IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i2p844-853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate change scenarios and Technology Transfer Protocols

Author

Listed:
  • Kypreos, Socrates
  • Turton, Hal

Abstract

We apply a specific version of MERGE-ETL, an integrated assessment model, to study global climate policies supported by Technology Transfer Protocols (TTPs). We model a specific formulation of such a TTP where donor countries finance via carbon tax revenues, the diffusion of carbon-free technologies in developing countries (DCs) and quantify its benefits. Industrialized countries profit from increased technology exports, global diffusion of advanced technology (leading to additional technology learning and cost reductions) and reduced climate damages through the likelihood of greater global participation in a new international agreement. DCs experience increased welfare from access to subsidized technology, and profit from the reduction of damages related to climate change and expected secondary benefits of carbon abatement (such as reduced local and regional air pollution). The analysis identifies potential candidate technologies that could be supported under a TTP, and the impact of a TTP on economic development (including the flow of transfer subsidies) and global emissions. Although a TTP may encourage additional participation, such a proposal is only likely to be successful if an increased willingness to pay to avoid climate damages is accepted, first by the present and future generations of the industrialized world and later on, when sufficient economic growth is accumulated, by today's developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Kypreos, Socrates & Turton, Hal, 2011. "Climate change scenarios and Technology Transfer Protocols," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 844-853, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:2:p:844-853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00809-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tooraj Jamasb, 2007. "Technical Change Theory and Learning Curves: Patterns of Progress in Electricity Generation Technologies," The Energy Journal, , vol. 28(3), pages 51-72, July.
    2. Kypreos, Socrates, 2007. "A MERGE model with endogenous technological change and the cost of carbon stabilization," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5327-5336, November.
    3. Yang, Zili & Nordhaus, William D., 2006. "Magnitude and direction of technological transfers for mitigating GHG emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 730-741, November.
    4. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    5. Manne, Alan & Richels, Richard, 2004. "The impact of learning-by-doing on the timing and costs of CO2 abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 603-619, July.
    6. Nikolaos Kouvaritakis & Patrick Criqui & Claude Thonet, 2000. "World post-Kyoto scenarios: benefits from accelerated technology progress," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(1/2/3/4), pages 184-203.
    7. Kypreos, Socrates, 2005. "Modeling experience curves in MERGE (model for evaluating regional and global effects)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(14), pages 2721-2737.
    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. Jin, Wei, 2016. "International technology diffusion, multilateral R&D coordination, and global climate mitigation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 357-372.
    2. Kypreos, Socrates, 2012. "From the Copenhagen Accord to efficient technology protocols," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 341-353.
    3. Michael Hübler, 2015. "A theory-based discussion of international technology funding," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(2), pages 313-327, April.
    4. Marcucci, Adriana & Turton, Hal, 2015. "Induced technological change in moderate and fragmented climate change mitigation regimes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 230-242.

    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. Kypreos, Socrates, 2012. "From the Copenhagen Accord to efficient technology protocols," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 341-353.
    2. Lohwasser, Richard & Madlener, Reinhard, 2013. "Relating R&D and investment policies to CCS market diffusion through two-factor learning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 439-452.
    3. Guo, Jian-Xin & Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2016. "Emission path planning based on dynamic abatement cost curve," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 255(3), pages 996-1013.
    4. Rubin, Edward S. & Azevedo, Inês M.L. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Yeh, Sonia, 2015. "A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-218.
    5. Enrica De Cian & Valentina Bosetti & Alessandra Sgobbi & Massimo Tavoni, 2009. "The 2008 WITCH Model: New Model Features and Baseline," Working Papers 2009.85, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    6. Karali, Nihan & Park, Won Young & McNeil, Michael, 2017. "Modeling technological change and its impact on energy savings in the U.S. iron and steel sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 447-458.
    7. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Duval, Romain & Tavoni, Massimo, 2011. "What should we expect from innovation? A model-based assessment of the environmental and mitigation cost implications of climate-related R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1313-1320.
    8. Lafond, François & Bailey, Aimee Gotway & Bakker, Jan David & Rebois, Dylan & Zadourian, Rubina & McSharry, Patrick & Farmer, J. Doyne, 2018. "How well do experience curves predict technological progress? A method for making distributional forecasts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 104-117.
    9. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    10. Criqui, P. & Mima, S. & Menanteau, P. & Kitous, A., 2015. "Mitigation strategies and energy technology learning: An assessment with the POLES model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 119-136.
    11. Moon, Hee Seung & Song, Yong Hyun & Lee, Ji Woo & Hong, Sanghyun & Kim, Eunsung & Kim, Seung Wan, 2024. "Implementation cost of net zero electricity system: Analysis based on Korean national target," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    12. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2012. "A review of uncertainties in technology experience curves," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 762-771.
    13. Jouvet, Pierre-André & Schumacher, Ingmar, 2012. "Learning-by-doing and the costs of a backstop for energy transition and sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 122-132.
    14. Arthur van Benthem & Kenneth Gillingham & James Sweeney, 2008. "Learning-by-Doing and the Optimal Solar Policy in California," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 131-152.
    15. Svetlana Valerievna Ratner & Vladislav Valerievich Klochkov, 2017. "Scenario Forecast for Wind Turbine Manufacturing in Russia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(2), pages 144-151.
    16. Marcucci, Adriana & Panos, Evangelos & Kypreos, Socrates & Fragkos, Panagiotis, 2019. "Probabilistic assessment of realizing the 1.5 °C climate target," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 239-251.
    17. Narbel, Patrick André & Hansen, Jan Petter, 2014. "Estimating the cost of future global energy supply," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 91-97.
    18. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.
    19. Lüken, Michael & Edenhofer, Ottmar & Knopf, Brigitte & Leimbach, Marian & Luderer, Gunnar & Bauer, Nico, 2011. "The role of technological availability for the distributive impacts of climate change mitigation policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6030-6039, October.
    20. Turton, Hal, 2008. "ECLIPSE: An integrated energy-economy model for climate policy and scenario analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(12), pages 1754-1769.

    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:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:2:p:844-853. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.