IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v125y2014i3p319-331.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic impacts of alternative greenhouse gas emission metrics: a model-based assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Strefler
  • Gunnar Luderer
  • Tino Aboumahboub
  • Elmar Kriegler

Abstract

In this paper we study the impact of alternative metrics on short- and long-term multi-gas emission reduction strategies and the associated global and regional economic costs and emissions budgets. We compare global warming potentials with three different time horizons (20, 100, 500 years), global temperature change potential and global cost potentials with and without temperature overshoot. We find that the choice of metric has a relatively small impact on the CO 2 budget compatible with the 2° target and therefore on global costs. However it substantially influences mid-term emission levels of CH 4 , which may either rise or decline in the next decades as compared to today’s levels. Though CO 2 budgets are not affected much, we find changes in CO 2 prices which substantially affect regional costs. Lower CO 2 prices lead to more fossil fuel use and therefore higher resource prices on the global market. This increases profits of fossil-fuel exporters. Due to the different weights of non-CO 2 emissions associated with different metrics, there are large differences in nominal CO 2 equivalent budgets, which do not necessarily imply large differences in the budgets of the single gases. This may induce large shifts in emission permit trade, especially in regions where agriculture with its high associated CH 4 emissions plays an important role. Furthermore it makes it important to determine CO 2 equivalence budgets with respect to the chosen metric. Our results suggest that for limiting warming to 2 °C in 2100, the currently used GWP100 performs well in terms of global mitigation costs despite its conceptual simplicity. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Strefler & Gunnar Luderer & Tino Aboumahboub & Elmar Kriegler, 2014. "Economic impacts of alternative greenhouse gas emission metrics: a model-based assessment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 319-331, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:125:y:2014:i:3:p:319-331
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-014-1188-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10584-014-1188-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-014-1188-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan S. Manne & Richard G. Richels, 2001. "An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6829), pages 675-677, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Kandlikar, Milind, 1996. "Indices for comparing greenhouse gas emissions: integrating science and economics," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 265-281, October.
    4. Daniel Johansson, 2012. "Economics- and physical-based metrics for comparing greenhouse gases," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 123-141, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Nico Bauer & Lavinia Baumstark & Marian Leimbach, 2012. "The REMIND-R model: the role of renewables in the low-carbon transformation—first-best vs. second-best worlds," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 145-168, September.
    7. Asbjorn Aaheim, Jan S. Fuglestvedt and Odd Godal, 2006. "Costs Savings of a Flexible Multi-Gas Climate Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 485-502.
    8. Katsumasa Tanaka & Daniel Johansson & Brian O’Neill & Jan Fuglestvedt, 2013. "Emission metrics under the 2 °C climate stabilization target," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 933-941, April.
    9. Richard Schmalensee, 1993. "Comparing Greenhouse Gases for Policy Purposes," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 245-256.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zach Dorner & Suzi Kerr, 2015. "Methane and Metrics: From global climate policy to the NZ farm," Working Papers 15_11, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    2. Gunnar Luderer & Zoi Vrontisi & Christoph Bertram & Oreane Y. Edelenbosch & Robert C. Pietzcker & Joeri Rogelj & Harmen Sytze Boer & Laurent Drouet & Johannes Emmerling & Oliver Fricko & Shinichiro Fu, 2018. "Residual fossil CO2 emissions in 1.5–2 °C pathways," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(7), pages 626-633, July.
    3. John Lynch & Tara Garnett, 2021. "Policy to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Is Agricultural Methane a Special Case?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(2), pages 11-17, August.
    4. Mathijs Harmsen & Oliver Fricko & Jérôme Hilaire & Detlef P. Vuuren & Laurent Drouet & Olivier Durand-Lasserve & Shinichiro Fujimori & Kimon Keramidas & Zbigniew Klimont & Gunnar Luderer & Lara Alelui, 2020. "Taking some heat off the NDCs? The limited potential of additional short-lived climate forcers’ mitigation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1443-1461, December.
    5. Bukvić, Rajko & Petrović, Dragan, 2017. "Парниковый Эффект И Рыночные Механизмы Киотского Протокола [Greenhouse Effect and Mechanisms of Kyoto Protocol]," MPRA Paper 76451, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2017.
    6. Morgan R. Edwards & Jessika E. Trancik, 2022. "Consequences of equivalency metric design for energy transitions and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-27, November.
    7. Mathijs J. H. M. Harmsen & Maarten Berg & Volker Krey & Gunnar Luderer & Adriana Marcucci & Jessica Strefler & Detlef P. Van Vuuren, 2016. "How climate metrics affect global mitigation strategies and costs: a multi-model study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 203-216, May.
    8. Bukvić, Rajko, 2015. "Рыночные Механизмы Сокращения Выбросов Парниковых Газов И Активности И Перспективы России [Market mechanisms of reduction of greenhouse gases emissions and actions and perspectives of Russia]," MPRA Paper 71616, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2015.
    9. Bukvić, Rajko, 2017. "Ефекат Стакленика, Глобално Загревање И Кјотски Протокол [Greenhouse Effect, Global Warming and Kyoto Protocol]," MPRA Paper 83953, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2017.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Johansson, 2012. "Economics- and physical-based metrics for comparing greenhouse gases," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 123-141, January.
    2. Johansson, Daniel J.A., 2009. "Economics vs. Physical-based Metrics for Relative Greenhouse Gas Valuations," Working Papers in Economics 363, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    3. Christian Azar & Daniel Johansson, 2012. "Valuing the non-CO 2 climate impacts of aviation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 559-579, April.
    4. Morgan R. Edwards & Jessika E. Trancik, 2022. "Consequences of equivalency metric design for energy transitions and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-27, November.
    5. Steven Smith & Joseph Karas & Jae Edmonds & Jiyong Eom & Andrew Mizrahi, 2013. "Sensitivity of multi-gas climate policy to emission metrics," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 663-675, April.
    6. Waldhoff, Stephanie & Anthoff, David & Rose, Steven K. & Tol, Richard S. J., 2014. "The marginal damage costs of different greenhouse gases: An application of FUND," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 8, pages 1-33.
    7. Christian Azar & Jorge García Martín & Daniel JA. Johansson & Thomas Sterner, 2023. "The social cost of methane," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(6), pages 1-22, June.
    8. Marten, Alex L. & Newbold, Stephen C., 2012. "Estimating the social cost of non-CO2 GHG emissions: Methane and nitrous oxide," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 957-972.
    9. Linda Sygna & Jan Fuglestvedt & H. Aaheim, 2002. "The adequacy of GWPs as indicators of damage costsincurred by global warming," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 45-62, March.
    10. Katsumasa Tanaka & Daniel Johansson & Brian O’Neill & Jan Fuglestvedt, 2013. "Emission metrics under the 2 °C climate stabilization target," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 933-941, April.
    11. Aaheim, Asbjørn & Mideksa, Torben, 2017. "Requirements to metrics of greenhouse gas emissions, given a cap on temperature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 460-467.
    12. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer, 2009. "Issues in Designing U.S. Climate Change Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 179-210.
    13. Samuel Carrara & Giacomo Marangoni, 2013. "Non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation modeling with marginal abatement cost curv es: technical change, emission scenarios and policy costs," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 91-124.
    14. Samuel Carrara & Giacomo Marangoni, 2013. "Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Modeling with Marginal Abatement Cost Curves: Technical Change, Emission Scenarios and Policy Costs," Working Papers 2013.110, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    16. J. West & Arlene Fiore & Larry Horowitz, 2012. "Scenarios of methane emission reductions to 2030: abatement costs and co-benefits to ozone air quality and human mortality," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 441-461, October.
    17. Heidi K. Edmonds & Julie E. Lovell & C. A. Knox Lovell, 2017. "A New Composite Index for Greenhouse Gases: Climate Science Meets Social Science," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, October.
    18. Erik Sterner & Daniel Johansson & Christian Azar, 2014. "Emission metrics and sea level rise," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 335-351, November.
    19. Richard S. J. Tol & Seán Lyons, 2008. "Incorporating GHG Emission Costs in the Economic Appraisal of Projects Supported by State Development Agencies," Papers WP247, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    20. Mathijs J. H. M. Harmsen & Maarten Berg & Volker Krey & Gunnar Luderer & Adriana Marcucci & Jessica Strefler & Detlef P. Van Vuuren, 2016. "How climate metrics affect global mitigation strategies and costs: a multi-model study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 203-216, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:125:y:2014:i:3:p:319-331. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.