IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt5rd41433.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Prioritizing Climate Change Mitigation Alternatives: Comparing Transportation Technologies to Options in Other Sectors

Author

Listed:
  • Lutsey, Nicholas P.

Abstract

Governments worldwide and in the U.S. are enacting a variety of measures to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from various economic sectors. Tools to prioritize these measures are generally lacking in analytical rigor. On the other hand, the research literature continues to proliferate with assessments of energy efficiency and GHG mitigation options that can be adapted to the policy evaluation process. This dissertation formulates an analytical method to better prioritize future climate change policy actions. A framework is developed to integrate current research on climate change mitigation technology alternatives from all sectors of the U.S. economy on an equal footing. Applying consistent economic assumptions, a multi-benefit cost-effectiveness accounting tool is developed that simultaneously evaluates the technology costs, lifetime energy saving benefits, and GHG reductions in a single cost-per-tonne-reduced metric. The framework synthesizes the disparate studies’ data to compare and prioritize options across sectors as well as determine the aggregate impacts from multiple sectors’ GHG mitigation actions. A broad portfolio of cost-effective technologies is available from each major sector of the economy. The findings indicate that there are many net-beneficial “no regrets†climate change mitigation technologies – where the energy savings of the technologies outweigh the initial costs – and most of these technologies are not being widely adopted. Transportation technologies are found to represent approximately half of the “no regrets†mitigation opportunities and about one-fifth of the least-cost GHG mitigation measures to achieve the benchmark 1990 GHG level. With the adoption of known near-term technologies, GHG emissions by 2030 could be reduced by 14% with net-zero-cost technologies, and emissions could be reduced by about 30% with technologies that each have net costs less than $30 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent reduced.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutsey, Nicholas P., 2008. "Prioritizing Climate Change Mitigation Alternatives: Comparing Transportation Technologies to Options in Other Sectors," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5rd41433, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt5rd41433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/5rd41433.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meier, Paul J. & Wilson, Paul P. H. & Kulcinski, Gerald L. & Denholm, Paul L., 2005. "US electric industry response to carbon constraint: a life-cycle assessment of supply side alternatives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1099-1108, June.
    2. Robert Ayres, 1994. "On economic disequilibrium and free lunch," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 435-454, October.
    3. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 1995. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 119-132, Fall.
    4. Bang, Guri & Froyn, Camilla Bretteville & Hovi, Jon & Menz, Fredric C., 2007. "The United States and international climate cooperation: International "pull" versus domestic "push"," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1282-1291, February.
    5. Panagiotis Karamanos, 2001. "Voluntary Environmental Agreements: Evolution and Definition of a New Environmental Policy Approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 67-84.
    6. Difiglio, Carmen & Fulton, Lewis, 2000. "How to reduce US automobile greenhouse gas emissions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 657-673.
    7. Farla, Jacco & Blok, Kornelis & Schipper, Lee, 1997. "Energy efficiency developments in the pulp and paper industry : A cross-country comparison using physical production data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7-9), pages 745-758.
    8. Blumstein, Carl & Stoft, Steven E, 1995. "Technical efficiency, production functions and conservation supply curves," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(9), pages 765-768, September.
    9. Lubowski, Ruben N. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Stavins, Robert N., 2006. "Land-use change and carbon sinks: Econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 135-152, March.
    10. Lutsey, Nicholas & Sperling, Daniel, 2008. "America's bottom-up climate change mitigation policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 673-685, February.
    11. Koomey, Jonathan G. & Mahler, Susan A. & Webber, Carrie A. & McMahon, James E., 1999. "Projected regional impacts of appliance efficiency standards for the US residential sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 69-84.
    12. Greene, David L. & Patterson, Philip D. & Singh, Margaret & Li, Jia, 2005. "Feebates, rebates and gas-guzzler taxes: a study of incentives for increased fuel economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 757-775, April.
    13. Delucchi, Mark, 2006. "Lifecycle Analyses of Biofuels," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1pq0f84z, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    14. Delucchi, Mark, 2004. "Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Lifecycle Analyses of Transportation Fuels," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8n77n6z7, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    15. Burtraw, Dallas & Krupnick, Alan & Palmer, Karen & Paul, Anthony & Toman, Michael & Bloyd, Cary, 2003. "Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity sector," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 650-673, May.
    16. David L. Greene & K.G. Duleep & Walter McManus, 2004. "Future Potential of Hybrid and Diesel Powertrains in the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Market," Industrial Organization 0410003, EconWPA.
    17. de la Chesnaye, Francisco & Harvey, Reid & Kruger, Dina & Laitner, John A. Skip, 2001. "Cost-effective reductions of non-CO2 greenhouse gases," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(14), pages 1325-1331, November.
    18. Newell, Richard & Anderson, Soren, 2003. "Prospects for Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies," Discussion Papers dp-02-68, Resources For the Future.
    19. Byrne, John & Hughes, Kristen & Rickerson, Wilson & Kurdgelashvili, Lado, 2007. "American policy conflict in the greenhouse: Divergent trends in federal, regional, state, and local green energy and climate change policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4555-4573, September.
    20. Ralph Alig & Darius Adams & Bruce McCarl & J. Callaway & Steven Winnett, 1997. "Assessing effects of mitigation strategies for global climate change with an intertemporal model of the U.S. forest and agriculture sectors," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(3), pages 259-274, April.
    21. RICHARD M. Adams & DARIUS M. Adams & JOHN M. Callaway & CHING-CHENG Chang & BRUCE A. Mccarl, 1993. "Sequestering Carbon On Agricultural Land: Social Cost And Impacts On Timber Markets," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 11(1), pages 76-87, January.
    22. Lutsey, Nicholas P. & Sperling, Dan, 2008. "America's Bottom-Up Climate Change Mitigation Policy," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8jj755d4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    23. Sergey Paltsev & John M. Reilly & Henry D. Jacoby & Angelo C. Gurgel & Gilbert E. Metcalf & Andrei P. Sokolov & Jennifer F. Holak, 2007. "Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals," NBER Working Papers 13176, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy-efficiency gap What does it mean?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(10), pages 804-810, October.
    25. Huntington, Hillard G., 1994. "Been top down so long it looks like bottom up to me," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(10), pages 833-839, October.
    26. Ogden, Joan M. & Williams, Robert H. & Larson, Eric D., 2004. "Societal lifecycle costs of cars with alternative fuels/engines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 7-27, January.
    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. Kok, Robert & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2011. "Cost-effectiveness of greenhouse gas mitigation in transport: A review of methodological approaches and their impact," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7776-7793.
    2. Hasanbeigi, Ali & Morrow, William & Sathaye, Jayant & Masanet, Eric & Xu, Tengfang, 2013. "A bottom-up model to estimate the energy efficiency improvement and CO2 emission reduction potentials in the Chinese iron and steel industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 315-325.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    UCD-ITS-RR-08-15; Engineering;

    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:cdl:itsdav:qt5rd41433. 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: (Lisa Schiff). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.