Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 297–315 | Cite as

A non-linear model for estimating the cost of achieving emission reduction targets: The case of the U.S., China and India



With the world talking about climate change, the United States (U.S.), China and India have announced their carbon emission reduction targets. For these three countries to achieve their targets, significant questions arise, such as what will be the annual emission reduction efforts to achieve those targets, how much it would cost and what would be the economic effects. This paper puts the carbon intensity reduction targets of China and India together with the absolute emission reduction target of the U.S. into the same non-linear model to quantitatively study the optimal emission control strategies and associated total cost for achieving those targets by the year 2020, and estimate and compare the minimized total costs of the three countries to reach their targets. Our results show that the total cost for the U.S. to achieve its emission reduction target is greater than those of China and India in terms of absolute amount. However, in terms of proportion of total cost to GDP, China and India’s ratios are significantly greater than that of the U.S., indicating that for the developing countries such as China and India, the achievement of emission reduction targets needs relatively greater effort.


Emission reduction cost analysis emission reduction strategy optimization model 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Boero, G., Clarke, R. & Winters, L.A. (1991). The Macroeconomic Consequences of Controlling Greenhouse Gases: A Survey. UK Department of the Environment, Environmental Economics Research Series, HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Bohm, P. & Larsen, B. (1994). Fairness in a tradeable-permit treaty for carbon emissions reductions in Europe and the former Soviet Union. Environmental and Resource Economics, 4: 219–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Chen, W., Wu, Z., He, J., Gao, P. & Xu, S. (2007). Carbon emission control strategies for China: a comparative study with partial and general equilibrium versions of the China MARKAL model. Energy, 32: 59–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Criqui, P., Mima, S. & Viguir, L. (1999). Marginal abatement cost of CO2 emission reductions, geographical flexibility and concrete ceilings: an assessment using the POLES model. Energy Policy, 27: 585–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Dean, A. & Hoeller, P. (1992). Costs of reducing CO2 emissions: evidence from six global models. Working papers, Department of Economics, No. 122, OECDGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Ellerman, D.A. & Decaux, A. (1998). Analysis of post-Kyoto CO2 emission trading using marginal abatement curves. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report 40Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Fan, Y., Zhang, X.B. & Zhu L. (2010). Estimating the macroeconomic costs of CO2 emission reduction in China based on multi-objective programming. Advances in Climate Change Research, 1: 27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Gaskins, D. & Weyant, J.P. (eds.) (1995). Reducing Global Carbon Emissions: Cost and Policy Options. Stanford University Press, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Grubb, M., Edmonds, J., Brink, P. & Morrison, M. (1993). The costs of limiting fossil-fuel CO2 emissions: a survey and analysis. Annual Review of Energy and Environment, 18: 397–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Hope, C. (2009). How deep should the deep cuts be? Optimal CO2 emissions over time under uncertainty. Climate Policy, 9(1): 3–8MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    IEA (2009). CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 2009. OECD/IEA, PairsGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007). Climate Change 2007: the Physical Science Basis, pp. 996–1022. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Italianer, A. (1986). The HERMES Model: Complete Specification and First Estimation Results. Commission of the European Communities, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Klepper, G. & Peterson, S. (2006). Marginal abatement cost curves in general equilibrium: the influence of world energy prices. Resource and Energy Economics, 28: 1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Loisel, R. (2010). Quota allocation rules in Romania assessed by a dynamic CGE model. Climate Policy, 10: 87–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Manne, A.S. & Richels, R.G. (1992). Buying Greenhouse Insurance: The Economic Costs of CO2 Emission Limits. MIT Press, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    McKibbin, W.J., Morris, A. & Wilcoxen, A. Comparing climate commitments: a model-based analysis of the Copenhagen Accord. The Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, discussion paper, 10–35Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Per-Anders, E., Tomas, N. & Jerker, R. (2007). McKinsey Quarterly, March, 2007Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Morris, J., Paltsev, S. & Reilly, J. (2008). Marginal abatement costs and marginal welfare costs for greenhouse gas emissions reductions: results from the EPPA model. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report 164Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Nordhaus, W.D. (1991). The cost of slowing climate change: a survey. Energy Journal, 12: 37–65Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Proops, J.L.R., Faber, M. & Wagenhals, G. (1993). Reducing CO2 Emissions: A Comparative Input-Output Study for Germany and the UK. Springer Express, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Schelling, T.C. (1997). Some economics of global warming. American Economic Review, 82: 1–14Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Schultz, P.A. & Kasting, J.F. (1997). Optimal reductions in CO2 emissions. Energy Policy, 25: 491–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Shrestha, R.M., Pradhan, S. & Liyanage, M.H. (2008). Effects of carbon tax on greenhouse gas mitigation in Thailand. Climate Policy, 8: 140–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Stern, D.I. & Jotzo, F. How ambitious are China and India’s emissions intensity targets? Energy Policy, 38: 6776–6783Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    World Bank (2009). World Development Indicators 2009. World Bank, WashingtonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Zhang, Z.X. (1996). Cost-effective analysis of carbon abatement options in China’s electricity sector. Energy Sources, 20: 385–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Systems Engineering Society of China and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Energy & Environmental Policy Research, Institute of Policy and ManagementChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of GothenburgGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations