Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Scenarios of methane emission reductions to 2030: abatement costs and co-benefits to ozone air quality and human mortality

Contents:

Author Info

  • J. West

    ()

  • Arlene Fiore
  • Larry Horowitz
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Methane 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 Info

    If 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.
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10584-012-0426-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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 Info

    Article provided by Springer in its journal Climatic Change.

    Volume (Year): 114 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 3 (October)
    Pages: 441-461

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:114:y:2012:i:3:p:441-461

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10584

    Order Information:
    Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

    Related research

    Keywords:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:
    as in new window
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. van Vuuren, Detlef P. & Weyant, John & de la Chesnaye, Francisco, 2006. "Multi-gas scenarios to stabilize radiative forcing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 102-120, January.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Rubin, Edward S & Taylor, Margaret R & Yeh, Sonia & Hounshell, David A, 2004. "Learning curves for environmental technology and their importance for climate policy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1551-1559.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:114:y:2012:i:3:p:441-461. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.