首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


How to decarbonize the transport sector?
Affiliation:1. Policy Studies Department, Energy research Center of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;2. Lenfest Center for Sustainable Energy, the Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, USA;3. School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Bologna, Italy;4. Energy Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom;5. Department of Energy and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden;1. School of Engineering and Natural Sciences, University of Iceland, Oddi Building, Sturlugata 3, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland;2. School of Engineering and Natural Sciences, and Environment and Natural Resources, University of Iceland, Iceland;3. Unitec Institute of Technology, New Zealand;4. School of Science and Engineering, Reykjavik University, Iceland;1. Systems Analysis Unit, IMDEA Energy, E-28935 Móstoles, Spain;2. Chemical and Environmental Engineering Group, Rey Juan Carlos University, E-28933 Móstoles, Spain;3. TECNALIA, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Astondo Bidea Building 700, E-48160 Derio, Bizkaia, Spain;1. School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, University of Western Sydney, Kingswood, Penrith 2751, New South Wales, Australia;2. Birmingham Centre for Railway Research and Education, School of Engineering, The University of Birmingham, Edgbaston B15 2TT, UK;3. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA;1. Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland;2. UCL Energy Institute, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK;3. Institute of Transport Studies, University of California, Davis, CA, USA;4. e4sma s.r.l., Via Livorno, 60 – Environment Park, I-10144 Turin, Italy
Abstract:This article investigates possible evolution pathways for the transport sector during the 21st century, globally and in Europe, under a climate change control scenario. We attempt to shed light on the question how the transport sector should best be decarbonized. We perform our study with the global bottom-up energy systems model TIAM-ECN, a version of the TIAM model that is broadly used for the purpose of developing energy technology and climate policy scenarios, which we adapted for analyzing in particular the transport sector. Given the global aggregated perspective of TIAM-ECN, that in its current version yields at every point in time a single CO2 price for different forms of energy use across geographic regions and economic sectors, it generates a decarbonization process that for the transport sector occurs later in time than for the power sector. This merely reflects that emission reductions are generally cheaper for electricity production than for transportation, and that it is thus cost-minimizing to spend limited financial resources available for CO2 emissions abatement in the power sector first. In our scenarios the use of hydrogen in internal combustion engines and fuel cells, rather than electricity as energy carrier and batteries to store it, gradually becomes the dominant transport technology. This outcome is in agreement with some recent publications but is at loggerheads with the current popularity of the electric car. Based on sensitivity analysis we conclude that even if the establishment of a hydrogen infrastructure proves about an order of magnitude more costly than modeled in our base case, electricity based transportation only broadly emerges if simultaneously also the costs of electric cars go down by at least 40% with respect to our reference costs. One of the explanations for why the electric car is today, by e.g. entrepreneurs, often considered the supposed winner amongst multiple future transportation options is that the decision horizon of many analysts is no more than a few decades, instead of a full century. Electric cars fit better the current infrastructure than hydrogen fueled vehicles, so that from a short time perspective (covering the next decade or two) investments are not optimally spent by establishing an extensive hydrogen distribution network. Hence the path-dependency created by the present existence of a vast power transmission and distribution network can make electricity the most efficient choice for transportation, but only if the time frame considered is short. Electric transportation generally proves the more expensive alternative in our long-term perspective, except when electric car costs are assumed to drop substantially.
Keywords:Transportation and Climate change  Hydrogen versus electricity
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号