| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
090079
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Electricity sector is among the key users of natural gas. The sustained electricity deficit and environment policies have added to an already rising demand for gas. This paper tries to understand gas demand in future from electricity sector. This paper models the future demand for gas in India from the electricity sector under alternative scenarios for the period 2005-2025, using bottom-up ANSWER MARKAL model. The scenarios are differentiated by alternate economic growth projections and policies related to coal reforms, infrastructure choices and local environment. The results across scenarios show that gas competes with coal as a base-load option if price difference is below US $ 4 per MBtu. At higher price difference gas penetrates only the peak power market. Gas demand is lower in the high economic growth scenario, since electricity sector is more flexible in substitution of primary energy. Gas demand reduces also in cases when coal supply curve shifts rightwards such as under coal reforms and coal-by-wire scenarios. Local environmental (SO2 emissions) control promotes end of pipe solutions flue gas de-sulfurisation (FGD) initially, though in the longer term mitigation happens by fuel substitution (coal by gas) and introduction of clean coal technologies integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
126601
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper analyses the impact of postponing global mitigation action on abatement costs and energy systems changes in China and India. It compares energy-system changes and mitigation costs from a global and two national energy-system models under two global emission pathways with medium likelihood of meeting the 2 °C target: a least-cost pathway and a pathway that postpones ambitious mitigation action, starting from the Copenhagen Accord pledges. Both pathways have similar 2010-2050 cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis shows that postponing mitigation action increases the lock-in in less energy efficient technologies and results in much higher cumulative mitigation costs. The models agree that carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear energy are important mitigation technologies, while the shares of biofuels and other renewables vary largely over the models. Differences between India and China with respect to the timing of emission reductions and the choice of mitigation measures relate to differences in projections of rapid economic change, capital stock turnover and technological development. Furthermore, depending on the way it is implemented, climate policy could increase indoor air pollution, but it is likely to provide synergies for energy security. These relations should be taken into account when designing national climate policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
046860
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Manohar Publishers and Distributors, 2000.
|
| Description |
2902p.
|
| Standard Number |
8173043515
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 044076 | 333.790954/AUD 044076 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|