IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/endeec/v17y2012i06p689-713_00.html

Energy and climate change in China

Author

Listed:
  • Carraro, Carlo
  • Massetti, Emanuele

Abstract

This paper examines future energy and emissions scenarios in China generated by the Integrated Assessment Model WITCH. A Business-as-Usual scenario is compared with five scenarios in which greenhouse gases emissions are taxed, at different levels. The elasticity of China's emissions is estimated by pooling observations from all scenarios and comparing them with the elasticity of emissions in OECD countries. China has a higher elasticity than the OECD for a carbon tax lower than US$50 per ton of CO2-eq. For higher taxes, emissions in OECD economies are more elastic than in China. Our best guess indicates that China would need to introduce a tax equal to about US$750 per ton of CO2-eq in 2050 to achieve the Major Economies Forum goal set for mid-century. In our preferred estimates, the discounted cost of following the 2°C trajectory is equal to 5.4 per cent and to 2.7 per cent of GDP in China and the OECD, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Carraro, Carlo & Massetti, Emanuele, 2012. "Energy and climate change in China," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(6), pages 689-713, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:17:y:2012:i:06:p:689-713_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1355770X12000228/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Emanuele Massetti, 2011. "Carbon tax scenarios for China and India: exploring politically feasible mitigation goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-227, September.
    2. Yingying Lu & David I. Stern, 2016. "Substitutability and the Cost of Climate Mitigation Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 81-107, May.
    3. Tiaoye Li & Lingjiang Tao & Mi Zhang, 2024. "Projection of Non-Industrial Electricity Consumption in China’s Pearl River Delta under Global Warming Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Li, Chuan-Zhong & Wei, Chu & Yu, Yang, 2020. "Income threshold, household appliance ownership and residential energy consumption in urban China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Vicki Duscha & Katja Schumacher & Joachim Schleich & Pierre Buisson, 2014. "Costs of meeting international climate targets without nuclear power," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 327-352, May.
    6. Lu, Yingying & Stegman, Alison & Cai, Yiyong, 2013. "Emissions intensity targeting: From China's 12th Five Year Plan to its Copenhagen commitment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1164-1177.
    7. Perrings, Charles, 2014. "Environment and development economics 20 years on," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 333-366, June.
    8. Hübler, Michael & Voigt, Sebastian & Löschel, Andreas, 2014. "Designing an emissions trading scheme for China—An up-to-date climate policy assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-72.
    9. Massetti, Emanuele & Tavoni, Massimo, 2012. "A developing Asia emission trading scheme (Asia ETS)," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S3), pages 436-443.
    10. Pedro Antonio Martín Cervantes & Nuria Rueda López & Salvador Cruz Rambaud, 2020. "Life Expectancy at Birth in Europe: An Econometric Approach Based on Random Forests Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, January.
    11. Carlo Carraro & Emanuele Massetti, 2012. "Beyond Copenhagen: a realistic climate policy in a fragmented world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 523-542, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F5 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:cup:endeec:v:17:y:2012:i:06:p:689-713_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ede .

    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.