IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i9p1587-d111029.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the EU, US, China, and India up to 2060 in Comparison with Their Pledges under the Paris Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Yang Liu

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Fang Wang

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Jingyun Zheng

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

A greenhouse gas (GHG) emission model was developed based on economic and energy sector development at the national level. Different development scenarios were established, including BAU (scenario with business as usual) and API (scenario with additional policy interventions). We simulated annual GHG emissions under different scenarios for the EU, US, China, and India from 2016 to 2060, and evaluated the impacts of emission changes on their mitigation pledges (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions, INDCs). Two main conclusions were obtained. (1) In API, EU’s emissions fell from 4160 to 2340 MtCO 2 e/year and would probably achieve its INDC pledge. Though US’s emissions fell from 6330 to 4020 MtCO 2 e/year, it still had a deficit of 370 MtCO 2 e in 2025. If the Clean Power Plan (CPP) is abandoned, US’s emissions would remain above 6000 MtCO 2 e/year. (2) In BAU, China’s emissions peaked in 2044 while India’s emissions were already close to the strict INDC target. In API, China and India both achieved a reduction of about 2000 MtCO 2 e exceeding their INDC targets in 2030. Chinese emissions peaked in 2030, but Indian emissions grew until 2060. This study also indicates that developed countries should play a more important role in future mitigation efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang Liu & Fang Wang & Jingyun Zheng, 2017. "Estimation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the EU, US, China, and India up to 2060 in Comparison with Their Pledges under the Paris Agreement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-10, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:9:p:1587-:d:111029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/9/1587/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/9/1587/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dai, Hancheng & Masui, Toshihiko & Matsuoka, Yuzuru & Fujimori, Shinichiro, 2011. "Assessment of China's climate commitment and non-fossil energy plan towards 2020 using hybrid AIM/CGE model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2875-2887, May.
    2. World Bank, 2016. "World Development Indicators 2016," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 23969.
    3. Jeffery B. Greenblatt & Max Wei, 2016. "Assessment of the climate commitments and additional mitigation policies of the United States," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1090-1093, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seyed Alireza Modirzadeh & Mohsen Nasseri & Mohammad Sadegh Ahadi & Farzam Pourasghar Sangachin, 2021. "Assessing GHG mitigation goals of INDCs (NDCs) considering socio-economic and environmental indicators of the parties," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 1-33, December.
    2. Chen, Xiuzhi & Liu, Chang & van Oel, Pieter & Mergia Mekonnen, Mesfin & Thorp, Kelly R. & Yin, Tuo & Wang, Jinyan & Muhammad, Tahir & Li, Yunkai, 2022. "Water and carbon risks within hydropower development on national scale," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    3. Rafael Tordecilla-Madera & Andrés Polo & Adrián Cañón, 2018. "Vehicles Allocation for Fruit Distribution Considering CO 2 Emissions and Decisions on Subcontracting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Senshaw, Dereje Azemraw & Kim, Jeong Won, 2018. "Meeting conditional targets in nationally determined contributions of developing countries: Renewable energy targets and required investment of GGGI member and partner countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 433-443.
    5. Nick Macaluso & Sugandha Tuladhar & Jared Woollacott & James R. Mcfarland & Jared Creason & Jefferson Cole, 2018. "The Impact Of Carbon Taxation And Revenue Recycling On U.S. Industries," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(01), pages 1-41, February.
    6. Ting Jiang & Zhenzhong Shen & Yang Liu & Yiyang Hou, 2018. "Carbon Footprint Assessment of Four Normal Size Hydropower Stations in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Jiang, Jingjing & Ye, Bin & Liu, Junguo, 2019. "Research on the peak of CO2 emissions in the developing world: Current progress and future prospect," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 186-203.
    8. Seyedashkan Madani, 2021. "The BRI and its Implications for China s Energy Security: The Four As Model Perspective," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(4), pages 549-559.
    9. Ayla Alkan & Ayla Oğuş Binatlı & Çağaçan Değer, 2018. "Achieving Turkey’s INDC Target: Assessments of NCCAP and INDC Documents and Proposing Conceivable Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, May.
    10. Zhang, Hongxia & Hewings, Geoffrey J.D. & Zheng, Xinye, 2019. "The effects of carbon taxation in China: An analysis based on energy input-output model in hybrid units," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 223-234.

    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. Jan Fagerberg & Bengt-Åke Lundvall & Martin Srholec, 2018. "Global Value Chains, National Innovation Systems and Economic Development," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 30(3), pages 533-556, July.
    2. Ni, Jinlan & Wei, Chu & Du, Limin, 2015. "Revealing the political decision toward Chinese carbon abatement: Based on equity and efficiency criteria," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 609-621.
    3. Keller, Wolfgang & Utar, Hale, 2023. "International trade and job polarization: Evidence at the worker level," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    4. Almeida, Alexandre N. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., 2019. "Agricultural productivity, shadow wages and off-farm labor decisions in Nicaragua," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 99-110.
    5. Bohlmann, H.R. & Horridge, J.M. & Inglesi-Lotz, R. & Roos, E.L. & Stander, L., 2019. "Regional employment and economic growth effects of South Africa’s transition to low-carbon energy supply mix," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 830-837.
    6. Dreher, Axel & Fuchs, Andreas & Langlotz, Sarah, 2019. "The effects of foreign aid on refugee flows," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 127-147.
    7. Iseghohi Judith Omon, 2021. "Migrant Remittances and Health Outcomes in the West Africa Monetary Zones (WAMZ)," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 24(81), pages 15-32, September.
    8. Markus Brueckner & Ngo Van Long & Joaquin L. Vespignani, 2020. "Non-Gravity Trade," Globalization Institute Working Papers 388, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    9. Tanu M Goyal & Arpita Mukherjee, 2017. "Trade Agreements and Services Value Chain: The Case of India and Thailand," Applied Finance and Accounting, Redfame publishing, vol. 3(1), pages 11-23, February.
    10. Malerba, Daniele, 2020. "Poverty alleviation and local environmental degradation: An empirical analysis in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    11. Dorsch, Michael T. & Maarek, Paul, 2020. "Economic downturns, inequality, and democratic improvements," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    12. Elert, Niklas & Henrekson, Magnus, 2017. "Entrepreneurship and Institutions: A Bidirectional Relationship," Working Paper Series 1153, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 05 May 2017.
    13. Bachewe, Fantu Nisrane & Koru, Bethlehem & Taffesse, Alemayehu Seyoum, 2018. "Productivity and efficiency in high-potential areas," IFPRI book chapters, in: The economics of teff: Exploring Ethiopia’s biggest cash crop, chapter 7, pages 149-180, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Mavisakalyan, Astghik & Tarverdi, Yashar, 2019. "Gender and climate change: Do female parliamentarians make difference?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 151-164.
    15. Zhang, Xi & Geng, Yong & Shao, Shuai & Wilson, Jeffrey & Song, Xiaoqian & You, Wei, 2020. "China’s non-fossil energy development and its 2030 CO2 reduction targets: The role of urbanization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    16. Oludele Emmanuel Folarin, 2019. "Financial reforms and industrialisation: evidence from Nigeria," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 21(1), pages 166-189, June.
    17. Igos, Elorri & Rugani, Benedetto & Rege, Sameer & Benetto, Enrico & Drouet, Laurent & Zachary, Daniel S., 2015. "Combination of equilibrium models and hybrid life cycle-input–output analysis to predict the environmental impacts of energy policy scenarios," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 234-245.
    18. Annarita BALDANZI & Alberto BUCCI & Klaus PRETTNER, 2016. "The Effects of Health Investments on Human Capital and R&D-Driven Economic Growth," Departmental Working Papers 2016-17, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    19. G. Yoganandan & Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman & M. Vasan & Abdelrhman Meero, 2022. "Evaluating agripreneurs’ satisfaction: exploring the effect of demographics and emporographics," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:9:p:1587-:d:111029. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.