According to Faber et al. (2011), the cost curves for marginal abatement, otherwise referred to as marginal abatement cost curve (MACC), are used in presenting measures that are involved in reducing GHG emissions depending on the order of their cost-effectiveness. They allude to the fact that over the years several MACC have been designed and they bear different abatement potentials. Notably, they cite the similarity amongst the several MACCs to be the ability to project a wider potential in cost-effectiveness. The researchers identified the reasons for the different abatement potentials as the adoption of a different set of measures and emission baselines. Other reasons issued are the potential and cost of the measures, and the different fleet structure projections. Despite the existence of some cost-effective measures, not all of them are adopted due to technological barriers, institutional barriers, and financial barriers (Faber et al., 2011).Finally, the last two technologies, biofuels (BF) and biogas (BG) involve the use of liquid biofuels that are blended into existing fuels at low proportions and the generation of biogas from landfills, anaerobic digestion and other industrial applications (Navigant Consulting, 2014). By blending the fuels, the report argues that this is anticipated to cut emissions by at least 50% or more. As assured by Macor and Pavanello (2009), biofuels are utilized in heating boilers within the residential buildings to provide hot water or heat the different spaces. In the same vein, biogas generated from anaerobic digestion is also channeled to boilers to power heating systems in the buildings