Upload
anushseth1
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
1/32
Topics in Environmental Economics:Taxes, Emissions Trading, and OtherTopics in the Economics of Pollution
Guest Lecturer: Hans Zigmund
DePaul University
PPS 329/359 Special Topics:Applied Urban and EnvironmentalEconomics
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
2/32
Purpose
To provide students with the tools of economic
theory for analyzing environmental issuesfrom an economic perspective.
To that end this lecture will be largelytheoretical with relevant applications in thesecond half of the talk.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
3/32
Outline Macroeconomics (Growth Theory)
Microeconomics Theory Utopian Capitalist View
Cost Benefit Analysis
Adjustments at the Margin (Taxes, Subsidies, andMarkets)
Microeconomics applied to policy Kyoto Protocol
European Union Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)
Alternative International Agreements
Boulder Carbon Tax
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
4/32
Economic Growth
Increase GDP/Capita (Economic Output)
Factors of production:Land (L)
Labor (N)
Capital (K)
Economic output requires the exploitation ofnatural resources.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
5/32
Areas of Government Intervention
Reduce Pollution (Todays area of focus)
Reduce Depletion of Natural ResourcesManage Public Lands
Compensation from Natural Disasters
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
6/32
Environmental Perspective onGDPFocus of economic growth is on increasing
GDP/capita.Hides negative impact on ecosphere of
producing goods and services.
Pollution related healthcare costs
Exxon Valdez clean up $2.2bn
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
7/32
Environmental Perspective onGDPGDP does not account for the degradation of
natural resources.Erosion
Water Pollution
Exhausting Mineral Resources
Depleting Fisheries (until possibly too late)
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
8/32
Environmental Perspective onGDPHides negative or underestimates some
positive effects.Energy efficient light bulbs and appliances.
Fuel efficient cars.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
9/32
Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare
(ISEW) and Genuine Progress Indictor(GPI)
Created by Herman E Daly and John Cobb Jr.(1989) and Philip Lawn (2003)
Adjusts GDP/capita for
Income Distribution
Depletion of natural resources
Loss of wetlands Loss of farmland from soil erosion and urbanization.
Cost of air and water pollution
Estimate of long term cost of global warming.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
10/32
Utopian Capitalist View: ParetoOptimalityEdgeworth Box
Exhausting Gains On TradeConditions of Pareto Optimality
You cannot make one party better off withoutmaking another worse off.
Parties involved in exchange bear the full true costof the transaction.(no externalities)
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
11/32
Cost Benefit Analysis: PollutionAbatementSeek out the point that minimizes both the
cost of abatement and environmental damagecosts (or maximize environmental benefit).
Total Cost curve is minimized at the point ofintersection.
$1 in abatement cost = $1 in damage costcontrol or environmental benefit.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
12/32
Cost Benefit Analysis: Pollution Abatement
0Societysm
arginalbenefit
andmarginal
cost
ofpollutionaba
tement
Amount of pollution abatement
Socially optimum
amount of
pollution
abatement
Damage Cost
Abatement Cost
(Environmental
Benefit)
TC
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
13/32
Cost Benefit Analysis: PollutionAbatementOn the right side, spend too little leads to high
environmental costs.On the left side, spend too much and it trade
offs will have to be made with other socialprograms such as public health.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
14/32
Regulatory ApproachHistorically the regulatory approach has been
effective.Example:
Automobile emissions and MPG standards.
Leads to reductions in Carbon Monoxideemissions and other pollutants.
Is the regulatory approach the most efficient?
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
15/32
Regulatory ApproachTwo Firm Model
Marginal Cost/Marginal Benefit andinefficiencies.
Because hypothetical firm A and firm B toabate the same quantity under different
marginal cost structures, firm A may abate inexcess of marginal benefit while firm B mayabate less than optimal.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
16/32
Regulatory Approach
0
Marginal
costof
pollutionabate
ment
Amount of pollution abatement
QR
I
II
Damage Per Unit
QeA QeB
MCA
MCB
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
17/32
Regulatory ApproachArea I represents abatement cost in excess of
benefits for firm A.Area II represents opportunity cost loss of firm
B for stopping abatement while marginalbenefits were still greater than marginal costs.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
18/32
Adjustments at the Margin:Pollution Taxes In efficient markets P = MC.
True only when firms marginal cost equals the realcost of the next unit of production.
If pollution create costs on society not incurred bybusiness (externality), then an over allocation of
resources into production will occur. Taxes can correct for this over allocation by
internalizing the externality.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
19/32
Adjustments at the Margin:Pollution TaxesSpillover
costs
Overallocation
Corrected
P
Q0 QeQ0
MCt
MC
DTAX
Pe
P0
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
20/32
Adjustments at the Margin:SubsidiesR&D that leads to reduction in pollution has
positive societal benefits.
R&D will only be invested in if profitable.
Subsidizing R&D can reduce the time it takesto develop new technology.
R&D doesnt always generate a outcome onthe income statement. The subsidy helpsoffset the risk of investment.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
21/32
Adjustments at the Margin:SubsidiesP
Q
R&D
Subsidy to
producers
Decreases
marginal
cost
Underallocation
Corrected
Q0Qe0
MCs
MC
D
Pe
P0
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
22/32
Adjustments at the Margin: Marketsfor Pollution Rights Politically more palatable to business because it relies on
markets rather than taxes for corrections.
Firms (such as public utilities in the market for SO2 )
receive a fixed number of pollution allowances.
These credits can be sold and bought on the CBOT.
If firms use more pollution than they own credits for theypay a fine.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
23/32
Adjustments at the Margin: Marketsfor Pollution Rights
Price
perton
ofpollution
right
Quantity of SO2 pollution rights (millions of tons)8 9 10 11 12 13
$2000
$1000
D2007
2010
S= Supply
ofSO2
pollutionrights
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
24/32
Allowance Trading Basics An emissions "cap":A limit on the total amount of
pollution that can be emitted (released) from all
regulated sources (e.g., power plants); the cap is setlower than historical emissions in order to reduceemissions.
Allowances:An authorization to emit a fixed amountof a pollutant.
Measurement:Accurate tracking of all emissions.Source:http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/trading/basics.html
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
25/32
Allowance Trading Basics Flexibility: Sources can choose how to reduce
emissions, including whether to buy additional
allowances from other sources that reduceemissions.
Allowance trading: Sources can buy or sellallowances on the open market. Because the total
number of allowances is limited by the cap, emissionreductions are assured.
Compliance:At the end of each compliance period,each source must own at least as many allowances
as its emissions.Source:http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/trading/basics.html
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
26/32
Trading the Right to PolluteThe NOx Budget Trading Program is a market-
based cap and trade program created toreduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx)from power plants and other large combustionsources in the eastern United States.
Source : http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/nox/sip.html
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
27/32
Trading the Right to Pollute Market-based sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowance trading
component of the Acid Rain Program
Utilities regulated under the program, decide themost cost-effective way to use available resources tocomply with the acid rain requirements of the Clean
Air Act.
Purchase pollution allowances. Switching to lower sulfur fuel.
Reduce emissions by employing energy conservationmeasures
Source: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/trading/factsheet.html
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
28/32
Success of Acid Rain Program whichincludes trading pollution allowances Reduced SO2 emissions by over 5.5 million tons from 1990
levels, or about 35 percent of total emissions from the powersector. Compared to 1980 levels, SO2 emissions from power
plants have dropped by more than 7 million tons, or about 41percent.
Cut NOx emissions by about 3 million tons from 1990 levels, sothat emissions in 2005 were less than half the level anticipatedwithout the program. Other efforts, such as the NOx Budget
Trading Program in the eastern United States, also contributedsignificantly to this reduction.
Led to significant cuts in acid deposition, including reductions insulfate deposition of about 36 percent in some regions of theUnited States and improvements in environmental indicators,
such as fewer acidic lakes.Source: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/arp05.html
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
29/32
Kyoto Protocol Industrialized nations reduce CO2 5 percent from 1990
levels by 2008-2012 compliance period.
United States withdrew in 2001. China and India are not required to comply because they
are developing nations.
By 2002 Kyoto only covered about 30 percent of global
CO2 emissions. Too little too fast.
Not enough change to make a difference.
Difficult to comply with for countries who experienced
substantial growth in the 1990s.
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
30/32
European Union EmissionsTrading Scheme (ETS)
Kyoto with teeth.
Covers half of Europes carbon emissions. (8% of global)
Each country creates a national allocation plan forspecifying caps on greenhouse gases.
Businesses can either reduce their emissions or purchaseallowances from facilities with an excess of allowances.
Allowances traded in the ETS are not printed but are heldin electronic account registries set up by Member Statesand are overseen by a Central Administrator at the EU.
Emissions considered a service under EUs VAT.Sources: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/emission.htm and Nordhaus, William D. The American Economic Review, After Kyoto:
Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming 96(2) May 2006, 31-34
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
31/32
Alternative International Treaty Options Link treaty to specific environmental objectives rather than a
baseline year pollution level. (e.g. temperature, costs,damages) (Nordhaus 2006)
Use an extended time path. Depart gradually from a businessas usual pattern becoming more severe over time. (Olmsteadand Stavins 2006)
Extend tradable allowances globally. (Olmstead and Stavins
2006) Extend participation beyond industrialized nations to include
the developing world and United States. (Olmstead andStavins 2006)
Nordhaus, William D. The American Economic Review, After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming 96(2) May2006, 31-34 and
Olmstead, Sheila M. and Robert N. Stavins. The American Economic Review, An International Policy Architecture for the Post-Kyoto Era96(2) May 2006, 31-34 and
8/3/2019 Topics in Evironmental Economics Carbon Taxes and the Economics of Pollution.314190500
32/32
Boulder Carbon Tax Boulder's City Council adopted the goals of the Kyoto Protocol in
2002 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels by2012.
On November 14, 2006 with Initiative 202, the Climate Action PlanTax, the Boulder Colorado city council approved a carbon tax whichis applied to residents electric and gas bills.
Average tax for homeowners $1.33/month and Business
$3.80/month Estimated energy cost savings from implementing the Climate
Action Plan are $63 million over the long term.
Revenue estimated is $6.7 million by 2012, when the goal is to havereduced carbon emissions by 350,000 metric tons.
Source:http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6136&Itemid=169and http://www.env-econ.net/2006/11/a_carbon_tax_in.html