1. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions1 France Projections of Energy related CO2 emissions Methodology and assumptions

2. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions2 Projections carried out 1997 – MIES : Two scenarios up to 2020, base year 1992. Without measures and with measures 1998 – MIES: Updating the scenario with measures; base year 1997. Reference for the second national Communication 2001 – MIES, MATE, ADEME: Three scenarios up to 2020, base year 1997. Without measures, with existing measures, comprehensive National Programme. Input in the 3rd National Communication

3. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions3 Overall organisation M I E S MINISTRIES, socio- economic assumptions EXPERTS, technical assumptions End-Use, bottom- up model MEDEE Adjustment for price/rebond effects Energy Demand per end- use, Energy Balances GHG emissions inventory, Common Reporting Format SENARIOSENARIO SIMULATIONSIMULATION

4. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions4 Household social need: intensity, satisfaction degree Production activity Useful energy need Physical, climatic, technological context Final energy demand Utilisation device, energy product, efficiency MEDEE: a bottom-up end-use model to assess policy measures within homogeneous energy demand modules

5. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions5 Agriculture Final demand End-uses LECIs Other Branches Industry Individual Collective Road Rail Waterways Air Passengers Freight Transport Hot water Cooking Lighting Appliances Space heating Air cond Flats Houses Résidential End-uses Branches Tertiairy Irrigation Engines Fishing Thermal Electric Products MEDEE – Overall structure

6. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions6 MEDEE: how to account for policy measures Intensity of needs input variables Prices, income Technology input variables Level and structure of the final energy demand of the module Regulations, voluntary agreements, incentives Service supply Budget coefficients MEASURESMEDEE INPUTPROJECTIONS

7. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions7 Budget coefficients: an instrument to account for interactions between economic and regulatory instruments HistoryFuture Budget coefficient MEDEE calculation Price effect rebond effect Trend Households

8. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions8 HistoryFuture Budget coefficient MEDEE calculation Price effect on production rebond effect Trend Budget coefficients: an instrument to account for interactions between economic and regulatory instruments Producers

9. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions9 Budget coefficient: example of motor cars Fuel and lubricants, source INSEE Scénario without measure

10. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions10 Budget coefficients for motor cars: the lessons from historical evolutions Historical trend downwards: the scenario without measure indicates the bottom line of the budget coefficient in the future Historical short term fluctuations shows that the budget coefficient never get higher than 25% above the long term trend The historical elasticity of the budget coefficient to energy prices is roughly 0.85

11. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions11 As compared to the scenario without measure, MEDEE calculates in 2010: A decrease of the budget coefficient: 0.07 point A decrease of the CO2 emissions: 3,8 MtC Example: ACEA agreement combined with fuel tax harmonisation and carbon tax 500F99/tC This result violates one of the fundamentals of the budget coefficient: it cannot remain permanently below the bottom line

12. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions12 Example: ACEA agreement combined with fuel tax harmonisation and carbon tax 500F99/tC Medee results are therefore « adjusted », taking into account the rebond effect: The budget coefficient is assumed to get back to the bottom line in 2010 This implies that the CO2 emission reduction is limited to 3.1 MtC instead of 3.8 Burden sharing among the three measures is then: 0,8 MtC (29%), 1,2 MtC (37%) et 1,1 MtC 34%

13. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions13 Findings – Evaluation of measures The global impact of a package of measures is less than the addition of the impacts of all individual measures The reference as to the future « natural » trend of the budget coefficient may have a crucial importance in the ex-ante evaluation process The impact of one particular measure depends on all the other measures taken at the same time: there cannot be a single universal evaluation of this impact

14. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions14 Findings – Modelling Price elasticities give an accurate assessment of the impact of pricing-taxation measures only in case no regulatory measure is taken simultaneously Simulating feed-backs of budget coefficients on technical and economic determinants of the energy demand is almost impossible: only a global evaluation « off model » on energy demand and CO2 emissions is relevant Budget coefficients as instruments to evaluate rebond effects and impacts of packages of measures: efficient, but controversial

15. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions15 Energy-CO2 projections, 3rd National Communication, France SM - Scenario without policy measure dedicated to green house gas mitigation after 1990 AME – Scenario with policy measure dedicated to green house gas mitigation implemented before 31- 12-1999 PNLCC - Scenario with all policy measures considered in the « Programme National de Lutte contre le Changement Climatique »

16. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions16 Socio-economic assumptions - 1 Economic growth Demography Agriculture1.2%y Non energy industry2.1%y Tertiary2.7%y Construction1.0%y GDP2.3%y Population+ 2.3 millions Households+ 1.7 millions

17. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions17 Socio-economic assumptions - 2 Energy prices 2010 Traffic growth, without measure, 1997-2010 Oil (Brent)25 US$/bbl Natural gas3.3 US$/Mbtu Coal40-50 US$/t Private cars+ 32% Other, passengers+ 18% LDVs+ 37% Road freight+ 42% Other, freight- 9%

18. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions18 Policies and measures - Buildings

19. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions19 Policies and measures - Buildings

20. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions20 Policies and measures - Industry

21. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions21 Policies and measures - Transport

22. ENERDATA Brussels, 27-28 Feb. 2002 Projections of Greenhouse Gas Emssions22 Policies and measures - Transport