Technological Scarcity, Compliance Flexibility And The Optimal Time Path Of Emissions Abatement
AbstractThe overall economic efficiency of a quantity-based approach to greenhouse gas mitigation depends strongly on the extent to which such a program provides opportunities for compliance flexibility, particularly with regard to the timing of emissions abatement. Here I consider a program in which annual targets are determined by choosing the optimal time path of reductions consistent with an exogenously prescribed cumulative reduction target and fixed technology set. I then show that if the availability of low-carbon technology is initially more constrained than anticipated, the optimal reduction path shifts abatement toward later compliance periods. For this reason, a rigid policy in which fixed annual targets are strictly enforced in every year yields a cumulative environmental outcome identical to the optimal policy but an economic outcome worse than the optimal policy. On the other hand, a policy that aligns actual prices (or equivalently, costs) with expected prices by simply imposing an explicit price ceiling (often referred to as a "safety valve") yields the opposite result. Comparison among these multiple scenarios implies that there are significant gains to realizing the optimal path but that further refinement of the actual regulatory instrument will be necessary to achieve that goal in a real cap-and-trade system.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University in its series CAMA Working Papers with number 2008-36.
Length: 23 pages
Date of creation: Nov 2008
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Crawford Building, Lennox Crossing, Building #132, Canberra ACT 0200
Phone: +61 2 6125 4705
Fax: +61 2 6125 5448
Web page: http://cama.crawford.anu.edu.au
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2003.
"Regulating stock externalities under uncertainty,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 416-432, March.
- Warwick J. McKibbin & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2003.
"Estimates of the Costs of Kyoto-Marrakesh versus the McKibbin-Wilcoxen Blueprint,"
Economics and Environment Network Working Papers, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network
0305, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
- McKibbin, Warwick J. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 2004. "Estimates of the costs of Kyoto: Marrakesh versus the McKibbin-Wilcoxen blueprint," Energy Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 467-479, March.
- Warwick J. McKibbin & Peter J Wilcoxen, 2003. "Estimates of the Costs of Kyoto-Marrakesh Versus The McKibbin-Wilcoxen Blueprint," Departmental Working Papers, The Australian National University, Arndt-Corden Department of Economics 2003-14, The Australian National University, Arndt-Corden Department of Economics.
- Roberts, Marc J. & Spence, Michael, 1976. "Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 193-208.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Cama Admin).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.