Translation of "Mitigation costs" in German

In addition, CCS could significantly reduce climate change mitigation costs.

Additionally, national mitigation potentials and mitigation costs as well as the economic development of the country is taken into consideration.

However, China's short term mitigation costs would be significantly higher than for the EU.

And, though the costs of climate damage are staggering, scientific research indicates that mitigation costs are manageable.

In other words, if the advanced countries absorb mitigation costs in the short run, while mitigation efforts lower emissions growth in developing countries, the conflict between developing countries’ growth and success in limiting global emissions may be reconciled – or at least substantially reduced.

The differences in increased direct energy system costs and non CO2 mitigation costs in 2020 relative to GDP are substantial between Member States.

National low-carbon development strategies in developing countries will provide additional net investment for mitigation costs and viable financing and mitigation policy options to leverage such investments.

It also took the view that the partial mitigation of the costs arising from the mechanism for financing the specific pension rights acquired before the date of the reform constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty that could be declared compatible with the common market.

Simplification of logistics chains will bring about major savings due to a reduction in the administrative burden and a mitigation of the costs incurred through legal uncertainty as regards liability in multi-modal transport chains.

If decisive action is taken in the COP21 of UNFCCC in Paris, 2015, IPCC estimates that mitigation costs will only amount to a fraction of the foreseeable GDP growth.

Edenhofer's research explores the impact of induced technological change on mitigation costs and mitigation strategies, the value capture and distribution of land rents, and the design of instruments for climate and energy policy.

Among those that could, mitigation costs on average more than doubled in scenarios without CCS.

Postponing global policy until the end of this decade would boost global mitigation costs by about 50 percent, he said.

So if government policymakers acknowledge that e-mobility and similar alternative propulsion technologies are key next-generation technologies that they want to promote because of the currently still high costs involved, and if they additionally acknowledge that the CO2 mitigation costs of these propulsion technologies are high, then there is no reason not to allow more generous super-credit weightings than envisaged so far.

But aren't we by now somehow used to the fact that CO2 mitigation costs play only a subordinate role in climate policy.

According to the report, further delays in implementing ambitious mitigation measures would drastically reduce the number of technological options available and significantly increase mitigation costs.

The equal distribution of emission allowances should therefore be complemented by measures facilitating the access to low-carbon technologies especially for those who expect high mitigation costs.

For the economic evaluation, they considered indicators like mitigation costs, energy prices or potential financial transfers induced by an international carbon market.

These assessments also take into account national mitigation potential and costs and the wider context of socio-economic development of the countries.

In addition, compared to other allocation rules a uniform distribution of emission allowances leads to relatively small differences in regional mitigation costs {11}.

But the study does indicate clearly that the development of a portfolio of technologies is crucial in order to keep mitigation costs low, paving the way for a global climate agreement.

It can be shown that in a global emissions trading scheme this distribution key leads to a net allocation of the mitigation costs where the developing countries bear the least burden or even yield benefits.

The most significant differences in the simulation results concern the GHG mitigation costs: With an enhanced use of biomass for heat (and to some extent heat and power) generation, considerable cost savings can be achieved compared to the fossil-fuelled reference systems, whereas the promotion of biofuels in the transport sector is connected with high costs of GHG mitigation, even on the long term.