When Should We Stop Extracting Nonrenewable Resources?
This article analyzes an economy where both nonrenewable resources and a costly energy resource are essential inputs in production. The extraction of the nonrenewable resources leads to emissions that increase the probability of a catastrophe. We find that, in contrast to the constant-probability case, the endogenous probability of a catastrophe implies that some nonrenewable resources might optimally be left in the ground. The larger the effect of the fossil energy use on the probability of a catastrophe, the fewer nonrenewable resources should be extracted and the earlier should be the switch to the renewable substitute. The richer a country, the earlier it should shift to the energy substitute. In the trade-off between higher consumption and a higher probability of catastrophe, even small probability changes are likely to be more important for the planner than higher consumption.
Volume (Year): 15 (2011)
Issue (Month): 04 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK|
Web page: http://journals.cambridge.org/jid_MDY
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:macdyn:v:15:y:2011:i:04:p:495-512_00. 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: (Keith Waters)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.