The near-term impacts of carbon mitigation policies on manufacturing industries
Who will pay for new policies to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions in the United States? This paper considers a slice of the question by examining the near-term impact on domestic manufacturing industries of both upstream (economy-wide) and downstream (electric power industry only) carbon mitigation policies. Detailed Census data on the electricity use of four-digit manufacturing industries is combined with input-output information on interindustry purchases to paint a detailed picture of carbon use, including effects on final demand. This approach, which freezes capital and other inputs at current levels and assumes that all costs are passed forward, yields upper-bound estimates of total costs. The results are best viewed as descriptive of the relative burdens within the manufacturing sector rather than as a measure of absolute costs. Overall, the principal conclusion is that within the manufacturing sector (which by definition excludes coal production and electricity generation), only a small number of industries would bear a disproportionate short-term burden of a carbon tax or similar policy. Not surprisingly, an electricity-only policy affects very different manufacturing industries than an economy-wide carbon tax.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- J. E. Stiglitz, 1999. "Introduction," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 28(3), pages 249-254, November.
- Pizer, William & Morgenstern, Richard & Shih, Jhih-Shyang, 1998.
"The Cost of Environmental Protection,"
dp-98-36, Resources For the Future.
- Sanstad, Alan H. & DeCanio, Stephen J. & Boyd, Gale A. & Koomey, Jonathan G., 2001. "Estimating bounds on the economy-wide effects of the CEF policy scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(14), pages 1299-1311, November.
- Koomey, Jonathan G. & Webber, Carrie A. & Atkinson, Celina S. & Nicholls, Andrew, 2001. "Addressing energy-related challenges for the US buildings sector: results from the clean energy futures study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(14), pages 1209-1221, November.
- Ruth, Matthias & Davidsdottir, Brynhildur & Laitner, Skip, 2000. "Impacts of market-based climate change policies on the US pulp and paper industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 259-270, April.
- Jorgenson, Dale W. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 1993.
"Reducing U.S. carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of different instruments,"
Journal of Policy Modeling,
Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 491-520.
- Jorgenson, D.W. & Wilcoxen, P.J., 1992. "Reducing US Carbon Dioxide Emissions: An Assessment of Different Instruments," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1590, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2001. "The Effect of Allowance Allocation on the Cost of Carbon Emission Trading," Discussion Papers dp-01-30-, Resources For the Future.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:32:y:2004:i:16:p:1825-1841. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.