international negotiations concerning climate change, taken place during the
UNFCCC conference in Durban at the end of year 2011, have failed to establish a
new global agreement to reduce global emissions. Therefore, the G8 commitments
on 80% reduction by 2050 seems to be the most realistic climate change mitigation
framework for the time being, enhanced by the political will of the EU and USA
administrations. For the needs of this paper, the G8 80% target is further
extended to cover the whole EU-27 region, where the reduction commitments of
the EU-27 member states are allocated based on the relevant allocation weights
considered for the Kyoto Protocol obligations. This paper examines the
implementation of the EU-27 and USA 80% emissions reduction target using a
macro-economic hybrid model E
 R. K. Pachauri and A. Reisinger, “Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” IPCC, 2007.
 N. Stern, S. Peters, V. Bakhshi, A. Bowen, C. Cameron, S. Catovsky, D. Crane, S. Cruickshank, S. Dietz, N. Edmonson, S.-L. Garbett, L. Hamid, G. Hoffman, D. Ingram, B. Jones, N. Patmore, H. Radcliffe, R. Sathiyarajah, M. Stock, C. Taylor, T. Vernon, H. Wanjie and D. Zenghelis, “Stern Review: The Economics of ClimateChange,” HM Treasury, London, 2006.
 T. Barker, “Achieving a 10% Cut in Europe’s Carbon Dioxide Emissions Using Additional Excise Duties: Coordinated, Uncoordinated and Unilateral Action Using the Econometric Model E3ME,” Economic Systems Research, Vol. 11, 1999, pp. 401-421. doi:10.1080/09535319900000029
 T. Barker, H. Pan, J. Kohler, R. Warren and S. Winne, “Decarbonizing the Global Economy with Induced Technological Change: Scenarios to 2100 Using E3MG,” In O. Edenhofer, K. Lessmann, K. Kemfert, M. Grubb and J. Kohler, Eds., Induced Technological Change: Exploring Its Implications for the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization, Energy Journal Special Issue on the International Model Comparison Project, 2006.
 J. R. McFarland, J. Reilly and H. J. Herzog, “Representing Energy Technologies in Top-Down Economic Models Using Bottom-Up Information,” Energy Economics, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2004, pp. 685-707. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2004.04.026
 M. Grub, J. Kohler and D. Anderson, “Induced Technical Change in Energy and Environmental Modelling: Analytical Approached and Policy Implications,” Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, Vol. 27, 2002, pp. 271-308. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.27.122001.083408
 M. Winskel, N. Markusson, H. Jeffrey, S. Jablonski, C. Candelise, D. Ward and P. Howarth, “Technology Change and Energy Systems: Learning Pathways for Future Sources of Energy,” UK Energy Research Centre, 2008.
 D. Anderson and S. Winne, “Energy System Change and External Effects in Climate Change Mitigation,” Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2007, pp. 359-378. doi:10.1017/S1355770X07003580
 S. Sorrell and J. Dimitropoulos, “The Rebound Effect: Microeconomic Definitions, Limitations and Extensions,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 65, No. 3, 2007, pp. 636-649. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.013
 H. Hottinen, P. Meibom, A. Orths, F. Van Hulle, C. Ensslin, L. Hofmann, J. McCann, J. Pierik, J. O. Tande, A. Estanqueiro, L. Soder, G. Strbac, B. Parsons, J. C. Smith and B. Lemstrom, “Design and Operation of Power Systems with Large Amounts of Wind Power,” Task 25 for IEA WIND Implementing Agreement, International Energy Agency, Paris, 2006.