Search

The sequential rollout of diverse climate policies by national and local governing bodies has sparked a series of concerns regarding their efficacy and long-term impact. These policies function either as constraints or incentives within the carbon market eco-trading system. This study aims to bridge gaps in quantitative analysis of climate policy interactions by employing the Stackelberg game model to explore various policy mix and their impacts on both national and regional conditions. It explored the effects of seven types of policy packages (including reduction targets, free allowance allocations, guideline prices, and their mixed scenarios) on regional and national economic growth and decarbonization targets. Moreover, fine-grained example analyses based on China's carbon markets were used to capture these win-win signals. The results show that: (1) when accounting for regional disparities, a waterbed effect emerges, implying that no scenario can simultaneously achieve both accelerated net profit growth and significant emission reductions across all regions. (2) Interactions among climate policies may yield strengthening, overlapping, or weakening effects compared to the business- as -usual scenario. However, it is crucial to note that these effects typically exhibit an inverse relationship between net profit growth and emission reductions. (3) Carbon trading prices act as public signals that assist policymakers in determining the Stackelberg-Nash equilibrium points to pursue optimized net profits under emission constraints. Hence, policymakers are encouraged to embrace comprehensive, sustainable solutions, ensuring ongoing monitoring and timely policy adaptations that strike a balance between economic growth and emission reduction regarding regional disparities. • Climate policies interact, causing strengthening, overlapping, or weakening effects. • Carbon trading prices play as public signals in the process behind the game. • Total net profit growth entails emission increases or exacerbating regional inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of internal carbon prices (ICPs) is a practice by which companies voluntarily attach a hypothetical cost to their carbon emissions to help prioritize low-carbon investment projects. We find that ICP use is driven by external carbon constraints and by firms' exposure to formal carbon pricing systems, next to various firm and society characteristics. The size of the gap between countries' actual and intended emissions alone, without a translation into stringent climate policies, does not play a role. These findings inform policymakers and investors about when and why firms account for future carbon constraints internally. A key societal risk is that corporate investments are not sufficiently directed at a future low-carbon economy. Stringent climate policies that provide predictable pathways appear to help firms mitigate the misalignment of their investments by using ICPs and thereby contribute to a less erratic and less expensive transition of the energy system. • We study how the use and the level of internal carbon prices relates to carbon constraints and cost uncertainty. • We use exposure to pricing systems and the carbon emission reduction rate implied by policies to assess constraints. • We find that climate policy stringency increases the likelihood of adopting internal carbon prices. • Firms use internal carbon prices to bring forward low-carbon investments in anticipation of future costs. • Stringent climate policies and explicit pricing systems provide pathways for investment in low-carbon technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of renewable energy sources (RES) is considered to be a key instrument in addressing climate change. However, different RES have different potential and economic feasibility depending on country-specific conditions and mitigation ambitions. Understanding the relative importance of each RES could help policymakers focus their efforts on the most promising options. In this paper, we focus on Ukraine and explore the potential of biomass use under two mitigation scenarios – with 68% and 83% of greenhouse gas emissions reduction in 2050 relative to the 2010 level. First, using the TIMES-Ukraine energy system model, we show that biomass would play a major role in the future climate mitigation. If constrained at the baseline scenario level (due to political or other reasons), mitigation costs would be substantially higher – by 14.0–19.6 B € or 10.8–14.3 €/tCO 2 -eq., over the 2020–2050 time frame. Second, we quantify the importance of each biomass source. We show that woody biomass and bioliquids are the most important biofuels under the high-ambition climate scenario, while biowaste and bioliquids play a key role in the lower ambition pathway. Finally, we analyse the current policy environment in the context of future biomass development and conclude with a set of policy recommendations toward the realization of the biomass potential in Ukraine. We believe that findings presented in the paper would be relevant not only for supporting the decision-making process in Ukraine, but could also provide useful insights for other countries with similar conditions. • Two scenarios with 68% and 83% reduction in GHG emissions in 2050 relative to 2010. • Over 50% of all renewable energy is coming from biomass under both scenarios. • Bioenergy constraint increases mitigation costs by 10.8–14.3 EUR/tCO 2 or 2.4–3.2 times. • No significant impact of the biogas availability on the mitigation costs. • Constraining biowoods , bioliquids or biowaste increases costs by at least 35% each. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews climate change mitigation policies implemented in five major emitting economies: China, the European Union, India, Japan and the United States. It analyses their historical performance in terms of energy system and greenhouse gas emissions indicators. In cases where policies aim to reduce future emissions, their target performance levels are assessed. The review centres on the sectors of electricity generation, passenger vehicles, freight transport, forestry, industry, buildings, agriculture, and oil and gas production. Most focus countries have implemented successful policies for renewable energy, fuel efficiency, electrification of passenger vehicles, and forestry. For other sectors, information is limited or very heterogeneous (e.g. buildings, appliances, agriculture) or there are few comprehensive policies in place (e.g. industry). The article further presents an explorative emissions scenario developed under the assumption that all countries will replicate both the observed trends in sector-level indicators and the trends that policies for future emissions reductions aspire to achieve. It shows that the global replication of sector progress would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 by about 20% compared to a current policies scenario. All countries analysed would overachieve the emissions reduction targets in their post-2020 climate targets. However, the resulting reduction in global emissions by 2030 would still not be sufficient to keep the world on track for a global cost-effective pathway that keeps temperature increase below 2°C. The findings of this study emphasise the need for transformative policies to keep the Paris Agreement temperature limit within reach. • China, the EU, Japan, India and the USA have effective policies for renewable energy, passenger vehicles, and forestry. • Other sectors are lagging behind in climate change mitigation. • Global replication of sector policies would reduce emissions by 20% in 2030. • This would, however, not close the emissions gap in 2030. • Implied emissions reductions go beyond the Nationally Determined Contributions for all economies analysed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]