IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v47y2012icp405-415.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impacts of alternative allowance allocation methods under a cap-and-trade program in power sector

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Beibei
  • He, Pan
  • Zhang, Bing
  • Bi, Jun

Abstract

Emission trading is considered to be a cost-effective environmental economic instrument for pollution control. However, the policy design of an emission trading program has a decisive impact on its performance. Allowance allocation is one of the most important policy design issues in emission trading, not only for equity but also for policy performance. In this research, an artificial market for sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission trading was constructed by applying an agent-based model. The performance of the Jiangsu SO2 emission trading market was examined under different allowance allocation methods and transaction costs. The results showed that the market efficiency of emission trading would be affected by the allocation methods when the transaction costs are positive. The auction allowance allocation method was more efficient and had the lowest total emission control costs than the other three allocation methods examined. However, the use of this method will require that power plants pay for all of their allowance, and doing so will increase the production costs of power plants. On the other hand, output-based allowance allocation is the second best method.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Beibei & He, Pan & Zhang, Bing & Bi, Jun, 2012. "Impacts of alternative allowance allocation methods under a cap-and-trade program in power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 405-415.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:47:y:2012:i:c:p:405-415
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512004107
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. MacKenzie, Ian A. & Hanley, Nick & Kornienko, Tatiana, 2009. "Using contests to allocate pollution rights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2798-2806, July.
    2. Cramton, Peter & Kerr, Suzi, 2002. "Tradeable carbon permit auctions: How and why to auction not grandfather," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 333-345, March.
    3. Philippe Quirion, 2009. "Historic versus output-based allocation of GHG tradable allowances: a comparison," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 575-592, November.
    4. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    5. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    6. Yu-Bong Lai, 2008. "Auctions or grandfathering: the political economy of tradable emission permits," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 181-200, July.
    7. Guerci, E. & Ivaldi, S. & Pastore, S. & Cincotti, S., 2005. "Modeling and implementation of an artificial electricity market using agent-based technology," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 355(1), pages 69-76.
    8. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Ahman, Markus & Burtraw, Dallas & Kruger, Joseph & Zetterberg, Lars, 2007. "A Ten-Year Rule to guide the allocation of EU emission allowances," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1718-1730, March.
    10. James Nicolaisen & Valentin Petrov & Leigh Tesfatsion, 2000. "Market Power and Efficiency in a Computational Electricity Market with Discriminatory Double-Auction Pricing," Computational Economics 0004005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Zhang, Fan, 2007. "Does uncertainty matter ? A stochastic dynamic analysis of bankable emission permit trading for global climate change policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4215, The World Bank.
    12. Charles Howe, 1994. "Taxesversus tradable discharge permits: A review in the light of the U.S. and European experience," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 151-169, April.
    13. Boemare, Catherine & Quirion, Philippe, 2002. "Implementing greenhouse gas trading in Europe: lessons from economic literature and international experiences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 213-230, December.
    14. Persson, Tobias A. & Azar, Christian & Lindgren, Kristian, 2006. "Allocation of CO2 emission permits--Economic incentives for emission reductions in developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(14), pages 1889-1899, September.
    15. Dixit, Avinash & Olson, Mancur, 2000. "Does voluntary participation undermine the Coase Theorem?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 309-335, June.
    16. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    17. Cong, Rong-Gang & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2010. "Potential impact of (CET) carbon emissions trading on China’s power sector: A perspective from different allowance allocation options," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 3921-3931.
    18. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2002. "Environmental Controls, Scarcity Rents, and Pre-existing Distortions," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 26, pages 504-522, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 2006. "Agent-Based Computational Economics: A Constructive Approach to Economic Theory," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 831-880, Elsevier.
    20. Chang, Yen-Chiang & Wang, Nannan, 2010. "Environmental regulations and emissions trading in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3356-3364, July.
    21. Fischer, Carolyn, 2001. "Rebating Environmental Policy Revenues: Output-Based Allocations and Tradable Performance Standards," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-22, Resources for the Future.
    22. Veit, Daniel J. & Weidlich, Anke & Krafft, Jacob A., 2009. "An agent-based analysis of the German electricity market with transmission capacity constraints," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 4132-4144, October.
    23. Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), 2006. "Handbook of Computational Economics," Handbook of Computational Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    24. Lin, Boqiang & Jiang, Zhujun & Zhang, Peng, 2011. "Allocation of sulphur dioxide allowance – An analysis based on a survey of power plants in Fujian province in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 3120-3129.
    25. Simshauser, Paul, 2008. "On Emission Permit Auction vs. Allocation and the Structural Adjustment of Incumbent Power Generators in Australia," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(10), pages 30-41, December.
    26. Woerdman, Edwin, 2001. "Emissions trading and transaction costs: analyzing the flaws in the discussion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 293-304, August.
    27. Georgopoulou, E. & Sarafidis, Y. & Mirasgedis, S. & Lalas, D.P., 2006. "Next allocation phase of the EU emissions trading scheme: How tough will the future be?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 4002-4023, December.
    28. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2001. "The Effect of Allowance Allocation on the Cost of Carbon Emission Trading," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-30-, Resources for the Future.
    29. Sichao, Kan & Yamamoto, Hiromi & Yamaji, Kenji, 2010. "Evaluation of CO2 free electricity trading market in Japan by multi-agent simulations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3309-3319, July.
    30. Milliman, Scott R. & Prince, Raymond, 1989. "Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 247-265, November.
    31. Lennox, James A. & van Nieuwkoop, Renger, 2010. "Output-based allocations and revenue recycling: Implications for the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7861-7872, December.
    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. Bing Zhang & Yongliang Zhang, 2016. "Policy Conflicts and the Performance of Emissions Trading Markets: An Adaptive Agent-based Analysis," EEPSEA Research Report rr20160339, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Mar 2016.
    2. Zhang, Hui & Zhang, Bing, 2020. "The unintended impact of carbon trading of China's power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. Wang, Baixue & Duan, Maosheng, 2022. "Consignment auctions of emissions trading systems: An agent-based approach based on China’s practice," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    4. Liu, Liwei & Sun, Xiaoru & Chen, Chuxiang & Zhao, Erdong, 2016. "How will auctioning impact on the carbon emission abatement cost of electric power generation sector in China?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 594-609.
    5. Burtraw, Dallas & McCormack, Kristen, 2017. "Consignment auctions of free emissions allowances," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 337-344.

    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. Lin, Boqiang & Jiang, Zhujun & Zhang, Peng, 2011. "Allocation of sulphur dioxide allowance – An analysis based on a survey of power plants in Fujian province in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 3120-3129.
    2. Boemare, Catherine & Quirion, Philippe, 2002. "Implementing greenhouse gas trading in Europe: lessons from economic literature and international experiences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 213-230, December.
    3. Bing Zhang & Yongliang Zhang, 2016. "Policy Conflicts and the Performance of Emissions Trading Markets: An Adaptive Agent-based Analysis," EEPSEA Research Report rr20160339, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Mar 2016.
    4. Frédéric Branger & Misato Sato, 2017. "Solving the clinker dilemma with hybrid output-based allocation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 483-501, February.
    5. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    6. Zetterberg, Lars, 2014. "Benchmarking in the European Union Emissions Trading System: Abatement incentives," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 218-224.
    7. Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2008. "Incentives and prices in an emissions trading scheme with updating," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 69-82, July.
    8. Yoon, Kyoung-Soo & Oh, Hyungna, 2021. "Impacts of ETS allocation rules on abatement investment and market structure," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. Yun-Fei Yao & Qiao-Mei Liang, 2016. "Approaches to carbon allowance allocation in China: a computable general equilibrium analysis," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(1), pages 333-351, November.
    10. Philippe Quirion, 2004. "Prices versus Quantities in a Second-Best Setting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 337-359, November.
    11. Ahman, Markus & Burtraw, Dallas & Kruger, Joseph & Zetterberg, Lars, 2007. "A Ten-Year Rule to guide the allocation of EU emission allowances," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1718-1730, March.
    12. Wang, M. & Zhou, P., 2022. "A two-step auction-refund allocation rule of CO2 emission permits," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    13. Lozano, S. & Villa, G. & Brännlund, R., 2009. "Centralised reallocation of emission permits using DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(3), pages 752-760, March.
    14. Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2007. "Incentives and quota prices in an emission trading scheme with updating," Discussion Papers 495, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    15. Ashwin Rode, 2021. "Rent Seeking over Tradable Emission Permits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 257-285, February.
    16. Sonia Schwartz, 2009. "Comment distribuer les quotas de pollution ?. Une revue de la littérature," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 119(4), pages 535-568.
    17. 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.
    18. Steven G. Medema, 2020. "The Coase Theorem at Sixty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1045-1128, December.
    19. Jaehn, Florian & Letmathe, Peter, 2010. "The emissions trading paradox," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 248-254, April.
    20. Burtraw, Dallas & Evans, David A., 2009. "Tradable rights to emit air pollution," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(1), pages 1-26.

    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:47:y:2012:i:c:p:405-415. 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.