IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-23-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Leveraging the IRA to Achieve 80x30 in the US Electricity Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Domeshek, Maya

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Burtraw, Dallas

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Palmer, Karen

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Roy, Nicholas

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Shih, Jhih-Shyang

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) promises to deliver important reductions in CO2 emissions from the electricity sector along with a host of other benefits to citizens and electricity consumers, but it falls short of achieving the 80 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2030 (80x30) consistent with meeting the nation’s Paris goals. This paper examines the consequences of the IRA and of policies designed to hit the Paris targets for generation mix, consumer costs of electricity, the federal budget, air quality, and human health. Our modeling shows that the IRA substantially reduces the allowance price for necessary an emissions cap to meet the 80x30 goal in the power sector and that doing so yields savings to consumers, particularly those with lower incomes, and additional health benefits beyond those promised from the IRA.

Suggested Citation

  • Domeshek, Maya & Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Roy, Nicholas & Shih, Jhih-Shyang, 2023. "Leveraging the IRA to Achieve 80x30 in the US Electricity Sector," RFF Working Paper Series 23-42, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-23-42
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rff.org/documents/4243/WP_23-42_11.13.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    3. Manuel Linsenmeier & Mr. Adil Mohommad & Gregor Schwerhoff, 2022. "Policy Sequencing Towards Carbon Pricing - Empirical Evidence From G20 Economies and Other Major Emitters," IMF Working Papers 2022/066, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Karl–Gustaf Lofgren & Torsten Persson & Jorgen W. Weibull, 2002. "Markets with Asymmetric Information: The Contributions of George Akerlof, Michael Spence and Joseph Stiglitz," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 104(2), pages 195-211, June.
    5. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, January.
    6. Coysh, Daniel & Johnstone, Nick & Kozluk, Tomasz & Nachtigall, Daniel & Cárdenas Rodríguez, Miguel, 2020. "Vintage differentiated regulations and plant survival: Evidence from coal-fired power plants," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Auerbach, Alan J. & Hines, James Jr., 2002. "Taxation and economic efficiency," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 21, pages 1347-1421, Elsevier.
    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. Bovenberg, A. Lans & Goulder, Lawrence H., 2002. "Environmental taxation and regulation," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 23, pages 1471-1545, Elsevier.
    2. Rausch, Sebastian & Yonezawa, Hidemichi, 2023. "Green technology policies versus carbon pricing: An intergenerational perspective," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    3. Milt, Austin W. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2017. "Performance of a cap and trade system for managing environmental impacts of shale gas surface infrastructure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 399-406.
    4. Heimvik, Arild & Amundsen, Eirik S., 2021. "Prices vs. percentages: Use of tradable green certificates as an instrument of greenhouse gas mitigation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Ian W.H. Parry & Mr. John Norregaard & Mr. Dirk Heine, 2012. "Environmental Tax Reform: Principles from Theory and Practice to Date," IMF Working Papers 2012/180, International Monetary Fund.
    6. Maurizio Ciaschini & Francesca Severini, 2010. "The Economic Impact of the Green Certificate Market through the Macro Multiplier Approach," Working Papers 2010.105, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    7. Lehmann, Paul, 2010. "Combining emissions trading and emissions taxes in a multi-objective world," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2010, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    8. William A Pizer & Steven Sexton, 2019. "The Distributional Impacts of Energy Taxes," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 104-123.
    9. Julie Anne Cronin & Don Fullerton & Steven Sexton, 2019. "Vertical and Horizontal Redistributions from a Carbon Tax and Rebate," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(S1), pages 169-208.
    10. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Elena Paglialunga, 2019. "Capital–energy substitutability in manufacturing sectors: methodological and policy implications," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 157-182, June.
    11. Alfredo Marvão Pereira & Rui M. Pereira, 2012. "DGEP - A Dynamic General Equilibrium Model of the Portuguese Economy: Model Documentation," Working Papers 127, Department of Economics, College of William and Mary.
    12. Ricci, Olivia, 2012. "Providing adequate economic incentives for bioenergies with CO2 capture and geological storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 362-373.
    13. Weber, Thomas A. & Neuhoff, Karsten, 2010. "Carbon markets and technological innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 115-132, September.
    14. Botor, Benjamin & Böcker, Benjamin & Kallabis, Thomas & Weber, Christoph, 2021. "Information shocks and profitability risks for power plant investments – impacts of policy instruments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    15. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2010. "Tax-Versus-Trading and Free Emission Shares as Issues for Climate Policy Design," Research Reports 95049, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    16. Fullerton, Don & Ta, Chi L., 2019. "Environmental policy on the back of an envelope: A Cobb-Douglas model is not just a teaching tool," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(S1).
    17. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    18. Philippe Quirion, 2004. "Prices versus Quantities in a Second-Best Setting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 337-360, November.
    19. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2012. "Tax-versus-trading and efficient revenue recycling as issues for greenhouse gas abatement," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 230-236.
    20. Ronnie Schöb, 2003. "The Double Dividend Hypothesis of Environmental Taxes: A Survey," CESifo Working Paper Series 946, CESifo.

    More about this item

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-23-42. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.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.