The role of technological availability for the distributive impacts of climate change mitigation policy

The impacts of the availability of low-carbon technologies on the regional distribution of mitigation costs are analyzed in a global multi-regional integrated assessment model. Three effects on regional consumption losses are distinguished: domestic measures, trade of fossil energy carriers and trade of emission permits. Key results are: (i) GDP losses and a redirection of investments in the energy system towards capital-intensive technologies are major contributions to regional consumption losses. (ii) A devaluation of tradable fossil energy endowments contributes largely to the mitigation costs of fossil fuel exporters. (iii) In case of reduced availability of low-carbon technologies, the permit market volume and associated monetary redistributions increase. The results suggest that the availability of a broad portfolio of low-carbon technologies could facilitate negotiations on the permit allocation scheme in a global cap-and-trade system.

[1]  R. Richels,et al.  The Value of Technological Advance in Decarbonizing the U.S. Economy , 2007 .

[2]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Decomposing General Equilibrium Effects of Policy Intervention in Multi-Regional Trade Models , 1999 .

[3]  Global climate change and the equity–efficiency puzzle , 2003 .

[4]  Marian Leimbach,et al.  Economic Development and Emission Control over the Long Term: The ICLIPS Aggregated Economic Model , 2003 .

[5]  Valentina Bosetti,et al.  The Economics of Decarbonization – Results from the RECIPE model intercomparison , 2009 .

[6]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Mitigation Costs in a Globalized World: Climate Policy Analysis with REMIND-R , 2010 .

[7]  Socrates Kypreos.  Modeling experience curves in MERGE (model for evaluating regional and global effects) , 2005 .

[8]  Alan S. Manne,et al.  International Trade, Capital Flows and Sectoral Analysis: Formulation and Solution of Intertemporal Equilibrium Models , 1994 .

[9]  Ottmar Edenhofer,et al.  Technological Change and International Trade -Insights from REMIND-R , 2010 .

[10]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Decomposing the Cost of Kyoto: A Global CGE Analysis of Multilateral Policy Impacts , 2000 .

[11]  Richard G. Richels,et al.  The Attached Material Is Posted on Regulation2point0.org with Permission. the Impact of Learning-by-doing on the Timing and Costs of Co 2 Abatement the Impact of Learning-by-doing on the Timing and Costs of Co 2 Abatement , 2022 .

[12]  Socrates Kypreos,et al.  The Economics of Low Stabilization: Model Comparison of Mitigation Strategies and Costs , 2010 .

[13]  Marshall A. Wise,et al.  International Equity and Differentiation in Global Warming Policy , 1998 .

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

[15]  L. Clarke,et al.  International climate policy architectures: Overview of the EMF 22 International Scenarios , 2009 .

[16]  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 .

[17]  K. Pearson,et al.  Decomposing Simulation Results with Respect to Exogenous Shocks , 2000 .

[18]  Valentina Bosetti,et al.  Optimal energy investment and R&D strategies to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations ☆ , 2009 .

[19]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Technologies , Policies and Economics of Global Reductions of Energy Related CO 2 Emissions An Analysis with ReMIND , 2010 .

[20]  Paul L. Lucas,et al.  The FAIR model: A tool to analyse environmental and costs implications of regimes of future commitments , 2005 .

[21]  W. Diewert.  The Measurement of Deadweight Loss Revisited , 1981 .

[22]  N. Höhne,et al.  Sharing the reduction effort to limit global warming to 2°C , 2010 .

[23]  Walter Diewert,et al.  A dynamic approach to the measurement of waste in an open economy , 1985 .

[24]  D. Vuuren,et al.  Regional abatement action and costs under allocation schemes for emission allowances for achieving low CO2-equivalent concentrations , 2008 .

[25]  N. Meinshausen,et al.  Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C , 2009, Nature.

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

[27]  Gunnar Luderer,et al.  Managing the Low-Carbon Transition - From Model Results to Policies , 2010 .

[28]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  New directions in computational economics , 1994 .

[29]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Low-stabilisation scenarios and technologies for carbon capture and sequestration , 2009 .

[30]  W. Patterson.  Energy policy , 1978, Nature.

[31]  Jan Christoph Steckel,et al.  Time to act now? Assessing the costs of delaying climate measures and benefits of early action , 2012, Climatic Change.

[32]  A. Meyer.  Briefing: Contraction and convergence , 2004 .

[33]  Socrates Kypreos,et al.  Linking energy system and macroeconomic growth models , 2008, Comput. Manag. Sci..