IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lsg/lsgwps/wp99.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Knowledge versus technique in SO2-saving technological change: A comparative test using quantile regression with implications for greenhouse gas compliance

Author

Listed:
  • David Grover

Abstract

Greenhouse gas emission limits are a major source of technical and policy uncertainty for electric power industry professionals. This paper tries to reduce some of this uncertainty by investigating the main forces that were responsible for the productivity gains made by the electric power sector with respect to SO2 emissions under the US SO2 cap and trade program. The SO2 cap and trade experience has important parallels with the GHG pollution problem, in both policy design and technical response. Linear and quantile regression are used to compare the effect of new technical knowledge (R&D) on SO2 productivity, against the effect of pre-existing techniques that did not involve very much new knowledge creation. Compliance techniques that involved little new technical knowledge and which were incremental and pragmatic played the most important role in SO2-saving technological change. Implications of this finding for electric power plants� technical response to GHG pollution limits are elaborated.

Suggested Citation

  • David Grover, 2012. "Knowledge versus technique in SO2-saving technological change: A comparative test using quantile regression with implications for greenhouse gas compliance," GRI Working Papers 99, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
  • Handle: RePEc:lsg:lsgwps:wp99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/WP99-so2-technological-change-greenhouse-gas-compliance.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. William Brock & M. Taylor, 2010. "The Green Solow model," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 127-153, June.
    3. Nadiri, M Ishaq & Prucha, Ingmar R, 1996. "Estimation of the Depreciation Rate of Physical and R&D Capital in the U.S. Total Manufacturing Sector," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(1), pages 43-56, January.
    4. Arik Levinson, 2009. "Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from US Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2177-2192, December.
    5. Popp, David, 2006. "International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the US, Japan, and Germany," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 46-71, January.
    6. Stern, David I., 2002. "Explaining changes in global sulfur emissions: an econometric decomposition approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 201-220, August.
    7. Richard Schmalensee & Paul L. Joskow & A. Denny Ellerman & Juan Pablo Montero & Elizabeth M. Bailey, 1998. "An Interim Evaluation of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 53-68, Summer.
    8. Popp, David C., 2001. "The effect of new technology on energy consumption," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 215-239, July.
    9. Richard G. Newell & Adam B. Jaffe & Robert N. Stavins, 1999. "The Induced Innovation Hypothesis and Energy-Saving Technological Change," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 114(3), pages 941-975.
    10. 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.
    11. Giovanni Peri, 2005. "Determinants of Knowledge Flows and Their Effect on Innovation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(2), pages 308-322, May.
    12. Joshua Linn, 2008. "Energy Prices and the Adoption of Energy-Saving Technology," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(533), pages 1986-2012, November.
    13. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Anna Montini & Roberto Zoboli, 2007. "Economic Dynamics, Emission Trends and the EKC Hypothesis New Evidence Using NAMEA and Provincial Panel Data for Italy," Working Papers 2007.24, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    14. 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.
    15. Joskow, Paul L & Schmalensee, Richard, 1998. "The Political Economy of Market-Based Environmental Policy: The U.S. Acid Rain Program," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 37-83, April.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lsg:lsgwps:wp99. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/grlseuk.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.