IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332786.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reconsidering Carbon Equivalence: Comparisons of GWP Time Horizon Choice Under a Global Carbon Tax

Author

Listed:
  • Batistich, Mary Kate

Abstract

This study explores the importance of carbon equivalence metric choice in determining the distributional effects of a global carbon tax by comparing the enforcement of the same tax under two different metrics: the 100-year GWP, which is the current industry standard, and the 20-year GWP, which is a reasonable alternative. Under a computable general equilibrium framework, simulations of a $27/tCO2e uniform, global tax indicate that many regions are made worse off by the 20-year GWP, generally because the metric more than doubles the importance of methane emissions. Regions with relatively low emissions intensities, particularly in methane-reliant sectors, benefit from the 20-year GWP. There are greater emissions reductions in both methane gas and nitrous oxide under the 20-year GWP.

Suggested Citation

  • Batistich, Mary Kate, 2016. "Reconsidering Carbon Equivalence: Comparisons of GWP Time Horizon Choice Under a Global Carbon Tax," Conference papers 332786, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332786/files/8322.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Golub, Alla & Hertel, Thomas & Lee, Huey-Lin & Rose, Steven & Sohngen, Brent, 2009. "The opportunity cost of land use and the global potential for greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture and forestry," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 299-319, November.
    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. Valentina Bosetti & Enrica De Cian, 2013. "A Good Opening: The Key to Make the Most of Unilateral Climate Action," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(2), pages 255-276, October.
    2. Anderson Gwanyebit Kehbila & Dieudonne Alemagi & Peter Akong Minang, 2014. "Comparative Multi-Criteria Assessment of Climate Policies and Sustainable Development Strategies in Cameroon: Towards a GIS Decision-Support Tool for the Design of an Optimal REDD+ Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Monge, Juan J. & Bryant, Henry L. & Gan, Jianbang & Richardson, James W., 2016. "Land use and general equilibrium implications of a forest-based carbon sequestration policy in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 102-120.
    4. Rong Li & Brent Sohngen & Xiaohui Tian, 2022. "Efficiency of forest carbon policies at intensive and extensive margins," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1243-1267, August.
    5. Hertel, Thomas W., 2013. "Land, Environment and Climate: Contributing to the Global Public Good," WIDER Working Paper Series 107, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Jianhong Mu & Anne Wein & Bruce McCarl, 2015. "Land use and management change under climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies: a U.S. case study," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(7), pages 1041-1054, October.
    7. Villoria, Nelson B. & Liu, Jing, 2018. "Using spatially explicit data to improve our understanding of land supply responses: An application to the cropland effects of global sustainable irrigation in the Americas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 411-419.
    8. Bosello, Francesco & Orecchia, Carlo & Parrado, Ramiro, 2013. "The additional contribution of non-CO2 mitigation in climate policy costs and efforts in Europe," Conference papers 332363, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. B. Henderson & A. Golub & D. Pambudi & T. Hertel & C. Godde & M. Herrero & O. Cacho & P. Gerber, 2018. "The power and pain of market-based carbon policies: a global application to greenhouse gases from ruminant livestock production," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 349-369, March.
    10. Khellaf, Ayache & Nihou, Abdelaziz & Baray, Abdoul G. & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique & Liverani, Andrea & Tyner, Wallace E., 2014. "Socioeconomic impacts of green energy growth policy in Morocco - a general equilibrium analysis," Conference papers 332493, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Francesco Bosello & Carlo Orecchia & David A. Raitzer, 2016. "Decarbonization Pathways in Southeast Asia: New Results for Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam," Working Papers 2016.75, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. 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.
    13. Kretschmer, Bettina & Peterson, Sonja, 2010. "Integrating bioenergy into computable general equilibrium models -- A survey," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 673-686, May.
    14. David Blandford & Ivar Gaasland & Erling Vårdal, 2013. "Extensification versus Intensification in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Agriculture: Insights from Norway," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 4-9, December.
    15. Francesco Bosello & Lorenza Campagnolo & Raffaello Cervigni & Fabio Eboli, 2018. "Climate Change and Adaptation: The Case of Nigerian Agriculture," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(4), pages 787-810, April.
    16. Taran Faehn & Gabriel Bachner & Robert Beach & Jean Chateau & Shinichiro Fujimori & Madanmohan Ghosh & Meriem Hamdi-Cherif & Elisa Lanzi & Sergey Paltsev & Toon Vandyck & Bruno Cunha & Rafael Garaffa , 2020. "Capturing Key Energy and Emission Trends in CGE models: Assessment of Status and Remaining Challenges," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 5(1), pages 196-272, June.
    17. Edwin Van Der Werf & Sonja Peterson, 2009. "Modeling linkages between climate policy and land use: an overview," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(5), pages 507-517, September.
    18. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2011. "On the Scope for Output-Based Rebating in Climate Policy," Conference papers 332056, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Michetti, Melania & Parrado, Ramiro, 2012. "Improving Land-use modelling within CGE to assess Forest-based Mitigation Potential and Costs," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 122862, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    20. Kumar, Anil & Luthra, Sunil & Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo & Kazancoglu, Yigit, 2023. "Analysing the adoption barriers of low-carbon operations: A step forward for achieving net-zero emissions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and 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:332786. 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.