gasification Fuel Switching Primary Energy Supply 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kram, T. and P.A. Okken (1989), Two low COb energy scenarios for the Netherlands, Proceedings IEA/OECD expert seminar on energy technologies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nota Energiebeleid (1974). Ministry EZ, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nationaal Milieubeleids Plan (1989). Ministries VROM, EZ, L&V, V&W, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Koyama, S. (ETL) and S. Yasukawa (JAERI) et.al. (1988). A preliminary energy-environment analysis: Part 1 and 2, Proc. of a joint ETSAP/IIASA-workshop BNL, Upton, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Larsson, T. and C-O. Wene (1988). Robust energy systems: a Swedish community as an example, Chalmers University, Gerg, Sweden.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blok, K., J. Bijlsma, S. Fockens and P.A. Okken (1988). CO2 emission coefficients for fuels and energy carriers in The Netherlands (in Dutch), Utrecht University/ESC, Petten, The Netherlands, ESC-WR-88–12.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Okken, P.A. and T. Kram (1989). CH4/CO-emissions from fossil fuels global warming potential. ESC, Petten, The Netherlands, ESC-WR-89-13.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Okken, P. A., J. Rotmans, R.J. Swart (1989). The greenhouse effect: uncertainty dilemma between science and policy, and its effect on scenario development. Presented at IEA/IPCC expert group meeting on methodologies and analytical tools. RIVM, Bilthoven/ESC, Petten, The Netherlands, ESC-WR-89-07.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Kram
    • 1
  • P. A. Okken
    • 1
  1. 1.Energy Study CentreNetherlands Energy Research FoundationPettenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations