Turkish Energy Sector Development and the Paris Agreement Goals: a CGE Model Assessment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Report 332 July 2018 Turkish Energy Sector Development and the Paris Agreement Goals: A CGE Model Assessment Bora Kat, Sergey Paltsev and Mei Yuan MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change Woods Hole and short- and long-term visitors—provide the united combines cutting-edge scientific research with independent policy vision needed to solve global challenges. analysis to provide a solid foundation for the public and private At the heart of much of the program’s work lies MIT’s Integrated decisions needed to mitigate and adapt to unavoidable global Global System Model. Through this integrated model, the program environmental changes. Being data-driven, the Joint Program uses seeks to discover new interactions among natural and human climate extensive Earth system and economic data and models to produce system components; objectively assess uncertainty in economic and quantitative analysis and predictions of the risks of climate change climate projections; critically and quantitatively analyze environmental and the challenges of limiting human influence on the environment— management and policy proposals; understand complex connections essential knowledge for the international dialogue toward a global among the many forces that will shape our future; and improve response to climate change. methods to model, monitor and verify greenhouse gas emissions and To this end, the Joint Program brings together an interdisciplinary climatic impacts. group from two established MIT research centers: the Center for This reprint is intended to communicate research results and improve Global Change Science (CGCS) and the Center for Energy and public understanding of global environment and energy challenges, Environmental Policy Research (CEEPR). These two centers—along thereby contributing to informed debate about climate change and the with collaborators from the Marine Biology Laboratory (MBL) at economic and social implications of policy alternatives. —Ronald G. Prinn and John M. Reilly, Joint Program Co-Directors MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy Massachusetts Institute of Technology T (617) 253-7492 F (617) 253-9845 of Global Change 77 Massachusetts Ave., E19-411 [email protected] Cambridge MA 02139-4307 (USA) http://globalchange.mit.edu/ JULY 2018 Turkish Energy Sector Development and the Paris Agreement Goals: A CGE Model Assessment Bora Kat1,2,3,4, Sergey Paltsev1, Mei Yuan1 Abstract: In the 2015 Paris Agreement, Turkey pledged to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 21% by 2030 relative to business-as-usual (BAU). However, Turkey currently relies heavily on imported energy and fossil-intensive power generation. Despite significant wind and solar energy potential, only 5.1% of its total power is generated by wind and solar installations; additionally, although two nuclear power stations are planned, no nuclear capacity currently exists. We expect that fulfilling Turkey’s Paris Agreement pledge will likely require a reduced reliance on fossil-based energy and additional investments in low-carbon energy sources, which may impact Turkey’s GDP, energy use, and electricity generation profiles. To fully assess these impacts, we develop a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the Turkish economy that combines macroeconomic representation of non-electric sectors with a detailed representation of the electricity sector. We analyze several scenarios to assess the impact of an emission trading scheme in Turkey: one including the planned nuclear development and a renewable subsidy scheme (BAU), and in the other with no nuclear technology allowed (NoN). Our assessment shows that in 2030, without policy, primary energy will be mainly oil, natural gas and coal. Under an emission trading scheme, however, coal-fired power generation vanishes by 2030 in both BAU and NoN due to the high cost of carbon. With nuclear (BAU), GHG emissions are 3.1% lower than NoN due to the resulting energy mix, allowing for a lower carbon price ($50/tCO2 in BAU compared to $70/tCO2 in NoN). Our results suggest that fulfillment of Turkey’s Paris Agreement pledge may be possible at a modest economic cost of about 0.8–1% by 2030. 1. INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................................2 2. AN OVERVIEW OF THE TURKISH ECONOMY AND ENERGY SECTOR .......................................................3 3. TR-EDGE MODEL .......................................................................................................................................................4 3.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .........................................................................................................................................4 3.2 DYNAMIC PROCESS..........................................................................................................................................................5 3.3 DATA ......................................................................................................................................................................................5 3.4 BACKSTOP TECHNOLOGIES ...........................................................................................................................................6 4. SCENARIOS ................................................................................................................................................................6 4.1 BUSINESS AS USUAL (BAU) SCENARIO.....................................................................................................................6 4.2 NO NUCLEAR (NON) SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................6 4.3 NATIONAL EMISSION TRADING SCHEME (TREM) SCENARIOS: BAU+TREM AND NON+TREM ............. 7 5. RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................................................7 6. CONCLUSION ...........................................................................................................................................................11 7. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 APPENDIX. PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION STRUCTURES ................................................................... 13 1 Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States 2 The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK), Ankara, Turkey 3 Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Earth System Science, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey 4 Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (Bora Kat) Report 332 MIT JOINT PROGRAM ON THE SCIENCE AND POLICY OF GLOBAL CHANGE 1. Introduction Ministry’s BAU results in an emission level twice as the For several decades, Turkey has acknowledged the impor- 2013 level. In fact, this target indicates a 40% increase in tance of preventing dangerous anthropogenic interference average emission growth rate in 2010–2030 compared to with the climate system. In 1992, the country joined the the 1990–2010 average (TUSIAD, 2016). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change To assess the impacts of Turkey’s contribution on its GDP, (UNFCCC), but refrained from signing the UNFCCC for a electricity generation profiles, and the resulting carbon long time due to obligations related to emission reductions prices, we developed a computable general equilibrium and financial support to developing countries. Meanwhile, (CGE) model of Turkey with a detailed representation of however, Turkey took several important actions to align with power generation technologies. global climate policies. After 2012, a significant change has Among many CGE models developed for assessing the been observed in Turkey’s attitude towards global efforts impacts of various policy applications on Turkish economy, against climate change. Declaration of intention to become only a few of them focused on environmental policies. a party to the new agreement with a flexible target at COP19 Kumbaroğlu (2003), Telli et al. (2008), Yeldan & Voyvo- in 2013 and at United Nations Climate Change Leaders’ da (2015) and Akın Olçum & Yeldan (2013) employed Summit in New York in 2014 were remarkable signs of this an aggregated power sector representation, thus did not change. The history of climate change milestones in Turkey fully capture technological details or accurately represent between the years 1992–2010 is summarized in Figure 1. abatement potential from the sector. Kat (2011) constructed The Paris Agreement, a UN treaty adopted in 2015 and a hybrid optimization model with detailed representation ratified by a majority of the world nations, aims at miti- of the power sector and five non-electricity sectors of the gating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to reduce risks Turkish economy; however, this model has numerous sim- and impacts of climate change. Each participating country plifications, such as exogenous setting of fuel prices and determines its own contribution to GHG reductions over a unspecified capital and labor costs. certain period of time, with the first round of contributions We aim to fill this gap in the literature by developing a CGE currently covering