Emission projection and marginal abatement cost curves(MACs) are the central components of any assessment of future carbon market, such as CDM (clean development mechanism) potentials, carbon quota price etc. However,...Emission projection and marginal abatement cost curves(MACs) are the central components of any assessment of future carbon market, such as CDM (clean development mechanism) potentials, carbon quota price etc. However, they are products of very complex, dynamic systems driven by forces like population growth, economic development, resource endowments, technology progress and so on. The modeling approaches for emission projection and MACs evaluation were summarized, and some major models and their results were compared. Accordingly, reduction and cost requirements to achieve the Kyoto target were estimated. It is concluded that Annex I Parties' total reduction requirements range from 503—1304 MtC with USA participation and decrease significantly to 140—612 MtC after USA's withdrawal. Total costs vary from 21—77 BUSD with USA and from 5—36 BUSD without USA if only domestic reduction actions are taken. The costs would sharply reduce while considering the three flexible mechanisms defined in the Kyoto Protocol with domestic actions' share in the all mitigation strategies drops to only 0—16%.展开更多
文摘Emission projection and marginal abatement cost curves(MACs) are the central components of any assessment of future carbon market, such as CDM (clean development mechanism) potentials, carbon quota price etc. However, they are products of very complex, dynamic systems driven by forces like population growth, economic development, resource endowments, technology progress and so on. The modeling approaches for emission projection and MACs evaluation were summarized, and some major models and their results were compared. Accordingly, reduction and cost requirements to achieve the Kyoto target were estimated. It is concluded that Annex I Parties' total reduction requirements range from 503—1304 MtC with USA participation and decrease significantly to 140—612 MtC after USA's withdrawal. Total costs vary from 21—77 BUSD with USA and from 5—36 BUSD without USA if only domestic reduction actions are taken. The costs would sharply reduce while considering the three flexible mechanisms defined in the Kyoto Protocol with domestic actions' share in the all mitigation strategies drops to only 0—16%.
