Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity sector

Burtraw, Dallas; Krupnick, Alan; Palmer, Karen; Paul, Anthony; Toman, Michael A.; Bloyd, Cary N.

doi:10.1016/s0095-0696(02)00022-0

Cited by 237 publications

(162 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

160

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Meyer et al 1998) and studies that emphasize the monetization of the impacts (e.g. Burtraw et al 2003). Several studies investigated the links between regional air pollution and climate policy in Europe (Syri et al 2001;Alcamo et al 2002;van Harmelen et al 2002).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the economic modelling, the ancillary benefits are quantified (a) relying on a linear programming partial equilibrium energy model (e.g., Burtraw et al 2003; Van Vuuren et al 2006;Riekkola et al 2011;Holland et al 2011; Rečka and Ščasný 2013) The model is defined as hybrid because it features an aggregated top-down Ramsey-type optimal growth model combined with a detailed description of the energy sector. The aggregated economic model is structured according to a Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES) framework where the two macro-inputs, capital and labour, are combined with energy to produce the final output.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the economic modelling, the ancillary benefits are quantified (a) relying on a linear programming partial equilibrium energy model (e.g., Burtraw et al 2003;Van Vuuren et al 2006;Riekkola et al 2011;Holland et al 2011;Rečka and Ščasný 2013) that can be further enriched, for instance, by econometric estimates of abatement costs (Burtraw et al 2014), or (b) using a computable general equilibrium model (e.g., Glomsrød et al 1992;Scheraga and Leary 1993;Paltsev et al 2005;Grossman et al 2011;Nam et al 2013;Kiuila et al forthcoming). Bollen et al (2009) use the MERGE model, a top-down optimization model with a good energy sector detail.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies investigated the links between regional air pollution and climate policy in Europe (Syri et al 2001;Alcamo et al 2002;van Harmelen et al 2002). Most, if not all, studies on ancillary benefits either utilize a damage factor for each pollutant or connect emissions to changes in concentrations, human exposures, physical effects and monetary damages using an integrated assessment model, such as the US APEEP (Muller and Mendelsohn 2007) or the EU ExternE's impact pathway analysis (Holland et al 2011).Regarding the economic modelling, the ancillary benefits are quantified (a) relying on a linear programming partial equilibrium energy model (e.g., Burtraw et al 2003; Van Vuuren et al 2006;Riekkola et al 2011;Holland et al 2011; Rečka and Ščasný 2013) The model is defined as hybrid because it features an aggregated top-down Ramsey-type optimal growth model combined with a detailed description of the energy sector. The aggregated economic model is structured according to a Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES) framework where the two macro-inputs, capital and labour, are combined with energy to produce the final output.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our results confirm previous studies. As pointed out by Burtraw et al (2003), not considering ancillary benefits could lead to an incorrect assessment of the net costs of mitigation policies and to an incorrect identification of 'no regrets' levels of GHG mitigation. For instance, Nam et al (2013), by using the EPPA5 model, found that if China achieves its SO 2 and NOx emission reduction targets, as proposed in its 12th Five Year Plan, the corresponding carbon-mitigation potential exceeds China's official 17% CO 2 intensity reduction goal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Quantifying the Ancillary Benefits of the Representative Concentration Pathways on Air Quality in Europe

Ščasný

Massetti

Melichar

et al. 2015

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may SummaryThis paper presents estimates of the economic benefit of air quality improvements in Europe that occur as a side effect of GHG emission reductions. We consider three climate policy scenarios that reach radiative forcing levels in 2100 of three Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). These targets are achieved by introducing a global uniform tax on all GHG emissions in the Integrated Assessment Model WITCH, assuming both full as well as limited technological flexibility. The resulting consumption patterns of fossil fuels are used to estimate the physical impacts and the economic benefits of pollution reductions on human health and on key assets by implementing the most advanced version of the ExternE methodology with its Impact Pathway Analysis. We find that the mitigation scenario compatible with +2°C reduces total pollution costs in Europe by 76%. Discounted ancillary benefits are more than €2.5 trillion between 2015 and 2100. The monetary value of reduced pollution is equal to €22 per abated ton of CO2 in Europe. Less strict climate policy scenarios generate overall smaller, but still considerable, local benefits (14 € or 18 € per abated ton of CO2). Without discounting, the ancillary benefits are in a range of €36 to €50 per ton of CO2 abated. Cumulative ancillary benefits exceed the cumulative additional cost of electricity generation in Europe. Each European country alone would be better off if the mitigation policy was implemented, although the local benefits in absolute terms vary significantly across the countries. We can identify the relative losers and winners of ancillary benefits in Europe. In particular, we find that large European countries contribute to as much as they benefit from ancillary benefits. The scenarios with limited technology flexibility do deliver results that are similar to the full technology flexibility scenario. Keywords AbstractThis paper presents estimates of the economic benefit of air quality improvements in Europe that occur as a side effect of GHG emission reductions. We consider three climate policy scenarios that reach radiative forcing levels in 2100 of three Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). These targets are achieved by introducing a global uniform tax on all GHG emissions in the Integrated Assessment Model WITCH, assuming both full as well as limited technological flexibility. The resulting consumption patterns of fossil fuels are used to estima...

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the economic modelling, the ancillary benefits are quantified (a) relying on a linear programming partial equilibrium energy model (e.g., Burtraw et al 2003;Van Vuuren et al 2006;Riekkola et al 2011;Holland et al 2011;Rečka and Ščasný 2013) that can be further enriched, for instance, by econometric estimates of abatement costs (Burtraw et al 2014), or (b) using a computable general equilibrium model (e.g., Glomsrød et al 1992;Scheraga and Leary 1993;Paltsev et al 2005;Grossman et al 2011;Nam et al 2013;Kiuila et al forthcoming). Bollen et al (2009) use the MERGE model, a top-down optimization model with a good energy sector detail.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Quantifying the Ancillary Benefits of the Representative Concentration Pathways on Air Quality in Europe

Ščasný

Massetti

Melichar

et al. 2015

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Policy planning for air quality management: global and local perspectives

El‐Fadel

Kalinian

Salhab

et al. 2001

Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasing number of environmental regulators in developed and developing countries have embarked on programmes for the promotion of environmentally sound and sustainable development strategies. Air pollution is among the most important environmental issues that need to be managed since it reflects directly and indirectly on the different aspects of human life. This paper presents an assessment of the evolution of air pollution control philosophies at the global level, and it describes advantages and disadvantages of alternate environmental strategies that can be considered in the development of an integrated and comprehensive plan for air quality management at the local level, with Lebanon as a case study of a typical developing country. The proposed strategy considers short-, medium-and long-term schemes that make use of regulatory and market-based instruments, such as pollution charges, and market creation and usage. The short-term scheme identifies serious polluters and improves environmental performance by adopting and enforcing updated environmental standards. Economic incentive concepts constitute the principal philosophy for medium-term application of a comprehensive environmental strategy, mostly applicable at the level of the transportation and energy sectors. Long-term strategies, targeting the industrial sector, aim at achieving a flexible free market in which polluters would compete on the basis of market forces and governmental incentives to attain better environmental performance and increase potential cost savings.

show abstract