IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aen/journl/2002v23-01-a01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Greenhouse Gas Reduction Policy in the United States: Identifying Winners and Losers in an Expanded Permit Trading System

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Rose
  • Gbadebo Oladosu

Abstract

We present an analysis of the economic impacts of marketable permits for greenhouse gas reduction across industries and income groups in the United States. A computable general equilibrium model is used to simulate permit markets under various assumptions about permit allocations, industry coverage, revenue recycling, sequestration, and the inclusion of multiple greenhouse gases. Our results indicate that a permit price of as much as $128 per ton carbon would be needed to comply with the full U.S. Kyoto commitment, and that this would lead to a slightly more than I percent reduction in GDP in the year 2010. Expansion of trading to include carbon sequestration and methane mitigation can significantly lower these impacts. However, all policy alternatives simulated are somewhat regressive in terms of income distribution, though to significantly different degrees depending on the policy design.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Rose & Gbadebo Oladosu, 2002. "Greenhouse Gas Reduction Policy in the United States: Identifying Winners and Losers in an Expanded Permit Trading System," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-18.
    • Handle: RePEc:aen:journl:2002v23-01-a01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iaee.org/en/publications/ejarticle.aspx?id=1376
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to IAEE members and subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adam Rose & Zhong Zhang, 2004. "Interregional burden-sharing of greenhouse gas mitigation in the United States," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 477-500, October.
    2. Rose, Adam & Peterson, Thomas D. & Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2006. "Regional carbon dioxide permit trading in the United States: coalition choices for Pennsylvania," MPRA Paper 13547, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kverndokk, Snorre & Rose, Adam, 2008. "Equity and Justice in Global Warming Policy," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 2(2), pages 135-176, October.
    4. Oladosu, Gbadebo & Rose, Adam, 2007. "Income distribution impacts of climate change mitigation policy in the Susquehanna River Basin Economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 520-544, May.
    5. Parry, Ian W.H. & Sigman, Hilary & Walls, Margaret & Williams, Roberton C., III, 2005. "The Incidence of Pollution Control Policies," Discussion Papers 10651, Resources for the Future.
    6. Araar, Abdelkrim & Dissou, Yazid & Duclos, Jean-Yves, 2011. "Household incidence of pollution control policies: A robust welfare analysis using general equilibrium effects," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 227-243, March.
    7. Adam Rose & Dan Wei & Fynnwin Prager, 2012. "Distributional Impacts Of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading: Alternative Allocation And Recycling Strategies In California," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(4), pages 603-617, October.
    8. Kurt Kratena & Michael Wüger, 2003. "The Role of Technology in Interfuel Substitution: A Combined Cross-Section and Time Series Approach," WIFO Working Papers 204, WIFO.
    9. Peterson, Thomas D. & Rose, Adam Z., 2006. "Reducing conflicts between climate policy and energy policy in the US: The important role of the states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 619-631, March.
    10. Thomas Dangl & Franz Wirl, 2007. "The consequences of irreversibility on optimal intertemporal emission policies under uncertainty," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 15(2), pages 143-166, June.
    11. Ha, Soo Jung & Hewings, Geoffrey & McGregor, Peter G & Swales, J Kim & Turner, Karen, 2010. "Econometric estimation of Armington import elasticities and their system-wide impact in a regional CGE model of the Illinois economy," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2010-19, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    12. Kampas, Athanasios & Mamalis, Spyridon, 2006. "Assessing the Distributional Impacts of Transferable Pollution Permits: The Case of Phosphorus Pollution Management at a River Basin Scale," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 7(2), pages 1-12, July.
    13. Fynnwin Prager & Dan Wei & Adam Rose, 2017. "Total Economic Consequences of an Influenza Outbreak in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 4-19, January.
    14. Kratena, Kurt, 2004. "'Ecological value added' in an integrated ecosystem-economy model--an indicator for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 189-200, February.
    15. Chen, Zhenhua & Rose, Adam Z. & Prager, Fynnwin & Chatterjee, Samrat, 2017. "Economic consequences of aviation system disruptions: A reduced-form computable general equilibrium analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 207-226.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General

    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:aen:journl:2002v23-01-a01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: David Williams (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaeeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.