国际能源署-东南亚的脱碳途径（英）-2023.4-46页_6mb

报告摘要

Decarbonization Pathways for Southeast Asia: IEA vs. IEEJ Analysis

Report Overview: The IEA and IEEJ compare decarbonization pathways for Southeast Asia and Indonesia, focusing on modeling approaches, drivers, and outcomes to inform policy on reducing CO2 emissions and achieving net-zero goals.
Key Agreements:
- Renewable Energy: Both pathways prioritize scaling up renewables for electricity decarbonization and direct use in transport.
- Electrification: Electrification is key to improving energy efficiency and leveraging decarbonized electricity supply.
- Coal Phase-Out: Both scenarios emphasize a strong shift away from unabated coal-fired power plants, the largest current CO2 source.
Key Differences:
- Economic Growth: IEEJ assumes higher GDP growth (e.g., 5.0% for Indonesia in IEEJ vs. 4.1% in IEA), leading to higher energy and consumption projections.
- Fossil Fuels with CCS: IEEJ includes greater long-term roles for fossil fuels equipped with carbon capture and hydrogen/ammonia.
- Emissions Reductions: IEEJ relies more on emissions reductions outside the energy sector (e.g., land use) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR), while IEA focuses on deeper sectoral decarbonization.
Energy and Emissions Pathways:
- Total Energy Supply and CO2 Emissions: Diverge significantly after 2030, with IEA showing faster reductions in oil and coal but higher GDP-adjusted TFC growth.
- Fuel Composition: Both reduce fossil fuel use, but IEEJ shows continued oil and gas growth and faster adoption of hydrogen/ammonia.
- Sectoral Consumption: Transportation and buildings see stronger growth in IEEJ due to economic assumptions.
Implications:
- Policy must navigate uncertainties in technology, costs, and growth, emphasizing international cooperation for innovation and capital.
- Affordability depends on reducing CDR costs and improving investment access.
- Agreements underscore shared goals, while differences highlight risks in achieving net-zero ambitions.