Induced Technological Change: Exploring its Implications for the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: Synthesis Report from the innovation Modeling Comparison Project

This paper summarizes results from ten global economy-energy-environment models implementing mechanisms of endogenous technological change (ETC). Climate policy goals represented as different CO2 stabilization levels are imposed, and the contribution of induced technological change (ITC) to meeting the goals is assessed. Findings indicate that climate policy induces additional technological change, in some models substantially. Its effect is a reduction of abatement costs in all participating models. The majority of models calculate abatement costs below 1 percent of present value aggregate gross world product for the period 2000-2100. The models predict different dynamics for rising carbon costs, with some showing a decline in carbon costs towards the end of the century. There are a number of reasons for differences in results between models; however four major drivers of differences are identified. First, the extent of the necessary CO2 reduction which depends mainly on predicted baseline emissions, determines how much a model is challenged to comply with climate policy. Second, when climate policy can offset market distortions, some models show that not costs but benefits accrue from climate policy. Third, assumptions about long-term investment behavior, e.g. foresight of actors and number of available investment options, exert a major influence. Finally, whether and how options for carbon-free energy are implemented (backstop and end-of-the-pipe technologies) strongly affects both the mitigation strategy and the abatement costs.

[1]  Valentina Bosetti,et al.  The Dynamics of Carbon and Energy Intensity in a Model of Endogenous Technical Change , 2005 .

[2]  Elmar Kriegler,et al.  The impact of technological change on climate protection and welfare: Insights from the model MIND , 2005 .

[3]  Jean Charles Hourcade,et al.  Endogenous Structural Change and Climate Targets Modeling Experiments with Imaclim-R , 2006 .

[4]  B. W. Ang,et al.  Some properties of an exact energy decomposition model , 2000 .

[5]  J. Sun Changes in energy consumption and energy intensity: A complete decomposition model , 1998 .

[6]  Michael Grubb,et al.  The Transition to Endogenous Technical Change in Climate-Economy Models: A Technical Overview to the Innovation Modeling Comparison Project , 2006 .

[7]  J. Sijm INDUCED TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE AND SPILLOVERS IN CLIMATE POLICY MODELING , 2004 .

[8]  Keigo Akimoto,et al.  Analysis of Technological Portfolios for C02 Stabilizations and Effects of Technological Changes , 2005 .

[9]  Claudia Kemfert,et al.  The role of technological change for a sustainable development , 2005 .

[10]  J. Bruce,et al.  Climate change, 1995 : economic and social dimensions of climate change , 1997 .

[11]  Max Henrion,et al.  Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis , 1990 .

[12]  K. Riahi,et al.  Importance of Technological Change and Spillovers in Long-Term Climate Policy , 2006 .

[13]  Jean Charles Hourcade,et al.  Endogenous structural change and climate targets , 2006 .

[14]  John P. Weyant,et al.  Issues in modeling induced technological change in energy, environmental, and climate policy , 1999 .

[15]  Andreas Löschel,et al.  Technological Change in Economic Models of Environmental Policy: A Survey , 2002 .

[16]  Reyer Gerlagh,et al.  ITC in a Global Growth-Climate Model with CCS: The Value of Induced Technical Change for Climate Stabilization , 2006 .

[17]  Toshihiko Masui,et al.  Assessment of C02 Reductions and Economic Impacts Considering Energy-Saving Investments , 2006 .

[18]  John P. Robinson,et al.  Mitigating factors : Assessing the costs of reducing GHG emissions , 1996 .

[19]  Ottmar Edenhofer,et al.  Mitigation Strategies and Costs of Climate Protection: The Effects of ETC in the Hybrid Model MIND , 2005 .

[20]  Hermann Held,et al.  A regulatory framework for carbon capturing and sequestration within the post-kyoto process , 2005 .

[21]  Kristian Lindgren,et al.  Induced Technological Change in a Limited Foresight Optimization Model , 2005 .

[22]  John P. Weyant,et al.  An introduction to the economics of climate change policy , 2000 .

[23]  Bill Hare,et al.  How Much Warming are We Committed to and How Much can be Avoided? , 2006 .

[24]  O. Davidson,et al.  Climate change 2001 : mitigation , 2001 .

[25]  William D. Nordhaus,et al.  Warming the World: Economic Models of Global Warming , 2000 .

[26]  Dennis Anderson,et al.  Induced Technical Change in Energy and Environmental Modeling: Analytic Approaches and Policy Implications , 2002 .

[27]  R. Repetto,et al.  The costs of climate protection : a guide for the perplexed , 1997 .

[28]  Elmar Kriegler,et al.  Uncertainty of the role of carbon capture and sequestration within climate change mitigation strategies , 2005 .

[29]  Stephen H. Schneider,et al.  Are the Economic Costs of Stabilising the Atmosphere Prohibitive? , 2022 .

[30]  Vuuren Dp van,et al.  Regional costs and benefits of alternative post-Kyoto climate regimes Comparison of variants of the Multi-stage and Per Capita Convergence regimes , 2003 .

[31]  David Popp,et al.  Comparison of Climate Policies in the ENTICE-BR Model , 2006 .

[32]  Jonathan Köhler,et al.  Decarbonizing the Global Economy with Induced Technological Change: Scenarios to 2100 using E3MG , 2006 .