Climate policy in Western Europe and avoided costs of air pollution control

Abatement of CO2 emissions will be accompanied by reduced air pollutant emissions such as particulate matter (PM), SO2, and NOx. This, in turn, will reduce the need for end of pipe (EOP) pollution control technologies to meet future air quality targets. This dynamic could put more stringent air quality goals within reach, and increase the political feasibility of climate policy. This paper presents a CGE model that has been modified to include the emissions and EOP abatement of PM, SO2, and NOx from stationary sources in the EU-17. Emissions of pollutants are modeled as fixed-factor complementary inputs to their associated source. Abatement in each sector is modeled as a substitution between the pollutants and discrete abatement technologies, each of which is sector-specific and characterized by a marginal abatement cost and technical capacity constraint. Scenarios are run to 2020, to assess the costs and co-benefits of simultaneous air quality and climate policies. We find that under the Kyoto Protocol in 2010, the welfare cost of pollution control is reduced by 16% compared to the baseline, effectively offsetting the cost of CO2 abatement by 15%. The co-benefit results depend heavily on policy choices, and their magnitude relative to total costs is likely to decline as greenhouse targets become more ambitious. In our scenarios, pollution control cost savings range from 1.3 to 20% in 2020, yielding a climate cost offset range of 0.2 to 3.9%. The CO2 credit imports allowed by the EU via the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) offer a total savings of $9.7bn in 2020, but only need to be compensated by an additional $0.3-0.4bn in domestic pollution control from stationary sources.

[1]  Thomas F. Rutherford,et al.  Integrating Bottom-Up into Top-Down: A Mixed Complementarity Approach , 2005 .

[2]  T. Rutherford.  Extension of GAMS for complementarity problems arising in applied economic analysis , 1995 .

[3]  J. O. Martins,et al.  Nox/Sox Emissions And Carbon Abatement , 1994 .

[4]  Marjan W. Hofkes,et al.  A measure of sustainable national income for the Netherlands , 2002 .

[5]  T. Hertel.  Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications , 1999 .

[6]  Richard D. Morgenstern,et al.  The Ancillary Carbon Benefits of SO2 Reductions from a Small-Boiler Policy in Taiyuan, PRC , 2004 .

[7]  Markus Amann,et al.  Exploring the ancillary benefits of the Kyoto Protocol for air pollution in Europe , 2006 .

[8]  Pierre-André Haldi,et al.  Dynamic formulation of a top-down and bottom-up merging energy policy model , 2003 .

[9]  Kristin Aunan,et al.  Co-benefits of climate policy—lessons learned from a study in Shanxi, China , 2004 .

[10]  Paul Ekins,et al.  How large a carbon tax is justified by the secondary benefits of CO2 abatement , 1996 .

[11]  D. Nestor,et al.  CGE model of pollution abatement processes for assessing the economic effects of environmental policy , 1995 .

[12]  L. Bergman.  General equilibrium effects of environmental policy: A CGE-modeling approach , 1991, Environmental and Resource Economics.

[13]  Dale W. Jorgenson,et al.  Environmental Regulation and U.S. Economic Growth , 1990 .

[14]  David Pearce,et al.  POLICY FRAMEWORKS FOR THE ANCILLARY BENEFITS OF CLIMATE CHANGE POLICIES , 2000 .

[15]  Huey-Lin Lee,et al.  An Emissions Data Base for Integrated Assessment of Climate Change Policy Using GTAP , 2002 .

[16]  Lars Mathiesen,et al.  Computational Experience in Solving Equilibrium Models by a Sequence of Linear Complementarity Problems , 1985, Oper. Res..

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

[18]  Alexei G. Sankovski,et al.  Special report on emissions scenarios , 2000 .

[19]  Z. Klimont,et al.  Cost-effective reduction of fine primary particulate matter emissions in Finland , 2007 .

[20]  Sergey Paltsev,et al.  Disaggregating Household Transport in the MIT-EPPA Model , 2004 .

[21]  L. Shapley.  A Value for n-person Games , 1988 .

[22]  Philip Wolfe,et al.  Contributions to the theory of games , 1953 .

[23]  Jaakko Kukkonen,et al.  Nordic air quality co-benefits from European post-2012 climate policies , 2007 .

[24]  M. Amann,et al.  Estimating long-term population exposure to ozone in urban areas of Europe. , 2001, Environmental pollution.

[25]  R. Dellink,et al.  Dynamic modelling of pollution abatement in a CGE framework , 2004 .

[26]  David Kendrick,et al.  GAMS, a user's guide , 1988, SGNM.

[27]  Knut H. Alfsen,et al.  Impacts of an EC carbon/energy tax and deregulating thermal power supply on CO2, SO2 and NOx emissions , 1995 .

[28]  Hu Tao,et al.  Domestic Environmental Benefits of China's Energy-Related CDM Potential , 2006 .

[29]  Delphine François,et al.  A Shapley decomposition of carbon emissions without residuals , 2002 .

[30]  F. Førsund,et al.  Economic Instruments for Air Pollution Control , 1994 .

[31]  Kristin Aunan,et al.  AGRICULTURAL AND HUMAN HEALTH IMPACTS OF CLIMATE POLICY IN CHINA: A GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM ANALYSIS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO GUANGDONG , 2003 .

[32]  P E Waggoner,et al.  A framework for sustainability science: A renovated IPAT identity , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  Pantelis Capros,et al.  Low-CO2 energy pathways and regional air pollution in Europe , 2001 .

[34]  S. Robinson,et al.  Modeling Air Pollution Abatement in a Market-Based Incentive Framework for the Los Angeles Basin , 1994 .

[35]  Kristin Aunan,et al.  Benefits and costs to China of a climate policy , 2007, Environment and Development Economics.

[36]  Robert McDougall,et al.  Theoretical Structure of Dynamic GTAP , 2000, GTAP Technical Paper Series.