IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v9y2009i1p40-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Marginal abatement cost estimates for non-CO 2 greenhouse gases: lessons from RECLAIM

Author

Listed:
  • ROBERT C. ANDERSON
  • RICHARD D. MORGENSTERN

Abstract

Recognizing the potential for over- as well as under-estimating the mitigation costs of non-CO 2 greenhouse gases in an offset programme, this article examines the accuracy of cost estimates prepared by government agencies for the control of other types of emissions from small/medium sources via an offset programme. Specifically, analogy is made to the control of SO x and NO x controlled by California's Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) Program. Even allowing for the energy crisis in 2000-2001 that drove up NO x emissions and control costs, it appears that the engineering cost methods used turned out to be generally accurate, defined as ±25%. Although such a finding does not ensure that the same results will apply to the case of non-CO 2 GHGs, it certainly reinforces the growing literature on ex ante-ex post cost comparisons of environmental controls.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert C. Anderson & Richard D. Morgenstern, 2009. "Marginal abatement cost estimates for non-CO 2 greenhouse gases: lessons from RECLAIM," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 40-55, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:9:y:2009:i:1:p:40-55
    DOI: 10.3763/cpol.2008.0398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3763/cpol.2008.0398
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3763/cpol.2008.0398?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. Burtraw, Dallas, 2000. "Innovation Under the Tradable Sulfur Dioxide Emission Permits Program in the U.S. Electricity Sector," Discussion Papers 10599, Resources for the Future.
    2. Carl Pasurka, 2008. "Perspectives on Pollution Abatement and Competitiveness: Theory, Data, and Analyses," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 194-218, Summer.
    3. Nathaniel O. Keohane, 2003. "What Did the Market Buy? Cost Savings Under the U. S. Tradeable Permits Program for Sulfur Dioxide," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm437, Yale School of Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michael Peneder & Spyros Arvanitis & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2022. "Policy instruments and self-reported impacts of the adoption of energy saving technologies in the DACH region," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 369-404, May.
    2. Qian Wang & Zhuoya Du & Boyu Wang & Yung‐ho Chiu & Tzu‐Han Chang, 2022. "Environmental regulation and foreign direct investment attractiveness: Evidence from China provinces," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 899-917, May.
    3. Berry, David, 2002. "The market for tradable renewable energy credits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 369-379, September.
    4. Daniela Marconi, 2012. "Environmental Regulation and Revealed Comparative Advantages in Europe: Is China a Pollution Haven?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 616-635, August.
    5. Simone Lazzini & Zeila Occhipinti & Angela Parenti & Roberto Verona, 2021. "Disentangling economic crisis effects from environmental regulation effects: Implications for sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2332-2353, July.
    6. Haoran He & Yefeng Chen, 2021. "Auction mechanisms for allocating subsidies for carbon emissions reduction: an experimental investigation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 387-430, August.
    7. Spyros Arvanitis & Michael Peneder & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2016. "Competitiveness and ecological impacts of green energy technologies: firm-level evidence for the DACH region," KOF Working papers 16-420, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    8. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    9. Cameron Hepburn & Jacquelyn Pless & David Popp, 2018. "Policy Brief—Encouraging Innovation that Protects Environmental Systems: Five Policy Proposals," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 154-169.
    10. Alberto Ansuategi & Simone Marsiglio, 2017. "Is Environmental Protection Beneficial for the Environment?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 786-802, August.
    11. Janis Birkeland & Stephen Knight-Lenihan, 2016. "Biodiversity offsetting and net positive design," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 50-66, February.
    12. Stowe, Robert C & Stavins, Robert Norman & Chan, Gabriel Angelo & Sweeney, Richard Leonard, 2012. "The SO2 Allowance Trading System and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990: Reflections on Twenty Years of Policy Innovation," Scholarly Articles 8160721, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2019. "Policy Evolution under the Clean Air Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 27-50, Fall.
    14. Roberto Mosheim, 2013. "A shadow distance function decomposition of the environmental Kuznets curve: comparing the South China Sea and the Caribbean," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 457-472, December.
    15. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2013. "The SO 2 Allowance Trading System: The Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 103-122, Winter.
    16. Neophyta Empora & Theofanis Mamuneas, 2011. "The Effect of Emissions on U.S. State Total Factor Productivity Growth," Review of Economic Analysis, Digital Initiatives at the University of Waterloo Library, vol. 3(2), pages 149-172, October.
    17. MacGill, Iain & Outhred, Hugh & Nolles, Karel, 2006. "Some design lessons from market-based greenhouse gas regulation in the restructured Australian electricity industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 11-25, January.
    18. Robert N. Stavins, 2020. "The Future of US Carbon-Pricing Policy," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 8-64.
    19. Stavins, Robert, 2019. "The Future of United States Carbon-Pricing Policy," RFF Working Paper Series 19-11, Resources for the Future.
    20. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.

    More about this item

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:9:y:2009:i:1:p:40-55. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.