climate change science, economics, and policy. climate economics i.climate change research...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Climate ChangeScience, Economics, and Policy
![Page 2: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Climate Economics
I. Climate Change Research
II. Climate Change Economics
III. Expert Opinion
IV. Climate Surprises & Adaptation
V. The IPCC and Policy Evolution
![Page 3: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
I. Climate Change Research
Good science in economic models “From Ecology to Economics: The Case Against
CO2 Fertilization,” Ecological Economics, 1993.
“Carbon Dioxide Effects on Plants: Uncertainties and Implications for Modeling Crop Response to Climate Change,” Agricultural Dimensions of Global Climate Change, St. Lucie Press, 1993. (w/ D. Wolfe)
![Page 4: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Climate change policy and international realism
“The Inefficiency and Unfairness of Tradable CO2 Permits,” World Resource Review, 1993.
The role of energy technology
“Photovoltaic Technology: Markets, Economics, and Development,” World Development, 1995. (w/ D. Chapman)
I. Climate Change Research
![Page 5: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Technology evolution: R&D vs. Export markets
“Residential Rural Solar Electricity in Developing
Countries,” Contemporary Economic Policy, 1995. (w/ D. Chapman)
“Solar Power and Climate Change Policy in Developing Countries,” Energy Policy, 1996. (w/ T. Drennen, D. Chapman)
“Technological Learning and Renewable Energy Costs: Implications for U.S. Energy Policy,” Energy Policy, 2006. (w/ P. Kobos, T. Drennen)
I. Climate Change Research
![Page 6: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The China factor “Who Will Fuel China?,” Science, 1998. (w/ T.
Drennen)
“Scenario Analysis of Chinese Passenger Vehicle Growth,” Contemporary Economic Policy, 2003. (w/ P. Kobos & T. Drennen)
I. Climate Change Research
![Page 7: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
The Kyoto protocol and production-based standards
“International Trade and Carbon Embodiment:
Loophole in the Kyoto Protocol,” 19th Annual North American Conference of the International Association for Energy Economics, Albuquerque, NM, Oct. 18-21, 1998 (w/ M. Zhang, T. Drennen)
I. Climate Change Research
![Page 8: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Abatement vs. adaptation in a stochastic world
“The Future of Economics in the Century of the
Environment,” Indian Journal of Applied Economics, 2002.
“Incorporating Catastrophes into Integrated Assessment: Science, Impacts, and Adaptation,” Climatic Change, 2003 (w/ E. Wright)
“Climate Variability, Economic Adaptation, and Investment Timing,” International J. of Global Env. Issues, 2003 (w/ E. Wright)
I. Climate Change Research
![Page 9: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
II. Climate Change Economics
A. Development
1983: National Academy of Science “CO2 Assessment Committee”
1991: “Sketch of the Economics of the Greenhouse Effect” & “To Slow or Not to Slow”
1992: “An Optimal Transition Path for Controlling Greenhouse Gases”
1994: Managing the Global Commons: the Economics of Climate Change (MIT Press)
1995 – present: Regional version of DICE; countless spin-offs to the Nordhaus framework.
~ Nordhaus DICE Model ~
“Considering the relatively short history of integrated assessment ofclimate, a surprising amount of knowledge has emerged. Probablythe most striking result is that our current understanding of thedamage of climate change does not justify more than modestemissions control.” - Kolstad, 1998
![Page 10: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
II. Climate Change Economics
B. Basic Structure (DICE)
1. Global macroeconomy represented by aggregate gross world output
2. Climate change impacts gross output production
3. Objective is to maximize the discounted value of world utility
T
1t
t
tt )(1c(t)][ln *N
}CR,{I
U Maxtr
![Page 11: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
II. Climate Change Economics
B. Basic Structure
Production
Emissions
GHG Concentration
Global average temperature change
Damage to gross output from both control expenditures and
climate change costs
![Page 12: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
II. Climate Change EconomicsC. Technological Advance
i. Estimates 1.3% per year 1960 - 1989
ii. In future, gradually declines to 1%
iii. In 100 years, today’s K and L could product 227% more outputi. Declines independently at 1.25% / year
ii. In 100 years, a dollar of gross world product will emit only 28% of today’s CO2
1. General technological progress
2. Declining carbon intensity
3. Interaction of (1) and (2)
i. In 100 years, a given amount of capital and labor will have 35% less emissions with 2.27 times more output.
![Page 13: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
II. Climate Change Economics
D. Policy Experiments
Impact of Program
(percent difference)
No Controls Policy 0.000
Optimal Policy 0.027
Stabilize Emissions -0.706
Stabilize Climate -4.091
Geoengineering 0.559
![Page 14: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
II. Climate Change EconomicsE. Conclusions from the Economics of Climate
Change
“ . . . a massive effort to slow climate change today would be premature given current understanding of the damages imposed by greenhouse warming.”
- Nordhaus (1994, p.6)
1. Optimal control is relatively small
2. More aggressive control policies have negative net benefits
3. IPCC and science community is not behaving rationally.
![Page 15: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Are Scientists and Policy-Makers Behaving Irrationally?
• Over 1500 scientists, including 104 out of 178 living nobel laureates, signed the World Call for Action initiated by the Union of Concerned Scientists at Kyoto, Japan in the Fall of 1997.
• Over 160 countries negotiated the Kyoto Protocol, committing 35 countries to reduce GHG emissions to 5.2% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012
![Page 16: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
III. Expert Opinion
• Mainstream economist v. environmental economists
• Damage functions by discipline• Probability distribution of expert
opinion
![Page 17: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Monte Carlo Simulation v. DICE Model (Roughgarden and Schneider)
Data Source
Total Discounted Consumption
(trillions of 1990 US $)
Optimal Carbon Tax
(1990 US $ per ton)
1995 2055 2105
DICE* 730.92 5.24 15.04 21.73
Median 699.99 21.91 46.91 61.28
Mean 680.99 41.89 86.58 111.04
Tail
(95th)
508.97 179.39 348.37 465.44
![Page 18: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
. . . the significant chance of a “surprise” causes a relatively high level of optimal abatement.
- Roughgarden & Schneider
![Page 19: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Climate Surprises & Adaptation
• Ocean currents• Ice caps and freshwater inputs• Storm frequency and severity• Natural positive feedback loops• Economic positive feedback loops
![Page 20: Climate Change Science, Economics, and Policy. Climate Economics I.Climate Change Research II.Climate Change Economics III.Expert Opinion IV.Climate Surprises](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022082613/5697c00e1a28abf838cc9ef0/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
IPCC and Policy Evolution• IPCC established by WMO and UNEP, 1988
Three working groups (science, adaptation, mitigation)• First Assessment of the IPCC, 1990
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992• Second Assessment of the IPCC, 1995
“. . . balance of evidence suggests . . .” Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCC, 1997
• Special Report: The Regional Impacts of Climate Change - An Assessment of Vulnerability, 1997
• Third Assessment of the IPCC, 2001 ????