IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v27y2006i3_supplp503-520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Non-CO2 GHGs in Climate Policy: Analysis Using the MIT IGSM

Author

Listed:
  • John Reilly
  • Marcus Sarofim
  • Sergey Paltsev
  • Ronald Prinn

Abstract

First steps toward a broad climate agreement, such as the Kyoto Protocol, have focused on less than global geographic coverage. We consider instead a policy that is less comprehensive in term of greenhouse gases (GHGs), including only the non-CO2 GHGs, but is geographically comprehensive. Abating non-CO2 GHGs may be seen as less of a threat to economic development and therefore it may be possible to involve developing countries in such a policy even though they have resisted limits on CO2 emissions. The policy we consider involves a GHG price of about $15 per ton carbon-equivalent (tce) levied only on the non-CO2 GHGs and held at that level through the century. We estimate that such a policy would reduce the global mean surface temperature in 2100 by about 0.55° C; if only methane is covered that alone would achieve a reduction of 0.3° to 0.4° C. We estimate the Kyoto Protocol in its current form would achieve a 0.25° C reduction in 2100 if Parties to it maintained it as is through the century. Furthermore, we estimate the costs of the non-CO2 policies to be a small fraction of the Kyoto policy. Whether as a next step to expand the Kyoto Protocol, or as a separate initiative running parallel to it, the world could well make substantial progress on limiting climate change by pursuing an agreement to abate the low cost non-CO2 GHGs. The results suggest that it would be useful to proceed on global abatement of non-CO2 GHGs so that lack of progress on negotiations to limit CO2 does not allow these abatement opportunities to slip away.

Suggested Citation

  • John Reilly & Marcus Sarofim & Sergey Paltsev & Ronald Prinn, 2006. "The Role of Non-CO2 GHGs in Climate Policy: Analysis Using the MIT IGSM," The Energy Journal, , vol. 27(3_suppl), pages 503-520, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:27:y:2006:i:3_suppl:p:503-520
    DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-VolSI2006-NoSI3-26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-VolSI2006-NoSI3-26
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-VolSI2006-NoSI3-26?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mustafa Babiker, John Reilly and Laurent Viguier, 2004. "Is International Emissions Trading Always Beneficial?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 33-56.
    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. Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "Intra- and extra-union flexibility in meeting the European Union's emission reduction targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4329-4336, November.
    2. Kuik, Onno & Brander, Luke & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "Marginal abatement costs of greenhouse gas emissions: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1395-1403, April.
    3. Nebojsa Nakicenovic & Peter Kolp & Keywan Riahi & Mikiko Kainuma & Tatsuya Hanaoka, 2006. "Assessment of emissions scenarios revisited," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 7(3), pages 137-173, September.
    4. Sergey Paltsev & John M. Reilly & Henry D. Jacoby & Angelo C. Gurgel & Gilbert E. Metcalf & Andrei P. Sokolov & Jennifer F. Holak, 2007. "Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals," NBER Working Papers 13176, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Suzi Kerr & Adam Millard-Ball, 2012. "Cooperation To Reduce Developing Country Emissions," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(04), pages 1-30.
    6. Tol, Richard S.J., 2013. "Targets for global climate policy: An overview," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 911-928.
    7. Nebojsa Nakicenovic & Peter Kolp & Keywan Riahi & Mikiko Kainuma & Tatsuya Hanaoka, 2006. "Assessment of emissions scenarios revisited," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 7(3), pages 137-173, September.
    8. Gilbert E. Metcalf & Sergey Paltsev & John Reilly & Henry Jacoby & Jennifer F. Holak, 2008. "Analysis of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Tax Proposals," NBER Working Papers 13980, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    10. Halkos, George, 2010. "Construction of abatement cost curves: The case of F-gases," MPRA Paper 26532, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. 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.

    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. Liu, Yu & Tan, Xiu-Jie & Yu, Yang & Qi, Shao-Zhou, 2017. "Assessment of impacts of Hubei Pilot emission trading schemes in China – A CGE-analysis using TermCO2 model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 762-769.
    2. Piris-Cabezas, Pedro & Lubowski, Ruben N. & Leslie, Gabriela, 2023. "Estimating the potential of international carbon markets to increase global climate ambition," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    3. Wood, Peter John & Jotzo, Frank, 2011. "Price floors for emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1746-1753, March.
    4. Mario A. Fernandez & Adam J. Daigneault, 2018. "Money Does Grow On Trees: Impacts Of The Paris Agreement On The New Zealand Economy," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-23, August.
    5. Alain Bernard & Marc Vielle & Laurent Viguier, 2005. "Premières simulations de la directive européenne sur les quotas d'émission avec le modèle GEMINI-E3," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(3), pages 171-196.
    6. De Cian, Enrica & Tavoni, Massimo, 2012. "Do technology externalities justify restrictions on emission permit trading?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 624-646.
    7. Yazid Dissou and Muhammad Shahid Siddiqui, 2013. "Regional Trade Agreements, Emissions Bubbles, and Carbon Tariff Harmonization," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    8. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Conference papers 332096, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. Doda, Baran & Quemin, Simon & Taschini, Luca, 2019. "Linking permit markets multilaterally," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    10. Qi, Tianyu & Winchester, Niven & Karplus, Valerie J. & Zhang, Xiliang, 2013. "Expanding international GHG emissions trading: The role of Chinese and U.S. participation," Conference papers 332348, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Arvaniti, Maria & Habla, Wolfgang, 2021. "The political economy of negotiating international carbon markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    12. Yifei Zhang & Sheng Li & Fang Zhang, 2020. "Does an Emissions Trading Policy Improve Environmental Efficiency? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Roman Lokhov & Heinz Welsch, 2008. "Emissions trading between Russia and the European Union: a CGE analysis of potentials and impacts," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Christoph Bohringer & Heinz Welsch, 2006. "Burden sharing in a greenhouse: egalitarianism and sovereignty reconciled," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(9), pages 981-996.
    15. Shiro Takeda & Toshi H. Arimura & Makoto Sugino, 2019. "Labor Market Distortions and Welfare-Decreasing International Emissions Trading," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 271-293, September.
    16. Bernard, A. & Haurie, A. & Vielle, M. & Viguier, L., 2008. "A two-level dynamic game of carbon emission trading between Russia, China, and Annex B countries," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1830-1856, June.
    17. Marc Vielle, 2020. "Navigating various flexibility mechanisms under European burden-sharing," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(2), pages 267-313, April.
    18. Akın Olçum, Gökçe & Yeldan, Erinç, 2013. "Economic impact assessment of Turkey's post-Kyoto vision on emission trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 764-774.
    19. Djiofack-Zebaze, Calvin & Keck, Alexander, 2006. "Telecommunications Services in Africa: The Effects Of Multilateral and Unilateral Liberalization," Conference papers 331508, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    20. Olivier Godard, 2011. "Climate justice, between global and international justice -Insights from justification theory," RSCAS Working Papers 2011/56, European University Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-CO2 greenhouse gases; Climate policy; MIT IGSM model; Economic costs of mitigation policy;
    All these keywords.

    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:sae:enejou:v:27:y:2006:i:3_suppl:p:503-520. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.