Climatic Change

, Volume 103, Issue 1–2, pp 277–289 | Cite as

Carbon emission trading and carbon taxes under uncertainties

  • Tatiana Ermolieva
  • Yuri Ermoliev
  • Günther Fischer
  • Matthias Jonas
  • Marek Makowski
  • Fabian Wagner
Article

Abstract

The idea of market-based carbon emission trading and carbon taxes is gaining in popularity as a global climate change policy instrument. However, these mechanisms might not necessarily have a positive outcome unless their value reflects socioeconomic and environmental impacts and regulations. Moreover, the fact that they have various inherent exogenous and endogenous uncertainties raises serious concerns about their ability to reduce emissions in a cost-effective way. This paper aims to introduce a simple stochastic model that allows the robustness of economic mechanisms for emission reduction under multiple natural and human-related uncertainties to be analyzed. Unlike standard equilibrium state analysis, the model shows that the explicit introduction of uncertainties regarding emissions, abatement costs, and equilibrium states makes it almost impossible for existing market-based trading and carbon taxes to be environmentally safe and cost-effective. Here we propose a computerized multi-agent trading model. This can be viewed as a prototype to simulate an emission trading market that is regulated in a decentralized way. We argue that a market of this type is better equipped to deal with long-term emission reductions, their direct regulation, irreversibility, and “lock-in” equilibria.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baumol W, Oates W (1971) The use of standards and prices for protection of the environment. Swed J Econ 73:42–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. EEA (2006) Application of the emission trading directive by EU Member States. Technical Report No. 2/2006, European Environment Agency (EEA), Denmark, p 54. http://reports.eea.europa.eu/technical_report_2006_2/en/technicalreport_2_2006.pdf
  3. Energy Business Review (2006) Volatility the only certainty in EU carbon market. http://www.energy-business-review.com/article_feature.asp?guid=FD09D7CA-3EFC-4229-BA86-1D968025DF5B
  4. Ermoliev Y, Michalevich M, Nentjes A (2000) Markets for tradable emission and ambient permits: a dynamic approach. Environ Res Econ 15:39–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ermolieva T, Ermoliev Y (2005) Catastrophic risk management: flood and seismic risks case studies. In: Wallace SW, Ziemba WT (eds) Applications of stochastic programming. MPS-SIAM Series on Optimization, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  6. Ermolieva T, Jonas M, Ermoliev Y, Makowski M (2007) The difference between deterministic and probabilistic detection of emission changes: toward the use of the probabilistic verification time concept. In: Proc. of the 2nd international workshop on uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories, IIASA-Systems Research Institute of the Polish academy of Sciences. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/FOR/unc_prep.html
  7. Godal O, Ermoliev Y, Klassen G, Obersteiner M (2003) Carbon trading with imperfectly observable emissions. Environ Res Econ 25:151–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hudz H (2002) Verification times underlying the Kyoto protocol: consideration of risk. Interim Report IR-02-066, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-02-066.pdf
  9. Hudz H, Jonas M, Ermolieva T, Bun R, Ermoliev Y, Nilsson S (2003) Verification times underlying the Kyoto protocol: consideration of risk. Background data for IR-02-066, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/FOR/vt_concept.html
  10. Jonas M, Nilsson S (2007) Prior to economic treatment of emissions and their uncertainties under the Kyoto Protocol: scientific uncertainties that must be kept in mind. Water Air Soil Pollut Focus 7(4–5):495–511. doi:10.1007/s11267-006-9113-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jonas M, Nilsson S, Obersteiner M, Gluck M, Ermoliev Y (1999) Verification times underlying the Kyoto protocol: global benchmark calculations. Interim Report IR 99-062, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, p 43. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-99-062.pdf
  12. Lieberman D, Jonas M, Nahorski Z, Nilsson S (eds) (2007) Accounting for climate change. Uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 159, ISBN: 978-1-4020-5929-2 [Reprint: Water Air Soil Pollut.: Focus, 2007, 7(4–5), ISSN: 1567-7230]. http://www.springer.com/environment/global+change+-+climate+change/book/978-1-4020-5929-2
  13. Marland G (2008) Uncertainties in accounting for CO2 from fossil fuels. J Ind Ecol 12(2):136–139. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2008.00014.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nahorski Z, Jeda W, Jonas M (2003) Coping with uncertainty in verification of the Kyoto obligations. In: Studzinski J, Drelichowski L, Hryniewicz O (eds) Zastosowania informatyki i analizy systemowej w zarządzaniu. Systems Research Institute PAS, Warsaw, pp 305–317Google Scholar
  15. Nahorski Z, Horabik J, Jonas M (2007) Compliance and emissions trading under the Kyoto protocol: rules for uncertain inventories. In: Lieberman D, Jonas M, Nahorski Z, Nilson S (eds) Accounting for climate change: uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 119–138Google Scholar
  16. Rockafellar T, Uryasev S (2000) Optimization of conditional-value-at-risk. J Risk 2/3:21–41Google Scholar
  17. Rypdal K, Winiwarter W (2000) Uncertainties in greenhouse gas emission inventories evaluation, comparability and implications. Environ Sci Policy 4:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Winiwarter W (2007) National greenhouse gas inventories: understanding uncertainties versus potential for improving reliability. In: Lieberman D, Jonas M, Nahorski Z, Nilson S (eds) Accounting for climate change: uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 23–30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tatiana Ermolieva
    • 1
  • Yuri Ermoliev
    • 1
  • Günther Fischer
    • 1
  • Matthias Jonas
    • 1
  • Marek Makowski
    • 1
  • Fabian Wagner
    • 1
  1. 1.International Institute for Applied Systems AnalysisLaxenburgAustria

Personalised recommendations