IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v117y2013i4p663-675.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sensitivity of multi-gas climate policy to emission metrics

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Smith
  • Joseph Karas
  • Jae Edmonds
  • Jiyong Eom
  • Andrew Mizrahi

Abstract

The Global Warming Potential (GWP) index is currently used to create CO 2 -equivalent emission totals for multi-gas greenhouse targets. While many alternatives have been proposed, it is not possible to uniquely define a metric that captures the different impacts of emissions of substances with widely disparate atmospheric lifetimes, which leads to a wide range of possible index values. We examine the sensitivity of emissions and climate outcomes to the value of the index used to aggregate methane emissions using a technologically detailed integrated assessment model. The methane index is varied between 4 and 70, with a central value of 21, which is the 100-year GWP value currently used in policy contexts. We find that the sensitivity to index value is, at most, 10–18 % in terms of methane emissions but only 2–3 % in terms of the maximum total radiative forcing change, with larger regional emissions differences in some cases. The choice of index also affects estimates of the cost of meeting a given end of century forcing target, with total two-gas mitigation cost increasing by 7–9 % if the index is increased, and increasing in most scenarios from 4 to 23 % if the index is lowered, with a slight (1 %) decrease in total cost in one case. We find that much of the methane abatement occurs as the induced effect of CO 2 abatement rather than explicit abatement, which is one reason why climate outcomes are relatively insensitive to the index value. We also find that the near-term climate benefit of increasing the methane index is small. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Smith & Joseph Karas & Jae Edmonds & Jiyong Eom & Andrew Mizrahi, 2013. "Sensitivity of multi-gas climate policy to emission metrics," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 663-675, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:117:y:2013:i:4:p:663-675
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-012-0565-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10584-012-0565-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-012-0565-7?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. Alan S. Manne & Richard G. Richels, 2001. "An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6829), pages 675-677, April.
    2. John P. Weyant, Francisco C. de la Chesnaye, and Geoff J. Blanford, 2006. "Overview of EMF-21: Multigas Mitigation and Climate Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 1-32.
    3. Daniel Johansson, 2012. "Economics- and physical-based metrics for comparing greenhouse gases," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 123-141, January.
    4. Richard S. Eckaus, 1992. "Comparing the Effects of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Global Warming," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 25-36.
    5. Asbjorn Aaheim, Jan S. Fuglestvedt and Odd Godal, 2006. "Costs Savings of a Flexible Multi-Gas Climate Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 485-502.
    6. Steven J. Smith and T.M.L. Wigley, 2006. "Multi-Gas Forcing Stabilization with Minicam," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 373-392.
    7. Son H. Kim, Jae Edmonds, Josh Lurz, Steven J. Smith, and Marshall Wise, 2006. "The objECTS Framework for integrated Assessment: Hybrid Modeling of Transportation," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 63-92.
    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. Morgan R. Edwards & Jessika E. Trancik, 2022. "Consequences of equivalency metric design for energy transitions and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-27, November.
    2. Rautiainen, Aapo & Lintunen, Jussi, 2017. "Social Cost of Forcing: A Basis for Pricing All Forcing Agents," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 42-51.
    3. Mathijs J. H. M. Harmsen & Maarten Berg & Volker Krey & Gunnar Luderer & Adriana Marcucci & Jessica Strefler & Detlef P. Van Vuuren, 2016. "How climate metrics affect global mitigation strategies and costs: a multi-model study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 203-216, May.
    4. Dharik S. Mallapragada & Bryan K. Mignone, 2020. "A theoretical basis for the equivalence between physical and economic climate metrics and implications for the choice of Global Warming Potential time horizon," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 107-124, January.

    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. Jessica Strefler & Gunnar Luderer & Tino Aboumahboub & Elmar Kriegler, 2014. "Economic impacts of alternative greenhouse gas emission metrics: a model-based assessment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 319-331, August.
    2. Morgan R. Edwards & Jessika E. Trancik, 2022. "Consequences of equivalency metric design for energy transitions and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-27, November.
    3. Kuik, Onno & Brander, Luke & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "Marginal abatement costs of greenhouse gas emissions: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1395-1403, April.
    4. Daniel Johansson, 2012. "Economics- and physical-based metrics for comparing greenhouse gases," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 123-141, January.
    5. Katsumasa Tanaka & Daniel Johansson & Brian O’Neill & Jan Fuglestvedt, 2013. "Emission metrics under the 2 °C climate stabilization target," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 933-941, April.
    6. Samuel Carrara & Giacomo Marangoni, 2013. "Non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation modeling with marginal abatement cost curv es: technical change, emission scenarios and policy costs," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 91-124.
    7. Samuel Carrara & Giacomo Marangoni, 2013. "Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Modeling with Marginal Abatement Cost Curves: Technical Change, Emission Scenarios and Policy Costs," Working Papers 2013.110, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    9. Waldhoff, Stephanie & Anthoff, David & Rose, Steven K. & Tol, Richard S. J., 2014. "The marginal damage costs of different greenhouse gases: An application of FUND," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 8, pages 1-33.
    10. Erik Sterner & Daniel Johansson & Christian Azar, 2014. "Emission metrics and sea level rise," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 335-351, November.
    11. Mathijs J. H. M. Harmsen & Maarten Berg & Volker Krey & Gunnar Luderer & Adriana Marcucci & Jessica Strefler & Detlef P. Van Vuuren, 2016. "How climate metrics affect global mitigation strategies and costs: a multi-model study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 203-216, May.
    12. Steven Smith & J. West & Page Kyle, 2011. "Economically consistent long-term scenarios for air pollutant emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 619-627, October.
    13. Christian Azar & Daniel Johansson, 2012. "Valuing the non-CO 2 climate impacts of aviation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 559-579, April.
    14. Wilkerson, Jordan T. & Leibowicz, Benjamin D. & Turner, Delavane D. & Weyant, John P., 2015. "Comparison of integrated assessment models: Carbon price impacts on U.S. energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 18-31.
    15. Tol, Richard S.J., 2013. "Targets for global climate policy: An overview," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 911-928.
    16. Steven Rose & Richard Richels & Steve Smith & Keywan Riahi & Jessica Strefler & Detlef Vuuren, 2014. "Non-Kyoto radiative forcing in long-run greenhouse gas emissions and climate change scenarios," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 511-525, April.
    17. Allison Thomson & Katherine Calvin & Steven Smith & G. Kyle & April Volke & Pralit Patel & Sabrina Delgado-Arias & Ben Bond-Lamberty & Marshall Wise & Leon Clarke & James Edmonds, 2011. "RCP4.5: a pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 77-94, November.
    18. Stefan Wirsenius & Fredrik Hedenus & Kristina Mohlin, 2011. "Greenhouse gas taxes on animal food products: rationale, tax scheme and climate mitigation effects," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 159-184, September.
    19. John Daniel & Susan Solomon & Todd Sanford & Mack McFarland & Jan Fuglestvedt & Pierre Friedlingstein, 2012. "Limitations of single-basket trading: lessons from the Montreal Protocol for climate policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(2), pages 241-248, March.
    20. Kerkhof, Annemarie C. & Moll, Henri C. & Drissen, Eric & Wilting, Harry C., 2008. "Taxation of multiple greenhouse gases and the effects on income distribution: A case study of the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 318-326, September.

    More about this item

    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:spr:climat:v:117:y:2013:i:4:p:663-675. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.