Abstract
Although emissions of CO2 are the largest anthropogenic contributor to the risks of climate change, other substances are important in the formulation of a cost-effective response. To provide improved facilities for addressing their role, we develop an approach for endogenizing control of these other greenhouse gases within a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the world economy. The calculation is consistent with underlying economic production theory. For parameterization it is able to draw on marginal abatement cost (MAC) functions for these gases based on detailed technological descriptions of control options. We apply the method to the gases identified in the Kyoto Protocol: methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexaflouride (SF6), the perflourocarbons (PFCs), and the hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Complete and consistent estimates are provided of the costs of meeting greenhouse-gas reduction targets with a focus on “what” flexibility – i.e., the ability to abate the most cost-effective mix of gases in any period. We find that non-CO2 gases are a crucial component of a cost-effective policy. Because of their high GWPs under current international agreements they would contribute a substantial share of early abatement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
M. Babiker, J.M. Reilly and H.D. Jacoby, The Kyoto Protocol and developing countries, Energy Policy 28 (2000) 525–536.
M.H. Babiker, G. Metcalf and J. Reilly, Tax distortions and climate policy, Journal of Environmental and Economic Management (forthcoming).
M.H. Babiker, J.M. Reilly, M. Mayer, R.S. Eckaus, I. Sue Wing and R.C. Hyman, The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model: Revisions, sensitivities, and comparisons of results, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report 71 (2001).
M. Babiker, L. Viguier, J. Reilly, A.D. Ellerman and P. Criqui, The welfare costs of hybrid carbon policies in the European Union, Environmental Modeling and Assessment (2002) submitted.
M.A. Brown, M.D. Levine, J.P. Romm, A.H. Rosenfeld and J.G. Koomey, Engineering-economic studies of energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: Opportunities and challenges, Annual Review of Energy (1998) 287–385.
D. Fullerton and G.E. Metcalf, Environmental controls, scarcity rents, and pre-existing distortions, Journal of Public Economics 80(2) (2001) 249–267.
K. Hayhoe, A. Jain, H. Pitcher, C. MacCracken, M. Gibbs, D. Wuebbles, R. Harvey and D. Kruger, Costs of multigreenhouse gas reduction targets for the USA, Science 286 (1999) 905–906.
R.C. Hyman, A More Cost-Effective Strategy for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Modeling the Impact of Methane Abatement Opportunities, Master's Thesis (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2001).
IEA [International Energy Agency], Abatement of methane emissions, IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, Cheltenham, UK (1998).
IEA [International Energy Agency], Technologies for the abatement of methane emissions, IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, Cheltenham, UK (1999).
A. Manne and R. Richels, An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases, Nature 410 (2001) 675–677.
M. Mayer, R. Hyman, J. Harnisch and J. Reilly, Emissions inventories and time-trends for GHGs and other pollutants, Technical Note 1, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change (2000).
J.R. McFarland, H.J. Herzog and J. Reilly, Economic modeling of the global adoption of carbon capture and sequestration technologies, Sixth International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-6), Kyoto (October 2002).
R. Prinn, H. Jacoby, A. Sokolov, C. Wang, X. Xiao, Z. Yang, R. Eckhaus, P. Stone, D. Ellerman, J. Melillo, J. Fitzmaurice, D. Kicklighter, G. Holian and Y. Liu, Integrated global system model for climate policy assessment: Feedbacks and sensitivity studies, Climatic Change 41(3/4) (1999) 469–546.
J. Reilly, M. Mayer and J. Harnisch, Multiple gas control under the Kyoto Agreement, joint program on the science and policy of global change, Environmental Modeling and Assessment (forthcoming).
J. Reilly, R. Prinn, J. Harnisch, J. Fitzmaurice, H. Jacoby, D. Kicklighter, J. Melillo, P. Stone, A. Sokolov and C. Wang, Multi-gas assessment of the Kyoto Protocol, Nature 401 (1999) 549–555.
J. Reilly, H.D. Jacoby and R. Prinn, Multi-Gas Contributors to Global Climate Change: Climate Impacts and Mitigation Costs of non-CO 2 Gases (Pew Center for Climate Change, Arlington, VA, 2003).
N. Nakićenović and R. Swart, eds., Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, 2000).
US EPA [US Environmental Protection Agency], US methane emissions 1990-2020: Inventories, projections, and opportunities for reductions, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC (1999).
US EPA [US Environmental Protection Agency], U.S. high GWP gas emissions 1990-2020: Inventories, projections, and opportunities for reductions, Report No. EPA-000-F-97-000, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (June 2001).
M.D. Webster, M. Babiker, M. Mayer, J.M. Reilly, J. Harnisch, R. Hyman, M.C. Sarofim and C. Wang, Uncertainty in emissions projections for climate models, Atmospheric Environment 36 (2002) 3659–3670.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hyman, R.C., Reilly, J.M., Babiker, M.H. et al. Modeling non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Abatement. Environmental Modeling & Assessment 8, 175–186 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025576926029
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025576926029