Skip to main content

Schemes for the Regional Allocation of Emission Allowances under Stringent Global Climate Policy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Informing Energy and Climate Policies Using Energy Systems Models

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Energy ((LNEN,volume 30))

  • 1618 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter we investigate burden-sharing regimes for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission reduction obligations under a 2 °C long-term climate policy framework, and present our findings derived from an integrated energy-economy-climate assessment. In our analysis we focus on two different allocation schemes: a per-capita-based scheme, and a scheme aiming at equalising the climate policy costs among the world regions with respect to their economic capability. We find that, under a per capita based burden-sharing scheme, the amount of carbon certificates traded on the carbon market yields a cumulative capital transfer of 20 trillion US$ between 2020 and 2050, which is on average 680 billion US$/year. The main certificate selling regions are Africa and India and the main buyers South America and the Middle East. Conversely to the per capita based scheme, a burden-sharing regime that aims at equalising regional climate policy costs leads to a cumulative carbon market capita flow until 2050 of about one quarter with average annual certificate transactions worth 180 billion US$/year, with China and Other Developing Asia being the major certificate sellers and Western Europe the main buyer. Comparing both burden-sharing schemes with regard to the compensation of non-OECD countries’ climate change mitigation efforts via revenues from the global carbon certificate market reveals an advantage of the scheme based on climate policy costs over the per capita scheme, because the policy cost related scheme covers 12 % of the non-OECD’s climate policy costs of the first half of this century, whereas 4 % under the per capita scheme only.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The LIMITS project was funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007–2013 under grant agreement no. 282846. Further information on the project is available under www.feem-project.net/limits.

  2. 2.

    GDP is expressed in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP) and monetary values in US$ (2005), if not indicated otherwise.

  3. 3.

    This forcing target refers to all anthropogenic radiative agents with the exception of three agents: nitrate aerosols, mineral dust aerosols, and land use albedo changes. According to our model approach we adjusted the forcing target to be applied to the three GHG emissions represented in the TIAM-ECN.

  4. 4.

    Policy costs in the context of our bottom–up modelling approach refer to undiscounted costs for the entire energy system, including expenditures for technology investments, operation and maintenance, other variable costs as well as costs associated with changing demand patterns. Policy implementation and transaction costs are excluded. Climate policy costs are calculated as the difference between the total costs under certain policy conditions and the costs in the reference case.

References

  • Calvin K, Wise M, Klein D, McCollum D, Tavoni M, van der Zwaan B, van Vuuren D (2013) A multi-model analysis of the regional and sectoral roles of bioenergy in near-term and long-term carbon mitigation. Clim Change Econ 4(4):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciscar J, Saveyn B, Soria A, Szabo L, van Regemorter D, van Ireland T (2013) A comparability analysis of global burden sharing GHG reduction scenarios. Energy Policy 55:73–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • den Elzen M, Höhne N, van Vliet J, Ellerman C (2008) Exploring comparable post-2012 reduction efforts for AnnexI countries. MNP report 500102019/2008, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union (2013) Decision of the European parliament and of the council on the effort of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community’s greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments up to 2020. 406/2009/EC

    Google Scholar 

  • GEA (2012) Global energy assessment—towards a sustainable future. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hof A, den Elzen M, van Vuuren D (2008) Environmental effectiveness and economic consequences of fragmented versus universal regimes: what can we learn from model studies? Int Env Agreements: Politics, Law Econ 9(1):39–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2014) Energy technology perspectives. International Energy Agency, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T and Minx JC (eds) Contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby H, Babiker M, Paltsev S, Reilly J (2008) Sharing the burden of GHG reductions. Report No. 167, MIT joint program on the science and policy of global change, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Keppo I, van der Zwaan B (2012) The impact of uncertainty in climate targets and CO2 storage availability on long-term emissions abatement. Environ Model Assess 17:177–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kober T, van der Zwaan B, Rösler H (2014) Regional burden sharing regimes for reaching a global long-term 2 °C climate change control target. Clim Change Econ 5(1):0–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kriegler E, Tavoni M, Aboumahboub T, Luderer G, Calvin K, De Maere G, Krey V, Riahi K, Rösler H, Schaeffer M, van Vuuren D (2013) What does the 2 °C target imply for a global climate change agreement in 2020? The LIMITS study on implications of Durban platform action scenarios. Clim Change Econ 4(4):1–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer A (2000) Contraction and convergence—the global solution to climate change. Schumacher Briefings 5, Green books for the Schumacher society, Bristol, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Phylipsen, D, Blok C (2013) European experiences with burden sharing in climate change—lessons learned for the post-2020 negotiations. Report published under the MAPS programme

    Google Scholar 

  • Rösler, H, Bruggink J, Keppo I (2011) Design of a European sustainable hydrogen model—model structure and data sources. Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) report ECN-E-11-041, Petten

    Google Scholar 

  • Rösler H, van der Zwaan B, Keppo I, Bruggink J (2014) Electricity versus hydrogen under stringent climate change control. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 5:106–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavoni M, Kriegler E, Aboumahboub T, Calvin K, De Maere G, Jewell J, Kober T, Lucas P, Luderer G, McCollum D, Marangoni G, Riahi K, van Vuuren D (2013) The distribution of the major economies’ effort in the Durban platform scenarios. Clim Change Econ 4(4):0–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (UN) (2011) World population prospects: the 2010 revision. http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/. Accessed 31 Mar 2012

  • UNFCCC (2014) Financial, technology and capacity-building support. http://cancun.unfccc.int/financial-technology-and-capacity-building-support/new-long-term-funding-arrangements/. Accessed 31 July 2014

  • van der Zwaan B, Keppo I, Johnsson F (2013a) How to decarbonize the transport sector? Energy Policy 61:562–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Zwaan B, Rösler H, Kober T, Aboumahboub T, Calvin K, Gernaat D, Marangoni G, McCollum D (2013b) A cross-model comparison of global long-term technology diffusion under a 2 °C climate change control target. Clim Change Econ 4(4):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • van Sluisveld M, Gernaat D, Otto A, Isaak M, van Vuuren D, Mouratiadou I, Ashina S, Garg A, Shukla P, Calvin K, Rao S, Lucas P, van Vliet J (2013) A multi-model analysis of post-2020 mitigation efforts of five major economies. Clim Change Econ 4(4):1–24

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Kober .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kober, T., van der Zwaan, B., Rösler, H. (2015). Schemes for the Regional Allocation of Emission Allowances under Stringent Global Climate Policy. In: Giannakidis, G., Labriet, M., Ó Gallachóir, B., Tosato, G. (eds) Informing Energy and Climate Policies Using Energy Systems Models. Lecture Notes in Energy, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16540-0_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16540-0_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16539-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16540-0

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics