sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

Lenny Bernstein
from mitigation measures, they are also included in appropriate parts of the proceedings as
additional input for information and wider coverage.
At the meeting, there was a lively debate at all the sessions. Participants were very much
involved in or even committed to a better understanding of the issues that the number of
questions and comments and time had to be limited during the discussion. After the meeting,
many speakers and discussants revised their papers or extended their presentation to a full paper.
Therefore, quite a few papers look somewhat different from their presentations at the meeting.
Some participants even submitted their comments in writing after the meeting. These written
comments are also incorporated in the appropriate sessions of this volume.
3 Key Points from the Meeting
• Significant disagreements existed among the experts attending the meeting over the extent of
the economic impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on the coal, oil and natural gas industries. An
overview paper, presented by Ulrich Bartsch of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, and
a paper distributed by Jonathan Pershing of the International Energy Agency (IEA), both
argued that impacts on the fossil fuels industry would be relatively minor. Representatives of
the coal and oil industries argued that their industries would suffer significant losses of
revenue. These disagreements were the result of differences in assumptions on parameters
such as the availability of conventional oil resources, the extent that natural gas would
penetrate the Chinese and Indian markets, the use of carbon sinks and the Kyoto
mechanisms, among others.
• Whilst oil is traded globally, most coal and natural gas are traded locally or regionally. The
impacts of GHG mitigation policies on these local or regional markets will differ and should
be taken into account. This point was made by many presenters and discussants.
• Model results indicate that GHG mitigation will benefit the renewables sector with increased
R&D (research and development) investments, lower investment and operating costs, and
increased market penetration. Model results showing these effects were presented by Patrick
Criqui, IEPE-Grenoble.
• The implementation of renewable energy technology in developing countries can provide a
wide variety of ancillary benefits, including improvements in public health, education,
community development and small business development. However, large-scale
implementation of renewables, or any new technology, in developing countries requires the
parallel development of a technological support infrastructure. An overview presentation by
Gina Roos of the South African Country Study, and a paper distributed by Garba Goudou
Dieudonne of the Office of the Prime Minister of Niamey-Niger, discussed both the benefits
of, and requirements for, large-scale implementation of renewables.
• GHG mitigation is not a primary driver of policy making in many sectors, particularly
transport. However, many policies being adopted for other reasons can also reduce GHG
emissions. An overview paper by Ranjan Bose of the Tata Energy Research Institute (TERI)
provided an extensive list of policy options for the transport sector.
• Policies that exempt specific sectors from GHG emissions reduction requirements will be
more costly than policies that cover the whole economy. This view was put forward in an
overview paper presented by Henry Jacoby of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and
Policy of Global Change. However, the arguments made by specific U.S. industries in four
papers, which were distributed by Paul Cicio of the International Federation of Industrial
5