- freely available
Energies 2016, 9(4), 227; https://doi.org/10.3390/en9040227
2. Review of Marginal Abatement Cost Curves
2.1. Early Conservation Supply Curves
2.2. Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) Curves for Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
2.3. Emerging MAC Curves for Cities
2.4. An Evaluation of MAC Curves
2.4.1. Merits and Methodological Improvements
2.4.2. Shortcomings and Limitations of Application
2.4.3. MAC Curves Influence on Policy
5. Methodology for Constructing a Bottom-Up MAC Curve
- CEMM = Cost effectiveness of the mitigation measure over the lifetime of the measure in 2012$ per ton of CO2 reduction, $/tCO2;
- NPCINC,MM = Net present cost of the incremental costs and benefits of the mitigation measure over the lifetime of the measure, $; and
- EMM = GHG emissions avoided during the lifetime of the measure, tCO2.
- CINC,MM (t) = Annual incremental costs of the operations of the mitigation measure, at time t, over its lifetime, $;
- SINC,MM (t) = Annual savings, evaluated as financial savings due to reduced energy consumption of the mitigation measure, over its lifetime, $;
- i = discount rate, %;
- L = Lifetime of mitigation measure (estimated as the design life of the technology), in years.
- ECBE,REF = Annual energy consumption of baseline energy by the reference technology, in GJ;
- ECBE,MM = Annual energy consumption of the baseline energy of the mitigation measure, in GJ;
- ECAE,MM = Annual energy consumption of alternate energy (due to fuel switching) of the mitigation measure, in GJ;
- pBE = Unit price of energy (for baseline energy), in $/GJ (constant in the analysis); and
- pAE = Unit price of energy (for alternate energy), in $/GJ (constant in the analysis).
- AGHG,MM = GHG abatement potential achieved by the mitigation measure which is implemented by the “eligible” infrastructure stock in the target year (tCO2); (“eligible” stock is the amount of stock for which the mitigation measure is applicable and does not include the total infrastructure stock);
- nTARGET = Number of years to target year of the climate commitment for emission reductions, and represents the analysis period up to the target year. For example, if the year 2012 is the beginning of the analysis, therefore n = 8 for 2020, and n = 38 for 2050.
- UMM = Units of the mitigation measure in the infrastructure stock (e.g., one appliance per household, 1 passenger vehicle per 20,000 VKT)
- SMM = Infrastructure stock to which the mitigation measure is eligible (i.e., applicable to), measured in number of households for residential buildings and residential waste sectors, GFA (m2) for commercial buildings and commercial waste sectors, VKT (km) in passenger vehicles, buses and freight transportation, and kWh for electricity consumption. Note: existing technology penetration is subtracted from the eligible stock.
- Reference technology is selected for comparison, and in some cases mitigation measures do not replace a technology, but rather are additional, in which case, a reference technology does not apply.
- Industry costs are used for costing technologies; where cost estimates that are city-specific when and where available are used, but country and global costing data are used in the event of their absence at the city scale.
- Average capital cost of technology is used.
- Existing technology penetration, or policy adoption is assumed from existing city programs, if available.
- Abatement is assumed to follow the status quo, i.e., existing uptake of the technology.
- Planned abatement takes city program projections into account.
- Savings only include financial savings from reduced fuel or energy consumption, and is the only benefit considered.
- Co-benefits are not considered in the analysis.
- Some policy options are assumed to have no cost, but result in emission savings.
- Information is obtained from publicly available documents where possible.
- Capital cost of mitigation measures, and reference technologies are converted to 2012$.
- Operations and maintenance (O&M) costs.
- Discount rate (assumed 5%).
- Energy source.
- Emission factors for energy sources.
- Emissions intensity of the power supply.
- Electricity and fuel prices.
- Stock of residential, commercial, transportation and waste in target years based on an emissions forecasting model.
- Lifetime of technologies for reference technology and mitigation measure, and reconciled where different.
Conflicts of Interest
Marginal Abatement Cost
Managing Emission Targets and Reduction Options
- World Bank. World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change. Available online: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2010/Resources/5287678-1226014527953/WDR10-Full-Text.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2015).
- World Bank. Towards a Partnership for Sustainable Cities. Urbanization Knowledge Partnership. 2012. Available online: http://www.urbanknowledge.org/smartsustainablecities.html (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- McKinsey Global Institute. Urban World: Mapping the Economic Power of Cities; McKinsey & Company: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- IEA (International Energy Agency). Energy Technology Perspectives 2012: Pathways to a Clean Energy System; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Hoornweg, D.; Sugar, L.; Trejos-Gomez, C.L. Cities and greenhouse gas emissions: Moving forward. Environ. Urban. 2011, 23, 207–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IEA (International Energy Agency). Energy Technology Perspectives 2008: Scenarios and Strategies to 2050; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Cities and Climate Change: Responding to an Urgent Agenda. World Bank. 2011. Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/2312/626960PUB0Citi000public00BOX361489B.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- World Bank. The Low Carbon City Development Program (LCCDP) Guidebook. A systems Approach to Low Carbon Development in Cities; The World Bank, DNV KEMA Energy and Sustainability, 2012. Available online: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resources/336387-1371610171995/LCCDP-Guidebook_Draft-for-Consultation.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2015).
- Meier, A.; Rosenfeld, A.; Wright, J. Supply curves of conserved energy for California’s residential sector. Energy 1982, 7, 347–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jackson, T. Least-cost greenhouse planning supply curves for global warming abatement. Energy Policy 1991, 19, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rentz, O.; Haasis, H.D.; Jattke, A.; Ru, P.; Wietschel, M.; Amann, M. Influence of energy-supply structure on emission-reduction costs. Energy 1994, 19, 641–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaumont, N.J.; Tinch, R. Abatement cost curves: A viable management tool for enabling the achievement of win-win waste reduction strategies? J. Environ. Manag. 2004, 71, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Addams, L.; Boccaletti, G.; Kerlin, M.; Stuchtey, M. Charting Our Water Future-Economic Frameworks to Inform Decision-Making; 2030 Water Resources Group, McKinsey & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Kesicki, F. Decomposing Long-Run Carbon Abatement Cost Curves-Robustness and Uncertainty. Ph.D. Thesis, University College London, London, UK, 2012. Available online: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1338584/1/1338584.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2015). [Google Scholar]
- McKinsey & Company. Greenhouse Gas Abatement Cost Curves. 2010. Available online: http://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/sustainability/latest_thinking/greenhouse_gas_abatement_cost_curves (accessed on 2 June 2015).
- ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program). Low Carbon Growth Country Studies—Getting Started: Experience from Six Countries Low Carbon Growth Country Studies Program. Carbon Finance Assist, World Bank. 2012. Available online: http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportalb/doc/ESMAP/KnowledgeProducts/Low_Carbon_Growth_Country_Studies_Getting_Started.pdf (accessed on 3 June 2015).
- Blok, K.; Worrell, E.; Cuelenaere, R.; Turkenburg, W. The cost effectiveness of CO2 emission reduction achieved by energy conservation. Energy Policy 1993, 21, 656–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sustainable Energy Ireland. Ireland’s Low-Carbon Opportunity: An Analysis of the Costs and Benefits of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 2009. Available online: http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Renewables_Publications_/Low_Carbon_Opportunity_Study/Irelands_Low-Carbon_Opportunity.pdf (accessed on 5 June 2015).
- Wuppertal Institute. Options and Potentials for Energy End-Use Efficiency and Energy Services. Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy. 2006. Available online: http://epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/index/index/docId/5015 (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- Sweeney, J.; Weyant, J. Analysis of Measures to Meet the Requirements of California’s Assembly Bill 32. Precourt Institute for Energy Efficiency, Stanford University. 2008. Available online: http://web.stanford.edu/group/peec/cgi-bin/docs/policy/research/September%2027%202008%20Discussion%20Draft%20-%20Analysis%20of%20Measures%20to%20Meet%20the%20Requirements%20of%20Californias%20Assembly%20Bill%2032.pdf (accessed on 5 June 2015).
- Blok, K.; de Jager, D.; Hendriks, C.; Kouvaritakis, N.; Mantzos, L. Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change: Top-down Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Possibilities in the EU. Contribution to a Study for DG Environment, European Commission by Ecofys Energy and Environment, AEA Technology Environment and National Technical University of Athens. 2001. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/climate_change/pdf/top_down_analysis.pdf (accessed on 5 June 2015).
- Ellerman, A.D.; Decaux, A. Analysis of Post-Kyoto CO2 Emissions Trading Using Marginal Abatement Curves. MIT’s Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. 1998. Available online: http://test2-globalchange.mit.edu/files/document/MITJPSPGC_Rpt40.pdf (accessed on 5 June 2015).
- McKinsey & Company. Pathways to a Low-Carbon Economy. Version 2 of the Global Greenhouse Gas Abatement Cost Curve. 2009. Available online: http://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/sustainability/latest_thinking/pathways_to_a_low_carbon_economy (accessed on 4 June 2015).
- Akashi, O.; Hanaoka, T. Technological feasibility and costs of achieving a 50% reduction of global GHG emissions by 2050: Mid- and long-term perspectives. Sustain. Sci. 2014, 7, 139–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Edenhofer, O.R., Pichs-Madruga, Y., Sokona, E., Farahani, S., Kadner, K., Seyboth, A., Adler, I., Baum, S., Brunner, P., Eickemeier, B., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014; Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_full.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- Annex III: Technology-Specific Cost and Performance Parameters, 2014. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_annex-iii.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- Rubin, E.S.; Cooper, R.N.; Frosch, R.A.; Lee, T.H.; Marland, G.; Rosenfeld, A.H.; Stine, D.D. Realistic mitigation options for global warming. Science 1992, 257, 148–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lutsey, N.P. Prioritizing Climate Change Mitigation Alternatives: Comparing Transportation Technologies to Options in Other Sectors. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA, 2008. Available online: http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/research/publications/publication-detail/?pub_id=1175 (accessed on 7 June 2015). [Google Scholar]
- Lutsey, N.; Sperling, D. Greenhouse gas mitigation supply curve for the United States for transport versus other sectors. Transp. Res. Part D 2009, 14, 222–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stokes, J.R.; Hendrickson, T.P.; Horvath, A. Save water to save carbon and money: Developing abatement costs for expanded greenhouse gas reduction portfolios. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 13583–13591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Schepper, E.; Van Passel, S.; Lizin, S.; Achten, W.M.J.; Van Acker, K. Cost-efficient emission abatement of energy and transportation technologies: Mitigation costs and policy impacts for Belgium. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2014, 16, 1107–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sustainable Urban Infrastructure: London Edition—A View to 2025. Available online: https://www.swe.siemens.com/italy/web/citta_sostenibli/ricerche/Documents/SustainableUrbanInfrastructure-StudyLondon.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2015).
- Gouldson, A.; Kerr, N.; Topi, C.; Dawkins, E.; Kuylenstierna, J.; Pearce, R. The Economics of Low Carbon Cities: A Mini-Stern Review for the Leeds City Region. Available online: http://www.the-lep.com/LEP/media/LCR-Corporate/Research%20and%20publications/Green%20Economy/Leeds-City-Region-Mini-Stern.pdf?ext=.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2016).
- City of New York. New York City’s Pathway to Deep Carbon Reductions, Mayor’s Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability, New York. 2013. Available online: http://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/planyc2030/pdf/nyc_pathways.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2015). [Google Scholar]
- World Bank. Applying Abatement Cost Curve Methodology for Low-Carbon Strategy in Changning District, Shanghai. 2013. Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/16710/840680ESW0whit00City0Summary0Report.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 4 June 2015).
- Climate Works Australia. Melbourne’s Zero Net Emissions Strategy, Update 2014. Available online: https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/Sustainability/CouncilActions/Documents/zero_net_emissions_update_2014.pdf (accessed on 3 June 2015).
- Kesicki, F.; Ekins, P. Marginal abatement cost curves: A call for caution. Clim. Policy 2012, 12, 219–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kesicki, F.; Strachan, N. Marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves: Confronting theory and practice. Environ. Sci. Policy 2011, 14, 1195–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ward, D.J. The failure of marginal abatement cost curves in optimising a transition to a low carbon energy supply. Energy Policy 2014, 73, 820–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ürge-Vorsatz, D.; Novikova, A. Potentials and costs of carbon dioxide mitigation in the world’s buildings. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 642–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ürge-Vorsatz, D.; Koeppel, S.; Mirasgedis, S. Appraisal of policy instruments for reducing buildings’ CO2 emissions. Build. Res. Inf. 2007, 35, 458–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ürge-Vorsatz, D.; Novikova, A.; Köppel, S.; Boza-Kiss, B. Bottom-up assessment of potentials and costs of CO2 emission mitigation in the buildings sector: Insights into the missing elements. Energy Effic. 2009, 2, 293–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vogt-Schilb, A.; Hallegatte, S. Policy Research Working Paper 5803, When Starting with the Most Expensive Option Makes Sense: Use and Misuse of Marginal Abatement Cost Curves, World Bank, Sustainable Development Network, Office of the Chief Economist. 2011. Available online: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2011/09/21/000158349_20110921094422/Rendered/PDF/WPS5803.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- Vogt-Schilb, A.; Hallegatte, S. Marginal abatement cost curves and the optimal timing of mitigation measures. Energy Policy 2014, 66, 645–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ackerman, F.; Bueno, R. Use of McKinsey Abatement Cost Curves for Climate Economics Modeling, Stockholm Environment Institute. 2011. Available online: http://www.sei-international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/sei-workingpaperus-1102.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2015).
- Lutsey, N.; Sperling, D. America’s bottom-up climate change mitigation policy. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 673–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinventing the City: Three Prerequisites for Greening Urban Infrastructure. Available online: http://www.wwf.se/source.php/1481769/WWF_Low_Carbon_Cities_2012.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2015).
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).