The 11th AIM International Workshop
19-21, February 2006
Ohyama Memorial Hall
NIES, Tsukuba, Japan

Development of AIM/Enduse
in world regions
Tatsuya HANAOKA
Mikiko KAINUMA
Yuzuru MATSUOKA
Junichi FUJINOGo HIBINO
Maho MIYASHITA
Osamu AKASHIOverview of AIM family
Enduse/SDB type modules
Energy end-use, Renewable energy,
Waste treatment/disposal, Resource
recycling

AIM/CGE

AIM/Material

CGE approach

AIM/Enduse models(Energy, Materials)

GlobalNational

Bottom-up, enduse, SDB
approach

AIM/Ecosystem[global]

AIM/Ecosystem[country]

Bottom up/accounting
modelsProcess/SDB type modules

AIM/Impact[Policy]… Simplified model forLong-term assessment of climate change

Land-use, Population-urbanization
Forestry, Agriculture
Water Resource and Infrastructures
Air Load/emission

Feature of AIM/Enduse[Global]
Regional scale: 21 global regional aggregations
but, improve detail data in a national level
Temporal scale: 2000 (Base year) – 2020 (Target year)
but, plan to extend upto 2050
Gas classifications: CO2, CH4, N2O, HFC, PFC, SF6,（CFC, HCFC）
but plan to consider SO2, NOx, PM, BC/OC
Sector classifications: Multiple sectors

Sector coverage
Sector classifications:- Power generation sector- Industry sector- Residential sector- Commercial sector- Transport sector- Agriculture sector- CH4 & N2O emissions- F-gas emissions- Energy supply & price: Hibino: Hibino: Miyashita: Miyashita: Akashi: Pandy → Hanaoka: Nair → Hanaoka: Hanaoka: Fujino

Geographical coverage
Region1) Japan
2) China
3) India
4) Indonesia5) Korea6) Thailand
7) Other South-east Asia
8) Other South Asia
9) Middle East
10) Australia11) New Zealand12) Canada
13) USA14) EU-15 in Western Europe
15) EU-10 in Eastern Europe16) Russia17) Argentine18) Brazil19) Other Latin America20) Africa21) Rest of the World

CodeJPN
CHN
IND
IDN
KOR
THA
XSE
XSA
XME
AUS
NZL
CAN
USA
XE15
XE10
RUS
ARG
BRZ
XLM
XAF
XRW

Asia regionsin detailPreliminary Results
Results presented atInformal Experts Meeting on Modeling Activities
dealing with Climate Changeorganized by Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in September 2004

We focused on:
to estimate marginal abatement costs andevaluate GHG mitigation potentials in world
regions in 2020.
- Region-wise mitigation potentials and costs- Sector-wise mitigation potentials and costs

Outline of simulationz Target Year: 2020z Discount rate:(1) 5% (private & public)(2) 33%(private), 10% (public)z Simulation cases
9 Reference case (technology-frozen case)i.e.) the case under existing technology options with the same
technical and economic characteristics as in 2000

9 Advanced technologies casei.e.) the market selections of realistic advanced technologies

Reduction potentials and abatement costs

Reduction potentials in 2020
Mt-CO25%

Discount rate
Marginal abatement cost 2000US$

CO2CH4

Ste e l< 100< 300<0< 100< 300395

571

642

338

486

546

Othe r manufacture

1,045

1,850

1,855

196

1,195

1,898

Indutry total

1,440

2,421

2,496

533

1,682

2,444

Re side ntial

210

330

351

22110

281

Comme rcial

307

474

483

56

275

373

Transportation

1,298

1,826

2,481

448

542

1,233

Agriculture

00

0

000

Othe rs

000000

Powe r ge ne ration

3,026

3,366

3,526

3,010

3,082

3,463

Total

6,282

8,417

9,337

4,069

5,690

7,795

0

42330

032152

Ene rgy

797

2,005

2,005478

2,001

2,005

Total

797

2,048

2,335

478

2,033

2,158

Agriculture

N2O
HFCs,PFCs,SF6 (4%)
Total<033%(Private ), 10%(Public)

‐

‐

‐

84796

859

7,163

11,26012,531

‐

‐‐

‐

‐

‐

4,548

7,723

9,953

in the year 2020

Regional Breakdown: Reduction potentials
in the year 2020

Discount rate = 5%
Developed

HFCs,PFCs,SF6Developing/Transition

Agriculture CH4

Energy industry- CH4

Energy industry- CO2

Energy industry- CO2

Transportation CO2

Transportation CO2

Residential &Commecial CO2

Residential &Commecial CO2

Manufacture CO2

Manufacture CO21,000

2,000

3,000

CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2eq)< US$ 0, 2020

Developing/Transition

Agriculture CH4

Energy industry- CH40DevelopedHFCs,PFCs,SF60

1,000

2,000

3,000

CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2eq)< US$ 100, 2020

2.1 Gt-CO2 and 5.0 Gt-CO2

3.4 Gt-CO2 and 7.9 Gt-CO2(Developed and Developing/Transition)(Developed and Developing/Transition)

Rest of the World

AfricaOther Latin America

2,000Brazil

in the year 2020

Argentine

RussiaEU-10 in Eastern Europe

EU-15 in Western Europe

USACanada

New ZealandAustralia

Middle East

Other South Asia

Other South-east Asia

Thailand

KoreaIndonesia

India

ChinaJapan

Reduction Potential (Mt-CO2)

Reduction potentials in 21 regions
Discount rate = 5%2,500
US$ 100-300/t-CO2

US$ 0-100/t-CO2< US$ 0/t-CO2

1,500

1,000

5000Reduction potentials in steel sector
600

Steel production contributes to the largest
CO2 emissions share in industry sector

2,307(-28%)(-25%)(-17%)(-21%)(-15%)(-24%)+787

2,00032
CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2)

CO2 Emission (Mt-CO2)

2,500

40500

97

400

300

200

17212174

67

1414
4674

1,500

2224

Developing Others

74

Brazil79

EU-10 in EasternEurope
India100

175200Russia115

Reduction
Emission

China0< US$0/t-CO2

500

Developed

58

1,520

1,000

108

< US$100/tCO2< US$300/tCO2

Discount rate = 33%

600

AC < 300

AC < 100

2020 DR= 33%

DiscountAbatement CostRate

US$/tCO2

Mt-CO2vs frozen

33%

less than 0

338

15%

less than 100

486

21%

less than 300

546

24%

5%

CO2 Reduction

less than 0

395

17%

less than 100

571

25%

less than 300

642

28%

Others66

500
CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2)2020 DR= 5%

AC < 0AC < 300

AC < 0AC < 100

DR=Discount rate
AC = Abatement Cost (US$/tCO2)

2020 Frozen

2000

0400300

262547202547

14152866

66

15281528686868888888

Coke dry typequenching
High efficiency
heating furnace
Increase of coalinjection
LDG & latent heatrecovery
Continuous caster
Retire of OHF

200100124

124

124

Large size blastfurnace
Large size coke oven
Furnace gas recovery0< US$0/t-CO2
Discount rate = 33%< US$100/tCO2< US$300/tCO2

Technology with large reduction potentials
under 100 US$ marginal abatement costs in 2020
(MtCO2)Developing/Transition(MtCO2)High efficiency gasoline engine(VVLT, GDI etc)

632

Existing type of power plant(coal ,gas)

2,462

Existing type of power plant(coal ,gas)546

Use of instrument air, low bleed
pneumatic devices*

676

Inverter control for motor216

Gas high efficiency industrial
furnace449

Fluorescent of incandescent type

143

Inverter control for motor

431

Domestic refrigeration: recovery

129

Coal bed methane ventilationoxidizer for heat**232

Developed* Recovery of CH4 leakage from natural gas pipeline and well** Recovery of CH4 in coal mine

(Discount rate = 5%)

Marginal abatement cost of developed
and developing countries in 2020

Marginal Abatement Cost (US$/t-CO2)

200

200

150

150

100

100

5050000

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000-50

0-50-100-100

CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2)

Developed

CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2)

Developing/Transition

Marginal Abatement Cost (US$/t-CO2)

left-right reversal(Discount rate = 5%)

Marginal abatement cost of developed
and developing/transition economies
4,900 Mt-CO2
196 US$ Billion

150
Marginal Abatement Cost (US$/t-CO2)200

4,200 Mt-CO2
120 US$ Billion

150

3,400 Mt-CO2
52 US$ Billion

100

100

5050

000

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,0008,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

-50

0-50-100-100
CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2)

Developed(Discount rate = 5%)

CO2 Reduction (Mt-CO2)

Developing/Transition

Marginal Abatement Cost (US$/t-CO2)200

Preliminary Findings:
How much reduction could be possible?
9 Global reduction potential in 2020:
4.5 - 7.2 Gt-CO2eq in no-regret case
7.7 - 11.3 Gt-CO2eq under 100 US$/t-CO2 marginal costs
if we move into action and take countermeasures now.
9 Regional reduction potential in 2020 (5% discount rate) :in no-regret case:
2.1 Gt-CO2eq and 5.0 Gt-CO2eq
under 100 US$/t-CO2 marginal abatement costs:
3.4 Gt-CO2eq and 7.9 Gt-CO2eq
in developed countries and developing/transition
economies, respectively
It is essential to set up frameworks considering transfers of technologies
and financial aid to the developing regions.

Remaining issues
1. Update of database such as new advanced
technologies, grass-roots countermeasures.
This analysis was based on realistic technologies withcurrent cost estimates. Therefore, it may be possible toreduce more if new advanced technologies become
available in the future.

2. Future scenarios and determination of service
demands of enduse services in each sector.
3. Hard-linkage among sector models
We have been developing database and considering
more appropriate methods how to determine service
demands in each sector.

Current Major Projects
Japan Low Carbon Society
Scenarios toward 2050

Socioeconomicmodels

Mitigation
TargetAIM/ Impact[Policy]

Regional impact andAdaptation details

Aimplified integrated assessment
model for climate stabilization

AIM/Enduse[county]

Burdensharing

AIM/Material

AIM/Impact

Global emission paths
to climate stabilization

Process model for assessingdetailed climate impacts

AIM/ CGE[Global]

Regional economic
details on climate
vulnerability andadaptation potential

With cooperation of AIM team in Asia
Global multi- regional CGE type
Energy- Economic model

Socioeconomicmodels

Mitigation
Target

AIM/Enduse[Country]

Strategic
database

AIM/CGE[Country]

Reduction potentials andabatement cost curves

Macro- economic
driving forces onenergy consumption
and GHG emissions

AIM/ Enduse[global]
Bottom- up type
Energy- emission model

Low Carbon Scenarios
in China, India, Thailand
Nationalscale

Globalscale

ModelOutput

Further Cooperation among AIM teamIn the near future, we appreciate cooperation:- Update of Strategic Database- Data of dwelling types in Residential sector- Data of person trip in transport sector- Data of BCand so on,
and so on,
and so on…
Thank you very much for your cooperation!

その他予備資料

Logic of technology selection
Service demand

Initial cost

Running cost for X years

Technology A
New demands
Replacement

Introduction
in year X+1

Technology B
Tech A ＜ Tech B ⇒ Tech A is selected

XX+1

YearAs private industries take into account high investment risk for energy
conserving technologies, a payback period of 3-years is usually assumed.
e.g.)
the discount rate corresponding to 3-years payback is about 33% based on
the assumption of 30 years lifetime for steel plants.

Logic of technology selection(1) Replacement, new demands
Initial cost

Running cost for X years

Technology A

Service demand

Technology B

New demands
Replacement

Introduction
in year X+1

Extention ofpay back period

Tech A ＜ Tech B ⇒ Tech B is selected

Initial cost

Running cost for X years

Technology AXX+1

YearTechnology B
Carbon tax

Tech A ＜ Tech B ⇒ Tech B is selectedLogic of technology selection(2) Substitution of existing technology
Service demand

Initial cost Running cost for X years
Technology A
Technology B
Initialcost
Target for substitution
in year X+1

XX+1

Year

Running costfor X years

Tech A ＜ Tech B ⇒ Tech B is selected