Abatement Cost Curves for mitigation strategies for the Great Metropolitan Area Executive Summary This paper is presented as fundamental criteria for prioritizing the measures proposed in the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) abatement costs, defined as the incremental cost of implementing mitigation measures GHG compared to the baseline scenario, evaluated as monetary units for each ton of CO2 equivalent avoided where the available capital is not considered a constraint. The abatement cost is given by the following formula, which represents the difference between the cost of reducing a ton of CO2, if a mitigation option is developed, versus the BAU scenario. abatement costs
$
tCO2
= CAE EDBC − CAE BAU
Emissions EDBC − Emissions BAU
The difference in emissions between the two scenarios is defined as the potential for abatement of the mitigation option. There are measures that have negative net costs but net positive benefits which in addition to a reduction of CO2 emissions produced savings of annual cost is achieved with respect to the baseline situation. These type of measures are those whose cost is less than or equal to zero and measures are known as "no-­‐regrets". The discount rate is adjusted to any funding conditions of different mitigation strategies, considering the possible sources of financing. A sensitivity rate analysis was conducted, concluding that the strategies that defer much mitigation benefits or require large initial investments, will be favored at lower rates, while those with little investment strategies and mitigations with moderate growth are not sensitive to the rate. In practice, due to the diverse nature of the strategies proposed, is not shown that the capital cost is the same for all strategies and all projects, so it could be that different rates modify the priority of actions only for financial criteria. However, the analysis supported the prioritization and posts a deepening of the financial schemes for the final cost of abatement determined. Typical costs that can be found in the Costa Rican market are presented, corresponding to the implementation of each of the measures EDBC in Table 1. Summary Abatement Cost results (US $ / ton, Gg) per stage. Table 1. Summary Abatement Cost results (US $ / ton, Gg) by setting MEDIDAS ESCENARIO PESIMISTA
Energía l impia
Diseño bioclimático
CDI
Agua residual
Ecoetiquetado
No motorizado
Vehículos e ficientes
TBM
WTE
Recuperación metano
Reciclaje
Regulaciones
Desechos construcción
Generación distribuida
Distritos e nergía
Transporte i ntegrado
Biocombustibles
Diseño activo
BRT
Tren
CAE
-­‐67.21
-­‐49.87
-­‐19.86
-­‐14.34
-­‐12.29
-­‐5.35
-­‐4.68
-­‐3.55
-­‐1.95
-­‐1.54
-­‐0.93
-­‐0.56
-­‐0.12
1.66
3.63
7.30
10.57
12.41
69.22
87.79
CO2e
1331
251
128
105
450
22
2673
146
1313
1416
1045
206
221
337
27
1393
2374
242
113
331
MEDIDAS ESCENARIO MEDIO
Diseño bioclimático
Diseño activo
CDI
Agua residual
Desechos construcción
No motorizado
WTE
Energía l impia
Ecoetiquetado
Generación distribuida
Vehículos e ficientes
Distritos e nergía
TBM
Transporte i ntegrado
Reciclaje
Recuperación metano
Regulaciones
Biocombustibles
BRT
Tren
CO2e
Gg 443
441
1,216
263
332
66
1,784
1,831
900
924
9,520
35
209
2,501
1,462
1,893
357
3,899
310
402
CAE
-­‐44.22
-­‐22.91
-­‐17.92
-­‐14.34
-­‐12.93
-­‐10.61
-­‐10.28
-­‐9.57
-­‐6.14
-­‐5.71
-­‐4.25
-­‐4.20
-­‐3.55
-­‐1.60
-­‐1.56
-­‐0.89
-­‐0.75
11.99
51.96
63.90
MEDIDAS ESCENARIO OPTIMISTA
Diseño bioclimático
Diseño activo
CDI
Desechos construcción
Distritos e nergía
Agua residual
No motorizado
Transporte i ntegrado
Ecoetiquetado
TBM
Vehículos e ficientes
WTE
Reciclaje
Regulaciones
Biocombustibles
Recuperación metano
Generación distribuida
Energía l impia
Tren
BRT
CAE
-­‐43.65
-­‐25.20
-­‐17.93
-­‐16.59
-­‐14.99
-­‐14.34
-­‐11.93
-­‐5.34
-­‐4.10
-­‐3.55
-­‐3.31
-­‐1.67
-­‐1.56
-­‐0.83
-­‐0.80
-­‐0.69
-­‐0.52
1.96
14.31
72.00
CO2e
Gg 907
582
907
387
53
368
133
3,700
1,350
271
12,827
2,870
2,089
521
4,873
2,448
1,230
2,033
595
298