Scenarios of methane emission reductions to 2030: abatement costs and co-benefits to ozone air quality and human mortality
AbstractMethane emissions contribute to global baseline surface ozone concentrations; therefore reducing methane to address climate change has significant co-benefits for air quality and human health. We analyze the costs of reducing methane from 2005 to 2030, as might be motivated to reduce climate forcing, and the resulting benefits from lower surface ozone to 2060. We construct three plausible scenarios of methane emission reductions, relative to a base scenario, ranging from 75 to 180 Mton CH 4 yr −1 decreased in 2030. Using compilations of the global availability of methane emission reductions, the least aggressive scenario (A) does not incur any positive marginal costs to 2030, while the most aggressive (C) requires discovery of new methane abatement technologies. The present value of implementation costs for Scenario B are nearly equal to Scenario A, as it implements cost-saving options more quickly, even though it adopts positive cost measures. We estimate the avoided premature human mortalities due to surface ozone decreases by combining transient full-chemistry simulations of these scenarios in a global atmospheric chemical transport model, with concentration-mortality relationships from a short-term epidemiologic study and projected global population. An estimated 38,000 premature mortalities are avoided globally in 2030 under Scenario B. As benefits of methane reduction are positive but costs are negative for Scenario A, it is justified regardless of how avoided mortalities are valued. The incremental benefits of Scenario B also far outweigh the incremental costs. Scenario C has incremental costs that roughly equal benefits, only when technological learning is assumed. Benefits within industrialized nations alone also exceed costs in Scenarios A and B, assuming that the lowest-cost emission reductions, including those in developing nations, are implemented. Monetized co-benefits of methane mitigation for human health are estimated to be $13–17 per ton CO 2eq, with a wider range possible under alternative assumptions. Methane mitigation can be a cost-effective means of long-term and international air quality management, with concurrent benefits for climate. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Climatic Change.
Volume (Year): 114 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 (October)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10584
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- K. Aunan & H.E. Mestl & H.M. Seip & J. Fang & D.O'Connor & H. Vennemo & F. Zhai, 2003. "Co-benefits of CO 2-reducing policies in China - a matter of scale?," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3), pages 287-304.
- Riahi, Keywan & Rubin, Edward S. & Taylor, Margaret R. & Schrattenholzer, Leo & Hounshell, David, 2004. "Technological learning for carbon capture and sequestration technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 539-564, July.
- Burtraw, Dallas & Krupnick, Alan & Palmer, Karen & Paul, Anthony & Toman, Michael & Bloyd, Cary, 2003. "Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity sector," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 650-673, May.
- Benjamin J. DeAngelo, Francisco C. de la Chesnaye, Robert H. Beach, Allan Sommer and Brian C. Murray , 2006. "Methane and Nitrous Oxide Mitigation in Agriculture," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 89-108.
- John P. Weyant, Francisco C. de la Chesnaye, and Geoff J. Blanford, 2006. "Overview of EMF-21: Multigas Mitigation and Climate Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 1-32.
- Ekin, Paul, 1996. "The secondary benefits of CO2 abatement: How much emission reduction do they justify?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 13-24, January.
- Syri, Sanna & Amann, Markus & Capros, Pantelis & Mantzos, Leonidas & Cofala, Janusz & Klimont, Zbigniew, 2001. "Low-CO2 energy pathways and regional air pollution in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 871-884, September.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.