Modelling Complex Emissions Intensity Targets with a Simple Simulation Algorithm
Designing, modelling and analysing global emissions policies are becoming increasingly complex undertakings. Pressure on developing economies to make quantifiable emissions reduction commitments has led to the introduction of intensity based emissions targets, where reductions in emissions are specified with reference to some measure of output, generally gross domestic product. The Copenhagen commitments of China and India are two prominent examples. From a modelling perspective, intensity targets substantially increase the complexity of analysis, with respect to both theoretical design and computational implementation. Here, a clear and practically relevant theoretical design is used to present a new algorithm that can be applied to frameworks that model the complex interaction that occurs between emissions policy instruments, emissions levels and output effects under an emissions intensity target. The coding of the algorithm has been simplified to allow for easy integration into a range of modelling frameworks. Further development of the algorithm that allows for more complex theoretical design structures is possible.
|Date of creation:||May 2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Crawford Building, Lennox Crossing, Building #132, Canberra ACT 2601|
Phone: +61 2 6125 4705
Fax: +61 2 6125 5448
Web page: http://cama.crawford.anu.edu.au
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Marschinski, Robert & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2010. "Revisiting the case for intensity targets: Better incentives and less uncertainty for developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5048-5058, September.
- Warwick J. Mckibbin & Adele C. Morris & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2011.
"Comparing Climate Commitments: A Model-Based Analysis Of The Copenhagen Accord,"
Climate Change Economics (CCE),
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(02), pages 79-103.
- Warwick J. McKibbin & Adele C. Morris & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2010. "Comparing Climate Commitments: A Model-Based Analysis of the Copenhagen Accord," CAMA Working Papers 2010-24, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Lu, Yingying & Stegman, Alison & Cai, Yiyong, 2013. "Emissions intensity targeting: From China's 12th Five Year Plan to its Copenhagen commitment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1164-1177.
- Yingying Lu & Alison Stegman & Yiyong Cai, 2012. "Emissions Intensity Targeting: From China's 12th Five Year Plan to its Copenhagen Commitment," CAMA Working Papers 2012-45, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Frank Jotzo & John Pezzey, 2007. "Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 259-284, October.
- Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2007. "Optimal Intensity Targets for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Under Uncertainty," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0701, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
- Quirion, Philippe, 2005. "Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 343-353, November.
- Philippe Quirion, 2005. "Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps?," Post-Print halshs-00007162, HAL.
- McKibbin, Warwick J. & Pearce, David & Stegman, Alison, 2007. "Long term projections of carbon emissions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 637-653. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)