I analyse the costs of policies aimed at stabilising global climate change. I show that abatement of all major greenhouse gases is important to the costs of climate policies and that flexible reduction of methane and other non-CO2 gases may reduce costs significantly. The non-CO2 gases offer many low-cost abatement options and this reduces the need for abatement of CO2 to stabilise climate change. Multi-gas flexibility may be important if climate policies reflect not only long-term stabilisation, but also the rate at which the climate changes, as the latter may require large reductions in emissions in the short-term.
DimarananBetina V.McDougallRobert A. (2002). Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 5 Data Base. West Lafayette: Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.
2.
HoughtonJ. T.Meria FilhoL. G.CallanderB.A.HarrisN.KattenbergA.MaskellK. (eds.) (1996). Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
JensenJesper (2004). “EDGE Model Documentation”. Copenhagen Economics working paper, Copenhagen Economics, Copenhagen.
4.
JensenJesperThelleMartin Hvidt(2001). “What are the Gains from a Multi-Gas Strategy?” Copenhagen Economics working paper, Copenhagen Economics, Copenhagen.
5.
SchaeferDeborah OttingerGodwinDaveHarnischJochen (2004). “Estimating Future Emissions and Potential Reductions of HFCs, PFCs, and SF6”. Working paper, US-EPA, Washington D.C.
6.
ScheehleElizabeth A.KrugerDina (2004). “Global Anthropogenic Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions”. Working paper, US-EPA, Washington D.C.
7.
WeyantJohn P.(ed.) (1999). “The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation.” Special Issue of The Energy Journal.
