Marginal abatement cost curves: a call for caution

Legal commitments to reduce CO2 emissions require policy makers to find cost-efficient means to meet these obligations. Marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves, which illustrate the economics associated with climate change mitigation, have recently attracted a great amount of attention. A number of limitations with MAC curves are explained by the implication they should be just one tool in a broader set of decision-making aids used in assessing climate policy. MAC curves, for example, omit ancillary benefits of greenhouse gas emission abatement, treat uncertainty in a limited manner, exclude intertemporal dynamics and lack the necessary transparency concerning their assumptions. MAC curves based on the individual assessment of abatement measures suffer from additional shortcomings such as the non-consideration of interactions and non-financial costs, a possibly inconsistent baseline, double counting and limited treatment of behavioural aspects. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation exhibit many of the above-mentioned problems, making it particularly difficult to capture in a cost curve. Policy makers should therefore be cautious when interpreting MAC curves, pay attention to the underlying assumptions, consider non-financial costs and be aware of the important uncertainties and underlying path dependencies.

[1]  Sergey Paltsev,et al.  Marginal Abatement Costs and Marginal Welfare Costs for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: Results from the EPPA Model , 2011, Environmental Modeling & Assessment.

[2]  F. Ackerman,et al.  Use of McKinsey abatement cost curves for climate economics modeling , 2011 .

[3]  Daniel M. Kammen,et al.  The Energy-Poverty-Climate Nexus , 2010, Science.

[4]  Gabrial Anandarajah,et al.  Interactions and Implications of Renewable and Climate Change Policy on UK Energy Scenarios , 2010 .

[5]  Brenda Vale,et al.  Domestic energy use, lifestyles and POE: past lessons for current problems , 2010 .

[6]  Feng Liu,et al.  Low-Carbon Development for Mexico , 2009 .

[7]  O. Franco,et al.  Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: urban land transport , 2009, The Lancet.

[8]  Gabrial Anandarajah,et al.  Pathways to a Low-Carbon Economy , 2009 .

[9]  N. Meinshausen,et al.  Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne , 2009, Nature.

[10]  R. Kannan,et al.  Modelling the UK residential energy sector under long-term decarbonisation scenarios: Comparison between energy systems and sectoral modelling approaches , 2009 .

[11]  Steve Pye,et al.  The iterative contribution and relevance of modelling to UK energy policy , 2009 .

[12]  Yoram Bauman,et al.  Does Technological Innovation Really Reduce Marginal Abatement Costs? Some Theory, Algebraic Evidence, and Policy Implications , 2008 .

[13]  Michael Obersteiner,et al.  Global cost estimates of reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  M. Grieg-Gran.  The Cost of Avoiding Deforestation: Update of the Report prepared for the Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change , 2008 .

[15]  R. Loulou,et al.  The role of nuclear energy in long-term climate scenarios: An analysis with the World-TIMES model , 2007 .

[16]  N. Stern.  The Economics of Climate Change: Implications of Climate Change for Development , 2007 .

[17]  Michael Grubb,et al.  Induced Technological Change: Exploring its Implications for the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: Synthesis Report from the innovation Modeling Comparison Project , 2006 .

[18]  Sergey Paltsev,et al.  The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model: Version 4 , 2005 .

[19]  John M. Reilly,et al.  The costs of the Kyoto protocol in the European Union , 2003 .

[20]  Ross McKitrick,et al.  A Derivation of the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve , 1999 .

[21]  Henry D. Jacoby,et al.  The Uses and Misuses of Technology Development as a Component of Climate Policy , 1998 .

[22]  A. Denny Ellerman,et al.  Analysis of post-Kyoto CO₂ emissions trading using marginal abatement curves , 1998 .

[23]  Steven Stoft,et al.  The Economics of Conserved-Energy "Supply" Curves* , 1995 .

[24]  Steven Stoft,et al.  Technical efficiency, production functions and conservation supply curves , 1995 .

[25]  O. Rentz,et al.  Influence of energy-supply structure on emission-reduction costs , 1994 .

[26]  A. Jaffe,et al.  The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology , 1994 .

[27]  John P. Weyant,et al.  Costs of Reducing Global Carbon Emissions , 1993 .

[28]  Stephen J. DeCanio,et al.  Barriers within firms to energy-efficient investments , 1993 .

[29]  Ernst Worrell,et al.  The cost effectiveness of CO2 emission reduction achieved by energy conservation , 1993 .

[30]  S. Sitnicki,et al.  Opportunities for carbon emissions control in Poland , 1991 .

[31]  Evan Mills,et al.  Getting started: no-regrets strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions , 1991 .

[32]  R. Sutherland.  Market Barriers to Energy-Efficiency Investments , 1991 .

[33]  C. Difiglio,et al.  Cost Effectiveness of Future Fuel Economy Improvements , 1990 .

[34]  Lawrence J. White,et al.  Innovation in pollution control , 1986 .

[35]  Alan Meier,et al.  Supply Curves of Conserved Energy , 1982 .

[36]  H. Cowles.  Forestry , 1907, Botanical Gazette.

[37]  A. Karsenty,et al.  Does the opportunity cost approach indicate the real cost of REDD+ ? Rights and realities of paying for REDD+ , 2010 .

[38]  E. F. Schumacher.  McREDD: How McKinsey ‘cost-curves’ are distorting REDD , 2010 .

[39]  Martin Wietschel,et al.  Costs and potentials of energy savings in European industry - a critical assessment of the concept of conservation supply curves , 2009 .

[40]  Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Abatement Potential in Poland by 2030 Summary of findings , 2009 .

[41]  Johan Eliasch.  Climate Change: Financing Global Forests , 2008 .

[42]  S. Sorrell.  The rebound effect: an assessment of the evidence for economy-wide energy savings from improved energy efficiency , 2007 .

[43]  Energy Agency.  World Energy Outlook 2007 : China and India Insights , 2007 .

[44]  Gabrial Anandarajah,et al.  UK MARKAL Model Documentation , 2007 .

[45]  M. Jakob.  Marginal costs and co-benefits of energy efficiency investments: The case of the Swiss residential sector , 2006 .

[46]  Lena Neij,et al.  Transaction Costs of Energy Efficiency Projects: A Review of Quantitative Estimations , 2006 .

[47]  農林水産奨励会農林水産政策情報センター,et al.  The green book : appraisal and evaluation in central government , 2003 .

[48]  G. Klepper,et al.  On the robustness of marginal abatement cost curves: the influence of world energy prices , 2003 .

[49]  C. Hendriks,et al.  Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change , 2003 .

[50]  Risø Withauthor,et al.  UNEP greenhouse gas abatement costing studies. Analysis of abatement costing issues and preparation of a methodology to undertake national greenhouse gas abatement costing studies. Phase two. Appendix: Guidelines , 1994 .

[51]  Alan Meier,et al.  CONSERVED ENERGY SUPPLY CURVES FOR U.S. BUILDINGS , 1993 .

[52]  Tim Jackson,et al.  Least-cost greenhouse planning : supply curves for global warming abatement , 1991 .