Journal cover Journal topic
Earth System Dynamics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 3.635 IF 3.635
  • IF 5-year<br/> value: 3.869 IF 5-year
    3.869
  • CiteScore<br/> value: 4.15 CiteScore
    4.15
  • SNIP value: 0.995 SNIP 0.995
  • SJR value: 2.742 SJR 2.742
  • IPP value: 3.679 IPP 3.679
  • h5-index value: 21 h5-index 21
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2017-117
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
06 Dec 2017
Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. It is a manuscript under review for the journal Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
The Role of Bioenergy and Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the Case of Delayed Climate Policy – Insights from Cost-Risk Analysis
Jana Mintenig, Mohammad M. Khabbazan, and Hermann Held Research Unit Sustainability and Global Change, Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability, Universität Hamburg, Grindelberg 5, 20144 Hamburg, Germany
Abstract. Cost-Risk Analysis (CRA), a hybrid of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) and Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), has been proposed as an alternative to CEA as a decision criterion for evaluating climate policy. It weighs mitigation costs against associated risks of violating a predefined temperature guardrail, thereby enabling an analysis of otherwise infeasible temperature targets. Under CEA, delaying climate policy causes infeasibility of temperature targets which was resolved by the assessment under CRA. Indeed, CRA enables a quantitative evaluation of any delay scenario, thereby yielding information of the severeness of postponing climate policy. Alternatively, negative emission technologies have been included in CEA to enlarge the leeway in decision making and postpone infeasibility. This study closes the loop by evaluating the impact of the technology option BECCS (Bioenergy and Carbon Capture and Storage) in light of delayed climate policy under CRA. The work is conducted using the Integrated Assessment Model MIND (Model of Investment and Technological Development). This interplay creates the following insights: An inclusion of BECCS avoids corner solutions that were previously identified for delay scenarios, yielding a larger window of opportunity for action to mitigate climate change. Moreover, it postpones mitigation efforts into the future and removes the pressure to shut down fossil fuel use immediately. Thereby, mitigation-induced welfare losses are reduced substantially. BECSS, when evaluated under CRA, has confirmed well-known results from CEA. However, in contrast to results derived from CEA, mitigation-induced welfare losses decline with delay, while climate risk-induced welfare losses increase with delay by approximately the same magnitude. Hence within CRA, BECCS reduces the welfare effect of delayed climate policy by an order of magnitude. This underlines the crucial role of BECCS for the case of delay, even if one changes the decision-analytic framework from CEA to CRA and thereby softened the temperature target.

Citation: Mintenig, J., Khabbazan, M. M., and Held, H.: The Role of Bioenergy and Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the Case of Delayed Climate Policy – Insights from Cost-Risk Analysis, Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2017-117, in review, 2017.
Jana Mintenig et al.
Jana Mintenig et al.
Jana Mintenig et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 128 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
107 20 1 128 1 1

Views and downloads (calculated since 06 Dec 2017)

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 06 Dec 2017)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 128 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

Thereof 127 with geography defined and 1 with unknown origin.

Country # Views %
  • 1

Saved

Discussed

Latest update: 14 Dec 2017
Publications Copernicus
Download
Share