The present paper aims to reliably depict the impact of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EUETS) on Spain under different assumptions about the industries involved. Prior analyses, based either on highly aggregated macroeconomic or specific electricity industry models, have been limited in degree of detail or scope. Two types of modeling were combined in the present study: general equilibrium was used to assess the impact on different industries and to explain cross-industry changes, and partial equilibrium to suitably model the complex and crucial electricity system. Combining and interrelating these two models yields the effects on price, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and distributional patterns in Spain of both the current policy and of an alternative in which all industries take part in the EU ETS. Since Spain is a key participant in this scheme, the conclusions and policy implications stemming from this paper are relevant to and useful for post-Kyoto arrangements.
BallardC.ShovenJ.WhalleyJ. (1985). “General Equilibrium Computations of the Marginal Welfare Costs of Taxes in the United States”. American Economic Review 75(1): 128-138.
2.
BohringerC.FerrisM.RutherfordT. (1997). “Alternative CO2 Abatement Strategies for the European Union”. InProostS.BraderJ. (Eds.), Climate Change, Transport and Environmental Policy. Cheltenham: Edward Edgar.
3.
BohringerC. (1998). “The Synthesis of Bottom-up and Top-down in Energy Policy Modelling”. Energy Economics 20(3): 283-291.
4.
BohringerC.HoffmannT.LangeA.LoschelA.MoslenerU. (2005). “Assessing Emissions Regulation in Europe: An Interactive Simulation Approach”. Energy Journal, 26: 1-22.
5.
BohringerC.LoschelA. (2006). “Promoting Renewable Energy in Europe: a Hybrid Computable General Equilibrium Approach”. Energy Journal, Special Issue: 135-150.
6.
BohringerC.RutherfordT. (2007). “Integrating Bottom-up into Top-down: a Mixed Complementary Approach”, Discussion Paper No. 06-007, Center for European Economic Research ZEW, Germany.
7.
BohringerC.RutherfordT. (2008). “Combining Bottom-up and Top-down”. Energy Economics 30:574-596.
8.
BosettiV.CarraroC.GaleottiM.MassettiE.TavoniM. (2006). “WITCH: A World Induced Technical Change Hybrid Model”. Energy Journal, Special Issue: 13-38.
9.
EdmondsJ.WilsonT.WiseM.WeyantJ. (2006). “Electrification of the Economy and CO2 emissions mitigation”. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 7: 175-203.
10.
EllermanA.JoskowP. (2008). The European Union’s Emissions Trading System in Perspective. Pew Center for Global Climate Change.
11.
European Commission (2009). Directive of the European Parliament and the Council amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the Community. PE-CONS 3737/08.
12.
FernandezM.ManriqueC. (2006). “La Matriz de Contabilidad Nacional: un Metodo Alternativo de Presentacion de las Cuentas Nacionales”. Revista Asturiana de Econom-a 37: 85-105.
13.
GhersiF.HourcadeJ. (2006). “Macroeconomic Consistency Issues in E3 modeling: The Continued Fable of the Elephant and the Rabbit”. Energy Journal, Special Issue: 39-61.
14.
HoganW.ManneS. (1977). “Energy-Economy Interactions: The Fable of the Elephant and the Rabbit?” InHitchC. (ed.). Modeling Energy-economy Interactions: Five Approaches: 247-277. Washington D.C.: Resources for the Future.
15.
HourcadeJ.JaccardM.BatailleC.GhersiF. (2006). “Hybrid Modeling: New Answers to Old Challenges”. Energy Journal, Special Issue:1-11.
16.
IEA (1998). Energy Statistics of OECD Countries. 1995-1996. Paris: International Energy Agency.
17.
INE (2002a). Contabilidad Nacional de Espana. Base 1995. Serie Contable 1995-2000. Marco Input-output 1995-1996-1997, Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Estad-stica.
18.
INE (2002b). Estad-sticas de Medio Ambiente. Cuentas Ambientales. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Estad-stica.
19.
LabandeiraX.LabeagaJ.RodriguezM. (2009). “An integrated Economic and Distributional Analysis of Energy Policies”. Energy Policy, forthcoming.
20.
LabeagaJ.SanzJ. (2001). “Oferta de trabajo y fiscalidad en Espana. Hechos recientes y tendencias tras el nuevo IRPF”. Papeles de Economia Espanola 87:230-243.
21.
LinaresP.SantosF.VentosaM.LapiedraL. (2006). “Estimated Impacts of the European Emissions Trading Scheme Directive and Permit Assignment Methods on the Spanish Electricity Sector”. Energy Journal 27: 79-98
22.
LinaresP.SantosF.VentosaM.LapiedraL. (2008a). “Incorporating Oligopoly, CO2 Emissions Trading and Green Certificates into a Power Generation Expansion Model” Automatica44: 1608-1620.
23.
LinaresP.SantosF.Perez-ArriagaI. (2008b). Scenarios for the Evolution of the Spanish Electricity Sector: Is it on the Right Path towards Sustainability? Energy Policy 36: 4057-4068.
24.
ManneA.MendelsohnR.RichelsR., (2006). “MERGE: a Model for Evaluating Regional and Global Effects of GHG Reduction Policies”. Energy Policy 23:17-34.
25.
McFarlandJ.ReillyJ.HerzogH. (2004). “Representing Energy Technologies in Top-down Economic Models using Bottom-up Information”. Energy Economics 26: 685-707
26.
ParryI.WilliamsR.GoulderL. (1999). “When Can Carbon Abatement Policies Increase Welfare? The Fundamental Role of Distorted Factor Markets”. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 37:52-84.
27.
PizerW.BurtrawD.HarringtonW.NewellR.SanchiricoJ. (2006). Modeling Economy-wide versus Sectoral Climate Change Policies Using Combined Aggregate-sectoral Models. Energy Journal 27(3): 135-168.
28.
RiversN.JaccardM. (2005). “Combining Top-down and Bottom-up Approaches To Energy-economy Modeling Using Discrete Choice Methods”. Energy Journal 26: 83-106.
29.
RutherfordT. (1999). “Applied General Equilibrium Modeling with MPSGE as a GAMS Subsystem: an Overview of the Modeling Framework and Syntax”. Computational Economics 14:1-46.
30.
SchaferA.JacobyH. (2006). “Experiments with a Hybrid CGE-MARKAL Model”. Energy Journal, Special Issue: 171-177.
31.
ShovenJ.WhalleyJ. (1992). Applying general equilibrium. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Sue WingI. (2006). “The Synthesis of Bottom-up and Top-down Approaches to Climate Policy Modeling: electric Power Technologies and the Cost of Limiting U.S. CO2 Emissions”. Energy Policy 34: 847-3869.
33.
Sue WingI.(2008). “The synthesis of Bottom-up and Top-down Approaches to Climate Policy Modeling: Electric Power Technology Detail in a Social Accounting Framework”. Energy Economics 30: 547-573.
34.
VivesX. (1999). Oligopoly Pricing. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
