IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i5p2499-2507.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A decarbonization strategy for the electricity sector: New-source subsidies

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, Kenneth C.

Abstract

An expedient phase-out of carbon emissions in the electricity sector could be facilitated by imposing carbon fees and applying the revenue exclusively to subsidize new, low-carbon generation sources. Since there would initially be no "new sources," fees would be substantially zero at the outset of the program. Nevertheless, the program would immediately create high price incentives for low-carbon capacity expansion. Fees would increase as new, low-carbon sources gain market share, but price competition from a growing, subsidized clean-energy industry would help maintain moderate retail electricity prices. Subsidies would automatically phase out as emitting sources become obsolete.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Kenneth C., 2010. "A decarbonization strategy for the electricity sector: New-source subsidies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2499-2507, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:5:p:2499-2507
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)01000-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Sterner, Thomas & Hoglund Isaksson, Lena, 2006. "Refunded emission payments theory, distribution of costs, and Swedish experience of NOx abatement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 93-106, April.
    2. Johnson, Kenneth C., 2007. "Refunded emission taxes: A resolution to the cap-versus-tax dilemma for greenhouse gas regulation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 3115-3118, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tahri, Meryem & Hakdaoui, Mustapha & Maanan, Mohamed, 2015. "The evaluation of solar farm locations applying Geographic Information System and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making methods: Case study in southern Morocco," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1354-1362.
    2. Ping Che & Yanyan Zhang & Jin Lang, 2019. "Emission-Intensity-Based Carbon Tax and Its Impact on Generation Self-Scheduling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Adelman, David E. & Spence, David B., 2018. "U.S. climate policy and the regional economics of electricity generation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 268-275.
    4. Zhang, Pan & Wang, Huan, 2022. "Do provincial energy policies and energy intensity targets help reduce CO2 emissions? Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    5. Wei Wei & Yile Liang & Feng Liu & Shengwei Mei & Fang Tian, 2014. "Taxing Strategies for Carbon Emissions: A Bilevel Optimization Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Timmons, David & Konstantinidis, Charalampos & Shapiro, Andrew M. & Wilson, Alex, 2016. "Decarbonizing residential building energy: A cost-effective approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 382-392.

    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. Wang, M. & Zhou, P., 2022. "A two-step auction-refund allocation rule of CO2 emission permits," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    2. Heimvik, Arild, 2020. "Refunded emission payments scheme – a cost-efficient and politically acceptable instrument for reduction of NOx-emissions?," Working Papers in Economics 2/20, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    3. Sterner, Thomas & Muller, Adrian, 2006. "Output and Abatement Effects of Allocation Readjustment in Permit Trade," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-49, Resources for the Future.
    4. Alcott, Blake, 2008. "The sufficiency strategy: Would rich-world frugality lower environmental impact," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 770-786, February.
    5. Bonilla, Jorge & Coria, Jessica & Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Synergies and Trade-offs between Climate and Local Air Pollution: Policies in Sweden," Working Papers in Economics 529, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    6. Fischer, Carolyn, 2011. "Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 212-230, January.
    7. Ioanna Pantelaiou & Panos Hatzipanayotou & Panagiotis Konstantinou & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2020. "Can Cleaner Environment Promote International Trade? Environmental Policies as Export Promoting Mechanisms," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 809-833, April.
    8. Kasikowski, Tomasz & Buczkowski, Roman & Cichosz, Marcin & Lemanowska, Eliza, 2007. "Combined distiller waste utilisation and combustion gases desulphurisation method," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 665-690.
    9. Yuanguang Yu, 2012. "An Optimal Ad Valorem Tax/Subsidy with an Output-Based Refunded Emission Payment for Permits Auction in an Oligopoly Market," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(2), pages 235-248, June.
    10. Lele Zou & Jinjun Xue & Alan Fox & Bo Meng, 2018. "The Emissions Reduction Effect And Economic Impact Of An Energy Tax Vs. A Carbon Tax In China: A Dynamic Cge Model Analysis," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 63(02), pages 339-387, March.
    11. Gren, Ing-Marie & Höglind, Lisa & Jansson, Torbjörn, 2021. "Refunding of a climate tax on food consumption in Sweden," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Coria, Jessica & Mohlin, Kristina, 2017. "On Refunding of Emission Taxes and Technology Diffusion," Strategic Behavior and the Environment, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 205-248, March.
    13. Dapeng Cai & Jie Li, 2020. "Pollution for Sale: Firms’ Characteristics and Lobbying Outcome," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 539-564, November.
    14. Broberg, Thomas & Dijkgraaf, Elbert & Meens-Eriksson, Sef, 2022. "Burn or let them bury? The net social cost of producing district heating from imported waste," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    15. Meunier, Guy & Montero, Juan-Pablo & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2018. "Output-based allocations in pollution markets with uncertainty and self-selection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 832-851.
    16. Krutilla Kerry & Alexeev Alexander, 2012. "The Normative Implications of Political Decision-Making for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-36, May.
    17. Brown, David P. & Eckert, Andrew & Eckert, Heather, 2018. "Carbon pricing with an output subsidy under imperfect competition: The case of Alberta's restructured electricity market," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 102-123.
    18. Brand, Christian & Anable, Jillian & Tran, Martino, 2013. "Accelerating the transformation to a low carbon passenger transport system: The role of car purchase taxes, feebates, road taxes and scrappage incentives in the UK," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 132-148.
    19. Bernard, Alain L. & Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2007. "Is there a rationale for output-based rebating of environmental levies?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 83-101, May.
    20. Xenophon, Aleksis Kazubiernis & Hill, David John, 2019. "Emissions reduction and wholesale electricity price targeting using an output-based mechanism," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 1050-1063.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cap and trade Carbon tax;

    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:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:5:p:2499-2507. 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/enpol .

    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.