The Use of CCS in Global Carbon Management: Simulation with the DICE Model
This study attempts a numerical simulation of potential CCS (carbon dioxide capture and storage) use by using a modified version of the DICE (Dynamic Integrated model on Climate and Economy) model (Nordhaus, 1994; Nordhaus and Boyer, 2000). In DICE, CO2 emissions are controlled to the extent in which a hypothetical optimal carbon tax justifies CO2 reduction by firms: in our analysis, CCS is used when the optimal tax level is higher than the price of CCS. The analysis assesses the economic optimality of CCS use with a range of different assumptions. The simulation particularly focuses on the difference of results originating from two sets of general assumptions on climate change modeling, reflecting the current debate on the economics of climate change (see for example, Heal, 2008): (1) Parameterization of the standard DICE; (2) Alternative assumptions whose hints are drawn from Stern (2007). In the standard DICE cases, the model calculation shows that at the price level of $25/tCO2 ($92/tC), CCS is introduced around in the middle of the twenty-first century. With the alternative assumptions (e.g., near-zero discount rate), CCS begins to be utilized massively earlier in the century. The two sets of results lead to contrasting policy implications on the future CCS use; this is particularly problematic in the CCS context since its benefits are not always clear-cut (e.g., limitedness of secondary benefits besides CO2 reduction, uncertainties about the validity of technology itself). Settlement of the current intellectual debate on the economics of climate change would greatly benefit the debate on the role of CCS as well
|Date of creation:||Aug 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +49 431 8814-1
Fax: +49 431 85853
Web page: http://www.ifw-kiel.de
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- McFarland, J. R. & Reilly, J. M. & Herzog, H. J., 2004. "Representing energy technologies in top-down economic models using bottom-up information," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 685-707, July.
- Reyer Gerlagh & Bob van der Zwaan, 2006. "Options and Instruments for a Deep Cut in CO2 Emissions: Carbon Dioxide Capture or Renewables, Taxes or Subsidies?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 25-48.
- Riahi, Keywan & Rubin, Edward S. & Taylor, Margaret R. & Schrattenholzer, Leo & Hounshell, David, 2004. "Technological learning for carbon capture and sequestration technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 539-564, July.
- Minh Ha-Duong & David Keith, 2003. "Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs," Post-Print halshs-00003927, HAL.
- Thomas Sterner & U. Martin Persson, 2008. "An Even Sterner Review: Introducing Relative Prices into the Discounting Debate," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 61-76, Winter.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kie:kieliw:1440. 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: (Dieter Stribny)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.