The ï¿½advancednessï¿½ of knowledge in pollutionsaving technological change with a qualitative application to SO2 cap and trade
This paper investigates the extent to which ï¿½advancedï¿½ knowledge and technology is likely to play a role in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emission in future by looking at the role that advanced knowledge and technology played in the technological change process that reduced SO2 emissions under the US SO2 cap and trade program. It investigates the hypothesis that advanced knowledge and technology dedicated to pollution abatement played a minor role in that process while pre-existing, relatively unadvanced forms of knowledge and technology played the main role. New qualitative evidence is used to investigate the hypothesis including interviews with electric power plant R&D managers, plant-level compliance data, and the nature of the changes undergone by the boiler manufacturer, coal mining and railroad companies in the plantsï¿½ upstream supply chain. The paper finds that advanced knowledge dedicated to pollution abatement like the type now being emphasised for carbon capture and storage (CCS) played a minor role, while unadvanced knowledge and technology as well as general purpose knowledge repurposed to the pollution problem, played the main role. There are limits to how far these findings can be generalised to the role that knowledge will play in controlling GHG emissions. Nonetheless, one contribution is to point out that at least with respect to reducing pollution emissions, ï¿½innovationï¿½ in pollution control can be inexpensive and effective without involving universal advance in dedicated pollution control technology.
|Date of creation:||Nov 2012|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE|
Phone: +44 (020) 7405 7686
Web page: http://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham.
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.:
- Kemp, René & Pontoglio, Serena, 2011. "The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments — A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 28-36.
- Darmstadter, Joel, 1997. "Productivity Changes in U.S. Coal Mining," Discussion Papers dp-97-40, Resources For the Future.
- Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Pasurka, Carl Jr., 2007. "Pollution abatement activities and traditional productivity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 673-682, May.
- Arik Levinson, 2007.
"Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from U.S. Manufacturing,"
gueconwpa~07-07-05, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
- Arik Levinson, 2009. "Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from US Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2177-2192, December.
- Levinson, Arik, 2007. "Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from U.S. Manufacturing," Discussion Papers dp-07-40, Resources For the Future.
- Arik Levinson, 2008. "Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from U.S. Manufacturing," NCEE Working Paper Series 200802, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Feb 2008.
- Arik Levinson, 2007. "Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from U.S. Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 13616, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kumar, Surender & Managi, Shunsuke, 2010. "Sulfur dioxide allowances: Trading and technological progress," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 623-631, January.
- Scott Barrett, 2006. "Climate Treaties and "Breakthrough" Technologies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 22-25, May.
- Riahi, Keywan & Rubin, Edward S. & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2004. "Prospects for carbon capture and sequestration technologies assuming their technological learning," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1309-1318.
- Castelnuovo, Efrem & Galeotti, Marzio & Gambarelli, Gretel & Vergalli, Sergio, 2005.
"Learning-by-Doing vs. Learning by Researching in a model of climate change policy analysis,"
Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 261-276, August.
- Marzio Galeotti & Sergio Vergalli & Efrem Castelnuovo & Gretel Gambarelli, 2003. "Learning by Doing vs Learning by Researching in a Model of Climate Change Policy Analysis," Working Papers 2003.11, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Zvi Griliches, 1990.
"Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey,"
NBER Working Papers
3301, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Griliches, Zvi, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 1661-1707, December.
- Gillingham, Kenneth T. & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2007.
"Modeling Endogenous Technological Change for Climate Policy Analysis,"
dp-07-14, Resources For the Future.
- Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
- Sue Wing, Ian, 2006. "Representing induced technological change in models for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 539-562, November.
- David I. Stern, 2012. "Ecological Economics," Crawford School Research Papers 1203, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Metcalfe, J S, 1995. "Technology Systems and Technology Policy in an Evolutionary Framework," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 25-46, February.
- 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.
- Bellas, Allen S., 1998. "Empirical evidence of advances in scrubber technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 327-343, December.
- David Popp, 2010. "Exploring Links Between Innovation and Diffusion: Adoption of NO X Control Technologies at US Coal-fired Power Plants," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 319-352, March.
- Ian Lange & Allen Bellas, 2005. "Technological Change for Sulfur Dioxide Scrubbers under Market-Based Regulation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
- Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516 Elsevier.
- Seskin, Eugene P. & Anderson, Robert Jr. & Reid, Robert O., 1983. "An empirical analysis of economic strategies for controlling air pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 112-124, June.
- Sue Wing, Ian, 2008. "Explaining the declining energy intensity of the U.S. economy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 21-49, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lsg:lsgwps:wp100. 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: (The GRI Administration)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.