Technological Change and International Trade – Insights from REMIND-R

Within this paper, we explore the technical and economic feasibility of very low stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentration based on the hybrid model REMIND-R. The Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC and the scientific literature have analyzed some low stabilization scenarios but with as yet li...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.) Mass.), 2010-01, Vol.31 (1_suppl), p.109-136
Hauptverfasser: Leimbach, Marian, Bauer, Nico, Baumstark, Lavinia, Lüken, Michael, Edenhofer, Ottmar
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 136
container_issue 1_suppl
container_start_page 109
container_title The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.)
container_volume 31
creator Leimbach, Marian
Bauer, Nico
Baumstark, Lavinia
Lüken, Michael
Edenhofer, Ottmar
description Within this paper, we explore the technical and economic feasibility of very low stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentration based on the hybrid model REMIND-R. The Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC and the scientific literature have analyzed some low stabilization scenarios but with as yet little attention being given to the regional distribution of the global mitigation costs. Our study helps to fill this gap. While we examine how technological development and international trade affect mitigation costs, this paper is novel in addressing the interaction between both. Simulation results show for instance that reduced revenues f rom fossil fuel exports in a low stabilization scenario tend to increase mitigation costs borne by the exporting countries, but this impact varies with the technology options available. Furthermore it turns out that the use of biomass in combination with carbon capturing and sequestration is key in order to achieve ambitious CO₂ reduction targets. Regions with high biomass potential can clearly benefit from the implementation of low stabilization scenarios due to advantages on the carbon market. This may even hold if a reduced biomass potential is assumed.
doi_str_mv 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-5
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3098706807</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>41323493</jstor_id><sage_id>10.5547_ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-5</sage_id><sourcerecordid>41323493</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-a3fecc3b551f163b49a96ac8d7bd38067850c42ea6246a1731faf666637ed0bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1OwzAQhS0EEqVwBKRIiKXBrv9iJBaohJIKitQWtpabOG2qNC52umDHHbghJ8ElULbMZqSZ9-aNPgDOMbpgjIrLdDIZISwZ5ExQmAzhi60IhiM7SSHbAx0sKYUSxXIfdHa6Q3Dk_RKFoiLugMHUZIvaVnZeZrqK-gtdz02k6zxK68a4WjelrcNi6nRuos_3jzD35XzR-KhwdhWNk8d0dAvHx-Cg0JU3Jz-9C57vkmn_Hj48DdL-zQPMKMcN1KQwWUZmjOECczKjUkuuszgXs5zEiIuYoYz2jOY9yjUWBBe64KGIMDkKmi44a--unX3dGN-opd2ENyuvCJKxQDxGIqiuW1XmrPfOFGrtypV2bwojtWWnftmpLROVDNU3O7Vlp1jwX7V-r-fmL-G_5tPWvPSNdbtkikmPUEnIF8pVgSU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3098706807</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Technological Change and International Trade – Insights from REMIND-R</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>JSTOR</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Leimbach, Marian ; Bauer, Nico ; Baumstark, Lavinia ; Lüken, Michael ; Edenhofer, Ottmar</creator><creatorcontrib>Leimbach, Marian ; Bauer, Nico ; Baumstark, Lavinia ; Lüken, Michael ; Edenhofer, Ottmar</creatorcontrib><description>Within this paper, we explore the technical and economic feasibility of very low stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentration based on the hybrid model REMIND-R. The Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC and the scientific literature have analyzed some low stabilization scenarios but with as yet little attention being given to the regional distribution of the global mitigation costs. Our study helps to fill this gap. While we examine how technological development and international trade affect mitigation costs, this paper is novel in addressing the interaction between both. Simulation results show for instance that reduced revenues f rom fossil fuel exports in a low stabilization scenario tend to increase mitigation costs borne by the exporting countries, but this impact varies with the technology options available. Furthermore it turns out that the use of biomass in combination with carbon capturing and sequestration is key in order to achieve ambitious CO₂ reduction targets. Regions with high biomass potential can clearly benefit from the implementation of low stabilization scenarios due to advantages on the carbon market. This may even hold if a reduced biomass potential is assumed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-6574</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-9089</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: Energy Economics Education Foundation, Inc</publisher><subject>Biofuels ; Biomass ; Biomass energy production ; Carbon dioxide ; Carbon sequestration ; Climate change ; Climate change policy ; Coal ; Cost benefit analysis ; Costs ; Economic stabilization ; Energy technology ; Environmental technology ; Exports ; Feasibility studies ; Fossil fuels ; International trade ; Mitigation costs ; Regional development ; Regions ; Stabilization ; Technological change</subject><ispartof>The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.), 2010-01, Vol.31 (1_suppl), p.109-136</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2010 International Association for Energy Economics</rights><rights>The Author(s)</rights><rights>The Author(s). 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-a3fecc3b551f163b49a96ac8d7bd38067850c42ea6246a1731faf666637ed0bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-a3fecc3b551f163b49a96ac8d7bd38067850c42ea6246a1731faf666637ed0bd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41323493$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/41323493$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,21819,27866,27924,27925,43621,43622,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leimbach, Marian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauer, Nico</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baumstark, Lavinia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lüken, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edenhofer, Ottmar</creatorcontrib><title>Technological Change and International Trade – Insights from REMIND-R</title><title>The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.)</title><description>Within this paper, we explore the technical and economic feasibility of very low stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentration based on the hybrid model REMIND-R. The Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC and the scientific literature have analyzed some low stabilization scenarios but with as yet little attention being given to the regional distribution of the global mitigation costs. Our study helps to fill this gap. While we examine how technological development and international trade affect mitigation costs, this paper is novel in addressing the interaction between both. Simulation results show for instance that reduced revenues f rom fossil fuel exports in a low stabilization scenario tend to increase mitigation costs borne by the exporting countries, but this impact varies with the technology options available. Furthermore it turns out that the use of biomass in combination with carbon capturing and sequestration is key in order to achieve ambitious CO₂ reduction targets. Regions with high biomass potential can clearly benefit from the implementation of low stabilization scenarios due to advantages on the carbon market. This may even hold if a reduced biomass potential is assumed.</description><subject>Biofuels</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Biomass energy production</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Carbon sequestration</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Climate change policy</subject><subject>Coal</subject><subject>Cost benefit analysis</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Economic stabilization</subject><subject>Energy technology</subject><subject>Environmental technology</subject><subject>Exports</subject><subject>Feasibility studies</subject><subject>Fossil fuels</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>Mitigation costs</subject><subject>Regional development</subject><subject>Regions</subject><subject>Stabilization</subject><subject>Technological change</subject><issn>0195-6574</issn><issn>1944-9089</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1OwzAQhS0EEqVwBKRIiKXBrv9iJBaohJIKitQWtpabOG2qNC52umDHHbghJ8ElULbMZqSZ9-aNPgDOMbpgjIrLdDIZISwZ5ExQmAzhi60IhiM7SSHbAx0sKYUSxXIfdHa6Q3Dk_RKFoiLugMHUZIvaVnZeZrqK-gtdz02k6zxK68a4WjelrcNi6nRuos_3jzD35XzR-KhwdhWNk8d0dAvHx-Cg0JU3Jz-9C57vkmn_Hj48DdL-zQPMKMcN1KQwWUZmjOECczKjUkuuszgXs5zEiIuYoYz2jOY9yjUWBBe64KGIMDkKmi44a--unX3dGN-opd2ENyuvCJKxQDxGIqiuW1XmrPfOFGrtypV2bwojtWWnftmpLROVDNU3O7Vlp1jwX7V-r-fmL-G_5tPWvPSNdbtkikmPUEnIF8pVgSU</recordid><startdate>20100101</startdate><enddate>20100101</enddate><creator>Leimbach, Marian</creator><creator>Bauer, Nico</creator><creator>Baumstark, Lavinia</creator><creator>Lüken, Michael</creator><creator>Edenhofer, Ottmar</creator><general>Energy Economics Education Foundation, Inc</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>International Association for Energy Economics</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100101</creationdate><title>Technological Change and International Trade – Insights from REMIND-R</title><author>Leimbach, Marian ; Bauer, Nico ; Baumstark, Lavinia ; Lüken, Michael ; Edenhofer, Ottmar</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-a3fecc3b551f163b49a96ac8d7bd38067850c42ea6246a1731faf666637ed0bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Biofuels</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Biomass energy production</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Carbon sequestration</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Climate change policy</topic><topic>Coal</topic><topic>Cost benefit analysis</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Economic stabilization</topic><topic>Energy technology</topic><topic>Environmental technology</topic><topic>Exports</topic><topic>Feasibility studies</topic><topic>Fossil fuels</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>Mitigation costs</topic><topic>Regional development</topic><topic>Regions</topic><topic>Stabilization</topic><topic>Technological change</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leimbach, Marian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauer, Nico</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baumstark, Lavinia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lüken, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edenhofer, Ottmar</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI商业信息数据库</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leimbach, Marian</au><au>Bauer, Nico</au><au>Baumstark, Lavinia</au><au>Lüken, Michael</au><au>Edenhofer, Ottmar</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Technological Change and International Trade – Insights from REMIND-R</atitle><jtitle>The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.)</jtitle><date>2010-01-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>1_suppl</issue><spage>109</spage><epage>136</epage><pages>109-136</pages><issn>0195-6574</issn><eissn>1944-9089</eissn><abstract>Within this paper, we explore the technical and economic feasibility of very low stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentration based on the hybrid model REMIND-R. The Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC and the scientific literature have analyzed some low stabilization scenarios but with as yet little attention being given to the regional distribution of the global mitigation costs. Our study helps to fill this gap. While we examine how technological development and international trade affect mitigation costs, this paper is novel in addressing the interaction between both. Simulation results show for instance that reduced revenues f rom fossil fuel exports in a low stabilization scenario tend to increase mitigation costs borne by the exporting countries, but this impact varies with the technology options available. Furthermore it turns out that the use of biomass in combination with carbon capturing and sequestration is key in order to achieve ambitious CO₂ reduction targets. Regions with high biomass potential can clearly benefit from the implementation of low stabilization scenarios due to advantages on the carbon market. This may even hold if a reduced biomass potential is assumed.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>Energy Economics Education Foundation, Inc</pub><doi>10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-5</doi><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0195-6574
ispartof The Energy journal (Cambridge, Mass.), 2010-01, Vol.31 (1_suppl), p.109-136
issn 0195-6574
1944-9089
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3098706807
source PAIS Index; SAGE Complete; JSTOR; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete
subjects Biofuels
Biomass
Biomass energy production
Carbon dioxide
Carbon sequestration
Climate change
Climate change policy
Coal
Cost benefit analysis
Costs
Economic stabilization
Energy technology
Environmental technology
Exports
Feasibility studies
Fossil fuels
International trade
Mitigation costs
Regional development
Regions
Stabilization
Technological change
title Technological Change and International Trade – Insights from REMIND-R
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T14%3A15%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Technological%20Change%20and%20International%20Trade%20%E2%80%93%20Insights%20from%20REMIND-R&rft.jtitle=The%20Energy%20journal%20(Cambridge,%20Mass.)&rft.au=Leimbach,%20Marian&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=1_suppl&rft.spage=109&rft.epage=136&rft.pages=109-136&rft.issn=0195-6574&rft.eissn=1944-9089&rft_id=info:doi/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-5&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E41323493%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3098706807&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=41323493&rft_sage_id=10.5547_ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol31-NoSI-5&rfr_iscdi=true