IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332082.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Should a vehicle fuel economy standard be combined with an economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions constraint? Implications for energy and climate policy in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Karplus, Valerie J.
  • Paltsev, Sergey
  • Babiker, Mustafa
  • Reilly, John M.

Abstract

The United States has adopted fuel economy standards that require increases the on-road efficiency of new passenger vehicles, with the goal of reducing petroleum use, as well as (more recently) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Understanding the cost and effectiveness of this policy, alone and in combination with economy-wide policies that constrain GHG emissions, is essential to inform coordinated design of future climate and energy policy. In this work we use a computable general equilibrium model, the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, to investigate the effect of combining a fuel economy standard with an economywide GHG emissions constraint in the United States. First, a fuel economy standard is shown to be at least five to fourteen times less cost effective than a price instrument (fuel tax) when targeting an identical reduction in cumulative gasoline use. The GHG emissions reduction under a fuel economy standard alone is also shown to be proportionally less than the reduction in gasoline use, in part because GHG emissions from electricity production used in grid-connected electric vehicles are excluded from the regulation. Second, when combined with a cap-and-trade (CAT) policy, the fuel economy standard increases the cost of meeting the GHG emissions constraint by forcing expensive reductions in passenger vehicle gasoline use, replacing other more cost-effective abatement opportunities. Third, the impact of adding a fuel economy standard depends on the availability and cost of abatement opportunities in transport—if advanced biofuels provide a cost-competitive alternative to gasoline, the fuel economy standard does not bind and passenger vehicles provide a significantly larger contribution to GHG emissions abatement. This analysis underscores the potentially large costs of a fuel economy standard relative to alternative policies, as well as importance of jointly considering the effects of policies on petroleum use and GHG emissions reductions, and the associated economic costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Karplus, Valerie J. & Paltsev, Sergey & Babiker, Mustafa & Reilly, John M., 2011. "Should a vehicle fuel economy standard be combined with an economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions constraint? Implications for energy and climate policy in the United States," Conference papers 332082, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332082/files/5672.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rathmann, M., 2007. "Do support systems for RES-E reduce EU-ETS-driven electricity prices?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 342-349, January.
    2. McDaniel, Christine A. & Balistreri, Edward J., 2002. "A Discussion on Armington Trade Substitution Elasticities," Working Papers 15856, United States International Trade Commission, Office of Economics.
    3. Narayanan, Badri G. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Horridge, J. Mark, 2010. "Disaggregated data and trade policy analysis: The value of linking partial and general equilibrium models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 755-766, May.
    4. Jean Pierre Ponssard & Neil Walker, 2008. "EU emissions trading and the cement sector: a spatial competition analysis," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(5), pages 467-493, September.
    5. Grant, Jason H. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2006. "Extending General Equilibrium to the Tariff Line: U.S. Dairy in the Doha Development Agenda," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21409, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Lori Bennear & Robert Stavins, 2007. "Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 111-129, May.
    7. Christoph Böhringer & Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2009. "Green Serves the Dirtiest: On the Interaction between Black and Green Quotas," CESifo Working Paper Series 2837, CESifo.
    8. Karplus, Valerie J. & Paltsev, Sergey & Reilly, John M., 2010. "Prospects for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the United States and Japan: A general equilibrium analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 620-641, October.
    9. Mustafa H. Babiker & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2005. "The Economic Effects of Border Measures in Subglobal Climate Agreements," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 99-126.
    10. Narayanan, Badri G. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Horridge, J. Mark, 2010. "Disaggregated data and trade policy analysis: The value of linking partial and general equilibrium models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 755-766, May.
    11. McFarland, J. R. & Reilly, J. M. & Herzog, H. J., 2004. "Representing energy technologies in top-down economic models using bottom-up information," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 685-707, July.
    12. Schafer, Andreas & Jacoby, Henry D., 2006. "Vehicle technology under CO2 constraint: a general equilibrium analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 975-985, June.
    13. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, March.
    14. Shiau, Ching-Shin Norman & Michalek, Jeremy J. & Hendrickson, Chris T., 2009. "A structural analysis of vehicle design responses to Corporate Average Fuel Economy policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(9-10), pages 814-828, November.
    15. Felder Stefan & Rutherford Thomas F., 1993. "Unilateral CO2 Reductions and Carbon Leakage: The Consequences of International Trade in Oil and Basic Materials," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 162-176, September.
    16. Rutherford, Thomas F, 1999. "Applied General Equilibrium Modeling with MPSGE as a GAMS Subsystem: An Overview of the Modeling Framework and Syntax," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 14(1-2), pages 1-46, October.
    17. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685, December.
    18. De Jonghe, Cedric & Delarue, Erik & Belmans, Ronnie & D'haeseleer, William, 2009. "Interactions between measures for the support of electricity from renewable energy sources and CO2 mitigation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4743-4752, November.
    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. Cai, Yongxia & Woollacott, Jared & Beach, Robert H. & Rafelski, Lauren E. & Ramig, Christopher & Shelby, Michael, 2023. "Insights from adding transportation sector detail into an economy-wide model: The case of the ADAGE CGE model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    2. Montag, Josef, 2015. "The simple economics of motor vehicle pollution: A case for fuel tax," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 138-149.
    3. Bansal, Prateek & Dua, Rubal, 2022. "Fuel consumption elasticities, rebound effect and feebate effectiveness in the Indian and Chinese new car markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Bjertnæs, Geir H.M., 2023. "Taxation of fuel and vehicles when emissions are constrained," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    5. Bishop, Justin D.K. & Martin, Niall P.D. & Boies, Adam M., 2016. "Quantifying the role of vehicle size, powertrain technology, activity and consumer behaviour on new UK passenger vehicle fleet energy use and emissions under different policy objectives," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 196-212.
    6. Malik, Leeza & Tiwari, Geetam, 2017. "Assessment of interstate freight vehicle characteristics and impact of future emission and fuel economy standards on their emissions in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 121-133.
    7. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2019. "Addressing climate change through price and non-price interventions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 594-612.
    8. Paltsev, Sergey & Chen, Y.-H. Henry & Karplus, Valerie & Kishimoto, Paul & Reilly, John & Loeschel, Andreas & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Koesler, Simon, 2015. "Reducing CO2 from cars in the European Union: Emission standards or emission trading?," CAWM Discussion Papers 84, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    9. Voltes-Dorta, Augusto & Perdiguero, Jordi & Jiménez, Juan Luis, 2013. "Are car manufacturers on the way to reduce CO2 emissions?: A DEA approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 77-86.
    10. Wang, Jiayu & Quiggin, John & Wittwer, Glyn, 2019. "The rebound effect of the Australian proposed light vehicle fuel efficiency standards," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 73-84.
    11. Saket, Mohammad Javad & Maleki, Abbas & Hezaveh, Erfan Doroudgar & Karimi, Mohammad Sadegh, 2019. "Institutional analysis on impediments over fuel consumption reduction at Iran's transportation niches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 861-867.
    12. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    13. Guerrero, Sebastian E. & Madanat, Samer M. & Leachman, Robert C., 2013. "The Trucking Sector Optimization Model: A tool for predicting carrier and shipper responses to policies aiming to reduce GHG emissions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 85-107.
    14. Shi, Wenjing & Ou, Yang & Smith, Steven J. & Ledna, Catherine M. & Nolte, Christopher G. & Loughlin, Daniel H., 2017. "Projecting state-level air pollutant emissions using an integrated assessment model: GCAM-USA," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 511-521.
    15. Chen, Y.-H. Henry & Paltsev, Sergey & Reilly, John M. & Morris, Jennifer F. & Babiker, Mustafa H., 2016. "Long-term economic modeling for climate change assessment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PB), pages 867-883.

    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. Caron, Justin, 2012. "Estimating carbon leakage and the efficiency of border adjustments in general equilibrium — Does sectoral aggregation matter?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 111-126.
    2. Karplus, Valerie J. & Paltsev, Sergey & Babiker, Mustafa & Reilly, John M., 2013. "Applying engineering and fleet detail to represent passenger vehicle transport in a computable general equilibrium model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 295-305.
    3. Frank van Tongeren & Robert Koopman & Stephen Karingi & John Reilly & Joseph Francois, 2021. "Back to the Future: A 25-Year Retrospective on GTAP and the Shaping of a New Agenda," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Peter Dixon & Joseph Francois & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe (ed.), POLICY ANALYSIS AND MODELING OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY A Festschrift Celebrating Thomas Hertel, chapter 3, pages 41-93, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Winchester Niven & Paltsev Sergey & Reilly John M, 2011. "Will Border Carbon Adjustments Work?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-29, January.
    5. Michał Antoszewski, 2019. "Assessment of Energy-Related Technological Shocks Within a CGE Model for the Polish Economy," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 1, pages 9-45.
    6. Li, Aijun & Du, Nan & Wei, Qian, 2014. "The cross-country implications of alternative climate policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 155-163.
    7. Christoph Böhringer & Jared C. Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2018. "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 183-210, January.
    8. Jakob, Michael, 2021. "Climate policy and international trade – A critical appraisal of the literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    9. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    10. Standardi, Gabriele & Cai, Yiyong & Yeh, Sonia, 2017. "Sensitivity of modeling results to technological and regional details: The case of Italy's carbon mitigation policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 116-128.
    11. Christoph Böhringer & Knut Einar Rosendahl & Halvor Storrøsten, 2021. "Smart hedging against carbon leakage [An overview of the GTAP 9 data base]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 36(107), pages 439-484.
    12. repec:old:wpaper:340 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Zhang, Zhong Xiang, 2012. "Competitiveness and Leakage Concerns and Border Carbon Adjustments," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 225-287, December.
    14. Samuel Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn & Jisung Park, 2010. "Combining Multiple Climate Policy Instruments: How Not To Do It," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(03), pages 209-225.
    15. Alessandro Antimiani & Valeria Costantini & Chiara Martini & Luca Salvatici, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0136, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    16. Fischer, Carolyn & Preonas, Louis, 2010. "Combining Policies for Renewable Energy: Is the Whole Less Than the Sum of Its Parts?," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(1), pages 51-92, June.
    17. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "Impacts of border carbon adjustments on China's sectoral emissions: Simulations with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 77-94.
    18. Lennox, James A. & Turner, James & Daigneault, Adam J. & Jhunjhnuwala, Kanika, 2013. "Regional, sectoral and temporal differences in carbon leakage," 2013 Conference (57th), February 5-8, 2013, Sydney, Australia 152164, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. Guy Meunier, 2015. "Prices vs. quantities in presence of a second, unpriced, externality," Working Papers hal-01242040, HAL.
    20. Rahel Aichele, 2013. "Trade, Climate Policy and Carbon Leakage - Theory and Empirical Evidence," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 49.
    21. Van den Bergh, Kenneth & Delarue, Erik & D'haeseleer, William, 2013. "Impact of renewables deployment on the CO2 price and the CO2 emissions in the European electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1021-1031.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:ags:pugtwp:332082. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.