An Assessment of Near-to-Mid-Term Economic Impacts and Energy Transitions under “2 °C” and “1.5 °C” Scenarios for India

Solely economic mitigation strategy suggests upward revision of nationally determined contributions

ABSTRACTThe 2015 Paris Agreement was adopted at the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In the run-up to COP 21, most UNFCCC Parties put forward intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs), containing mitigation pledges. These INDCs are now being confirmed as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), as governments formally ratify the Paris Agreement. NDCs are supposed to provide transparent, quantifiable, comparable, and verifiable mitigation objectives. However, there is neither methodological nor data consistency in the way Parties have prepared their NDCs. This article showcases recent collaboration among research, government, and private institutions that contributed to the Colombian NDC. While documenting the novel research, data, and rich web of collaboration that helped the Colombian government prepare the country’s NDC, this article links this specific case with the challenges of policy-oriented and interactive models of research. Our experience confirms previous research on the importance of stakeholder interaction, transparency and openness of processes, and willingness to break disciplinary and institutional barriers. In addition, the experience points to the importance of having appropriate available resources and a local institution acting as champion for the project.POLICY RELEVANCEThe lack of methodological and data consistency in the way parties have prepared their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) can significantly slow down the progress toward limiting global warming below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. In the meantime, calls for scientists to provide ‘usable’ information are increasing and the importance of close collaboration between scientists, end-users, and stakeholders is also increasingly acknowledged. In this article we make explicit the process and research challenges faced during what was, in the authors’ opinion, the successful collaboration among scientists, governmental, and private institutions that led to the formulation of an essential component of the Colombian NDC. As policy makers move forward with the implementation of their plans and as scientists become increasingly engaged with government planning, it is essential that they are aware of the needs and demands in terms of collaborations, data, resources, and type of results necessary to produce analyses that can be made fully public and can withstand international scrutiny.

Climate change is a global collective action problem, which is primarily caused due to combination of the current Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and the historical cumulative GHG emissions, contributed mainly by the developed countries. Even though India’s per capita GHG emission is minimal, India is committed to addressing the challenge with firm adherence to multilateralism, keeping in mind the national circumstances and based on equity and the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), as enshrined in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Developed countries have to take lead in reducing their GHG emissions and by providing finance, technology and capacity building support to developing countries. The continuous increase in the global mean-surface temperature due to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and the noticeable adverse impact of global warming across the world, have resulted in high incidences of disasters and vulnerability of human beings. In this context, the manuscript describes India's updated Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) targets submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in August 2022, and provides a detailed analysis of the progress made so far to reduce global warming and the major concerning issues. It provides an in-depth analysis of the achievements vis-à-vis the more inclusive global Environmental Performance Index (EPI) ranking 2024 from the overall environmental scenario. The way forward has been suggested based on the policy analysis of climate change and personal opinion. It concludes that though India has done remarkably well in achieving its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) targets in containing and mitigating the rise of greenhouse gases, it also requires to address the root cause of the problem such as high population along with the other social issues such as lack of awareness, public participation, and environmental responsibility for improvement in global ranking from the overall environmental perspective.

implemented projects.While additionality and the quantification of emission reductions are, in principle, key considerations for unit quality for crediting mechanisms, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impact from using credits from already implemented projects is more complex.If the supply of credits considerably exceeds demand, a key consideration for the global GHG emissions impact is whether already implemented projects would continue to reduce GHG emissions even without credit revenues, or whether they are 'vulnerable' to discontinuing GHG abatement.A detailed assessment of the status and operating conditions of projects under the Clean Development Mechanism, and their marginal costs of supplying credits, shows that most projects would continue GHG abatement even if they cannot sell credits.If CORSIA allows airline operators the unlimited use of offset credits from these projects, this will not only undermine its environmental objectives but also lead to continued low carbon prices, and thus neither offer incentives for new investments nor lead to any significant revenues for already implemented projects.The thesis recommends limiting eligibility under CORSIA to new or 'vulnerable' projects (Chapter 5).Unit quality is also a key consideration when linking emissions trading systems (ETSs).As linking of ETSs faces several practical and political challenges and risks, including with regard to whether allowances have 'quality' and whether linking provides incentives or disincentives to enhance the ambition of caps, policy-makers are considering also restricted forms of linking ETSs.The thesis uses a simple economic model and three criteria -abatement outcome, economic implications, and feasibility -to assess three different options for implementing restricted linking of ETSs: quotas, exchange rates, or discount rates.The analysis shows that quotas can enhance cost-effectiveness relative to no linking and allow policy-makers to retain control on the extent of unit flows.Exchange rates could enhance abatement and economic benefits or have unintended adverse implications for cost-effectiveness and total abatement, depending on how rates are set.Due to information asymmetries between the regulated entities and policy-makers setting the exchange rate, and uncertainties about future developments, setting exchange rates in a manner that avoids such unintended consequences could prove difficult.Discount rates, in contrast, can ensure that both cost-effectiveness and total abatement are enhanced.The thesis recommends the consideration of quotas or discount rates, but to refrain from using exchange rates, due to the environmental integrity risks (Chapter 6).The varying scope and ambition of current NDC targets, and possible disincentives to broaden their scope and enhance their ambition, could be addressed by facilitating the adoption of ambitious and economy-wide mitigation targets and by preventing the transfer of carbon market units in situations of high environmental integrity risks.This latter approach could be implemented through eligibility criteria or limits on the generation, transfer or use of carbon market units.Limits could in particular address the risk that some countries have mitigation targets that correspond to higher levels of Summary 10 emissions than independent projections of their likely emissions.If such 'hot air' can be transferred to other countries, it could increase aggregated emissions and create a perverse incentive for countries not to enhance the ambition of future mitigation targets.The thesis proposes a typology for such limits, explores key design options, and tests different types of limits in the context of fifteen countries.The analysis indicates that limits to international transfers could, if designed appropriately, prevent most of the hot air contained in current mitigation targets from being transferred, but also involve trade-offs between different policy objectives (Chapter 7).The thesis concludes by discussing how four strategies to mitigate environmental integrity risks -robust accounting, ensuring unit quality, facilitating economy-wide and ambitious mitigation targets, and restricting international transfers -could be implemented under the Paris Agreement and CORSIA (see Figure S-1).Crediting mechanisms pose higher risks for environmental integrity than linking of ETSs and should therefore have a limited role in the future.International oversight can reduce the risks to environmental integrity to some extent.Acquiring countries could also reduce risks by only acquiring units from countries that also have ambitious NDC targets.Overall, policy-makers should not regard carbon market approaches as the one and only 'silver-bullet' to mitigating climate change but carefully assess what policy instrument or mix of instruments is best suited achieve and balance different policy objectives, in particular in light of the rapid transition that is necessary to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement (Chapter 8). How can the environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms be ensured in the new context of the Paris Agreement?To assess this, further research questions are:1. How should environmental integrity be defined in the context of international carbon market mechanisms?1. Accounting for the international transfer of carbon market units: Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement requires countries to "apply robust accounting to ensure, inter alia, the avoidance of double counting".A lack of robust accounting could undermine environmental integrity in several ways (Chapter 2).If emission reductions are double counted, for example, actual global GHG emissions are higher than the sum of what individual countries report (see Chapter 3).Establishing and implementing robust accounting rules is thus an important prerequisite for achieving environmental integrity (see Chapters 2 and 3).An important question is therefore how robust accounting can be implemented in the new context of the Paris Agreement, taken into account the diverse scopes, metrics, types and timeframes of current NDC targets.Chapter 7: When less is more: Limits to international transfers under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement Chapter 8: Discussion, conclusions and recommendations Note: Dark green indicates that this aspect is the main focus of the chapter.Bright green indicates that this aspect is also considered.Grey indicates that this aspect is not considered.Chapter 5 takes up a matter that is controversially debated under both ICAO and the Paris Agreement: whether carbon market units from the Kyoto mechanisms should be eligible for use after 2020.The chapter assesses the environmental and economic implications of using offset credits from the largest mechanism to date -the CDM -under CORSIA, and analyses what type of eligibility criteria are necessary to perverse environmental integrity.Towards this end, a model is established that estimates the supply potential and the costs of generating certified emission reductions (CERs) for each of the 8,000 registered CDM projects and assesses under which conditions creating new demand for CERs from already existing projects triggers actual emission reductions, taking into account differences between project types.Chapter 6 turns the focus from crediting mechanisms to another form of international carbon market mechanisms: the linking of ETSs.Several jurisdictions are considering, or 'hot air' -a term used in context of mitigation targets that countries over-achieve without pursuing further mitigation actions (Boehringer, 2000;den Elzen & de Moor, 2002;Kollmuss et al., 2015).They could, however, also be used to address other environmental integrity risks, such as the lack of robust accounting system, concerns related unit quality, or possible disincentives to enhance mitigation action in the future.This chapter proposes a typology for limits, explores key design options, and quantitatively tests different types of limits in the context of fifteen countries.Lastly, Chapter 8 discusses the overall findings of the thesis, provides conclusions and makes recommendations.These can inform the ongoing negotiations on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, and the implementation of carbon market mechanisms by countries, jurisdictions and international organizations, such as ICAO.Chapter 2Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms 19Chapter 2Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms under the Paris

Rapid industrialization and urbanization in the 20th century have led to increasing volumes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere[...]

Scientists welcome new global climate change pact

Thailand’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) aims to reduce 20 to 25% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with respect to the projected reference level of NDC in 2030, respectively, in its unconditional and conditional scenarios. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C would require net zero carbon dioxide emissions globally by around 2050. Thailand’s current energy system is highly fossil fuel dependent and requires enormous transformations to achieve more stringent GHG emission reduction targets beyond its NDC. This paper seeks to estimate the level and the intensities of Thailand’s energy system and their economy-wide effects post-2030 under the business as usual and 16 GHG emission reduction scenarios ranging from 30 to 100% by 2050. A computable general equilibrium analysis using the AIM/Hub model is employed to estimate the macroeconomic impacts of meeting the unconditional and conditional emission reductions of Thailand’s NDC in 2030 along with varying GHG emission reductions in 2050. Results show that renewables – constituting solar, wind, biomass and hydro and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies account for more than 95% in the power generation mix by 2050, if 100% GHG emission reduction from the 2010 level is to be achieved. Electricity generation based on biomass both with and without CCS will occupy a major share in the investments by 2050 in all the conditional and unconditional NDC scenarios. A rapid increase in carbon sequestration occurs from 2040 onwards through the deployment of CCS and bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) technologies in all the conditional and unconditional NDC scenarios. Carbon prices lie in the range of 3.4–266.2 US$/tCO2eq during 2025–2050 to achieve 100% GHG emission reductions in 2050. Imposition of early stringent mitigation target lowers the carbon prices in the conditional scenarios towards 2050 when compared to the unconditional scenarios. The rapid uptake of CCS, energy efficiency improvements and electrification of the end-use technologies are identified to be the key measures to transform the energy system of Thailand. Key policy insights By 2050, the Thai economy would face a higher fall in both the GDP and household consumption in the unconditional scenarios than those in the conditional scenarios at all levels of GHG emission reduction. Results indicate that early mitigation efforts can be less costly than the delayed ones in the long-term. The cumulative investment needed to achieve decarbonization in Thailand is estimated to exceed 355 billion US$2005 over the period 2010–2050 in the 100% GHG reduction scenarios. The transmission and distribution investments in the power sector need to increase by 30–35% to attain 100% GHG emission reductions during 2010–2050. The trade deficit improves by up to 23–29% in the various GHG mitigation scenarios in 2050.

The Paris Agreement presents a historical landmark in the global response to climate change and sets out the objective of limiting global warming to well below 2 °C and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. However, the national climate change efforts to which Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have committed themselves in the form of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are largely insufficient, and only cover one third of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions necessary to reach this temperature goal (UNEP 2017). There is still a significant gap between 2030 emission levels and a least-cost 2 °C pathway amounting to 11 GtCO2e or even as much as 13.5 GtCO2e, taking only unconditional NDCs into account (UNEP 2017). Global greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, albeit at a slower rate, and even though the Parties must increase the goals of their NDCs over time, it is unlikely that the emissions reductions thus achieved will be sufficient (UNEP 2017).

In this paper, we compare 2015 satellite-derived natural gas (gas) flaring data with the greenhouse gas reduction targets presented by those countries in their nationally determined contributions (NDC) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Paris Agreement. Converting from flaring to utilization is an attractive option for reducing emissions. The analysis rates the potential role of reduction of gas flaring in meeting country-specific NDC targets. The analysis includes three categories of flaring: upstream in oil and gas production areas, downstream at refineries and transport facilities, and industrial (e.g., coal mines, landfills, water treatment plants, etc.). Upstream flaring dominates with 90.6% of all flaring. Global flaring represents less than 2% of the NDC reduction target. However, most gas flaring is concentrated in a limited set of countries, leaving the possibility that flaring reduction could contribute a sizeable portion of the NDC targets for specific countries. States that could fully meet their NDC targets through gas flaring reductions include: Yemen (240%), Algeria (197%), and Iraq (136%). Countries which could meet a substantial portion of their NDC targets with gas flaring reductions include: Gabon (94%), Algeria (48%), Venezuela (47%), Iran (34%), and Sudan (33%). On the other hand, several countries with large flared gas volumes could only meet a small portion of their NDC targets from gas flaring reductions, including the Russian Federation (2.4%) and the USA (0.1%). These findings may be useful in guiding national level efforts to meet NDC greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Toward a Super-COP? Timing, Temporality, and Rethinking World Climate Governance

Since its inception in Rio, 1992, United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC) has held 23 Conference of Parties (COP). COP21 of Paris, December 2015, by consensus, is a breakthrough in more than 25 years of debates and disputes over climate change and global warming issues. COP21 invites the world players to reduce the Global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, to limit Planet’s temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius, if not below 1.5, by the end of the 21st century. To meet the challenge, the main recommendations of the agreement are as follows: COP21 invites its member to propose an intended Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), towards meeting its goals, proportionate to their administrative, economic, and technological capabilities. NDCs are required to be Measurable, Reportable, and Verifi able (MRV). NDCs should be revised every 5 years on the basis of knowledge and experience gained in the process. COP21 urges the developed countries to assist the developing ones, technology-, fi nance-, and knowhow-wise to develop and execute their NDCs. Recommendations of COP12 are nonbinding. Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of UNFCCC since 1996. President H. Rouhani attended the Paris Conference and pledged to reduce Iran’s GHG emissions: a) Voluntarily by 4% in the period 2020-30; and b) Conditionally by an additional 8% by 2050. The reference year for GHG reductions is 2010 on BAU basis. Conditions for the 8% reduction are, the availability of fi nancial and technological means, and lifting of the sanctions imposed upon the country. Again, the pledges are non-binding, as for all UNFCCC parties. A Working Group on Climate Change (WGCC), stationed in the Department of Environment of Iran (DOE), is the liaison with UNFCCC. WGCC is given the task of drawing up Iran’s NDC. A fi rst draft of this document is now available to public.

Thailand's long-term GHG emission reduction in 2050: the achievement of renewable energy and energy efficiency beyond the NDC

Climate change challenges and the urgent need to take things seriously were once again thrust into the spotlight in October and November 2021 with the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) held in Glasgow under the presidency of the United Kingdom, in partnership with Italy. COP stands for Conference of the Parties, and the summit was attended by the countries that signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) ? a treaty agreed in 1994. Billed by many as the most significant climate event since the 2015 Paris Agreement, COP26 aimed to accelerate action towards the goals of both the UNFCCC treaty and Paris Agreement, such as for every country to work together to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) were central to the Paris Agreement and outlined efforts from each country to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. Unfortunately, the commitments laid out in Paris in 2015 did not come close to achieving the 1.5°C target, and with the window for action becoming ever smaller, there was substantial pressure on Glasgow to deliver something meaningful. Following two weeks of intense negotiations, COP26 finally ended with nearly 200 countries agreeing the Glasgow Climate Pact. Crucially this pact keeps the 1.5°C reduction alive and completes the Paris Rulebook, a set of guidelines for how the Paris Agreement will be delivered including a transparency process to hold countries accountable as they deliver on their targets. But what about agriculture? Despite being the second largest driver of climate change behind the energy sector, and therefore central to meeting emissions reductions and achieving the 1.5°C target, the general consensus was that the agriculture sector did not feature prominently enough at COP26, and that reliance on major pledges and pacts disguised a lack of detail on exactly how action would be achieved. Under the UNFCCC there is only one program focussed on agriculture ? the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture (KJWA) which was established at COP23 in 2017 and aims to address agricultural issues through the lens of climate change. It is composed of six interrelated topics, namely soils, nutrient use, water, livestock, methods for assessing adaptation, and the socioeconomic and food security dimensions of climate change across the agricultural sectors. The process was scheduled to finish at COP26; however, by the end of the meeting there were still many areas of disagreement and so these will need to be ironed out in the future. Furthermore, despite pledging action, none of the updated NDCs submitted by the G20 nations prior to COP26 included specific targets on how commitments made for their agricultural sectors would actually be achieved in practice. Many of the current challenges in agriculture are political in nature, whether it is the desire of developed countries to reduce meat and dairy consumption and move towards more plant-based diets, or the reluctance of developing countries to agree, or discussions on farm subsidies, so it is perhaps not surprising that these challenges were not tackled. Agriculture plays a key role on both sides of the climate change debate as both a source and sink for emissions. Approximately 20% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide come from agriculture, forestry and land use. This value increases to 31% when considered across the whole agrifood system that includes crops and livestock. When split individually, agrifood systems globally account for 21% of carbon dioxide emissions, 53% of methane emissions and 78% of nitrous oxide emissions. Whilst the principal GHG emitted by most sectors is carbon dioxide, the agricultural sector is unusual in that direct emissions of methane and nitrous oxide, in particular, are far higher. Given the importance of these GHGs both as key drivers of climate change, and to the agricultural sector, it is timely to review COP26 discussions in this area.

Limits to Paris compatibility of CO2 capture and utilization

Accelerating towards net zero emissions: the most important global health intervention