DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105513
论文题名: Health co-benefits and mitigation costs as per the Paris Agreement under different technological pathways for energy supply
作者: Sampedro J. ; Smith S.J. ; Arto I. ; González-Eguino M. ; Markandya A. ; Mulvaney K.M. ; Pizarro-Irizar C. ; Van Dingenen R.
刊名: Environment International
ISSN: 1604120
出版年: 2020
卷: 136 语种: 英语
英文关键词: Air pollution
; Co-benefits
; Deep decarbonization
; Health
; Integrated assessment
Scopus关键词: Air pollution
; Air quality
; Carbon capture
; Health
; Nuclear fuels
; Air quality modeling
; Carbon capture and storages (CCS)
; Co benefits
; Integrated assessment
; Integrated assessment models
; Integrated modelling
; Premature mortality
; Technological pathways
; Cost benefit analysis
; atmospheric pollution
; carbon emission
; cost-benefit analysis
; electricity supply
; emission control
; environmental economics
; health impact
; integrated approach
; air pollution
; air quality
; Article
; bioenergy
; carbon capture and storage
; carbon footprint
; carbon sequestration
; carbonization
; China
; climate change
; controlled study
; cost benefit analysis
; economic aspect
; energy resource
; environmental health
; environmental policy
; France
; Global Change Assessment Model
; India
; nonbiological model
; nuclear energy
; priority journal
; China
; India
英文摘要: This study assesses the reductions in air pollution emissions and subsequent beneficial health effects from different global mitigation pathways consistent with the 2 °C stabilization objective of the Paris Agreement. We use an integrated modelling framework, demonstrating the need for models with an appropriate level of technology detail for an accurate co-benefit assessment. The framework combines an integrated assessment model (GCAM) with an air quality model (TM5-FASST) to obtain estimates of premature mortality and then assesses their economic cost. The results show that significant co-benefits can be found for a range of technological options, such as introducing a limitation on bioenergy, carbon capture and storage (CCS) or nuclear power. Cumulative premature mortality may be reduced by 17–23% by 2020–2050 compared to the baseline, depending on the scenarios. However, the ratio of health co-benefits to mitigation costs varies substantially, ranging from 1.45 when a bioenergy limitation is set to 2.19 when all technologies are available. As for regional disaggregation, some regions, such as India and China, obtain far greater co-benefits than others. © 2020 Citation statistics:
资源类型: 期刊论文
标识符: http://119.78.100.158/handle/2HF3EXSE/158896
Appears in Collections: 气候变化与战略
There are no files associated with this item.
作者单位: Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Leioa, Spain; Joint Global Change Research Institute, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, United States; Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, University of MarylandMD 20742, United States; University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Bilbao, Spain; Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States; Joint Research Centre, Energy, Transport and Climate Directorate, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, Ispra, VA I 21027, Italy
Recommended Citation:
Sampedro J.,Smith S.J.,Arto I.,et al. Health co-benefits and mitigation costs as per the Paris Agreement under different technological pathways for energy supply[J]. Environment International,2020-01-01,136