Showing posts with label Input-Output Models. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Input-Output Models. Show all posts

Sunday, January 3, 2021

Reaching Net Zero Emissions In Virginia Could Increase State GDP More Than $3.5 Billion Per Year

When Governor Ralph Northam signed the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) into law this April, the state joined the vanguard of U.S. states enacting ambitious policy to transition from fossil fuels to a clean energy economy. But while the VCEA would significantly decarbonize Virginia’s power sector by 2050, it will still fall short of the emissions reductions needed for a safe climate future.

New modeling using the Virginia Energy Policy Simulator (EPS), developed by Energy Innovation and Rocky Mountain Institute, estimates the VCEA will reduce power sector emissions nearly 64% and cut economy-wide emissions 26% by 2050 compared to business-as-usual. While the VCEA puts Virginia on the path to significant decarbonization, it does not cover the rest of the state’s economic sectors, and falls short of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s recommended pathway to limit warming to 1.5° Celsius for a safe climate future.
...
[The general Energy Policy Simulator available for other regions is available at https://us.energypolicy.solutions/ and more fully described  in a blog post at https://tinyurl.com/yajhwfw7 ]
Percent GDP Change in a Net Zero Scenario - U.S.
... A more ambitious policy package that implements climate policies across the transportation, buildings, industrial, land, and agricultural sectors could put Virginia on a 1.5°C pathway and generate massive economic benefits: By 2050, this scenario could achieve net-zero emissions, generate more than 12,000 job-years, and increase state GDP by more than $3.5 billion per year.

Virginia’s second-largest source of emissions is the electricity sector. Before the VCEA was enacted, the state’s power sector emissions were projected to grow from roughly 30 million metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (MMT CO2e) in 2019 to about 35 MMT CO2e in 2050.

The VCEA will spur significant electricity sector emissions reductions by requiring the state’s investor-owned utilities to decarbonize, including requiring Dominion to achieve 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2045 and Appalachian Power to achieve 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2050. It also requires closing nearly all coal-fired power plants by 2024 and most natural gas, biomass, and petroleum-fired power plants by 2045.

The VCEA would also [increase] Virginia’s renewable energy industry with targets for 5,200 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind by 2034, 3,100 MW of energy storage capacity by 2035, and significant energy efficiency growth....Virginia currently has 2,300 MW of installed renewable energy capacity....
...
Transportation is the largest current source of statewide emissions, followed by industry and buildings as the third- and fourth-largest greenhouse gas contributors....

Modeling of the VCEA and 1.5°C pathway was conducted using the open-source and peer reviewed Virginia EPS computer model, which allows users to estimate climate and energy policy impacts on emissions, the economy, and public health.... 

This policy package would reduce economywide emissions 63% below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions before 2050.... In addition to the economic benefits, the scenario would reduce harmful air pollution, creating health benefits for Virginians.

... The Virginia EPS ... [requires] all new passenger cars sold to be electric by 2035, and all new trucks to be electric by 2045. This standard aligns with California’s transportation sector policies and the multi-state Memorandum of Understanding on moving to zero emissions medium and heavy duty vehicles that 17 states follow. The scenario also includes investing in alternatives to passenger car travel, with supportive land use and transportation policies that empower people to use public transit or walk and bike, resulting in a 20% passenger car travel reduction by 2050.

In the buildings sector, a sales standard requiring all newly sold building equipment to be electric by 2030 would shift gas space and water heating systems to all-electric heat pumps, which are already commercially available and common in many parts of the U.S. Strong efficiency standards (potentially state standards on new equipment sales, a utility rebate program, or a statewide energy efficiency resource standard) further improve the efficiency of newly sold building equipment.

The Virginia EPS 1.5°C pathway ...covers the entire electricity sector (including municipal and cooperative utilities) and targets 100% clean power [earlier], by 2035. The VCEA’s offshore wind, energy storage, and power plant closure requirements are also included along with additional policies to expand the transmission system, spur demand response, and add even more storage for valuable grid flexibility.

Virginia’s industry sector emissions come from [leaks].... To reduce energy-related emissions, the scenario requires industrial facilities electrify all end-uses where possible, to switch to a zero-carbon fuel (in this case hydrogen) for all others by 2050, and for the hydrogen to be produced through the zero-carbon process known as electrolysis. Policies promoting more efficient use of industrial materials and improved industrial energy efficiency achieve additional reductions.
...
By 2050, this scenario would generate more than 12,000 job-years and increase Virginia’s GDP by more than $3.5 billion per year.

Moving away from fossil fuels also improves air quality by reducing particulate matter emissions and other pollutants that harm human health – [avoiding] more than 16,000 asthma attacks per year by 2050.
...
by Silvio Marcacci, Communications Director at Energy Innovation a nonpartisan climate policy think tank helping policymakers make informed energy policy choices and accelerate clean energy by supporting the policies that most effectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
December 9, 2020
Also see Greentech Media's coverage at https://tinyurl.com/y7zvgj8y

Saturday, August 25, 2012

The Impact on Japanese Industry of Alternative Carbon Mitigation Policies

Abstract: To address the climate change issue, developed nations have considered introducing carbon pricing mechanisms in the form of a carbon tax or an emissions trading scheme (ETS). Despite the small number of programs actually in operation, these mechanisms remain under active discussion in a number of countries, including Japan. Using an input–output model of the Japanese economy, this paper analyzes the effects of carbon pricing on Japan‘s industrial sector. We also examine the impact of a rebate program of the type proposed for energy intensive trade exposed (EITE) industries in U.S. legislation, the Waxman–Markey bill (H.R. 2454), and in the European Union‘s ETS. We find that a carbon pricing scheme would impose a disproportionate burden on a limited number of sectors—namely, pig iron, crude steel (converters), cement, and other EITE industries. We also find that the determinant of the increase in total cost differs among industries, depending on the relative inputs of directly combusted fossil fuel, electricity, or steam, as well as intermediate goods. Out of 401 industries, 23 would be eligible for rebates if a Waxman–Markey type of program were adopted in Japan. Specifically, the 85 percent rebate provided to eligible industries under H.R. 2454 would significantly reduce the cost of direct and indirect fossil fuel usage. The E.U. criteria identify 120 industries eligible for rebates. However, the E.U. program only covers direct emissions while the U.S. program includes indirect emissions as well. Overall, despite the differences in coverage, we find that the Waxman–Markey and E.U. rebate programs have roughly similar impacts in reducing the average burdens on EITE industries.

by Makoto Sugino, Toshi Arimura, Richard D. Morgenstern
Resources For the Future (RFF) www.RFF.org
RFF Discussion Paper 12-17; July, 2012

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

The quantification of the embodied impacts of construction projects on energy, environment, and society based on I–O LCA

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151100557X
Abstract: With rapid social development and large-scale construction of infrastructure in China, construction projects have become one of the driving forces for the national economy, whose energy consumption, environmental emissions, and social impacts are significant. To completely understand the role of construction projects in Chinese society, this study developed input–output life-cycle assessment models based on 2002, 2005, and 2007 economic benchmarks. Inventory indicators included 10 types of energy, 7 kinds of environmental emissions, and 7 kinds of social impacts. Results show that embodied energy of construction projects in China accounts for 25–30% of total energy consumption; embodied SO2 emissions are being controlled, and the intensities of embodied NOx and CO2 have been reduced. However, given that the construction sector related employment is 17% of the total employment in China, the accidents and fatalities related to the construction sector are significant and represent approximately 50% of the national total. The embodied human and capital investments in science and technology (ST) increased from 2002 to 2007. The embodied full time equivalent (FTE) of each ST person also increased while the personal ST funding and intramural expenditures decreased. This might result from the time lag between RD activities and large-scale implementation.

by Yuan, Chang 1 , Robert J., Ries 1 , Yaowu, Wang 2
Energy Policy via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 6 August 2011
1. M.E. Rinker Sr. School of Building Construction, University of Florida, 331 Rinker Hall, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
2. School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, PR China
Keywords: Input–output life cycle assessment; Embodied impacts; Construction projects

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Measuring the welfare effects of infrastructure: A simple spatial equilibrium evaluation of Dutch railway proposals

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885910001265
Abstract: We specify a spatial computable general equilibrium model for the Netherlands based on the so-called New Economic Geography. The model distinguishes 14 sectors, two modes of transportation and over 500 municipalities. Key parameters are estimated by fitting predicted interregional trade flows to bi-regional input-output data. The model is then calibrated to a baseline scenario for 2020. From there, the transport grid is modified in line with six proposals for changes in rail infrastructure. The effects of these changes on employment and welfare are computed. We find that the most ambitious project leads to a redistribution of around 8000 jobs from regions further out to regions along the line and especially at the end of it. The net national welfare effect is equivalent to a 250 million euro (0.016%) increase in GDP.

by Thijs Knaapa, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author and Jan Oosterhavenb, E-mail The Corresponding Author
a Amsterdam School of Economics, Valckenierstraat 65-67, 1018 XE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
b University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business, Postbus 800, 9700 AV Groningen, The Netherlands
Research in Transportation Economics
Volume 31, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 19-28; Available online 2 February 2011
Special Issue: The Economic Impact of Changing Accessibility
Keywords: Transport infrastructure; Computable General Equilibrium; New Economic Geography; Interregional input-output data

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Quantification of interdependencies between economic systems and ecosystem services: An input–output model applied to the Seine estuary

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800911001625
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to assess the possible contribution of an input–output model towards two of the basic principles of the sustainability strategy of integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) and Post-Normal Science. According to these principles, decision-support tools should offer a holistic perspective and handle high uncertainty. The difficulties in reaching sustainability are due partly to the prevailing use of “narrow-system-boundary” tools that are non-holistic. Consequently, they fail to capture important ecosystem services and ignore interdependencies between them. To comply with the basic principles, our method allows environmental assets to be evaluated in multiple units and integrates results from recent researches in natural sciences. Both enable coverage of interdependencies between ecosystem services. Thereby, we enlarge input–output modelling from the two conventional ecosystem services of sink and provisioning to the most vital ones: the supporting services. An application to the Seine estuary addresses the impacts of maritime transportation infrastructures on nursery habitats for commercial fish. The ecosystem services covered are life support and resource provisioning. Our results show that the restoration of a total of 73.7 km2 of nursery areas over the period 2004–2015 would result in a stock of sole in 2015 that exceeds the “business as usual” scenario by 44.2% (uncertainty range: 35.9%–69.9%). In spite of high restoration costs, the negative macro-economic impact is very low. However, on the sector level, a trade-off results between nurseries and three economic sectors. The quantification of such trade-offs in our model is particularly useful to public participation in decision-making.

by Mateo Cordier 1 and 3, José A. Pérez Agúndez 2, Martin O'Connor 3, Sébastien Rochette 4 and Walter Hecq 1
1. Centre d'Etudes Economiques et Sociales de l'Environnement/Centre Emile Bernheim, Université Libre de Bruxelles (CEESE-ULB), Université d'Europe, 44 avenue Jeanne, CP. 124, 1050 Bruxelles, Belgium; Tel.: + 32 2 650 35 88; fax: + 32 2 650 46 91.
2. Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer (Ifremer)/UMR-Amure/Département d'économie maritime, Centre de Brest, Technopôle de Brest-Iroise, BP 70, 29280, Plouzané, France
3. Recherches en Economie-Ecologie, Eco-innovation et ingénierie du Développement Soutenable à l'Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (REEDS-UVSQ), 47 boulevard Vauban, Guyancourt 78047 cedex, France
4. Université Européenne de Bretagne, UMR 985 Agrocampus OUEST, INRA «Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes», Ecologie halieutique, Agrocampus OUEST, 65 rue de St Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes, France
Ecological Economics via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 70, Issue 9; 15 July 2011; Pages 1660-1671
Special Section - Governing the Commons: Learning from Field and Laboratory Experiments
Keywords: Input–output; Ecosystem services; Participative process; Integrated coastal zone management; Post-Normal Science; Decision-support