Options and Instruments for a Deep Cut in CO2 Emissions: Carbon Dioxide Capture or Renewables,Taxes or Subsidies?

Abstract

This paper compares both the main physical options and the principal policy instruments to realize a deep cut in carbon dioxide emissions necessary to control global climate change. A top-down energy-economy model is used that has three emission reduction options: energy savings, a transition towards less-carbon-intensive or non-carbon energy resources, and the use of carbon dioxide capture and storage technology. Five policy instruments - carbon taxes, fossil fuel taxes, non-carbon (renewable) energy subsidies, a portfolio standard for the carbon intensity of energy production, and a portfolio standard for the use of non-carbon (renewable) energy resources - are compared in terms of costs, efficiency and their impact on the composition of the energy supply system. One of our main conclusions is that a carbon intensity portfolio standard, involving the recycling of carbon taxes to support renewables deployment, is the most cost-efficient way to address the problem of global climate change. A comprehensive introduction of the capture and storage of carbon dioxide would contribute to reducing the costs of climate change control, but would not obviate the large-scale need for renewables.

Keywords

Carbon emissions reductions climate change endogenous technical change CO2 capture and storage renewables

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bovenberg

A.L.

Smulders

S.A.

(1996). “Transitional Impacts of Environmental Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model.” International Economic Review 37: 861-893.

Buonanno

Carraro

Galeotti

(2003). “Endogenous induced technical change and the costs of Kyoto.” Resource and Energy Economics 25:11-34.

Chakravorty

Roumasset

Tse

(1997). “Endogenous substitution among energy resources and global warming.” Journal of Political Economy 105: 1201-1234.

Fischer

Newell

(2004). “Environmental and Technology Policies for Climate Change and Renewable Energy,” Discussion Paper 04-05 (Rev), Resources for the Future, Washington D.C.

Gerlagh

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

(2003). “Gross World Product and Consumption in a Global Warming Model with Endogenous Technological Change.” Resource and Energy Economics 25: 35-57.

Gerlagh

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

(2004). “A sensitivity analysis of timing and costs of greenhouse gas emission reductions under learning effects and niche markets.” Climatic Change, 65: 39-71.

Gerlagh

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

Hofkes

M.W.

Klaassen

(2004). “Impacts of CO2-taxes in an economy with niche markets and learning-by-doing.” Environmental and Resource Economics 28: 367-394.

Goulder

L.H.

Mathai

(2000). “Optimal CO2 abatement in the presence of induced technological change.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39: 1-38.

Ha-Duong

Keith

D.W.

(2003). “Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs.” Clean Techn Environ Policy 5: 181-189.

10.

IEA/OECD (1999). Key World Energy Statistics. Paris: IEA/OECD.

11.

IEA/OECD (2000). Experience Curves for Energy Technology Policy. Paris: IEA/OECD.

12.

IPCC (2005). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group III, Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage, Cambridge University Press.

13.

Jaccard

Nyboer

Bataille

(2003). “Modeling the cost of climate policy: distinguishing between alternative cost definitions and long-run cost dynamics.” The Energy Journal 24(1): 49-73.

14.

Keller

Yang

Hall

Bradford

D.F.

(2003). “Carbon dioxide sequestration: when and how much?” CEPS working paper 94, Princeton University.

15.

Knapp

K.E.

(1999). “Exploring energy technology substitution for reducing atmoshperic carbon emissions.” The Energy Journal 20(2): 121-143.

16.

McDonald

Schrattenholzer

(2001). “Learning rates for energy technologies.” Energy Policy 29: 255-261.

17.

Messner

(1997). “Endogenized technological learning in an energy systems model.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 7: 291-313.

18.

Naki enovi

, eds. (2001). Special Report on Emission Scenarios. Published for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

19.

Newelli

R.G.

Jaffe

A.B.

Stavins

R.N.

(1999). “The induced innovation hypothesis and energy-saving technological change.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 114: 941-975.

20.

Nordhaus

W.D.

(2002). “Modeling induced innovation in climate change policy.” Ch. 9 in Modeling induced innovation in climate change policy Grübler

Nakićenović

Nordhaus

W.D.

(eds), Resources for the Future Press, Washington D.C.

21.

Nordhaus

W.D.

Boyer

(2000). Warming the world, economic models of global warming, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

22.

Papathanasiou

Anderson

(2001). “Uncertainties in responding to climate change: on the economic value of technology policies for reducing costs and creating options.” The Energy Journal 22(3): 79-114.

23.

Riahi

Rubin

E.S.

Taylor

M.R.

Schrattenholzer

Hounshell

D.A.

(2004). “Technological learning for carbon capture and sequestration technologies.” Energy Economics, 26(4): 539-564.

24.

Rubin

E.S.

Taylor

M.R.

Yeh

Hounshell

D.A.

(2004). “Learning curves for environmental technologies and their importance for climate policy analysis.” Energy 29: 1551-1559.

25.

Smekens

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

(2006).“Atmospheric and Geological CO2 Damage Costs in Energy Scenarios.” Environmental Science and Policy, 9, 3.

26.

Stephens

J.C.

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

(2005). “The Case for Carbon Capture and Storage.” Issues in Science and Technology, Fall, pp.69-76.

27.

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

Gerlagh

Klaassen

Schrattenholzer

(2002). “Endogenous technological change in climate change modelling.” Energy Economics 24:1-19.

28.

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

(2005). “Will coal depart or will it continue to dominate global power production during the 21st century?” Climate Policy 5(4): 445-453.

29.

van der Zwaan

B.C.C.

Gerlagh

(2006). “Climate Sensitivity Uncertainty and the Necessity to Transform Global Energy Supply.” Energy, forthcoming.

30.

World Bank (1999). 1999 World development indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.