IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v128y2014icp296-306.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a global computable general equilibrium model coupled with detailed energy end-use technology

Author

Listed:
  • Fujimori, Shinichiro
  • Masui, Toshihiko
  • Matsuoka, Yuzuru

Abstract

A global computable general equilibrium (CGE) model integrating detailed energy end-use technologies is developed in this paper. The paper (1) presents how energy end-use technologies are treated within the model and (2) analyzes the characteristics of the model’s behavior. Energy service demand and end-use technologies are explicitly considered, and the share of technologies is determined by a discrete probabilistic function, namely a Logit function, to meet the energy service demand. Coupling with detailed technology information enables the CGE model to have more realistic representation in the energy consumption. The proposed model in this paper is compared with the aggregated traditional model under the same assumptions in scenarios with and without mitigation roughly consistent with the two degree climate mitigation target. Although the results of aggregated energy supply and greenhouse gas emissions are similar, there are three main differences between the aggregated and the detailed technologies models. First, GDP losses in mitigation scenarios are lower in the detailed technology model (2.8% in 2050) as compared with the aggregated model (3.2%). Second, price elasticity and autonomous energy efficiency improvement are heterogeneous across regions and sectors in the detailed technology model, whereas the traditional aggregated model generally utilizes a single value for each of these variables. Third, the magnitude of emissions reduction and factors (energy intensity and carbon factor reduction) related to climate mitigation also varies among sectors in the detailed technology model. The household sector in the detailed technology model has a relatively higher reduction for both energy intensity and the carbon factor.

Suggested Citation

  • Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko & Matsuoka, Yuzuru, 2014. "Development of a global computable general equilibrium model coupled with detailed energy end-use technology," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 296-306.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:128:y:2014:i:c:p:296-306
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261914004371
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.074?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Toshihiko Masui & Kenichi Matsumoto & Yasuaki Hijioka & Tsuguki Kinoshita & Toru Nozawa & Sawako Ishiwatari & Etsushi Kato & P. Shukla & Yoshiki Yamagata & Mikiko Kainuma, 2011. "An emission pathway for stabilization at 6 Wm −2 radiative forcing," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 59-76, November.
    2. Henri Waisman & Céline Guivarch & Fabio Grazi & Jean Hourcade, 2012. "The I maclim-R model: infrastructures, technical inertia and the costs of low carbon futures under imperfect foresight," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 101-120, September.
    3. Oladosu, Gbadebo, 2012. "Estimates of the global indirect energy-use emission impacts of USA biofuel policy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 85-96.
    4. Detlef Vuuren & Elke Stehfest & Michel Elzen & Tom Kram & Jasper Vliet & Sebastiaan Deetman & Morna Isaac & Kees Klein Goldewijk & Andries Hof & Angelica Mendoza Beltran & Rineke Oostenrijk & Bas Ruij, 2011. "RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 95-116, November.
    5. Calvin, Katherine & Clarke, Leon & Krey, Volker & Blanford, Geoffrey & Jiang, Kejun & Kainuma, Mikiko & Kriegler, Elmar & Luderer, Gunnar & Shukla, P.R., 2012. "The role of Asia in mitigating climate change: Results from the Asia modeling exercise," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S3), pages 251-260.
    6. Allison Thomson & Katherine Calvin & Steven Smith & G. Kyle & April Volke & Pralit Patel & Sabrina Delgado-Arias & Ben Bond-Lamberty & Marshall Wise & Leon Clarke & James Edmonds, 2011. "RCP4.5: a pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 77-94, November.
    7. Sands, Ronald D., 2004. "Dynamics of carbon abatement in the Second Generation Model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 721-738, July.
    8. Andreas Schäfer & Henry D. Jacoby, 2006. "Experiments with a Hybrid CGE-MARKAL Model1," The Energy Journal, , vol. 27(2_suppl), pages 171-177, June.
    9. Liang, Qiao-Mei & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2012. "Distributional impacts of taxing carbon in China: Results from the CEEPA model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 545-551.
    10. Keywan Riahi & Shilpa Rao & Volker Krey & Cheolhung Cho & Vadim Chirkov & Guenther Fischer & Georg Kindermann & Nebojsa Nakicenovic & Peter Rafaj, 2011. "RCP 8.5—A scenario of comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 33-57, November.
    11. Murphy, Rose & Jaccard, Mark, 2011. "Energy efficiency and the cost of GHG abatement: A comparison of bottom-up and hybrid models for the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7146-7155.
    12. Huang, Jikun & Yang, Jun & Msangi, Siwa & Rozelle, Scott & Weersink, Alfons, 2012. "Global biofuel production and poverty in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 246-255.
    13. Sue Wing, Ian, 2008. "The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down approaches to climate policy modeling: Electric power technology detail in a social accounting framework," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 547-573, March.
    14. Richard H. Moss & Jae A. Edmonds & Kathy A. Hibbard & Martin R. Manning & Steven K. Rose & Detlef P. van Vuuren & Timothy R. Carter & Seita Emori & Mikiko Kainuma & Tom Kram & Gerald A. Meehl & John F, 2010. "The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7282), pages 747-756, February.
    15. Messner, Sabine & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2000. "MESSAGE–MACRO: linking an energy supply model with a macroeconomic module and solving it iteratively," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 267-282.
    16. Fujimori, Shinichiro & Matsuoka, Yuzuru, 2011. "Development of method for estimation of world industrial energy consumption and its application," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 461-473, May.
    17. Zhang, Shuwei & Bauer, Nico & Luderer, Gunnar & Kriegler, Elmar, 2014. "Role of technologies in energy-related CO2 mitigation in China within a climate-protection world: A scenarios analysis using REMIND," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 445-455.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cai, Yiyong & Newth, David & Finnigan, John & Gunasekera, Don, 2015. "A hybrid energy-economy model for global integrated assessment of climate change, carbon mitigation and energy transformation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 381-395.
    2. Dai, Hancheng & Mischke, Peggy & Xie, Xuxuan & Xie, Yang & Masui, Toshihiko, 2016. "Closing the gap? Top-down versus bottom-up projections of China’s regional energy use and CO2 emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1355-1373.
    3. Ritchie, Justin & Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 2017. "The 1000 GtC coal question: Are cases of vastly expanded future coal combustion still plausible?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 16-31.
    4. Fujimori, S. & Kainuma, M. & Masui, T. & Hasegawa, T. & Dai, H., 2014. "The effectiveness of energy service demand reduction: A scenario analysis of global climate change mitigation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 379-391.
    5. Fujimori, Shinichiro & Dai, Hancheng & Masui, Toshihiko & Matsuoka, Yuzuru, 2016. "Global energy model hindcasting," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 293-301.
    6. Hermann Lotze-Campen & Martin Lampe & Page Kyle & Shinichiro Fujimori & Petr Havlik & Hans Meijl & Tomoko Hasegawa & Alexander Popp & Christoph Schmitz & Andrzej Tabeau & Hugo Valin & Dirk Willenbocke, 2014. "Impacts of increased bioenergy demand on global food markets: an AgMIP economic model intercomparison," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 103-116, January.
    7. Matsumoto, Ken׳ichi & Andriosopoulos, Kostas, 2016. "Energy security in East Asia under climate mitigation scenarios in the 21st century," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PA), pages 60-71.
    8. Ritchie, Justin & Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 2017. "Why do climate change scenarios return to coal?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 1276-1291.
    9. Julien Lefevre, 2018. "Modeling the Socioeconomic Impacts of the Adoption of a Carbon Pricing Instrument – Literature review," CIRED Working Papers hal-03128619, HAL.
    10. Amouzou, Kokou Adambounou & Naab, Jesse B. & Lamers, John P.A. & Borgemeister, Christian & Becker, Mathias & Vlek, Paul L.G., 2018. "CROPGRO-Cotton model for determining climate change impacts on yield, water- and N- use efficiencies of cotton in the Dry Savanna of West Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 85-96.
    11. Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko & Matsuoka, Yuzuru, 2015. "Gains from emission trading under multiple stabilization targets and technological constraints," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 306-315.
    12. Iñigo Capellán-Pérez & Mikel González-Eguino & Iñaki Arto & Alberto Ansuategi & Kishore Dhavala & Pralit Patel & Anil Markandya, 2014. "New climate scenario framework implementation in the GCAM integrated assessment model," Working Papers 2014-04, BC3.
    13. Cai, Yiyong & Arora, Vipin, 2015. "Disaggregating electricity generation technologies in CGE models: A revised technology bundle approach with an application to the U.S. Clean Power Plan," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 543-555.
    14. Hong, Eun-Mi & Nam, Won-Ho & Choi, Jin-Yong & Pachepsky, Yakov A., 2016. "Projected irrigation requirements for upland crops using soil moisture model under climate change in South Korea," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 163-180.
    15. Chicco, Gianfranco & Stephenson, Paule M., 2012. "Effectiveness of setting cumulative carbon dioxide emissions reduction targets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 19-31.
    16. Kriegler, Elmar & Riahi, Keywan & Bauer, Nico & Schwanitz, Valeria Jana & Petermann, Nils & Bosetti, Valentina & Marcucci, Adriana & Otto, Sander & Paroussos, Leonidas & Rao, Shilpa & Arroyo Currás, T, 2015. "Making or breaking climate targets: The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 24-44.
    17. Li, Jun & Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem & Cassen, Christophe, 2017. "Aligning domestic policies with international coordination in a post-Paris global climate regime: A case for China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 258-274.
    18. Nathalie Spittler & Ganna Gladkykh & Arnaud Diemer & Brynhildur Davidsdottir, 2019. "Understanding the Current Energy Paradigm and Energy System Models for More Sustainable Energy System Development," Post-Print hal-02127724, HAL.
    19. Yan Lu & Haikun Wang & Qin’geng Wang & Yanyan Zhang & Yiyong Yu & Yu Qian, 2017. "Global anthropogenic heat emissions from energy consumption, 1965–2100," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 459-468, December.
    20. Sebastian Rausch & Valerie J. Karplus, 2014. "Markets versus Regulation: The Efficiency and Distributional Impacts of U.S. Climate Policy Proposals," The Energy Journal, , vol. 35(1_suppl), pages 199-228, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:128:y:2014:i:c:p:296-306. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.