IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_11153.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Synthesis of Evidence Yields High Social Cost of Carbon Due to Structural Model Variation and Uncertainties

Author

Listed:
  • Frances C. Moore
  • Moritz A. Drupp
  • James Rising
  • Simon Dietz
  • Ivan Rudik
  • Gernot Wagner

Abstract

Estimating the cost to society from a ton of CO2 - termed the social cost of carbon (SCC) - requires connecting a model of the climate system with a representation of the economic and social effects of changes in climate, and the aggregation of diverse, uncertain impacts across both time and space. Increasingly a growing literature has examined the effect of fundamental structural elements of the models supporting SCC calculations. This work has accumulated in piecemeal fashion, leaving their relative importance unclear. Here we perform a comprehensive synthesis of the evidence on the SCC, combining 1823 estimates of the SCC from 147 studies with a survey of authors of these studies. The distribution of published 2020 SCC values is wide and substantially right-skewed, showing evidence of a heavy right tail (truncated mean of $132). Analysis of variance reveals important roles for the inclusion of persistent damages, representation of the Earth system, and distributional weighting. However, our survey reveals that experts believe the literature is biased downwards due to an under-sampling of structural model variations and biases in damage-function and discount-rate. To address this imbalance, we train a random forest model on variation in the literature and use it to generate a synthetic SCC distribution that more closely matches expert assessments of appropriate model structure and discounting. This synthetic distribution has a mean of $284 per ton CO2, respectively, for a 2020 pulse year (5%–95% range: $32–$874), higher than all official government estimates, including a 2023 update from the U.S. EPA.

Suggested Citation

  • Frances C. Moore & Moritz A. Drupp & James Rising & Simon Dietz & Ivan Rudik & Gernot Wagner, 2024. "Synthesis of Evidence Yields High Social Cost of Carbon Due to Structural Model Variation and Uncertainties," CESifo Working Paper Series 11153, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_11153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp11153.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Anthoff & Richard S. J. Tol, 2022. "Testing the Dismal Theorem," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(5), pages 885-920.
    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. Tol, Richard S.J., 2024. "A meta-analysis of the total economic impact of climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Faustino Prieto & Catalina B. Garc'ia-Garc'ia & Rom'an Salmer'on G'omez, 2024. "Modelling Global Fossil CO2 Emissions with a Lognormal Distribution: A Climate Policy Tool," Papers 2403.00653, arXiv.org.
    3. Giacomo Marangoni & Jonathan R. Lamontagne & Julianne D. Quinn & Patrick M. Reed & Klaus Keller, 2021. "Adaptive mitigation strategies hedge against extreme climate futures," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-17, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social cost of carbon;

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_11153. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.