IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332131.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Diffusion of Climate Technologies in Presence of an Emissions Cap

Author

Listed:
  • FæHn, Taran
  • Jacobsen, Karl
  • Bye, Brita

Abstract

The EU and other selected jurisdictions have independently expressed high ambitions for greenhouse gas (GHG) control. In absence of international, binding agreements the reliance in such proclamations by individual governments can, however, suffer. A uniform GHG pricing scheme, that would otherwise be a first-best strategy for meeting a national cap, may not be optimal if the agents perceive the durability of the scheme as uncertain. Given this assumption, this paper compares a uniform GHG pricing system with two second-best options, one which combines emissions pricing with subsidies to upfront investments in climate technologies, and one with a public guarantee arrangement that places the political risk on the shoulders of the government. We use a technology-rich, dynamic CGE model that accounts for abatement both within and beyond existing technologies, the latter through investments in alternative, climate-friendly technologies. We find that domestic climate policies unable to stimulate investments in new technological solutions will triple the costs of a uniform GHG pricing system. Subsidising investments is a remedy, though costly compared to a system that ensures commitment from the government.

Suggested Citation

  • FæHn, Taran & Jacobsen, Karl & Bye, Brita, 2011. "Diffusion of Climate Technologies in Presence of an Emissions Cap," Conference papers 332131, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332131/files/5316.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Su, Bin & Huang, H.C. & Ang, B.W. & Zhou, P., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of sector aggregation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 166-175, January.
    2. McGregor, Peter G. & Swales, J. Kim & Turner, Karen, 2008. "The CO2 'trade balance' between Scotland and the rest of the UK: Performing a multi-region environmental input-output analysis with limited data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 662-673, July.
    3. Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher, 2000. "Truncation error in embodied energy analyses of basic iron and steel products," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 577-585.
    4. M. S. Common & U. Salma, 1992. "Accounting for Australian Carbon Dioxide Emissions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 68(1), pages 31-42, March.
    5. Rueda-Cantuche, José M. & Amores, Antonio F., 2010. "Consistent and unbiased carbon dioxide emission multipliers: Performance of Danish emission reductions via external trade," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 988-998, March.
    6. Common, M. S. & Salma, U., 1992. "Accounting for changes in Australian carbon dioxide emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 217-225, July.
    7. Robbie Andrew & Glen Peters & James Lennox, 2009. "Approximation And Regional Aggregation In Multi-Regional Input-Output Analysis For National Carbon Footprint Accounting," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 311-335.
    8. Common, M S & Salma, U, 1992. "Accounting for Australian Carbon Dioxide Emissions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 68(200), pages 31-42, March.
    9. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of spatial aggregation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 10-18, November.
    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. Das, Aparna & Paul, Saikat Kumar, 2014. "CO2 emissions from household consumption in India between 1993–94 and 2006–07: A decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 90-105.
    2. Misato Sato, 2014. "Embodied Carbon In Trade: A Survey Of The Empirical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 831-861, December.
    3. Yulei Xie & Ling Ji & Beibei Zhang & Gordon Huang, 2018. "Evolution of the Scientific Literature on Input–Output Analysis: A Bibliometric Analysis of 1990–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    4. Foran, Barney & Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher & Bilek, Marcela, 2005. "Integrating sustainable chain management with triple bottom line accounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 143-157, January.
    5. Arndt, Channing & Makrelov, Konstantin & Thurlow, James, 2011. "Measuring the Carbon Content of the South African Economy," WIDER Working Paper Series 045, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Xia, Yan & Fan, Ying & Yang, Cuihong, 2015. "Assessing the impact of foreign content in China’s exports on the carbon outsourcing hypothesis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 296-307.
    7. Zhou, Xin & Imura, Hidefumi, 2011. "How does consumer behavior influence regional ecological footprints? An empirical analysis for Chinese regions based on the multi-region input–output model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 171-179.
    8. Murthy, N. S. & Panda, Manoj & Parikh, Jyoti, 1997. "Economic development, poverty reduction and carbon emissions in India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 327-354, July.
    9. Erik Dietzenbacher & Jesper Stage, 2006. "Mixing oil and water? Using hybrid input-output tables in a Structural decomposition analysis," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 85-95.
    10. Piñero, Pablo & Heikkinen, Mari & Mäenpää, Ilmo & Pongrácz, Eva, 2015. "Sector aggregation bias in environmentally extended input output modeling of raw material flows in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 217-229.
    11. Gui, Shusen & Mu, Hailin & Li, Nan, 2014. "Analysis of impact factors on China's CO2 emissions from the view of supply chain paths," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 405-416.
    12. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of spatial aggregation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 10-18, November.
    13. Viktoras Kulionis, 2018. "Constructing energy accounts for WIOD 2016 release," Papers 1810.07112, arXiv.org.
    14. Carl Romanos & Suzi Kerr & Campbell Will, 2014. "Greenhouse Gas Emissions in New Zealand: A Preliminary Consumption-Based Analysis," Working Papers 14_05, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    15. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2014. "Input–output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: A multi-region model for China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 377-384.
    16. Munksgaard, Jesper & Pedersen, Klaus Alsted & Wien, Mette, 2000. "Impact of household consumption on CO2 emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 423-440, August.
    17. Bordigoni, Mathieu & Hita, Alain & Le Blanc, Gilles, 2012. "Role of embodied energy in the European manufacturing industry: Application to short-term impacts of a carbon tax," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 335-350.
    18. Moana S. Simas & Laura Golsteijn & Mark A. J. Huijbregts & Richard Wood & Edgar G. Hertwich, 2014. "The “Bad Labor” Footprint: Quantifying the Social Impacts of Globalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-27, October.
    19. Zha, Donglan & Yang, Guanglei & Wang, Qunwei, 2019. "Investigating the driving factors of regional CO2 emissions in China using the IDA-PDA-MMI method," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    20. Fujimori, Shinichiro & Matsuoka, Yuzuru, 2011. "Development of method for estimation of world industrial energy consumption and its application," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 461-473, May.

    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:ags:pugtwp:332131. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.