The role of abatement costs in GHG permit allocations: A global stabilization scenario analysis

Environmental Modeling and Assessment

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 169-179

  Vaillancourt, Kathleen ^a   Loulou, Richard ^a,b   Kanudia, Amit ^a  

^a GERAD   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Abatement costs; Burden sharing; Energy; Equity; MARKAL model; Permit allocations

Indexed keywords

GREENHOUSE GASES; STABILIZATION;

ABATEMENT COSTS; BURDEN SHARING; ENERGY; EQUITY; MARKAL MODELS; PERMIT ALLOCATION;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

ABATEMENT COST; BIOMASS ALLOCATION; EMISSIONS TRADING; GREENHOUSE GAS; SCENARIO ANALYSIS;

EID: 40849126780     PISSN: 14202026     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10666-007-9094-6     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aaheim, H. A. (1999). The appropriateness of economic approaches to the analysis of burden-sharing. In F. L. Toth (Ed.), Fair weather? Equity concerns in climate change (pp. 94-111). London: Earthscan.
2. 2 abatement cooperation. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 3, 107-115.
3. Banuri, T., Goran-Maler, K., Grubb, M., Jacobson, H. K., & Yamin, F. (1996). Chapitre 3: équité et considérations sociales. In Changement climatique: dimensions économiques et sociales GIEC, GT III (pp. 79-124). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Bayer, J. L. (1999). Climate change and multiple views of fairness. In F. L. Toth (Ed), Fair weather? Equity concerns in climate change (pp. 44-64). London: Earthscan.
5. Berk, M. M., & Den Elzen, M. G. J. (2001). Options for differentiation of future commitments in climate policy: how to realize timely participation to meet stringent climate goals? Climate Policy, 1, 465-480.
6. Blanchard, O., Criqui, P., Trommetter, M., & Viguier, L. (1998). Différenciation, équité internationale et efficacité dans la lutte contre le changement climatique global, Cahier de recherche 14, Grenoble.
7. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) (2001). The CIA World Factbook. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html.
8. Fishbone, L. G., & Abilock, H. (1981). MARKAL, a linear-programming model for energy systems analysis: technical description of the BNL version. Energy Research, 5, 353-375.
9. Grubb, M., Sebenius, J., Magalhaes, A., & Subak, S. (1992). Chapter 21: Sharing the burden. In I. M. Mintzer (Ed), Confronting climate change: Risks, implications and responses (pp. 305-322). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. 2 emissions. Energy Policy, 27, 727-736.
11. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2000). Energy statistics and balances of OECD and non-OECD countries. http://www.iea.org/w/bookshop/b.aspx?type=2.
12. Kanudia, A., Labriet, M., Loulou, R., Vaillancourt, K., & Waaub, J.-P. (2005). The World-MARKAL model and its application to cost-effectiveness, permit sharing, and cost-benefit analyses. In R. Loulou, J.-P. Waaub, & G. Zaccour (Ed.), Energy and environment (pp. 111-148). USA: Springer.
13. Kanudia, A., & Loulou, R. (1999). Advanced bottom-up modelling for national and regional energy planning in response to climate change. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 12(2/3), 191-216.
14. Loulou, R., Goldstein, G., & Noble, K. (2004). Documentation for the MARKAL family of models. Energy technology systems analysis programme (ETSAP) http://www.etsap.org/documentation.asp.
15. Morita, T. (2000). Global modeling and future scenario for climatic stabilization based on SRES world: a comparative analysis on development paths and climatic policies. In L. Fu-chen, H. Tokuda, & N. S. Cooray (Ed.), The sustainable future of the global system III (pp. 125-148). Tokyo: Institute of Advanced Studies and The United Nations University.
16. Morita, T., & Robinson, J. (coordinators) (2001). Chapter 2: greenhouse gas emission mitigation scenarios and implications. Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, IPCC, WG III (pp. 115-166). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Nakicenovic, N., & Swart, R. (Eds.) (2000). Emissions scenarios, IPCC, WG III (p. 570). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Onigkeit, J., & Alcamo, J. (2000). A different perspective for global climate policy: combining burden sharing and climate protection. In C. Carraro (Ed.), Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy (pp. 305-314). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
19. Rayner, S., Malone, E. L., & Thompson, M. (1999). Equity issues and integrated assessment. In F. L. Toth (Ed.), Fair weather? Equity concerns in climate change (pp. 11-43). London: Earthscan.
20. 2 emissions. Resource and Energy Economics, 15, 117-146.
21. Rose, A., Stevens, B., Edmonds, J., & Wise, M. (1998). International equity and differentiation in global warming policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 12, 25-51.
22. Shukla, P. R. (1999). Justice, equity and efficiency in climate change: A developing country perspective. In F. L. Toth (Ed.), Fair weather? Equity concerns in climate change (pp.145-159). London: Earthscan.
23. Torvanger, A., & Godal, O. (1999). A survey of differentiation methods for national greenhouse gas reduction targets. CICERO Report No. 5, University of Oslo.
24. UNFCCC, The Kyoto Protocol (1997) http://unfccc.int/.
25. UNFCCC, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) http://unfccc.int.
26. Vaillancourt, K. (2003). Équité et scénarios mondiaux de réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre : Une approche multicritère dynamique combinée au modèle énergétique MARKAL. Thèse de doctorat (p. 306), Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM).
27. Vaillancourt, K., & Waaub, J.-P. (2006). A decision aid tool for equity issues analysis in emission permit allocations. Climate Policy, 5, 487-501.
28. Weyant, J. P., & Hill, J. N. (1999). Introduction and overview. In J. P. Weyant (Ed.), The Energy Journal, Special Issue, The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-model Evaluation, pp. vi-xliv.