IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v34y2012is2ps168-s180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relevance of process emissions for carbon leakage: A comparison of unilateral climate policy options with and without border carbon adjustment

Author

Listed:
  • Bednar-Friedl, Birgit
  • Schinko, Thomas
  • Steininger, Karl W.

Abstract

Climate policy arrangements of partial regional coverage, as they seem to emerge from the UNFCCC process, might lead to carbon leakage and hence a broad literature has developed to quantify leakage. Most of these analyses, however, are confined to consider emissions from fuel combustion only. Yet, some of the most relevant simultaneously energy intensive and internationally trade exposed sectors are also subject to substantial emissions from industrial processes. Carbon dioxide emissions can be released in industrial processes which physically or chemically transform materials. In the steel and cement sectors, for example, these process emissions amount to about half of sector carbon dioxide emissions in many countries. We incorporate industrial process emissions based on UNFCCC data into a multi-sectoral multi-regional computable general equilibrium model and analyze the implications of a unilateral EU 20% carbon dioxide emission reduction policy on leakage and the effectiveness of border carbon adjustment in reducing leakage. By comparing the results to a model without process emissions, we find that leakage of climate policy so far has been underestimated. Leakage turns out to be higher when process emissions are correctly accounted for (38% instead of 29% for combustion emissions only). Conversely, border carbon adjustment measures are found to be roughly twice as effective to reduce leakage rates, when process emissions are correctly accounted for — as carbon adjustment rates are more directly targeted to the relevant sectors. Yet, border carbon adjustment measures should not be seen as a panacea as they might impede necessary technological carbon-free innovation, unless they are phased out over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Bednar-Friedl, Birgit & Schinko, Thomas & Steininger, Karl W., 2012. "The relevance of process emissions for carbon leakage: A comparison of unilateral climate policy options with and without border carbon adjustment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 168-180.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:s2:p:s168-s180
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988312002083
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.038?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. Wolf Grossmann & Karl Steininger & Christoph Schmid & Iris Grossmann, 2012. "Investment and employment from large-scale photovoltaics up to 2050," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 165-189, May.
    2. Fæhn, Taran & Bruvoll, Annegrete, 2009. "Richer and cleaner--At others' expense?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 103-122, May.
    3. Böhringer, Christoph & Lange, Andreas & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2014. "Optimal emission pricing in the presence of international spillovers: Decomposing leakage and terms-of-trade motives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 101-111.
    4. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7346 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. van Asselt, Harro & Brewer, Thomas, 2010. "Addressing competitiveness and leakage concerns in climate policy: An analysis of border adjustment measures in the US and the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 42-51, January.
    6. Onno Kuik & Reyer Gerlagh, 2003. "Trade Liberalization and Carbon Leakage," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 97-120.
    7. Hertel, Thomas & Lee, Huey-Lin & Rose, Steven & Sohngen, Brent, 2008. "Modeling Land-use Related Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks and their Mitigation Potential," GTAP Working Papers 2605, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    8. Hertel, Thomas & Lee, Huey-Lin & Rose, Steven & Sohngen, Brent, 2008. "Modeling Land-use Related Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks and their Mitigation Potential," GTAP Working Papers 2605, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    9. Sergey V. Paltsev, 2001. "The Kyoto Protocol: Regional and Sectoral Contributions to the Carbon Leakage," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 53-80.
    10. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC, 2008. "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report," Working Papers id:1325, eSocialSciences.
    11. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Veronika Kulmer & Thomas Schinko, 2012. "The effectiveness of anti-leakage policies in the European Union: results for Austria," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 233-260, May.
    12. Monjon, Stéphanie & Quirion, Philippe, 2011. "Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: Border adjustment or output-based allocation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1957-1971, September.
    13. Carolyn Fischer & Alan K. Fox, 2007. "Output-Based Allocation of Emissions Permits for Mitigating Tax and Trade Interactions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 575-599.
    14. McDougall, Robert & Aguiar, Angel, 2007. "Initial Preparation of Energy Volume Data for GTAP 7," GTAP Research Memoranda 2521, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    15. Jean-Marc Burniaux & Joaquim Oliveira Martins, 2000. "Carbon Emission Leakages: A General Equilibrium View," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 242, OECD Publishing.
    16. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, March.
    17. Kuik, Onno & Hofkes, Marjan, 2010. "Border adjustment for European emissions trading: Competitiveness and carbon leakage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1741-1748, April.
    18. Susanne Droege, 2011. "Using border measures to address carbon flows," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 1191-1201, September.
    19. Vermont, Bruno & De Cara, Stéphane, 2010. "How costly is mitigation of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture?: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1373-1386, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Schinko, Thomas & Bednar-Friedl, Birgit & Steininger, Karl W. & Grossmann, Wolf D., 2014. "Switching to carbon-free production processes: Implications for carbon leakage and border carbon adjustment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 818-831.
    2. Karl Steininger & Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Wolf Grossmann & Thomas Schinko, 2013. "The relevance of carbon free production processes for carbon leakage and carbon border adjustment," EcoMod2013 5482, EcoMod.
    3. Birgit BEDNAR-FRIEDL & Thomas SCHINKO & Karl STEININGER, 2010. "A CGE Analysis of Climate Policy Options after Copenhagen: Bottom-up Approaches, Border Tax Adjustments, and Carbon Leakage," EcoMod2010 259600022, EcoMod.
    4. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Veronika Kulmer & Thomas Schinko, 2012. "The effectiveness of anti-leakage policies in the European Union: results for Austria," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 233-260, May.
    5. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Veronika Kulmer & Thomas Schinko, 2011. "ETCLIP – The Challenge of the European Carbon Market: Emission Trading, Carbon Leakage and Instruments to Stabilise the CO2 Price. Effects of Different EU Climate Policy Scenarios on International Tra," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 43107, February.
    6. Li, Shantong & He, Jianwu, 2011. "Impact of China’s Domestic Carbon Emission Trading Scheme," Conference papers 332101, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. Sato, Misato & Dechezleprêtre, Antoine, 2015. "Asymmetric industrial energy prices and international trade," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 130-141.
    8. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "Impacts of border carbon adjustments on China's sectoral emissions: Simulations with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 77-94.
    9. Sakai, Marco & Barrett, John, 2016. "Border carbon adjustments: Addressing emissions embodied in trade," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 102-110.
    10. Narayanan G., Badri & Walmsley, Terrie L., 2011. "The Role of Labor Standards in International Trade: A CGE Approach," Conference papers 332097, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2013. "Assessing alternative solutions to carbon leakage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 299-311.
    12. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhingXiang & Qiao, Han & Wang, Shouyang, 2012. "Impact of Border Carbon Adjustments on China’s Sectoral Emissions: Simulations with a Dynamic Computable General Equilibirum Model," Working Papers 249391, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    13. Benjamin Jones & Michael Keen & Jon Strand, 2013. "Fiscal implications of climate change," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(1), pages 29-70, February.
    14. Gabriela Michalek & Reimund Schwarze, 2015. "Carbon leakage: pollution, trade or politics?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1471-1492, December.
    15. Halvor Briseid Storrøsten & Christoph Böhringer & Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2015. "Smart hedging against carbon leakage," Discussion Papers 822, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    16. Christian Lininger, 2013. "Consumption-Based Approaches in International Climate Policy: An Analytical Evaluation of the Implications for Cost-Effectiveness, Carbon Leakage, and the International Income Distribution," Graz Economics Papers 2013-03, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    17. Venmans, Frank, 2012. "A literature-based multi-criteria evaluation of the EU ETS," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 5493-5510.
    18. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Conference papers 332096, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 29-39.
    20. Reyer Gerlagh & Onno Kuik, 2007. "Carbon Leakage with International Technology Spillovers," Working Papers 2007.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Carbon leakage; Embodied carbon; Border tariffs; Process emissions; Low-carbon technologies;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:s2:p:s168-s180. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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.