Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Chapter 4. Case Study: Spain 209
1990 levels, whereas the industrial emissions show a decreasing trend. For the
30% EU reduction target the differences between the power and the industry
sector become less.
Figure 4 - 24. The EU-wide reduction targets (before emissions trading and CDM) for the industrial and
power sectors, based on an EU-wide ETS cap for the ‘EU 20% unilateral without CDM’ scenario (left)
and ‘EU 30% in a multilateral regime’ scenario (right). (Source: den Elzen et al., 2007b).
Although the allocation of the emission reductions for the various ETS
installations (here only the power and industrial sectors) will be arranged at the
European level, projections for the reduction targets in Spain can also be made
(industrial and power sectors) for the three allocation approaches, as shown in
Figure 4 – 25.
Significant differences between the approaches can be observed. The
Marginal abatement costs approach would allocate the Spanish industry sector a
growth target compared to 1990-level, as the most cost-effective approach this
would mean that abatement costs in this sector are greater for Spain than for
other EU countries. However, under the Tryptich approach, the reduction target
would be under 1990 levels; although costly, Spanish industry is inefficient.
Regarding the power sector, it would be the other way round. Under the
Marginal abatement costs approach Spain would have to reduce emissions
compared to 1990 levels. The Tryptich approach would allow an increase in
emissions of 37% to the Spanish power sector.
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería ICAI Carmen Bunzl Boulet Junio 2008