Advertisement

Incorporating Global Warming Externalities through Environmental Least Cost Planning: A Case Study of Western Europe

  • Florentin Krause
  • Jonathan Koomey
  • David Olivier

Abstract

With growing acceptance of the need for preventative action, the international debate on greenhouse policies has shifted from scientific issues to economic questions. Broadly speaking, proposals for incorporating global warming externalities move along the same lines as the debate over other environmental externalities—valuation-based price signals (monetized surcharges or carbon taxes) versus quantity constraints (emission caps or reduction targets). However, the global warming issue has produced specific forms of these alternative approaches. Most important for the current discussion are the so-called insurance buying approach (Krause et al. 1989) and the “no (economic) regrets” approach.

Keywords

Carbon Emission Carbon Taxis Energy Service Electricity Sector Carbon Reduction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brinner, R. E., J.M. Yanchar, M. Shelby, R. Shakleton 1992. “Balanced Policies to Address Global Warming,” Draft paper presented at the Meeting of the Western Economics Association, San Francisco, California, July.Google Scholar
  2. British Energy Committee 1990. “The Cost of Nuclear Power, Report together with Proceedings of the Committee and Memoranda of Evidence, ” House of Commons, Fourth Report, Session 1989–90, London, June.Google Scholar
  3. CEC 1990, Energy for a New Century: The European Perspective, Special issue of Energy in Europe, Commission of the European Communities, Directorate-General for Energy (DGXVII), July.Google Scholar
  4. CEC 1991a, CO2 Study-Crash programme: Increase of taxes of energy as a way to reduce CO2 emissions: problems and accompanying measures, Directorate Generale XII, JOULE Program, Commission of the European Communities, Bruxelles, July.Google Scholar
  5. CEC 1991b, CO2 Study-Crash programme: Increase of taxes of energy as a way to reduce C02 emissions: problems and accompanying measures, Directorate Generale XII, JOULE Program, Commission of the European Communities, Bruxelles, July.Google Scholar
  6. CEC 1991c, “A Community Strategy to Limit Carbon Dioxide Emissions and to Improve Energy Efficiency,” SEC(91) 1744 Final, Commission of the European Communities, Bruxelles, May.Google Scholar
  7. Cline, W.R. 1992, The Economics of Global Warming, Institute for International Economics, Washington, DC, June.Google Scholar
  8. Enquete Kommission 1990, Schutz der Erde—Eine Bestandsaufnahme mit Vorschlägen zu einer neuen Energiepolitik, 3. Bericht, Enquete-Kommission zum Schutz der Erdatmosphäre, 11. Deutscher Bundestag, Bonn, FRG.Google Scholar
  9. Friedrich, R., Kallenbach, U., Thoene, E., Voss, A., H.-H. Rogner, H.-D. Fritsche, U., L. Rausch, K.-H. Simon 1989, “Externe Kosten der Stromerzeugung, ” Vereinigung Deutscher Elektrizitaetswerke (VDEW), Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  10. IPCC 1990, Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, WMO/UNEP, Geneva, August.Google Scholar
  11. Krause, F., and J. Eto 1988, Least-Cost Utility Planning—A Handbook for Public Utility Commissioners. Volume Two: The Demand-Side: Conceptual and Methodological Issues, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), Washington, DC, December.Google Scholar
  12. Krause, F., W. Bach, J. Koomey 1989, Energy Policy in the Greenhouse, Volume I: From Warming Fate to Warming Limit: Benchmarks for a Global Climate Convention, Prepared for the Air Pollution Directorate, Dutch Ministry of Environment. Also published as Energy Policy in the Greenhouse by Earthscan Books, London 1990, and John Wiley&Sons, New York 1992.Google Scholar
  13. Krause, F., J. Koomey, D. Olivier, D. Bleviss, G. Onufrio, P. Radanne, H. Becht 1992a: Energy Policy in the Greenhouse, Volume Two. Least-Cost Insurance against Climate Risks: The Cost of Cutting Carbon Emissions in Western Europe. IPSEP, El Cerrito, CA. Prepared for the Air Pollution Directorate, Dutch Ministry of Environment.Google Scholar
  14. Krause, F., J. Koomey, D. Olivier et al. 1992b, Energy Policy in the Greenhouse, Volume IIA. Demand-Side Resources in the EC-5 Region, IPSEP, E1 Cerrito, CA. Prepared for the Air Pollution Directorate, Dutch Ministry of Environment.Google Scholar
  15. Krause, F., J. Koomey, et al. 1992c, Energy Policy in the Greenhouse, Volume II-B. Low carbon supply options for the EC-5 Power Sector, IPSEP, El Cerrito, CA. Prepared for the Air Pollution Directorate, Dutch Ministry of Environment.Google Scholar
  16. Krause, F., J. Busch, J. Koomey 1992d, Incorporating Global Warming Risks in Power Sector Planning; A Case Study of New England, Draft Final report, LBL-30797, Energy and Environment Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
  17. Mills, E., D. Wilson, and T.B. Johansson 1991: Getting started. No regrets strategies for reducing greenhouse emissions, Energy Policy, July/August, pp. 526–542.Google Scholar
  18. Ministere de l’Industrie 1990, Production d’Electricité Thermique: Les Couts de Reference, Direction Generale De l’Energie et des Matieres Premieres, Paris.Google Scholar
  19. NAS 1991, Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming—Report of the Mitigation Panel, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  20. OTA 1991, Changing by Degrees; Steps to Reduce Greenhouse Gases, Office of Technology Assessment, Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, February.Google Scholar
  21. Porter, Michael E. 1991, “Green Competitiveness,” Scientific American, April.Google Scholar
  22. Russ, P., H.D. Haasis, O. Rentz 1991, Elaborations of Strategies to Reduce CO2 Emissions in the European Community by Using a Linear Optimization Approach, Institute of Industrial Production, University of Karlsruhe, prepared for Directorate Generale XII, Commission of the European Communities, Bruxelles, January.Google Scholar
  23. Sanghi, A.K., J. Wang, and A. L. Joseph 1991, “State Level Impacts of a Federal Carbon Tax: A New York State Example, ” New York State Energy Office, albany, New York, June.Google Scholar
  24. UCS, ASE, ACEEE, NRDC 1991: America’s Energy Choices, Investing in a Strong Economy and a Clean Environment, Union of Concerned Scientists, Alliance to Save Energy, American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, and Natural Resources Defence Council, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. US DOE 1991, Limiting Net Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States. Executive Summary. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, September.Google Scholar
  26. Zimmerman, M.B. 1990, “Assessing the Cost of Climate Change Policies: The Uses and Limits of Models, ” Alliance to Save Energy, Washington, DC, April.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Florentin Krause
    • 1
  • Jonathan Koomey
    • 2
  • David Olivier
    • 3
  1. 1.IPSEPEl CerritoUSA
  2. 2.Environment DivisionLawrence Berkeley Laboratory’s EnergyBerkeleyUSA
  3. 3.Energy Advisory AssociatesHerefordshireUK

Personalised recommendations