Capturing natural resource heterogeneity in top-down energy-economic equilibrium models

Top-down energy-economic modeling approaches often use simplified techniques to represent heterogeneous resource inputs to production. We show that for some policies, such as feed-in tariffs for renewable electricity, detailed representation of renewable resource grades is required to describe the technology more precisely and identify cost-effective policy designs. We demonstrate the hybrid approach for modeling heterogeneity in the quality of natural resource inputs required for renewable energy production in a stylized computable general equilibrium framework. Importantly, compared to the traditional approach, the hybrid approach resolves near-flat or near-vertical sections of the supply curve and improves the precision of policy simulation. We then represent the shape of a resource supply curve based on more detailed data. We show that for the case of onshore wind development in China, a differentiated feed-in tariff design that can only be modeled with the hybrid approach requires less than half of the subsidy budget needed for a uniform feed-in tariff design to achieve the same installation targets.

[1]  Valerie J. Karplus,et al.  Modelling the potential for wind energy integration on China’s coal-heavy electricity grid , 2016, Nature Energy.

[2]  Bruce A. Blonigen,et al.  Estimating the Knowledge-Capital Model of the Multinational Enterprise: Comment , 2002 .

[3]  Edward J. Balistreri,et al.  Introduction to the EMF 29 special issue on the role of border carbon adjustment in unilateral climate policy , 2012 .

[4]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Green promotes the dirtiest: on the interaction between black and green quotas in energy markets , 2010 .

[5]  Shinichiro Fujimori,et al.  The impacts on climate mitigation costs of considering curtailment and storage of variable renewable energy in a general equilibrium model , 2017 .

[6]  Stefan Boeters,et al.  Fossil Fuel Supply, Leakage and the Effectiveness of Border Measures in Climate Policy , 2012 .

[7]  Carl Koopmans,et al.  Bridging the energy efficiency gap: using bottom-up information in a top-down energy demand model , 2001 .

[8]  Thomas F. Rutherford,et al.  Approximating infinite-horizon models in a complementarity format: A primer in dynamic general equilibrium analysis , 2002 .

[9]  Valerie J. Karplus,et al.  Carbon emissions in China: How far can new efforts bend the curve? , 2016 .

[10]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Embodied Carbon Tariffs , 2011 .

[11]  Sergey Paltsev,et al.  Distributional Implications of Alternative U.S. Greenhouse Gas Control Measures , 2010 .

[12]  Andreas Löschel,et al.  A new robustness analysis for climate policy evaluations: A CGE application for the EU 2020 targets , 2013 .

[13]  Andreas Löschel,et al.  Designing an Emissions Trading Scheme for China – An Up-to-Date Climate Policy Assessment , 2014 .

[14]  Nate Blair,et al.  Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) , 2011 .

[15]  M. Dalton,et al.  Global demographic trends and future carbon emissions , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  Jennifer Morris,et al.  The MIT EPPA6 Model: Economic Growth, Energy Use, and Food Consumption , 2015 .

[17]  Ian Sue Wing,et al.  The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down approaches to climate policy modeling: Electric power technology detail in a social accounting framework , 2008 .

[18]  Matthew Mowers,et al.  Distributional and Efficiency Impacts of Clean and Renewable Energy Standards for Electricity , 2012 .

[19]  Valerie J. Karplus,et al.  Quantifying regional economic impacts of CO2 intensity targets in China , 2012 .

[20]  Marco Springmann,et al.  Integrating emissions transfers into policy-making , 2014 .

[21]  L. Bretschger,et al.  Knowledge Diffusion, Endogenous Growth, and the Costs of Global Climate Policy , 2015 .

[22]  T. Rutherford,et al.  The cost of reducing CO2 emissions: Integrating abatement technologies into economic modeling , 2013 .

[23]  James R. McFarland,et al.  Technology and technical change in the MIT EPPA model , 2006 .

[24]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Output-Based Rebating of Carbon Taxes in the Neighbor's Backyard. Competitiveness, Leakage and Welfare , 2014 .

[25]  L. Bretschger,et al.  Nuclear Phase-out Under Stringent Climate Policies: A Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis , 2017 .

[26]  T. Rutherford,et al.  Combining bottom-up and top-down , 2008 .

[27]  I. Wing,et al.  The implications of the historical decline in US energy intensity for long-run CO2 emission projections , 2007 .

[28]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Integrated assessment of energy policies: Decomposing top-down and bottom-up , 2009 .