IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eco/journ2/2013-01-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Emissions Caps and the Impact of a Radical Change in Nuclear Electricity Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin D. Leibowicz

    (Management Science and Engineering Department, Stanford University, United States.)

  • Maria Roumpani

    (Management Science and Engineering Department, Stanford University, United States.)

  • Peter H. Larsen

    (Management Science and Engineering Department, Stanford University, United States.)

Abstract

In this study we analyze the impact of a radical change in nuclear electricity costs on the optimal electricity generation technology mix (EGTM) and constrain the value of information (VOI) on future nuclear costs. We consider three nuclear cost events and four carbon emissions caps. We develop a two-stage framework for energy-economic model MARKAL to eliminate foresight of future nuclear cost movements. We examine how the EGTM responds to these movements under alternative caps and analyze how these movements affect the cost of each cap. We define the expected savings from perfect foresight (ESPF), an upper bound on the VOI. We found that with current technologies, carbon mitigation that does not rely heavily on nuclear electricity is economically insensible. The Strong Cap is extremely costly because it restricts flexibility to respond to cost signals in choosing among technologies. The ESPF is highest under the Medium Cap by a substantial margin.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin D. Leibowicz & Maria Roumpani & Peter H. Larsen, 2013. "Carbon Emissions Caps and the Impact of a Radical Change in Nuclear Electricity Costs," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(1), pages 60-74.
    • Handle: RePEc:eco:journ2:2013-01-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijeep/article/download/365/190
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijeep/article/view/365/190
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bob van der Zwaan & Ad Seebregts, 2004. "Endogenous learning in climate-energy-economic models – an inventory of key uncertainties," International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1/2), pages 130-141.
    2. Thomas Eppel & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2008. "Value-of-Information Analysis for Nuclear Waste Storage Tanks," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 157-167, September.
    3. Bosetti, Valentina & Tavoni, Massimo, 2009. "Uncertain R&D, backstop technology and GHGs stabilization," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(Supplemen), pages 18-26.
    4. Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
    5. Hu, Ming-Che & Hobbs, Benjamin F., 2010. "Analysis of multi-pollutant policies for the U.S. power sector under technology and policy uncertainty using MARKAL," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5430-5442.
    6. Mark K. Jaccard & John Nyboer & Crhis Bataille & Bryn Sadownik, 2003. "Modeling the Cost of Climate Policy: Distinguishing Between Alternative Cost Definitions and Long-Run Cost Dynamics," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 49-73.
    7. Babiker, Mustafa & Gurgel, Angelo & Paltsev, Sergey & Reilly, John, 2009. "Forward-looking versus recursive-dynamic modeling in climate policy analysis: A comparison," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1341-1354, November.
    8. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Mathai, Koshy, 2000. "Optimal CO2 Abatement in the Presence of Induced Technological Change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-38, January.
    9. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Induced technological change and the attractiveness of CO2 abatement policies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 211-253, August.
    10. Keppo, Ilkka & Strubegger, Manfred, 2010. "Short term decisions for long term problems – The effect of foresight on model based energy systems analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2033-2042.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Carlos Ferran & Ricardo Salim, 2013. "Infoenergy: Technology for Replacing Massive Degradation with Speedier (Cleaner) Energy," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(4), pages 447-458.
    2. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mort Webster & Karen Fisher-Vanden & David Popp & Nidhi Santen, 2017. "Should We Give Up after Solyndra? Optimal Technology R&D Portfolios under Uncertainty," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(S1), pages 123-151.
    2. Baker, Erin & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2008. "Uncertainty and endogenous technical change in climate policy models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2817-2828, November.
    3. Mare Sarr & Joëlle Noailly, 2017. "Innovation, Diffusion, Growth and the Environment: Taking Stock and Charting New Directions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(3), pages 393-407, March.
    4. Szolgayová, Jana & Golub, Alexander & Fuss, Sabine, 2014. "Innovation and risk-averse firms: Options on carbon allowances as a hedging tool," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 227-235.
    5. Bistline, John E., 2016. "Energy technology R&D portfolio management: Modeling uncertain returns and market diffusion," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1181-1196.
    6. Baker, Erin & Clarke, Leon & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2008. "Technical change and the marginal cost of abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2799-2816, November.
    7. Pizer, William A. & Popp, David, 2008. "Endogenizing technological change: Matching empirical evidence to modeling needs," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2754-2770, November.
    8. Carraro, Carlo & De Cian, Enrica & Nicita, Lea & Massetti, Emanuele & Verdolini, Elena, 2010. "Environmental Policy and Technical Change: A Survey," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(2), pages 163-219, October.
    9. Joseph E. Aldy & Alan J. Krupnick & Richard G. Newell & Ian W. H. Parry & William A. Pizer, 2010. "Designing Climate Mitigation Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(4), pages 903-934, December.
    10. Loisel, Rodica, 2009. "Environmental climate instruments in Romania: A comparative approach using dynamic CGE modelling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2190-2204, June.
    11. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    12. Popp, David & Santen, Nidhi & Fisher-Vanden, Karen & Webster, Mort, 2013. "Technology variation vs. R&D uncertainty: What matters most for energy patent success?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 505-533.
    13. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Jacobsen, Karl, 2011. "Timing of innovation policies when carbon emissions are restricted: An applied general equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 913-937.
    14. Takanobu Kosugi, 2010. "Assessments of ‘Greenhouse Insurance’: A Methodological Review," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 17(4), pages 345-363, December.
    15. Blanford, Geoffrey J., 2009. "R&D investment strategy for climate change," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(Supplemen), pages 27-36.
    16. Emanuele Massetti & Lea Nicita, 2010. "The Optimal Climate Policy Portfolio when Knowledge Spills across Sectors," CESifo Working Paper Series 2988, CESifo.
    17. Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2004. "Cost-effective environmental policy: implications of induced technological change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 1099-1121, November.
    18. Richard S.J. Tol, 2006. "Multi-Gas Emission Reduction for Climate Change Policy: An Application of Fund," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 235-250.
    19. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Valeria Costantini & Susanna Mancinelli & Massimilano Corradini, 2011. "Environmental and Innovation Performance in a Dynamic Impure Public Good Framework," Working Papers 201117, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    20. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    MARKAL; nuclear electricity; value of information; foresight;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C60 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - General
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental 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:eco:journ2:2013-01-7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ilhan Ozturk (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.econjournals.com .

    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.